Chamber
Plenary, 24 Jan 2007
24 Jan 2007 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Schools (Health Promotion and Nutrition) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
At the outset, I say to the minister that we have evidence—which the Scottish Executive has tried to ignore for three years—that the provision of free, healthy school meals works. We knew that from other countries, but we now have evidence of that from within the United Kingdom. The policy works—not just a little bit, but spectacularly. As the researchers from the University of Hull put it, the policy "works wonders".
For three years, Hull City Council has given a free healthy meal and pudding to all primary school children in Hull. The policy has worked. That is not a matter of conjecture or opinion but of hard evidence and percentages. It has worked not only for the kids but for the family diet. The research shows that 30 per cent of parents said that, as a result of children eating healthier food at school, they now eat healthier food at home. Has the Executive not had a target since the previous parliamentary session on changing the food that is eaten in the house? In every debate on school meals, the Executive has said that any policy must be aimed at the parents as well. How much did the Executive spend on the fish phone billboard that advertised the healthier eating hotline and encouraged people to eat more healthily? That was a complete waste of money.
Given the results of the research into Hull's three-year programme, people might think that politicians would be lapping up the policy and shouting about its marvellous results. All other healthy eating initiatives, including those of the Scottish Executive, have failed to tackle obesity in children and have failed to increase healthy eating. According to the statistics and the research, every other initiative has resulted in either a very small effect or, in many cases, a negative effect. People might think that politicians would shout from the rooftops that they now have a policy that works. Unfortunately, that is not the case for Liberal Democrat councillors in Hull. As I said in my intervention on the minister, Hull's Liberal Democrats have decided to pull the plug on the eat well do well programme, under which the previous Labour administration in Hull introduced free healthy school meals.
Hull is at the bottom of England's school league tables but, within the past three years, it has risen to the top of the school league tables for the uptake of school meals. The Minister for Education and Young People said that one of the intentions behind the Schools (Health Promotion and Nutrition) (Scotland) Bill was to increase the uptake of school meals not just among those children who are entitled to free school meals but across the board. What policies does he have for that? How will he implement that intention? What targets does he have? When he gave evidence to the Communities Committee, I asked him what targets the Executive has. There are no targets. The Executive has no serious intention of increasing uptake of school meals, but Hull City Council has achieved that. Hull is now top of the list in England.
The research goes on to state that the provision of free school meals in Hull has had a dramatic effect on pupils' grades and behaviour. We now have a ridiculous situation in which the Labour Secretary of State for Education and Skills—perhaps Hugh Henry should give him a wee phone call—has attacked the Liberal Democrats for scrapping the scheme. Alan Johnson said:
"For the council to be scrapping the free school meals just as its success is being proved by this study is perverse."
That right honourable member from Hull is right on. He has got it right. He understands the research.
The Schools (Health Promotion and Nutrition) (Scotland) Bill is nothing more than a blocking bill. It is a cynical manoeuvre. The bill was not introduced with the interests of children's health in mind. It is supposed to tackle health and nutrition in schools, yet it will change the existing law to make it illegal for individual local authorities to introduce free healthy school meals. While the law in England is being changed to let individual local authorities introduce free healthy school meals, the bill before us will specifically make that illegal. The bill is a politically sectarian and cynical manoeuvre.
For three years, Hull City Council has given a free healthy meal and pudding to all primary school children in Hull. The policy has worked. That is not a matter of conjecture or opinion but of hard evidence and percentages. It has worked not only for the kids but for the family diet. The research shows that 30 per cent of parents said that, as a result of children eating healthier food at school, they now eat healthier food at home. Has the Executive not had a target since the previous parliamentary session on changing the food that is eaten in the house? In every debate on school meals, the Executive has said that any policy must be aimed at the parents as well. How much did the Executive spend on the fish phone billboard that advertised the healthier eating hotline and encouraged people to eat more healthily? That was a complete waste of money.
Given the results of the research into Hull's three-year programme, people might think that politicians would be lapping up the policy and shouting about its marvellous results. All other healthy eating initiatives, including those of the Scottish Executive, have failed to tackle obesity in children and have failed to increase healthy eating. According to the statistics and the research, every other initiative has resulted in either a very small effect or, in many cases, a negative effect. People might think that politicians would shout from the rooftops that they now have a policy that works. Unfortunately, that is not the case for Liberal Democrat councillors in Hull. As I said in my intervention on the minister, Hull's Liberal Democrats have decided to pull the plug on the eat well do well programme, under which the previous Labour administration in Hull introduced free healthy school meals.
Hull is at the bottom of England's school league tables but, within the past three years, it has risen to the top of the school league tables for the uptake of school meals. The Minister for Education and Young People said that one of the intentions behind the Schools (Health Promotion and Nutrition) (Scotland) Bill was to increase the uptake of school meals not just among those children who are entitled to free school meals but across the board. What policies does he have for that? How will he implement that intention? What targets does he have? When he gave evidence to the Communities Committee, I asked him what targets the Executive has. There are no targets. The Executive has no serious intention of increasing uptake of school meals, but Hull City Council has achieved that. Hull is now top of the list in England.
The research goes on to state that the provision of free school meals in Hull has had a dramatic effect on pupils' grades and behaviour. We now have a ridiculous situation in which the Labour Secretary of State for Education and Skills—perhaps Hugh Henry should give him a wee phone call—has attacked the Liberal Democrats for scrapping the scheme. Alan Johnson said:
"For the council to be scrapping the free school meals just as its success is being proved by this study is perverse."
That right honourable member from Hull is right on. He has got it right. He understands the research.
The Schools (Health Promotion and Nutrition) (Scotland) Bill is nothing more than a blocking bill. It is a cynical manoeuvre. The bill was not introduced with the interests of children's health in mind. It is supposed to tackle health and nutrition in schools, yet it will change the existing law to make it illegal for individual local authorities to introduce free healthy school meals. While the law in England is being changed to let individual local authorities introduce free healthy school meals, the bill before us will specifically make that illegal. The bill is a politically sectarian and cynical manoeuvre.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Trish Godman):
Lab
The next item of business is a debate on motion S2M-5339, in the name of Hugh Henry, that the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the Schools (Hea...
The Minister for Education and Young People (Hugh Henry):
Lab
Improving the health of people in Scotland is a key priority for the Executive. We are taking action on a number of fronts to tackle our poor health record. ...
Tricia Marwick (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP):
SNP
The minister talks about the need for our children to be given the right start in life. Will he say why the Executive has set its face against extending the ...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
I will touch on that later.Before discussing the bill in detail, I thank the many pupils, parents and professionals from the education sector, health service...
Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I understand why the minister is cautious about introducing universal free school meals, but the Scottish National Party's amendment simply asks that the bil...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
I did not say anything about reviewing proposals for universal free school meals at a later date. As I explained, I do not accept the principle behind provid...
Frances Curran (West of Scotland) (SSP):
SSP
Will the minister take an intervention?
Hugh Henry:
Lab
No, thank you.As I said, universal free school meals would make children in the poorest families no better off than they currently are.Ensuring that children...
Tricia Marwick:
SNP
Will the minister give way?
Hugh Henry:
Lab
No.Frances Curran's amendment is not factually accurate. The research in question is independent research, not research by Hull City Council, and I have been...
Frances Curran:
SSP
Does the minister accept that Labour councillors do not want to end the pilot, but Liberal Democrat councillors do, and that Labour councillors accept the re...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
Frances Curran talks about independent research, but her amendment states that the research was done by Hull City Council. Perhaps she can clarify for us at ...
Fiona Hyslop (Lothians) (SNP):
SNP
The SNP supports the general principles of the Schools (Health Promotion and Nutrition) (Scotland) Bill, which contains a great deal that we have called for ...
Tommy Sheridan (Glasgow) (Sol):
Sol
Does the member agree that the minister misled Parliament when he said that universal free school meals would not help poorer kids? Evidence from the Child P...
Fiona Hyslop:
SNP
I agree. The minister misled us on two points, one of which the member has just raised. The other is that the issue has been considered by the Scottish Parli...
Frances Curran (West of Scotland) (SSP):
SSP
At the outset, I say to the minister that we have evidence—which the Scottish Executive has tried to ignore for three years—that the provision of free, healt...
Mike Rumbles (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD):
LD
The member has made an interesting case, but so far she has not mentioned once how much the policy that she advocates would cost. Will she give Parliament an...
Frances Curran:
SSP
It would cost £73 million. Considering that the Scottish Executive's underspend over the past four years has left £1.3 billion in its Westminster bank accoun...
Tricia Marwick:
SNP
Will the member give way?
Frances Curran:
SSP
I have only a minute left in which to make my last few points.This is a politically sectarian bill that is not about nutrition. If it were, it would take on ...
Dave Petrie (Highlands and Islands) (Con):
Con
My initial reaction to the bill was a straight question: why do we need legislation to decide what our kids should eat? Was that not the aim of the hungry fo...
Frances Curran:
SSP
Does the member accept that that we know the reason? Research that has been done by a number of children's charities has shown that it is stigma.
Dave Petrie:
Con
I accept that stigma is a problem and was about to address the issue. I have taught in schools that operate a card system, to ensure anonymity, but let us ma...
Tricia Marwick:
SNP
Will the member give way?
Dave Petrie:
Con
I am sorry; I would struggle to finish if I did. There is talk of banning foods. We need to influence the culture of nutrition in schools, but we should not ...
Mr Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD):
LD
I came to the bill halfway through the Communities Committee's consideration of it. I thank the clerks and my colleagues on the committee for their forbearan...
Frances Curran:
SSP
Will the member give way?
Mr Stone:
LD
In a second.A parallel argument that both Frances Curran and I accept is that it should be horses for courses when it comes to taxation—in other words, we sh...
Tricia Marwick:
SNP
Will the member give way?
Mr Stone:
LD
I will do so shortly, after I have given way to Frances Curran.It is worth remembering that, according to the Executive's calculations, it would cost £180 mi...