New Zealand has had compulsory education since 1877. Generations of parents have made their children’s school lunch.
Free school lunches are a solution looking for a problem.
If it was to reduce absenteeism, the Treasury was not convinced. A 2023 report for then Finance Minister Grant Robertson said evaluations showed the programme had no effect on attendance and provided little benefit for Māori students.
If it was to reduce hunger, the Ministry of Health says we have an obesity epidemic.
“New Zealand has the third-highest adult obesity rate in the OECD … one in 10 children” is obese, according to the ministry.
Only the loony left could think free food is the answer to obesity.
There are parents who, because of mental health issues or because they are addicts, neglect their children.
I live in one of the poorest neighbourhoods in New Zealand. My neighbours, despite financial struggles, feed their children.
We have increasing child poverty because of cigarette taxes paid almost exclusively by the poor. The middle class has quit smoking. When I visit a household with children and no food, every time all the adults are smokers.
A packet of 20 cigarettes costs $37.57. Enough to buy breakfast and school lunch for a week.
The number of pupils who are hungry is tiny compared with the number who are overweight.
Free school lunches were never for the pupils, but to buy their parents’ votes by having the taxpayer fund a chore.
It is expensive. Reintroducing Labour’s school lunches would cost about $340 million a year. Even after David Seymour’s savings, the lunches cost the taxpayer about $200m a year.
My 9-year-old grandson has experienced homemade, Labour’s, and David Seymour’s school lunches. It is a sample of one, but enough to make observations.
The commentators appear to have never been parents. Every parent knows getting children to eat what they should eat is a struggle.
I ask my moko if he has eaten his lunch. He consumed most of ours, half of Labour’s and slightly less of David Seymour’s. His favourite lunch was the pie when the service was suspended.
He brings home some uneaten lunches. To test, I have eaten the returns.
Both Labour and David Seymour’s lunches are bland, but eatable. A hungry child would eat them.
An outraged school principal complained the lunches were the same for 11 days. I had the same lunch for 11 years. Christopher Luxon’s Marmite sandwiches and an apple. To my mother’s frustration, I would eat only Marmite sandwiches.
Every mass free lunch programme will be bland and have enormous waste. The only difference will be the cost of the pig food produced.
When we made the school lunch we were given strict instructions. The school said: “No fizzy drinks and no sugary food.” Our moko said: “Crunchy peanut butter sandwiches.”
Both pupils and the taxpayer would benefit if parents made the lunch.
Seymour is responsible, but he cannot cancel the programme because Luxon made a campaign promise to continue free school lunches.
Going back to Labour’s free lunches is not an option. The costs and the waste are far too high.
Running the lunches from Wellington is inefficient. The savings from centralisation are illusory. The incentives are all wrong. The demand for a free service is infinite. Schools having no responsibility have unrealistic expectations. The teachers will ensure the programme fails.
Pay the $3 a lunch to schools. Let schools and parents decide if their pupils go to school to eat lunch or to get an education. Locals will find better solutions. As it is their money, schools will only provide the number of meals that will be eaten.
Many school boards will support pupils experiencing hardship and spend the remaining funds on education.
The Government should pay the $3 a day only for pupils who are at school. As regular attendance is about 50%, the savings will be significant.
The incentives will ensure the policy is a success. Schools can choose to provide free lunches. Whatever choice, it will be cost-effective. Paying for only pupils who are at school will help tackle absenteeism.
We will have regular attendance only when the Minister of Education is courageous enough to pay schools based on the number of students they teach, not the number they enrol.
The Prime Minister has told the nation school lunches are Seymour’s responsibility. Seymour should take the PM at his word and announce this new school lunch policy, starting next term.
Sign up to the Premium Opinion newsletter for a wrap of the week’s best commentary and analysis, compiled by our Opinion Editor and delivered straight to your inbox every Wednesday.
