Subordinate Legislation
Provision of School Lunches (Disapplication of the Requirement to Charge) (Scotland) (Order) 2007 (Draft)
The third item on the agenda is formal consideration of the draft order. Members should have with them a copy of the draft order, a cover note, and a briefing paper from the Scottish Parliament information centre.
Motion moved,
That the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee recommends that the draft Provision of School Lunches (Disapplication of the Requirement to Charge) (Scotland) (Order) 2007 be approved.—[Adam Ingram.]
We can now debate any issues that have arisen as a result of our lines of questioning in item 2. I seek an indication from members who have something to say. There are no further questions for the minister, so this is an opportunity simply to state your position for the record, if you feel that that is appropriate. The minister can respond to the debate.
I feel that our decision is compromised by the situation that we discussed earlier: information has gone to the councils prior to proper scrutiny by the committee.
If the draft order is agreed to today, Parliament will have an opportunity to discuss it next week. I wish to register my frustration not only as a member of the committee but as a local member. Parents will today receive a further piece of information that the form that they have been asked to fill in may be inaccurate. Depending on what the minister will decide, on non-objective criteria, the pilot may be rolled out in the Borders but not in Midlothian. The minister told the committee today that, because of the spending review, there is no indication of further finance or, indeed, of an allocation to local authorities in the next financial year.
Later in the agenda we will discuss an SSI on the extension of the provision of school education to children under school age. The Executive note for that instrument says that an allocation has been made for 2008-09, with the proviso that that is subject to review because of the spending review. Nevertheless, an allocation of £21.75 million has been made. The lack of clarity is not fair for parents—I hope that that will be discussed in the chamber next week.
As a result of this morning's discussions I still have some concerns about the purpose of the pilot. I agree totally with Christina McKelvie when she says that we should all be concerned about the levels of obesity in Scotland. I understand the desire to change the culture, but I am not yet convinced that this is the way to do it. More measures need to be introduced—in regard to eating and, as the minister said, in regard to activity. I am concerned that the pilot will not show us what changes can be made by offering free school meals.
I hear what the minister says about this being a window of opportunity, but it seems to be a case of, "We've got a sum of money. Let's spend it on this, although we're not sure whether it will prove what we want it to prove." I think that the minister, because of his background, will accept that that is not particularly scientific. However, we should accept this opportunity as it stands and support the pilot.
My further concerns are the same as those of Jeremy Purvis: how we progress this at a later stage. I would hate to think that we are building up expectations that the minister cannot fulfil. The evidence provided by the pilot may not be the evidence we are hoping for, and we would then have a dilemma about whether to continue. I am uncertain about the process, but I do not oppose our going ahead with the pilot.
I echo the comments of my colleagues: I am slightly disappointed. The minister said that the work on the pilot would build on the work of the previous Executive. There is no doubt that there is broad support for improving the diet of our young people and of the nation as a whole, and for tackling our growing obesity problem. I am sure that we all share the underlying policy objective of inducing cultural and behavioural change among our young people. The difficulty is that I am not entirely convinced that the pilot will do that or that it will test anything. It is called a pilot, but I am not quite sure what the Executive is piloting. It seems to have made up its mind on a number of areas.
Although the pilot will add some information—for that reason, it is, on balance, worth supporting—it will not add a huge amount of information. In particular, it will not test any of the alternatives to free school meals. If we want to improve the take-up of school meals, universality is not the only issue to consider. We know that there is a problem with take-up in many areas in which free school meals are provided. It is also evident from the pilot areas that there is a huge divergence in take-up between different authorities. The pilot will provide some information, but I am not sure that variation in take-up will be investigated properly.
There are other issues to do with school meals that we must pursue. For example, we must consider how we can improve the diet of children who do not take school meals. Many policies can be introduced in that area, on which I hope the minister will follow through, including the provision of guidance on what should be in packed lunches, the imposition of controls on who sells food outside schools and consideration of whether children should be allowed out of school to go to mobile shops and other establishments.
I am left with the impression that the Government is committed to quite an expensive policy and that the pilot is a rather cheap way of introducing it initially. In other words, the pilot is not actually a test—it is just the introduction of a policy. Although the pilot is cheaper than the policy as a whole, it still involves the spending of a lot of money on something that will not take us much further forward.
I am slightly disappointed given that, underneath it all, I do not doubt that we share similar policy objectives. I hope that the minister will come back to the committee at a later stage with further information on the uptake of school meals and on the poverty alleviation measures to which he referred. I was pleased to hear that the new Administration is committed to meeting Labour's target of making 100,000 children eligible for free school meals. That is the best bit of news that we have heard this morning. I ask the minister to consider the other poverty alleviation measures that the committee has discussed, such as breakfast clubs and entitlement to school meals over the holiday period, as well as further work at pre-school level.
As an individual, I have been convinced of the case for universality for some time now. We have all agreed that we need to make every effort to improve the health and diet of the country. I am convinced of the case for universality partly because of the stigma that is attached to taking free school meals, which is an issue that has not cropped up today. When I was at school, my parents did not take up the chance for us to have free school meals because of that stigma. I hope that the Government will continue to address that issue and to look at existing best practice. As was discussed last week, Falkirk Council has an anonymous card system for free school meals, which would be a helpful measure to consider when the scheme is assessed further.
It is obvious from the evidence that we gathered last week that work on the pilot will not take place in isolation. I asked the witnesses at last week's meeting about the quality of the environment in which children eat their school meals. Tam Baillie said that addressing those conditions is part of the process of improving uptake and that free school meals have a part to play. He said that the environment is an important consideration and that there might be differences in provision between local authorities or between schools in the same local authority area. We are dealing with variables, and that is why it is difficult for the committee to pin down the details of research presented to us by professional organisations.
If we are to make progress, it will be important to add to the sum of knowledge. This pilot will add a good deal to the sum of knowledge, because there has never before been a commitment to trial free school meals on this scale. Given the financial constraints, I think that attempting to add to the sum of knowledge is a good use of money.
The pilot will not take place in isolation. At a November conference that ministers are underwriting, we will hear evidence from Hull. That will inform the research as it comes to a conclusion.
I understand the problems with lead-in times and with financial constraints, and I understand members' concerns, but I hope that members will have the good will to acknowledge that, on balance, the pilot is worth doing for the good of children. They and their parents might be very surprised if a section of this committee said, "No, we're not having this. We're not making any commitment this year to trialling free school meals."
Minister, there are lessons to be learned from the way in which this matter has been handled. I do not think for one minute that the committee would want to prevent the Government from making policy announcements—it is absolutely your right to make such announcements—but you have set the timetable for this policy initiative. To avoid any doubt, you should have given careful consideration to how it would be implemented and to the important role of Parliament's committees in scrutinising it. Parliament as a whole should have its say. I hope that you will reflect carefully on whether the issue has been handled as well as it could have been. What has happened should not happen again.
Like many members of the committee, I share the Government's desire to improve the eating habits of Scotland's children and young people. Benefits could follow—for example tackling obesity and improving attainment and discipline in schools—but the committee should have the opportunity to scrutinise and evaluate any proposals.
I have some reservations about whether the proposal before us will ensure that some of the most deprived young people in Scotland—the ones who need the most help—will actually benefit. The test of whether the pilot is successful will be whether uptake rises or falls.
I accept what was said about the special circumstances in Hull, but there will be special circumstances here too as the provisions of the Schools (Health Promotion and Nutrition) (Scotland) Act 2007 are rolled out. We know from our experience with hungry for success that changes to nutritional standards in schools have led to a fluctuation in uptake. That could have a negative impact on this pilot. One of the main criteria for judging the pilot will be whether uptake falls, so I have some concerns.
I also have major concerns about how we will judge whether the young people who take up their entitlement are the young people who will benefit the most from having a healthy school meal. We all want our young people to eat healthily, but some of us have concerns about whether the pilot is the most constructive way in which to proceed.
Minister, you have an opportunity to respond to the points that have been made in the debate.
I am sorry if committee members feel compromised by decisions that were taken or preparations that were made for the free school meals pilot. That was certainly not our intention, and I do not think that you are actually in that position. Obviously, you will vote one way or the other based on your assessment of our proposal.
I am conscious of the point about take-up, disadvantaged groups and the like. We share the objective of trying to ensure that disadvantaged children in particular are captured in anything that we do to promote healthy eating.
In relation to preparing for the committee, I will certainly learn some lessons from the experience. I hope that we will establish a constructive relationship. We both support many of the policy objectives of the proposal and of the hungry for success initiative. I am content to move on. I look forward to working with the committee and making available the results of the pilot, if it is approved, later this year.
The question is, that motion S3M-419 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
No.
There will be a division.
For
Campbell, Aileen (South of Scotland) (SNP)
Gibson, Rob (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
McIntosh, Ken (Eastwood) (Lab)
McKelvie, Christina (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Mulligan, Mary (Linlithgow) (Lab)
Purvis, Jeremy (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD)
Whitefield, Karen (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab)
Abstentions
Smith, Elizabeth (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
The result of the division is: For 7, Against 0, Abstentions 1.
Motion agreed to.
That the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee recommends that the draft Provision of School Lunches (Disapplication of the Requirement to Charge) (Scotland) (Order) 2007 be approved.
We will notify the Parliament that the motion has been agreed to.
I suggest that we have a comfort break of five minutes to allow the minister to leave and a changeover of witnesses.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—