Fair use

The mapping of the development of free school meal policy in Chapter 2 revealed that the provision of free meals has always been contentious, tapping into wider concerns about the family and parental responsibility for children (Welshman 1997). In order to mollify critics, the provision of free meals has always been limited to those defined as ‘in need’ and while measures defining need have fluctuated, the basic premise of restricted entitlement has remained, providing a defining feature of free school meal policy since inception (Colquhoun et al. 2001; Gillard 2003).

In the UK, welfare benefits such as free school meals are predominantly allocated via a means test, an approach which fits within a neo liberal welfare regime. Such an approach is characterised by minimal state provision in which benefits are modest and concentrated on those defined as ‘in need’ by strict political and administrative criteria (Bambra 2005, 2007). However, there was evidence that policy makers and stakeholders hold different views as to the efficacy of free school meal policy in meeting the needs of low income families.

As a result of the restricted nature of free school meal entitlement, the literature estimates that 1 million poor children miss out on free school meals because they do not meet the criteria of receipt of qualifying benefits (Curtis 2008; BBC News 2013). Within the data, stakeholders echo this view.

“They’re a really important form of support to the lowest income families, the problem is the means test is still so tight that there are families who are on lower sub poverty incomes…officially recognised as living in poverty who still

129

Specifically, criticism revolves around the fact that entitlement to free school meals is based on receipt of one of a number of ‘out of work’ benefits (outlined in section 2.6). Critics maintain that to measure need by focussing on worklessness excludes children living in ‘working poor’ households, estimated to constitute half of the 13 million people living in poverty in 2011/12 (MacInnes et al. 2013). However, policy makers defend the association of need with the receipt of ‘out of work’ benefits.

“We believe our research shows in terms of our policy on children and young people in poverty that there are around 20% of children and young people

living in poverty at the moment and around 20% are receiving free school meals…Welfare sometimes is a crude indicator of how in need a family is,

but it’s probably one of the best we’ve got, I can’t really think of one other one that is any better” (Policy Maker, Scotland).

While free school meal entitlement based on out of work benefits is criticised by stakeholders for excluding large numbers of children living in poverty, the association of free school meal entitlement and out of work benefits has another implication, welfare stigma. Welfare stigma will result in a negative attribution towards individuals who participate in means tested programmes and may result in deterring families from signing up for means tested benefits (Moffitt 1983; Currie 2004; Stuber and Schlesinger 2006). For stakeholders, the stigma associated with means testing of free school meal entitlement is a key reason for non-take up.

“We’re still means testing access to that healthy meal in the middle of the day, which means that some children, too many children are missing out on

that opportunity altogether. There is a problem about means testing, cos it reduces take up and means that children who are entitled are not getting the

free school meal that they are entitled to. We know that when you remove that means test, take up goes up significantly across the board”

130

However, for policy makers, welfare stigma is not considered the only reason for non-take up of entitlement and other factors are cited.

“It could be they don’t like the way the meals are served, it could be that the children are very fussy eaters” (Senior Policy Officer, England)

The evidence indicates that a significant number of families do not register for free school meal entitlement and of those that register, approximately one in four do not eat the meal (Iniesta-Martinez and Evans 2012). Non take up of entitlement has implications for the nutritional profile of low income children (Colquhoun et al. 2008) and within the data, concern is expressed in terms of the impact on attainment.

“I think we have still got this group of people who are just not accessing their free school meal and that causes significant impact on attainment and

achievement in school” (Stakeholder, School Food Trust)

Among policy makers and stakeholders, there is a consensus in terms of the purpose of free school meal policy, however, there is a dissensus as to how effective current policy is at addressing the problem. Two key areas of contention were identified, the first focusses on the nature of free school meal policy as it defines and measures need as stakeholders are critical of the way that the restricted nature of entitlement excludes children of poor working families. Secondly the association of means testing with stigma is considered by stakeholders as a key reason for non-take up, while for policy makers, other factors are considered as important. These varying perspectives have resulted in a pressure for policy change however the processes underpinning policy change are complex.

6.3. Addressing Policy Limitations; the Potential for Change