fbpx

Meals in Schools – too important for electioneering

Meals in Schools – too important for electioneering

Meals in Schools is a good initiative. I’d like to see it succeed and grow.


Update 26th September 2024

Labor has announced a commitment to expand Meals in schools to fifteen new schools over the next 4 years. They are seemingly declaring the 12-month pilot a success after less than one term. This is the type of reckless spending that costs ratepayers increasingly more.

I am the president of the Gold Creek School P&C which is a Meals in Schools pilot site. The program is well received; however, it is clear we still have lessons to learn. Our P&C was promised consultation in 2023, but the rollout has been politicised beyond that, so any consultation has been merely one-way advice.

The lack of transparency and accountability is staggering. We need an independent cross bench to provide that scrutiny.

Background

The Meals in Schools initiative aims to provide free breakfast and lunches for school children. The pilot is targeting cohorts within 5 schools, 3 days per week. This initiative should see outcomes for school families in educational achievement and reduce cost of living pressure.

This is a good aim, and I hope the pilot succeeds, though I have my concerns.

The problem

This looked like an election present in 2020, and it looks that way again in 2024. Massive delays and budget blowouts are too commonplace these days, and this is another example. The Education Directorate was expected to feed over 1,400 students for 18 months for under $1.5 million, which works out to be $2.88 per meal, assuming there were zero overheads, and all the money could be spent on food. This was clearly never going to be enough.

The Education Minister published a media release just 113 days (including weekends!) before meals were expected on tables. Given a provider hadn’t been selected yet, this was never achievable and was clearly a stunt. Unfortunately, we have a stale coalition government and inadequate scrutiny and accountability, so they got away with it.

In 2024, a more realistic budget has been allocated, but therein lies my concern. The initial numbers means that when scaled up to the whole of Canberra, the initiative may have cost $52 million per year. The new budget means a city-wide rollout might cost in the neighbourhood of $139 million. This works out to $2,766 per student per year, and that cost will be spread across all rate payers.

Universal rollout in schools

This initiative is a universal one, meaning that all children at school receive lunch, regardless of need. This means that all ratepayers share the burden of paying for this. There are times when that is appropriate, and times where it is not.

When something like this is not universal, the administrative and logistical overheads increase. It is easier to feed everyone than to figure out who you are feeding and only feeding them. It is easier if everyone is doing the same thing instead of some going to a canteen and some going elsewhere to eat meals from home. Supervision is easier if it is universal. All these efforts are placed on school staff, which has a cost.

It produces less waste when it is universal. If you know how many kids you are feeding on a given day, you can cater more precisely. If it is targeted at people in need, you must over-cater in case others are in need on a particular day.

If people (either families ahead of time, or students on the day) must opt in to receiving a special “poor-persons lunch”, it highlights the disadvantage and stigmatises the option. It can make children bigger targets for bullying.

I agree that targeted support often makes sense, but in this case I think universal is the way to go.

Actions

  • I will support the initiative, but only if the pilot is proven efficient, effective, and value for money.

Related

Media

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *