In brief
- The school lunch programme faced delays, botched logistics, and intense media coverage over poor execution.
- How can the government ever win with the current media narrative?
- Critics say the state should never have taken over parental responsibility.
- Polling shows most Kiwis, especially low-income voters, agree.
- However, the government should at least get some kudos for lowering per-meal costs.
Government failures in meal delivery
With state media biased against the centre-right government, government direct involvement inproviding nutritious, cost-efficient, meals that satisfy students, parents, educators, and the media, is a fool’s errand.
At the same time, the government appears to give the media ample opportunities to attack the programme because of its botched roll-out and messaging.
While the media focuses efforts on amplifying every issue, they rarely question whether the government should be spending nearly a quarter billion dollars annually feeding children at all.
Parental responsibility has been sidelined as a culture of dependency is fostered and normalised.
Whereas schools once chose their own suppliers, centralisation was intended to streamline processes and reduce waste, but service has reportedly worsened under a government-run model.
Delays, miscommunication, and logistical failures have left students with the wrong meal, waiting for meals that sometimes arrive hours late, or not at all. But, in the grand scheme of things, is this really a catastrophe?
Schools scramble for emergency food, and teachers divert from lessons to manage kitchen logistics. High-profile contracts, such as the $85 million deal with the School Lunch Collective and arrangements with providers like the controversial Waipareira Trust run by John Tamihere, have only fueled concerns over whether the contracting process truly prioritises efficiency and performance.
It doesn’t help matters that a key member of the School Lunch Collective, Libelle Group, has since declared bankruptcy.
Given the state’s track record with cost-effective programmes, expecting a government bureaucracy to reliably deliver tens of thousands of fresh, nutritious meals every school day, even without the constraint of low cost, remains a tall order.
However, in our view, the government at least deserves praise for reducing the cost per meal from more than $8.00 to about $3.00. It is, however, hard to get low cost and high standards.
A recent culture of dependency, and a helping hand
For decades, parents packed school lunches without government intervention. The notion that taxpayers should foot the bill for daily meals is relatively new, having expanded rapidly in 2020 under the Labour government to provide free lunches for more than 220,000 students across over 1,000 schools. While this shift has led to criticisms of ‘double-dipping’ – with families receiving both Family Tax Credits (about $261.86 weekly) and free school lunches – it is important to recognise the programme as a vital safety net.
Beyond the partisan debate, the school lunch programme serves as another helping hand for families, ensuring that even those facing socio-economic challenges receive nutritious meals. The programme’s various delivery models, including partnerships with local iwi or hapū providers, attempt to meet diverse needs and dietary requirements, underscoring its role in combating food insecurity.
Public opinion says: feed your own kids
Polling data backs up the case for stepping back. A recent RNZ–Reid Research survey found that nearly two-thirds of New Zealanders believe parents, not the government, should be responsible for school lunches. Strikingly, lower-income respondents were more likely to support that view, while wealthier voters were more inclined to back government provision.
The result flips the usual narrative: the working-class voters who stand to benefit most from the programme aren’t asking for it. This suggests the scheme reflects the values of affluent, progressive voters more than the needs of struggling families, and raises the question of whether the government should be in this business at all.
Correction: This story originally stated the school lunch program cost nearly a half billion dollars annually. This was incorrect. $478 million dollars has been allocated to the program for 2025 and 2026.
