An article by Maxine Thomas-Asante.
Image by Christoph Schmidt/Picture Alliance via Getty Images.
Over the past few months, we have witnessed a tense back and forth between the government and activists about the need to provide free school meals to ensure children do not go hungry during school holidays. Though in normal circumstances this is an uncontested discussion, in the context of Covid-19, the importance of this decision has become more heated than ever.
As we approach a socially distanced Christmas and say goodbye to what has been a year of loss for so many of us, at least we can be assured that the most vulnerable will have access to food.
What was the problem?
For the past few years, we have seen food insecurity in England become a real problem. Increasing numbers of people are accessing food banks. Some of these households may have faced unemployment, while others fit into a category referred to as the ‘working poor’. This means that despite having a job households are unable to afford the essentials. In 2019, 1 in 7 people using food banks actually had jobs.
Usually, when children are at school, if their parents receive other benefits (such as job seekers allowance, or Income Support) they can be eligible for free school meals. In Covid this has become particularly important, with many people (including parents) being made redundant and needing more financial help than usual. During 2020, the need for government support skyrocketed, with somewhere between 4.5 and 9 million people receiving furlough and approximately 4.8% of the population being unemployed by November. This has led to considerable uptake of Universal Credit. Unfortunately, where parents are struggling, children often struggle too. When this concern was first raised to the Conservative government a few months ago, their first instinct was to refuse the additional spend to provide free school meals to children over school holidays.
The situation has gotten so bad this December, that UNICEF (a UN humanitarian agency) have funded food packages for schools in South London. This is the first time in UNICEF’s 70 year history. Jacob Rees-Mogg, has scolded UNICEF, calling their donation to local council’s in London boroughs a “political stunt”. However, with Newham council announcing the potential reduction of spending on free school meals due to budget cuts, it seems this action may be necessary. The Conservative response is tragic in that it fails to recognise the reality of the deprivation that people are facing in Britain, in the context of incredibly high unemployment.
In October, the private sector was taking it upon themselves to donate food. McDonalds, for example, donated 1 million meals to Marcus Rashford’s campaign. This is, of course, a damning verdict for the national handling of child poverty and food insecurity.
What do the public think?
Interestingly, depending on who you ask, there are very different findings from research about whether or not the general public supports the idea of providing free school meals to children over the Christmas break. According to a poll by the New Statesman, in November, over 60% of people thought the government should pay to feed children eligible for free school meals over Christmas. The New Statesman found that only 25% of people think the government should not.
However, if you ask the Daily Express, 75% of their respondents (Daily Express readers) do not think the government should provide food for children eligible for free school meals over the Christmas break. What this tells us is that this is an issue our country feels very passionately about, but is also deeply divided on.
What is the solution?
There is no obvious solution and points raised about the potential expense of this government support are worth listening to. Between the Furlough Scheme, increased use of Universal Credit and Eat Out to Help Out, government expenditure has been high. The Office for Budgetary Responsibility estimated that the UK would borrow £394 billion this financial year. This is compared to an estimated borrowing of £55 billion before the crisis. Regardless, we cannot allow our children to go hungry under any circumstances. Above many other concerns, ensuring our children are provided food for should be a priority.
Why did it take Marcus Rashford?
Alarm bells should ring over why it took Marcus Rashford’s voice for the government to respond to challenges of deprivation. Child poverty is unacceptable in a high income country like the UK. As Brits, we generally do not expect to see widespread hunger or food insecurity. For this reason, it is disappointing that it took a well intentioned celebrity, private donations and a so called “political stunt” to make this a priority for the government.
We take this opportunity to thank the individuals and organisations that fought to make sure this demand was heard and implemented. Even though we may not be with family this year, most of us would agree that everyone deserves a warm meal at Christmas.
Where to read more:
- Free school meals scheme in one of UK’s poorest areas faces axe – https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/dec/17/free-school-meals-scheme-one-uk-poorest-areas-faces-axe-newham-london
- McDonald’s pledges one million free meals after Marcus Rashford campaign – https://www.itv.com/news/2020-10-23/councils-and-businesses-back-marcus-rashfords-free-meals-campaign
Coronavirus: How much will it cost the UK and how will we pay? – https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-52663523