Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on Education and Social Protection debate -
Wednesday, 16 Dec 2015

School Meals Programme: Discussion

I will first outline the position on privilege. By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they are to give this committee. If they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. The opening statements of witnesses will be published on the committee's website after the meeting. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

At the request of the broadcasting and recording services, witnesses and people in the Visitors Gallery are asked to ensure that their mobile telephones are turned off or switched to flight mode for the duration of the meeting.

Today's meeting will discuss the school meals programme. The programme aims to provide regular, nutritious food to children who are unable, through lack of good food, to take full advantage of the education provided for them. It also seeks to encourage school attendance and extra educational achievement by children, particularly those from the most disadvantaged backgrounds. The programme is operated by the Department of Social Protection by providing funding through two schemes, the statutory urban school meals scheme for primary schools and the non-statutory school meals local project scheme. To discuss the programme I am pleased to welcome Ms Sinéad Keenan, representing Healthy Food for All, Mr. Pádraig McCabe and Mr. David Ruddy, representing the Irish Primary Principals Network, IPPN, and Ms Helen Faughnan, Ms Jackie Harrington and Mr. Declan Kerr, representing the Department of Social Protection. I ask the speakers to keep their presentations to five minutes. They can take their submissions as read if they are obliged to omit parts of them.

Ms Sinéad Keenan

I am with Healthy Food for All, a charity that addresses food poverty. We do that by supporting community and school food initiatives across the country. We try to empower people at local level to address their food needs and we also raise awareness at policy level about the barriers people face accessing a healthy diet.

Food is central to the experience of poverty. One in five children goes to school or to bed hungry because there is not enough food in the home. That is a shocking statistic in this day and age. One in six children attends school without having breakfast according to a report, Health Behaviour in School-aged Children, which was launched last week by the Minister for Health, Deputy Varadkar. Poor nutrition and the lack of an adequate diet have a negative impact on children. It impacts on their ability to participate in the education system during the school day and is related to poor attendance and punctuality. It is also associated with disruptive behaviour.

We have developed resources from our work in schools across the country. We have a good practice guide for school food initiatives and breakfast clubs. We provide training to schools and signpost them to the different resources that are available to them. I am privileged to have worked with many schools and to have seen the impact that school food initiatives, particularly breakfast clubs, have had on children. I can tell the committee wonderful stories about the life-changing impact of a child coming to school at 9.30 a.m. because a breakfast club is available from 7.50 a.m. A parent volunteer told me last week that it is the most important hour of her day and she would never give it up. She is long-term unemployed. She also told me about a child who had communication issues and who was very silent. After involvement with the breakfast club the child has opened up and is engaging more.

Amazing work is taking place across the country. However, it is happening on an ad hoc basis and what is required is a systematic approach based on the needs of the child. That is the core consideration to bear in mind in any work we do on school food. A national food in schools forum is required. Currently, five Government Departments have a role in school food provision. The school meals programme is a vital resource and it impacts on over 200,000 children, but it is a challenge for schools to avail of this funding. Over 100 DEIS, Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools, schools do not avail of the funding and a huge number of non-DEIS schools we have engaged with are unable to draw down the funding but would have significant numbers of children from a disadvantaged background.

The Better Outcomes, Brighter Futures policy framework identifies the Department of Social Protection as the lead Department with responsibility to progress this. However, we believe it must be linked. The missing piece of the puzzle is policy coherence across Departments. There should be a national food in schools forum to develop a strategy that will meet the needs of children and support schools to avail of the funding. Infrastructure is one of the challenges schools face. We must link with the education budget. The recent budget commitment to school infrastructure must be explicitly related to building kitchens for schools, which is a support for the school food programme. We must expand the school meals programme to support children coming from a disadvantaged background even if they are not attending a DEIS school.

We must ensure we are measuring this issue and that it is included in, for example, the Growing Up in Ireland survey. There must also be a training and support package to build the capacity of schools to deliver a school food programme that meets the needs of the child.

Mr. Pádraig McCabe

I thank the committee for its invitation to discuss the school meals programme. Much of what I intend to say will echo some of what Sinéad Keenan said. The key issue from the IPPN point of view is that currently one in five children is coming to school hungry. That is a shocking statistic. As Ms Keenan said, this impacts significantly on their learning, concentration, attention, motivation and general well-being. Low income families are particularly vulnerable, as members of the committee are aware. DEIS schools, indeed all schools, have seen the impact of this.

The IPPN emphasises that at present we do not have a systematic national strategy to prevent hunger in schools, nor is there a single Department with responsibility for developing such a strategy. We also highlight the fact that there are anomalies in the system in terms of funding and provision. Ms Keenan outlined some good practices that are happening in schools. There is no question about that. We also acknowledge the Government's commitment to school meals, as is evident in the increased budget provision during very straitened times. Given the progress in this area to date, we believe the forthcoming centenary celebrations and the impending election give everybody an opportunity to address the need for a strategy for hunger prevention in schools with a view to "cherishing all of the children of the nation equally".

We acknowledge the opportunities provided by the national policy framework, Better Outcomes, Brighter Futures. This articulates a clear vision and defines clear goals and outcomes for children and families. The framework also names the Departments with responsibility for addressing food poverty, healthy food and schools meals, namely, the Department of Education and Skills, the Department of Children and Youth Affairs and the Department of Social Protection. We believe an efficient school meals programme has the potential to contribute significantly to all of these goals and outcomes. It is important that we convey that message.

In terms of funding, school meals funding is for food items only.

However, as alluded to by Ms Sinéad Keenan, increases in spending on school infrastructure provide an opportunity to allocate an explicit funding strand for providing kitchens and facilities in schools and schools should be made aware of that.

In terms of the challenges we face, we have already mentioned the absence of a national strategy for hunger prevention in schools and we note also that there is not one Department - that is key - or individual responsible for developing such a strategy. This has resulted, as the members have heard, in a fragmented approach. There are also issues around flexibility, information for schools and funding anomalies.

In the context of improving education outcomes in DEIS schools, the roll-out of school meals demonstrates that account is being taken of the impact of poor nutrition on children's education, which we acknowledge. However, the response lacks consistency on a clear strategy. Currently, as members have heard, a number of schools are not engaging in the school meals programme and a significant number of children from disadvantaged backgrounds are not attending DEIS schools. There are DEIS schools not engaging in the programme and there are children in non-DEIS schools who also suffer from significant disadvantage. We note from some media reports that there seems to be a misinterpretation as to why that is happening. There is no doubt that schools have concerns around the provision of school meals and there is a challenge for schools in this respect. They relate to a lack of adequate information and clear procedures, a lack of personnel, the reduction of in-school management structures, inadequate space and facilities, the workload and administrative burden, volunteer management, and concerns around waste and that there is no funding provided for infrastructure as the funding provided is only for food. We also believe that recommending the use of the minor works grants to provide such infrastructure does not take account of the stresses on school budgets currently as a result of the austerity measures that we have gone through. I know from talking to principals there are also concerns about stigmatising children in the absence of not providing for all children.

In terms of the strengths of the programme, I have been a principal of a DEIS school for 18 years and I can put my hand on my heart and say that the school meals provision in schools where it is properly done has been probably one of the most significant developments in our schools in terms of its direct and positive impact on children. As a result of this programme in our schools, many children now have access to a healthy breakfast and-or a healthy lunch and the way it is provided ensures a regular food intake in appropriate portions for small children, and the consequences of that are phenomenal in terms of their education, psychological health and social welfare.

The scheme has given rise to very good models of practice. For example, there are currently facilities preparing food off-site and this has reduced the need for kitchen facilities in schools while the food being provided can be monitored in terms of health and nutritional values. The Better Outcomes, Brighter Futures brainwork document highlights the returns that can accrue from investing in children. The school meals programme addresses all the goals and outcomes in that respect. It constitutes an excellent investment in children and it makes very good economic sense.

The Irish Primary Principals Network recommends nominating one Department to have full responsibility for addressing food poverty and for developing a national strategy to prevent hunger in schools. That is our primary focus. We acknowledge all the strengths in the system but we would also recommend that the anomalies currently in the system need to be addressed. They include, for example, providing funding for basic infrastructure without recourse to the minor works grant, having clear procedures and guidelines, ensuring adequate training and support, expanding the programme and ensuring systematic and fair provision. In terms of initiating the school meals programme in schools, it is important to decide who is responsible for it. This is too important an issue. Children going hungry in schools in the 21st century in a first world country that is known for its agriculture and food production is totally unacceptable. We have to grapple with the question of who is responsible for initiating this programme in schools.

We understand the magnitude of the issue of dealing with poverty and that it is a huge task to lift children out of poverty and the limitations on the allocation of resources, but we would say very strongly today that at a very minimum no child should go hungry in school and that every child in a DEIS school, in particular, given the communities we serve, should have access to a healthy breakfast and should have a healthy lunch provided. That goes without saying. We acknowledge all the excellent work that has been done and the funding that has been provided. There are excellent models of practice that can be built on, of which the school meals programme is one, and we would implore people to build on those.

Thank you, Mr. McCabe. Our final speaker is Ms Faughnan for the Department of Social Protection.

Ms Helen Faughnan

As the Chairman said, the Department of Social Protection administers the school meals programme as a targeted intervention for children at risk of food poverty and educational disadvantage. Proper nutrition, as the two previous speakers said, can improve children’s ability to concentrate, improve disruptive behaviour and encourage children to attend school. The programme aims to provide regular nutritious food to children who are unable, by reason of lack of food, to take full advantage of the education provided for them. Funding the provision of food services in schools guarantees ongoing positive returns on a public investment in the health and educational performance of future generations. There is a particular focus on the provision of breakfast clubs within the programme which provide very positive outcomes for vulnerable children in terms of their school attendance, punctuality and energy levels.

The programme provides funding towards the provision of food services to some 1,700 schools and organisations throughout the country, which benefits approximately 217,000 children at a total cost of €39 million this year. An additional €3 million was allocated to the programme as part of budget 2016, bringing the total allocation to €42 million for next year. The programme is an important component of policies to encourage school attendance and extra educational achievement by children, especially those who come from the most disadvantaged background.

As we have indicated, there are two schemes operated, the urban school meals scheme and the school meals local projects scheme. The urban school meals scheme is a historical statutory scheme that is operated in conjunction with local authorities. This scheme is confined to national school children and the decision on eligibility of individual children and schools rests with the local authorities, subject to this Department’s endorsement. The Department of Social Protection jointly funds the food costs on a 50:50 basis with the local authorities which are responsible for the administration and operation of the scheme. More than 300 schools benefit from the urban school meals scheme, at an annual cost to the Department of Social Protection of approximately €1 million. The second project, the school meals local projects scheme, provides funding directly to primary schools, secondary schools, local groups and voluntary organisations, in both urban and rural areas, which operate their own school meals projects. The scheme was established to assist school meals projects operating outside the remit of the urban school meals scheme. At the end of the previous academic year, 2014-15, almost 1,200 schools and more than 200 preschools and other groups were receiving funding under this scheme.

In line with the national policy framework for children and young people, Better Outcomes, Brighter Futures, priority for new applications for funding has been given to schools which are part of the Department of Education and Skills initiative for disadvantaged schools, Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools, the DEIS programme. Funding is allocated on a school year basis and schools or groups must reapply for funding in advance of each school year.

In recognition of the benefits that the scheme provides and despite severe pressure on the social protection budget, the Government has provided for an increased allocation of some 20% for the school meals programme - increasing it from €35 million in 2012 to €42 million in 2016. The extra funding provided under the scheme in recent years has extended the scheme to additional DEIS schools and special schools and has provided for increased payments to existing schools with a particular emphasis on breakfast clubs.

The additional €3 million that has been provided for next year will again be used to build on the previous commitment to prioritise the provision of breakfast clubs. Funding under the school meals local projects scheme is based on a maximum rate of payment per meal per child per day. It has been outlined that funding is for food costs only. All food must be of a suitable quality and nutritional value and must be prepared and consumed in an appropriate environment. The type and range of meals provided, as well as the method and logistics of supplying the meals, are decided by the individual local groups and schools that operate the projects. Responsibility for all aspects of the day-to-day operation of the scheme lies with the school or group. All schools have a responsibility to implement healthy eating policies. The Department advises schools to consult relevant healthy eating publications, such as those published by the Healthy Food for All initiative. Various links are available on the website of the Department of Social Protection.

Analysis undertaken with the Department of Education and Skills shows that the majority of DEIS schools are participating in the school meals scheme. The analysis shows that a high percentage of schools from DEIS bands 1 and 2, and from urban and town areas, are participating in the scheme. This shows that the scheme is clearly targeting the most educationally disadvantaged pupils in the State. DEIS schools that are not participating in the scheme are generally rural schools where an identified need for the scheme has not been established. Over the last two years, the Department has written twice to all DEIS schools that are not participating in the scheme to invite and encourage them to participate in it.

In line with the normal control aspects of all of our social welfare schemes, the Department commenced a school meals inspection programme in 2012. The on-site visits that are conducted by social welfare inspectors strengthen and support the controls that are already in place. Almost 455 schools have been examined to date under this inspection programme. The inspections find a high rate of compliance by funded organisations and schools with the conditions of the scheme. In cases of non-compliance, appropriate action is taken by the Department depending on the issues identified. As always, the Department needs to maintain a balance between managing payments to schools and continuing to provide for a service for the children therein. The inspection programme has been expanded recently. A three-year programme has been in place since August 2015 to cover the inspection of all schools. Within the next three years, we will have inspected all of the schools. Additional staffing resources have been allocated to the school meals section of the Department to support this inspection programme. As I have said, some 455 schools have been examined since 2012. Some 140 schools have been examined so far this year. While analysis of the returned reports for this year is ongoing, the indications are that as in previous years, the results will show a high rate of compliance.

I assure the committee that the Department is committed to the ongoing development and administration of the school meals programme and recognises the obvious benefits it provides to children. Applications for the scheme for the current year have been processed where the relevant documentation has been provided to the Department. I trust that my presentation has been of assistance to the committee. I will be happy to answer any questions that may arise.

I welcome all three groups to this afternoon's meeting. I thank them for their presentations and their time. I thank the Healthy Food for All organisation for its advocacy work across the country. I would like to make a few comments and ask a few questions. I will begin by asking the Department of Social Protection about the comments made by Ms Keenan and the Irish Primary Principals Network in relation to the current structure for food provision and their suggestions for how that might be improved and amended. Do the officials from the Department have any commentary or feedback on those suggestions? I would like to know whether those suggestions have been given any consideration within the Department. I think that would be welcome.

I am aware that Healthy Food for All is an all-island organisation. Could Ms Keenan provide a little additional commentary on the difference between the current structure in Northern Ireland and that in the Republic? What is the difference in how they operate? Is there anything we can learn from how things are done in the Six Counties, in particular? I understand that Healthy Food for All has proposed the establishment of a forum to structure this scheme and has indicated its belief that this should be done by a single Department. I would like its representatives to state which Department would be best placed to do that, in their view. If they have put together any costings on what needs to be achieved, and what it would cost to get there, I would like details of them.

I would like to hear some feedback from the representatives of the Irish Primary Principals Network on whether this scheme should be administered by a single Department. Mr. McCabe made the point that "where it is properly done", the schools meals programme has been a radical measure and has made a significant impact. I ask him to flesh that out a bit more. What does he mean by "properly" in this context? What does that mean for him? What exactly is involved in those instances where this is done "properly"? Mr. McCabe also made some points about the funding of facilities and the need for training and support. If he has any particular costings for the type of budget he is talking about in this context, I would like to hear about them.

I will conclude by putting some questions to the officials from the Department of Social Protection. Does the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine provide any funding for school meal projects? Am I wrong in thinking that some level of funding comes from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine in some instances? Can the departmental officials comment on whether they feel that many of the DEIS schools which are not participating in the scheme do not seem to have identified a need for school meals? If that is the case, I wonder how they can be so sure. Is it the Department's view that in some schools, there is no need for school meals to be provided?

Gabhaim buíochas leis na finnéithe as an méid atá ráite acu go dtí seo. A number of questions arise from the presentation. How do we move from where we are today? That is the key question. I think everyone here, and everyone who has visited a school that has participated in the school meals programme, can see how valuable it is. How can we ensure all DEIS schools can avail of the school meals programme in the first instance? How can we roll out the scheme beyond those schools? There are pupils in non-DEIS schools who are facing the same levels of disadvantage as their counterparts in DEIS schools. It would be interesting to hear how this is managed in the North. As far as I remember, they have a registration scheme of some sort.

My next question relates to the cost of delivering this scheme. Most schools operate within whatever they are given. I do not know how they manage to deliver the programme that is in front of them at the price they are given. For example, 60 cent per child is provided for breakfast. The programme or the scheme must provide two of the following items: cereal, toast, scone, fruit, yoghurt or milk. That does not include the cost of washing, cleaning and everything else. I know the money is supposed to be spent on food, but part of the spending relates to preparation. Anyone would do well to meet this challenge. The same thing applies to the lunchtime provision. I will not go through the figures. It is fabulous that people can do this. Are schools having to come up with additional funds to allow school projects to continue at the rate that has been set? The Department has said the food that is provided must be of a suitable quality and nutritional value. Yoghurt is of major nutritional value, but one can get very few yoghurts for less than 50 cent. I think it is a hard ask. I can understand the restrictions the Department is under. Some of the shortfalls in terms of the costs that have to be met, or the funding that is available, have to be addressed even as this scheme is expanding.

I would like to ask a question about the inspections that are done by the Department of Social Protection. What is being inspected? Are the inspectors making sure enough kids are there, or are they looking at food quality? I would imagine that the Food Safety Authority would be a more appropriate body to look at food quality. Perhaps the Department of Social Protection inspectors are experts at this stage. This brings us back to Ms Keenan's argument that a single forum or body needs to be responsible. At least such a body would have the necessary food safety expertise. I will leave it there. I can come back if needs be.

I thank the various groups for their presentations. If more funding was available for facilities the organisations could do more and it probably warrants doing more if the resources were available. Ms Sinéad Keenan and Mr. Pádraig McCabe raised issues around the fact that there is no national strategy and no single body involved. What is the result of that? What is not happening because there is no single body? In terms of a national strategy, perhaps Mr. McCabe would elaborate on what might be the key elements of such a strategy. On the question of why some DEIS schools do not get involved, perhaps he has some local knowledge on what they are saying that might be important. In terms of how we might deliver to children in need in non-DEIS schools without stigmatising them are there any thoughts that may be helpful to us?

I will start with Ms Sinéad Keenan.

Ms Sinéad Keenan

I thank members for those questions. I will start with Deputy Charlie McConalogue. Northern Ireland has a food and schools forum which was established in 2009. Obviously there is a very different tradition and legacy of school food provision in Northern Ireland. The food and schools forum is co-led by the Departments of education and health. It has implemented nutritional standards and develops policy around the need. The two Departments are exploring the food needs among the school population and responding to them. They also draw in key partners, such as the education authority. I am not sure of the exact structure but they would support the administration of it through that scheme. The benefit of that is policy coherence. At the moment we have five Departments with a role to play in school food provision. Obviously we have the school meals programme which I understand is quite an administrative function in terms of distributing the funding to the schools. The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine administers the EU school milk scheme and the EU fruit and vegetable scheme - the Food Dudes programme - which involves a different administrative application process for schools. The Department of Children and Youth Affairs has the school completion programme and is a key partner in delivering school food at local level. The Department of Education and Skills has a role to play in terms of the infrastructure available to schools. The Department of Health has a role around the nutrition guidelines and so on.

There are more than 100 DEIS schools not availing of the school food programme. Through our work we have run workshops to support schools which are entitled to the school meals programme to draw down. Largely the feedback we get from them is that there may be a need but they do not know where to start. They do not have the space as Ms Helen Faughnan mentioned. We do not have that tradition of school food provision and we do not have the space, which is particularly an issue for rural schools which are often two classroom or two teacher schools. That there is nowhere to provide food is an issue. There is also the administrative burden. When it is a teaching principal school who will do the application process? That the programme must be up and running for three weeks before the funding draw down is a challenge. The main issues for schools in terms of drawing down funding appears to be the lack of facilities, the lack of upfront funding and the lack of capacity among staff to actually deliver a school food programme. In addition, the money is available for the food item only. No start-up money is available for getting bowls, spoons, toasters, fridges etc., the equipment needed to provide food.

I assure Deputy Ó Snodaigh that schools are very resourceful in terms of their fundraising capabilities and how they can manage to deliver a model of good practice is phenomenal. I can tell him about a parent volunteer who is running a breakfast club in north Dublin. She has been working at the breakfast club for three years and has upskilled to become a fundraiser. She has gathered signatures from parents. She has approached the local supermarket and the local bread company who are providing food in addition to what the school can draw down from the school meals programme.

A single body would co-ordinate existing resources. A huge amount of resources is going into the school meals programme. By co-ordinating the different resources they can have a greater impact at the school level. It would ease the administrative burden on schools to have a one-stop shop with that approach. Schools do not know where to start. There are so many different strands and concerns around the administrative burden.

I would make one final point on stigma. That is a very real concern for schools. That is certainly something for us; it is not above dividing or judging. We want to ensure the school meals programme is provided to those in need. Schools are best equipped to address this issue. Schools promote it as a reward. A core group of children would attend but there is a reward system in schools. For whatever reason, a class would be selected and a number of students would be selected for this week and that is how they get around it. In other schools it is open to all where the children pay €1 each. For those who are unable to pay the charge is waived but is done at office level so the children themselves would not know that.

I thank Ms Keenan. I now call on Mr. Pádraig McCabe.

Mr. Pádraig McCabe

I will try to cover as many points as possible. The first question I recall was how this can be properly done. I was thinking of our own situation. There are logistics and infrastructure required. We are lucky in that we had applied a long time ago, before this became an issue, for dining facilities, library facilities and a parents room. We were lucky to be involved in the home-school liaison scheme also. We had the infrastructure in place in terms of being able to provide this. Since the school completion came on board it is looking after the administration of it; that has taken a huge burden off the schools. Having somebody who can administer it locally makes a huge difference. School completion has dealt with all the paperwork around our particular scheme. The infrastructure is basic. One is not talking about a huge amount of money. One is talking about a dishwasher, cups, saucers etc. In one school we had the facility to use our DEIS grant. It is a matter of prioritising. We have prioritised this in our school. Many schools that are availing of the scheme have prioritised it.

Which Department should be responsible? As Ms Sinéad Keenan said there are three Departments involved in the whole area of food - the Department of Social Protection provides funding for the meals, the Department of Education and Skills provides infrastructure and curriculum and the Department of Children and Youth Affairs looks after school completion. Genuinely, we do not mind which Department takes it on. If I was to say which Department should take it on board I can understand that people might look at me askance, but some Department needs to do it. If somebody asks what is meant by a strategy, a strategy is where one starts with the problem and work towards a solution. One does not start with the solution by throwing money at it and work towards the problem. One identifies and defines what the problem is and then sees how to plan to address that. We are a DEIS band 1 school. We have been doing this for years. The Department of Education and Skills know this. People come in and ask what is our DEIS plan for this, that or the other. We start by setting a target, we then decide what we are going to do to achieve that target and then review how well we have achieved it. That is a strategic approach to a problem as opposed to just solving the problem by throwing money at it.

On the issue of why schools may not take up the offer - I have covered a few points and Ms Keenan has covered many - I do not think people get it in terms of the difficulties families are facing. We are very lucky in our school. We have a home-school liaison teacher.

She goes into kitchens and sees empty cupboards. This week she is involved in collecting food vouchers to give to families for Christmas. We have first hand knowledge of the problem. Other smaller schools may not have access to these facilities and that information may not be coming into the school. Even in our school, a DEIS band 1 school, we have very proud families. Sometimes it will be said to me that we are giving something to people who get everything. However, we know some families coming into us will not ask for anything and will not say or pretend they are in difficulty. We find that out because our home school liaison teacher goes to the houses and sees what is happening. There is a lack of knowledge of the reality on the ground.

A question was asked in regard to how to deliver without stigmatising. Our school does that. The breakfast club is there for everybody. Our school is a DEIS band 1 school, but as we all know, every school has a mix. This programme is self-selecting in some respects. If we provide lunches or breakfasts, those who need it will engage. In our case we target those who need it to ensure they engage. Those who do not need it will not engage, but at least we have made it available and have the facilities there for them. Perhaps Mr. Ruddy would like to add to that.

Mr. David Ruddy

On the issue of DEIS schools and school meals, I am principal of a DEIS school and school attendance has increased from 87% to 95% over a ten year period. As a result, our attainment in literacy and numeracy has shot up. This is excellent news.

Deputies Ó Snodaigh and McConalogue asked what Department is responsible for this. My colleague has been shrewd in regard to commenting on that, but I will go for broke on the issue. With all due respect to my friends, perhaps former friends, in the Department of Social Protection, I think the Department of Children and Youth Affairs is very much at the core of this, because it is in charge of school attendance, enforcement and attendance strategies. It also deals with school completion. We are not fussy about who is responsible, but the direct question was asked and my response is that it should be the Department of Children and Youth Affairs, if we had to pick a Department.

Ms Helen Faughnan

In terms of the numbers participating, reference has been made to DEIS schools in bands 1 and 2. In percentage terms, some 98% of DEIS band 1 schools are participating, 97% of DEIS band 2 schools and in rural primary schools the percentage has increased from 67% to 77%. We have 836 DEIS schools, of which 742, 89%, are participating. Therefore, some 94 DEIS schools are not in the scheme. Despite writing to them and despite staff in the relevant section being in contact with them, the feedback, from rural schools in particular, is that rural families seem to be feeding their children.

I accept what Ms Keenan has said about some of the schools, that there is a concern about setting up the structure, etc., for the scheme. Our experience is that the school meals scheme is delivered in a variety of ways and that schools, principals and volunteers have been innovative in terms of using the resources they have. Some schools have a full canteen service, operated either by the school or outsourced to a private catering firm. In other examples, the school purchases prepared meals from a specialist school meal supplier. Others purchase prepared meals from local suppliers, such as a local café, restaurant or deli. Some purchase supplies and meals are prepared either on site or off site by volunteers or staff. Sometimes food that requires no preparation is purchased from local shops or wholesalers. This provides some idea of the scope for the scheme.

We too have a concern in regard to the spread of Departments involved in this. The Department of Education and Skills has taken a key step in this regard. In 2014, it commissioned a consolidated report on previous evaluations of DEIS. From that report, Learning from the Evaluation of DEIS was published in April 2015. Since then, the Minister has announced a consultation process to inform the future direction for the DEIS programme. An interdepartmental group has been established and we are participating in that. The first meeting of that group was held last week. We hope that this will be the initiation or stepping stones for the establishment of some sort of national strategy to address this issue, because we agree a more comprehensive and co-ordinated approach would be of value.

Deputy Ó Snodaigh asked how schools manage. I have set out the different approaches they take. The benefit of these is the economies of scale they can achieve in terms of purchase. Generally, the schools manage within the allocations provided to them. He also asked about inspections. Our inspections are threefold. We inspect the type of food being provided to ensure that schools adhere as best as possible to the healthy food guidelines. For example, we have had to follow up with schools that have been providing fizzy drinks rather than milk or better options. We also examine the finances and accounts regarding the money we have provided. We also check the number of children being fed. We are seeking to improve this in the context of getting more statistical information from the Department of Education and Skills in regard to the number of children registered. We are flexible however and if schools have a spike in pupil numbers, we can adapt to that.

On the question of which Department should be responsible for the programme, that is a matter for the Government in the context of allocating responsibility. Our Department is willing to work with and support whatever strategy is put in place because from the social inclusion perspective, the school meals programme is a vital support to children and parents.

Has the Department looked at similar schemes in other countries or considered using them as a reference point? Perhaps we could learn from the experience of other countries. England had a very good scheme years ago when I was teaching there, but I do not know if it is still in place. It was impressive in that it provided cooked meals at lunch time.

I have a couple of questions also. Mr. McCabe mentioned poverty and it is important we look at that. In terms of the redistribution of income, Ireland has the most redistributive system of all countries in the OECD. We had a meeting on this issue and Dr. Donal de Buitléir has written a lot on the issue. No matter how we cut it, we, more than any other country, redistribute income through tax and social transfers. The poverty reduction effect of social transfers in Ireland in comparison with other EU countries is approximately 60%, whereas the EU average is 36%. Not only do we redistribute, our redistribution is hugely effective. Therefore, I ask is it an issue of poverty or are there other issues? For example, if we look at a home that is visited, there is definitely cash going into that home, which would not be the case in other EU or OECD countries. They would not have that level of cash transfers.

We have a weakness in terms of public infrastructure. When there is child poverty I wonder if there are other issues. When the child goes to school hungry, is it just straightforward poverty? It is a bit like homelessness in that there are obviously other issues involved. I wonder about the DEIS review and if the demographic profile of some DEIS schools is not as disadvantaged. Some people are not in DEIS schools who should be in DEIS schools while others who should not be in DEIS, so there is a debate to be had around the schools that do not take up the DEIS designation.

With regard to costs, I am aware of some companies who offer a packed lunch and the children can go in themselves and pick what they want; a piece of fruit and a sandwich or whatever. If private companies can run these types of schemes, then it must be profitable for them to do that. They are not doing it for charity as they do not seem to be charities. Scale must come into the equation.

Reference was made to school inspections. I wonder when private companies are engaged by schools and are there issues around the transparency of that process to ensure that there would be fairness, proper competition and that no single company would have a monopoly.

There are two schemes and I am trying to figure out why there are two. One is a very small scheme which might be retained to allow the local authorities to contribute. However, it seems odd to have two schemes - the urban school meals scheme and the school meals programme - doing much of the same work. One of them was set up after the 1913 Lock-out and the fact that it still exists speaks volumes. However, we also have a return of soup kitchens, which says something about where we have gone. Although it is not a huge amount, would it be beneficial if the money in the urban school meals scheme was subsumed into the overall pot and local authorities were to continue to contribute, or would they hide their part or spend it somewhere else? The idea would be to increase the amount of money available and hopefully we could make this a recommendation from this meeting.

Ms Sinéad Keenan

I will address the Chairman's query on inequality. We see food poverty as a multi-dimensional issue with a number of factors. Affordability is the primary issue as Ireland has some of the highest food costs in Europe. The cumulative effect of austerity budgets has made it harder for families on a low income to put healthy food on the table for their children. We have heard stories from parents who say they try to pack their children full of calories because they do not want them to go hungry. Unfortunately the cheaper foods are higher in fat, sugar and salt. Where one lives in terms of proximity to supermarkets and shops also has a bearing on food poverty, as have other factors, such as dependence upon transport, the type of food being promoted in the area, housing conditions for food storage and cooking equipment. Confidence and motivation are also factors. A point was made about redistribution and infrastructure and the school meals programme is a real example of an opportunity to focus on service provision to give equal access to services. That is the real opportunity and benefit of the school meals programmes; it delivers equal access to all children.

With regard to the companies which provide the service, economy of scale is an issue but the question must be asked about the strategic focus. Is it appropriate to have a company in Limerick providing food to a school in Donegal? A strategic policy debate around this could ask if it is better to support local food provision and local food economies. It has certainly worked well with community employment schemes. Links could be made with local community resources for a joined-up approach.

Mr. Pádraig McCabe

With regard to poverty and the distribution, Ms Keenan is right that schools are for universal provision not the provision for some or a few. Schools are not homogeneous groups and when children come into DEIS schools all kinds of factors come into play. Some of the reasons schools are given DEIS status include the extent of single parent homes, the educational attainment of parents, addiction and private rented accommodation. We all know there are many issues around private rented accommodation and paying rent. Food is a variable in people's pay packet. It is one of the things families can skimp on whereas if the rent or bills are not paid they are in trouble. Cheaper food is less healthy than proper food. While wealth may be distributed better, some of the families are facing more significant problems. In DEIS schools we have noticed that food poverty is not the sole factor in that children are being affected by all sorts of home situations, including mental health and child mental health issues in the home, addiction and, in a minority of cases, there are children living with criminality. Different factors can affect a child's life.

As a principal of a DEIS school, every time I have to make a decision I only see children. That is what I deal with from the time I go to work until I leave so nothing else comes into my psyche. If there are any other factors which impact on why those children are not being fed in school I personally do not factor it in. I want to make sure the child in front of me is looked after and any strategy should also be focusing on the children. When it comes to how the food is provided, whether it is lunches or otherwise, our model is to use a private company, which works well for us. The three-piece lunch is €1.40, the small snack is 60 cent and the breakfast is 60 cent. Once the school has the funding it can provide relatively healthy food. It is as healthy as we can provide in the circumstances.

It is interesting to watch the Food Dudes and those type of programmes coming into schools. We can take food choices for granted. Children in our school do not. If you provide a strawberry, a mango or a blueberry to a child in a DEIS band 1 school they are considered exotic fruits which most of the children will never see. The food programmes give the children an opportunity to experience healthy food options. When one deals with food poverty there is the education aspect of accessibility, affordability and raising the awareness of healthy food. However, by doing it in schools in a non-threatening way it spills over into the family. The parents come in and see what the children are eating and it is hugely beneficial.

Mr. David Ruddy

Prior to the school food lunch scheme, the poorest children's parents were buying the lunches in delis across the road from schools. They had a difficulty managing their finances. The children came in with the most unhealthy of possible lunches. Now, at least every child has a healthy lunch. Deputy Conaghan asked about the experience of other countries and kitchens. Our schools are not set up to do that, but I am happy to say that if one wants to see a Rolls-Royce kitchen the members will see it at a school in Cherry Orchard. There are three Dublin South-Central Deputies here and they may know the school I am talking about.

Ms Helen Faughnan

To follow on from the points about educating families, the network of family resource centres throughout the country does good work in terms of supporting families and educating them on food quality. The centres teach them the basics of how to cook on a budget. In some ways, the Money Advice & Budgeting Service, MABS, also has a role in this regard. This is an important aspect to the issue.

In terms of value for money, this sector makes business sense for quite a number of companies. Decisions on the food and how it will be provided are for the school to make locally. The school principal and the board of management, possibly with input from the parents, will make the decisions. If they want to source it locally, that is entirely up to them. Our Department has held a preliminary meeting with officials from the Office of Government Procurement to tease out the possibility of a centralised procurement framework for the delivery of school meals in order that schools can draw down on a nationwide procurement process. This is at a very early stage of exploration and will depend on the capacity of the Office of Government Procurement. It is, however, something we will explore in more detail.

On some of the restrictions which applied to a school, until now if a school was running any sort of meal scheme, including a small snack club, for instance, it was precluded from setting up a second scheme. With the increased funding over recent years, we have been able to extend the schools meal programme to approximately 100 new DEIS schools. We have also been able to revisit existing DEIS schools where pupil numbers have increased or where only a snack club was in play. A school coming to us looking for funding for a breakfast club will, depending on the number of pupils, get 100% funding. If the school was a small, low-funded school, we would fund it up to 80% of its requirements. Generally, across the board, we will provide an increase in funding of up to 20%. Many schools have experienced increased allocations this year. If any Deputy or Senator is concerned about a particular school, he or she should speak to us about it.

Deputy Ó Snodaigh mentioned the historical issue relating to the urban school meals scheme. The scheme goes back to the Dublin Lock-out and the local authority involvement at the time. Some 300 schools are covered and joint funding is in place. This is something we will examine in a review of the DEIS schools and the provision under DEIS. We will be engaging with the Department of Education and Skills.

Once they do not lose out.

Ms Helen Faughnan

Exactly. That is part of it too because it is a valuable, local aspect that is working well. We would not want to see it being lost.

Did Deputy Byrne wish to speak?

I am sorry for being late, Chairman, but I heard some of the presentations in the office upstairs. I thank the Department of Social Protection for its work, in particular in recent years, on healthy eating in schools and breakfast clubs. Breakfast clubs have made a huge difference for many children. When my children went to school in Our Lady of Lourdes national school in Inchicore, there was no breakfast club. We on the parents committee found that some children were coming to school who had nothing to eat since the night before. Through the parents committee, we set up one of the first breakfast clubs. This was in the early 1980s. The only complaint we received about the breakfast club was that children who had their breakfasts at home still wanted to have a breakfast when they came into school.

I thought this was a great combination and one which could be joined in with one of the policy proposals around DEIS schools. The school meals scheme could be expanded to every school, even if it is not a DEIS school. This is very important. I do not love the term "DEIS" or the idea of segregating children and telling them they go to a DEIS school or any other school. All children should be treated the same, regardless of the type of school they attend. My opinion is that it is a disaster to label schools. There are many children in non-DEIS schools who are coming from very difficult backgrounds. They need the same advantages being given to children attending DEIS schools. I therefore agree with this policy.

Most of the schools in our constituency, that is, the constituency of us three members, are old schools although we also have new schools. There is a new school on the old model grounds and in St. Ultan's in Ballyfermot as well. These are relatively new schools and the facilities have meant it was possible to provide proper meals. Unfortunately, in some of the older schools, it is not possible. I agree that all new schools should have proper kitchen facilities where a regular meal can be prepared. I am a real fan of Jamie Oliver. I watched all his programmes from last year and the year before about school meals. One thing I took from them is the importance of people eating things such as broccoli, cauliflower and carrots from a young age which, sadly, does not happen in all households. Some children think vegetables only come in a jar or a tin, but they do not. They can be fresh and have to be prepared. I think that aspect of the programme made a huge impact on many children.

The principal of Mercy Secondary School in Goldenbridge was a model principal. She was there for a long time. My children went to this secondary school. The principal was one of the first principals I ever heard speak about the importance of eating healthy food. She banned all rubbish from the school. Even the teachers were subject to the ban. I thought this was a great idea. Everyone had a set lunch and she used to go through people's lunchboxes. She was an amazing person because she brought in a whole new concept around the preparation of lunches. She brought a great vitality to the school in terms of healthy eating. To this day, my own girls, who went to the school, would be fussy about what they eat and do not eat. Their mother is not as fussy but age has an awful lot to do with it.

I sit on the Committee on Health and Children where we have had people speaking to us about obesity, in particular in young children. At just a couple of months' old, these children can find themselves in children's hospitals because they are completely overweight for their age group. We need to promote healthy eating among very young children and this needs to start from their first day in a playschool or crèche.

I compliment the Department on the wonderful effort that has been put into the issue down through the years, in particular in breakfast clubs. Breakfast clubs have worked right across the board. I will not say where I was two weeks ago but I was coming back from my daughter's house. It was lunchbreak time in a school. The school is not in Dublin but in County Meath. I noticed a van parked outside the school gate, which took me by surprise, with a queue going around the corner. I pulled in the car to see what it was selling. I could not believe what was being sold on the doorstep of a secondary school. I thought it a shame when so many young people have good lifestyles and eat healthy foods.

I compliment the Department and agree with it that just because a school is not a DEIS school does not mean it does not have children coming from very difficult circumstances at home and in their communities. All schools that are to be built, be they primary or secondary schools, should have facilities to prepare food on the premises.

I will finish by thanking the volunteers. Sometimes we forget about the parents who show up to run the breakfast clubs and after-school programmes. If we are ever to tackle obesity in this country, we must start with children of a young age. I thank the delegates for their presentations. I was listening.

Do the Deputies have any other questions? There is one thing I would urge.

If the Department of Social Protection is considering national procurement, it might consider operating on a regional basis. For example, it could be done in the way the education and training boards were established. That would fit in with the need to have local investment and so on.

Deputy Byrne made another point. The deputations will be aware of cases in schools that are not under the DEIS programme. Sometimes there can be disorganisation in a family. There may be issues around children not going to bed on time and so on. When I went to school, for a while at least, we used to get a carton of milk. There is something to be said for an element of universal provision. If there are no other questions we will take concluding remarks from each representative.

Ms Sinéad Keenan

I missed one point from Deputy Conaghan on school food programmes in other countries. In Europe many countries have national schools food programmes. We have heard of the delights of France and Italy. They are at the top of the scale, but we also mentioned the United Kingdom earlier. All children in primary education in Wales are entitled to a free school breakfast. That touches on the universal aspect of it. All preschool meals are provided to every child in Sweden. Finland spends 8% of the entire education budget on food because those responsible see the impact on education, social and health outcomes.

I am keen to pick up on another point made by Deputy Catherine Byrne on the importance of an early start. I heard a short story about a school garden. The children came home to their mother with a cabbage they had grown in the garden. They had heard about the importance of cabbage for their health and wanted the cabbage cooked that night - they could not wait any longer. They also wanted to drink the water the cabbage was cooked in, because they had heard about the iron content. With an early start, all of this has an impact.

I am keen to touch on the point about planning. This should and must be considered by a national food-in-schools forum. We know about the case in Greystones of planning being granted for a fast food restaurant beside three schools. Thankfully, it was overturned. That point should be considered as well.

Mr. Pádraig McCabe

I found this meeting very positive. From what I can gather, everyone seems to be on the same page in some respects and that is positive. It is heartening to hear of moves towards joined-up thinking in all Departments and our organisation is supportive of that.

The key issue from our point of view is focusing on the problem in terms of ensuring that if we are going to have a strategic response, then we should make clear that it is unacceptable in current times to have any child in school who is hungry. Whether that means providing a glass of milk or whatever to every child, it is something we need to consider seriously. We commend the progress that has been made. It is down to the increases in the budget for social protection as well as the commitment across the board in terms of providing the necessary infrastructure.

We are at the start. When it comes to resolving major issues, it can be difficult to know where to start. A good starting point is that no child in a school in Ireland should ever be hungry. It is simple: no child in school in this country should ever be hungry. If we start from that point, we can build on it.

Mr. David Ruddy

I again thank the committee. Even in stringent and difficult times the programme was maintained and I am happy to give credit to all politicians for that.

Ms Helen Faughnan

I see addressing the issue of food poverty in children as two-pronged. We must not forget parental responsibility. Earlier, I referred to the need for education and trying to train parents in food preparation. Ms Keenan made reference to the school garden, etc. We have come a long way. I am the product of two parents from the country, so our back garden was always half covered in vegetables even though I grew up in Dublin. We need to concentrate on parental responsibility and how to support parents in terms of money management and assisting and training them to provide healthy nutritious food. This would have the two-pronged effect of helping to reduce the obesity risk for children.

We have seen many developments and improvements in the school meals programme. We have increased the number of schools in the DEIS programme this year. Thankfully, with the increased funding - some €3 million extra next year - we are going to increase the level of payments. Any extension to non-DEIS schools would have to be considered in a budgetary process. The Department is committed to the scheme and to working with whatever new strategy comes about to make it a more consistent and feasible scheme in future.

I thank our witnesses. We have had a very good and informative discussion. This is the last meeting before Christmas, although it may not be the last meeting - we will see how things go. I thank all our members. I am keen to take this opportunity to thank Tom Sheridan, our clerk, and Angela Treacy. We have a new member of staff with us today, Elaine Vaughan. Two other staff members, Mary Blaney and Nuala O'Hanlon, helped the committee during the year.

I wish everyone a happy Christmas and new year. The next meeting of the joint committee will be scheduled when the date of the resumption of the Dáil in the new year is known.

I am a latecomer to this committee but I want to thank you, Chairman. Sometimes we forget that the people at the top keep the show on the road. I wish to thank you in case we are not back, or, I should say, in case I am not back. It has been a pleasure to be on the committee. Most of all, it has been chaired so well. In fairness, the clerk and everyone else have kept all of us up to speed with the work we have had to do.

The joint committee adjourned at 2.50 p.m. until 1 p.m. on Wednesday, 13 January 2016.
Top
Share