NZPF: Schools being forced to become Food Police

NZPF: Schools being forced to become Food Police

- New Zealand Principals’ Federation -

The New Zealand Principals’ Federation has spoken out against the news that schools will be banned from selling unhealthy food.

The Government has just announced changes that will force schools to sell only healthy food on their premises. The changes to school regulations, the National Administration Guidelines (NAG), will mean that food and drink with high fat, sugar and salt content will not be allowed.

NZPF President Judy Hanna says this latest change is an example of the increasing bureacracy that schools are facing. “This is regulation for the sake of regulation. Principals and schools take the current National Administration Guidelines very seriously, and the vast majority of schools are already working hard to promote healthy eating in schools. The HeHa (Healthy Eating Healthy Action) scheme, for example, is showing some great results. This latest change by the Government is a slap in the face for all of our schools and their efforts so far.”

Mrs Hanna says that the NZPF is very supportive of healthy eating initiatives, but this latest change will generate more questions than answers for students, parents and teachers. It also puts many fundraising options in jeopardy.

“There are thousands of schools around the country that use sausage sizzles, hangis and cake stalls to raise funds. At school galas, food items such as bacon butties, toffee apples and soft drinks are the biggest sellers.

The Government is telling the public that these will still be ok under these new rules, but the fact of the matter is that the NAG says no unhealthy food can be sold on school grounds. There’s no clause exempting fundraisers, and so that’s what principals will be forced to do.”

“Will the Government now be regulating what constitutes a ‘healthy’ sausage sizzle? Do we now need to provide vegetarian sausages, gluten-free bread and sugar-free tomato sauce, or is this still not good enough for the Government?

Who will decide what is healthy?”

Mrs Hanna says on a philosophical level, this change is at total odds with our current teaching practices. “How does banning certain food groups fit in with personalising learning and professionalising teaching?

How does this NAG fit with a decentralised and flexible curriculum? I have recently been to the UK where politicians are mandating everything, and schools there are in a real muddle. There is no learning taking place, just new ‘initiatives’. We can’t afford to let that happen to our schools. This is a compliance issue that has nothing to do with teaching and learning. It will increase the workload of our teachers and principals yet again, for arguably negligible results.”

Mrs Hanna also believes that schools are being unfairly targeted in this latest push to improve eating habits.

“Why is the responsibility for the nation’s health disproportionately falling on schools and the food they sell? Children may consume 30% of their food intake at school, but the majority of students bring that food from home. Is the Government planning to legislate what they can bring in their sandwiches? Schools need to show ERO reviewers evidence that they are complying with policies - will the ERO now be doing taste tests as well?”

Mrs Hanna says the only guaranteed change in behaviour that will come from this is where students buy food. “There’s still nothing to stop students bringing unhealthy food from home, or stopping at the pie shop on the way to school. So what’s the point? The Government can’t tell parents what to do, so they are throwing the rulebook at us instead. The NAG’s run the risk of becoming worthless, if the government of the day continues to use them to achieve political pointscoring.”

ENDS

© Scoop Media