Schools and local authorities will have to invest in training

New rules banning "junk food" apply from next year, with nutrient standards from 2008 in primary schools and 2009 in secondaries.

Government funding of �220m to help schools and local authorities make changes is for three years only.

Local authority caterers are concerned about the sustainability of the project beyond that.

Kitchen refurbishment

The Local Authorities Caterers Association contrasted the government's investment with that in Scotland.

There, the executive provided �63.5m over three years from 2002 and has now confirmed a further �70m for another three years.

According to the Westminster government's own School Meals Review Panel, which has drawn up its nutritional standards, the equivalent funding in England would be more like �176m a year for the first three years.

TEMPORARY FUNDING: ANNUAL GRANTS Primary and special schools and PRUs: �1,070 + 50p per pupil Nursery schools: �1,070 + 50p for 50% of pupils Secondary and middle schools: �1,500 + 50p per pupil Same grant for this year and next two years only The 150 local authorities share �30m this year and �50m in each of next two years 70% of this on overall pupil numbers 30% for pupils getting free school meals Schools and authorities should "plan on a basis which will be sustainable from core budgets" beyond 2007-08

The review panel's report also concludes that significant capital investment is required to upgrade kitchens and dining rooms to a "fit for purpose" standard. It estimates this at �289m.

It says schools should also be encouraged to prioritise this in the direct capital funding they receive: �25,000 for a typical primary this year and �87,000 for a secondary.

The 15-year Building Schools for the Future programme for refurbishing secondary schools includes provisions for ensuring that kitchen and dining facilities are fit for purpose.

Health of pupils

But a report last month from the union Unison warned that a quarter of schools covered by long-term private finance initiative building contracts had only "regeneration" kitchens, to warm up food prepared elsewhere.

The review panel says the government must ensure current and future contracts "do not impose barriers to the improvement of school food".

The main meal should be cooked on the premises and all pupils should be taught practical cooking skills.

"The existence of long-term contracts cannot be allowed to adversely affect the health of pupils in PFI schools," it adds.

It notes "as a concern" that there is no Building Schools for the Future programme for primary schools.

Competing priorities

It says the Chancellor announced extra money for 50% of primary schools in his 2005 Budget, starting from 2008-09.

At the time, the government said its priority was to fund extended schools: to offer additional facilities such as computers after hours, parenting support, adult education and perhaps healthcare, and childcare from 8am to 6pm.

The school meals panel suggests kitchens and dining areas should have priority instead.

It further notes that its cost estimates do not include the cost of reinstating kitchens in the 13% of schools which have no hot meals service.

Free meals

A condition of the government's grants is that local authorities must plan "to begin the reintroduction" of hot meals for all pupils where they do not have them.

There are no clear government figures on this - and it has announced an audit to try to establish the current picture.

The campaign group the Soil Association lists 21 areas which have no universal hot meals service in primary schools, though there may be local arrangements.

But there is no weighting in the grants towards areas that have no service.

Priority instead is towards those with higher numbers of pupils entitled to free school meals because of family poverty.

Addressing the needs of these pupils is a major concern of the review panel.

It says only a third of girls in secondary schools and 42% of boys who are entitled to free meals actually take them.

Higher prices

The chairman of the Local Authority Caterers Association, Kevin McKay, argues that if the government is truly committed to its aims of improving the health of the next generation it should go further and invest in free meals for all pupils.

He said the review panel report was "a major turning point and a fantastic opportunity" after 25 years of public policy neglect.

But he said there was a shortfall even in the temporary funding.

The government's �220m - announced as it set up the review panel - was aimed at ensuring a minimum for school meal ingredients of 50p per head in primary schools and 60p in secondaries.

The review panel reckons that to meet its new standards the costs will be nearer 70p and 80p - plus another 10p for training and equipment.

Mr McKay says the result is that in some areas, parents may have to recognise that "good food costs more" - and pay "much higher prices" for school meals than the current average of �1.63 a day.

The money appears to be available. The review panel found that children aged eight to 16 spend almost �550m per year, equivalent to �1.75 a day each, on chocolate, crisps, confectionery and canned drinks - on their way to and from school.