12. KATHERINE RICH (National) Link to this
to the Minister of Education
Does he agree with the statement of Judy Hanna, President of the New Zealand Principals Federation, on the Government’s announced changes that will force schools to stop selling junk food, that “This is regulation for the sake of regulation … This latest change by the Government is a slap in the face for all our schools and their efforts so far.”; if not, why not?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education) Link to this
No, because I agree with the editorial in today’s New Zealand Herald, which states that the response of Katherine Rich to this announcement “took insufficient notice of both the seriousness of the obesity epidemic and many schools’ contradictory approach to it. It makes no sense for students to be taught good nutrition and healthy eating as part of the health curriculum and then, immediately afterwards, to queue at a tuck shop that serves mainly pies or other fatty, sugar- or salt-laden food.”
Why, when the new school guidelines—clause (5)(iii) of the National Administration Guidelines—clearly state that boards are “required to, where food and beverages are sold on school premises, make only healthy options available.”, was the Minister, within a few hours, back-pedalling at a rate of knots and personally listing products like pizza, sausage rolls, pies, chocolates, and burger rings as being OK for tuck shops?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY Link to this
I think I may have missed out the burger rings. I ask the member to do what I do not think she had done when she made her comments, which is to read the material. When she does so, she will find that on the third page of the material there is a frequently asked question, which is how to arrive at what sort of food might be available. The answer is to go through the Food and Beverage Classification System from the Ministry of Health, which will set out the kind of food that might be seen as “every day”, and food that might be seen as “sometimes” and “occasionally”—all of which makes up a good, healthy diet.
Hon Brian Donnelly Link to this
Does the Minister agree that the types of food and drink sold in the school tuck shops are part of the hidden curriculum, and that if schools are offering a diet of unhealthy products they would not be complying with the health and physical well-being curriculum, so that any further directions to schools are simply inflammatory and redundant?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY Link to this
I certainly hope the health curriculum in schools would be consistent across the tuck shops, as well. I just take the member back to the New Zealand Herald editorial again. “Nobody should pretend that healthier tuck shop food is more than a small part of the solution to obesity. As critics have pointed out, pupils will still be able to obtain pies and so on from neighbouring shops. Yet that is no argument for schools supplying this food as well. … it is reasonable to expect schools to set an example of healthy eating for all of society.”
Sue KedgleyIs he aware of a recent Green Party survey, which found that more than 80 percent of schools are selling sausage rolls, pies, fizzy drinks, and so forth as a staple diet; and does he agree that it is time to put the health and well-being of New Zealand children ahead of the profits of the school tuck shops?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY Link to this
Yes, I am aware of the survey conducted by the Greens that had that result. I just point out that a lot of schools have already made the shift to more healthy options, and they are finding they are getting the returns and profits that they require as part of their selling of that food.
Can the Minister confirm the wording of clause (5)(iii) of the National Administration Guidelines, which states that boards are “required to, where food and beverages are sold on school premises, make only healthy options available.”, and explain how that wording can be reconciled with the long list of junk foods he personally exempted yesterday, which included pies, sausage rolls, pizza, chocolate, and burger rings?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY Link to this
I can do so quite easily, because I know that the member still has not read the material. When she does so, she will see that the way that schools will interpret this national administration guideline is that healthy options will relate to the Ministry of Health’s food classification. The member also said the guidelines were to do with other bits and pieces, which is completely wrong. Schools will have nothing to do with what comes to school in the child’s lunch. They will be able to serve a snarler at the gala. They will be able to have a hāngi. They will be able to fund-raise through things like chocolate. What they are being asked to do, however, is to use the food classification system to ensure that an overall healthy diet is served at the schools. As the New Zealand Herald said, what is wrong with that?
Hon Brian Donnelly Link to this
Can the Minister confirm that the devolution of school decision-making to local boards of trustees through the Tomorrow’s Schools reforms was the progeny of the previous Labour Government; and is not the centralisation of decision making, such as which foods can or cannot be sold in tuck shops, nothing more than educational infanticide?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY Link to this
That was tremendous! The member will know, because he has been a school principal, that there are a number of guidelines for schools. This one fits into the safety and health part of one of the guidelines, and therefore it is already consistent with what goes on.
Why does the Minister continue to say that the new guidelines do not ban certain types of food, when they explicitly state that boards are required, where food and beverages are sold on school premises, to make only healthy options available—does he not understand the phrase “only healthy options available”; if so, how does he reconcile the long list of junk food that he personally exempted yesterday?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY Link to this
I say to the member that I do not know what her diet is like, but I think most people would accept a mix of food of the kind that goes with the Ministry of Health’s food classification, which would say some food—like salads, for example—are best eaten frequently; other things like fish and chips are best eaten infrequently. Part of a healthy diet can include all of that. That is why I know that the member will want to go home and say to her schools that they can still have, for example, a barbecue with a sausage at it. It explicitly states in the guidelines that they can do that, so she can relax.
Why is the Minister attempting to confuse the issue by referring to other guidelines such as the food and beverages guidelines, and the Mission-On guidelines, when the National Administration Guidelines are the guidelines that schools must comply with? Clause (5)(iii) of the National Administration Guidelines clearly states that the sale of junk food on school premises will not be permitted, and schools have been told that only healthy options are being allowed—how does “only healthy options” include pizza, sausages, pies, chocolates, and burger rings?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY Link to this
I have to say to the member that it is really important to go back to the office and read the whole document, which is available. It sets out, for example, that schools will have nothing to do with what lunches are in the lunch box that a child brings to school, and that schools can have a hangi or a barbecue. The document states—which is why I am using it—that the food classification system for the Ministry of Health will be the basis of what constitutes healthy eating options. It says it in black and white, and I will send the member a stack of these so she can have a good study of them.