Ottawa says a national school program should be accessible, in that 'children and youth can participate in school food programs without stigma or barriers.' It should also be 'health-promoting,' in that the food served is 'consistent with healthy eating recommendations in Canada’s Food Guide.'Fred Lum/the Globe and Mail
Last week, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Andrew Furey signed an agreement that will see $9.1-million added to the province’s school lunch program over the next three years. An additional 4,100 children will get a hot lunch daily as a result.
As federal-provincial deals go, this is small potatoes.
Understandably, it garnered little media attention, especially since, almost simultaneously, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh was announcing an end to the supply-and-confidence deal that had propped up the minority Liberal government.
But, in signing, Newfoundland and Labrador became the first province to join the $1-billion National School Food Program announced in April’s budget.
The ball is rolling. In the coming weeks, Manitoba, Prince Edward Island and British Columbia are expected to follow suit and, eventually, all the provinces and territories should be on board, embracing the sensible idea of feeding kids at school.
This is how “national” programs work in Canada. Ottawa throws out a public policy proposal, baited with cash, and the provinces and territories decide if they’re going to bite. (Perhaps that should read, “When they’re going to bite,” because, after some obligatory partisan political posturing, they never turn down federal money.)
Whether it’s a $200-billion, 10-year health accord, or a $1-billion school food program, the federal government negotiates and signs deals jurisdiction by jurisdiction.
It’s a tedious process, with a lot of backroom machinations.
The media tends to cover only the splashy initial announcement and do a poor job of the follow-up.
For example, in May, when Quebec became the 13th jurisdiction to sign the health accord, it garnered only a small mention, despite the initial descriptions of the health accord as “historic” and “game-changing.”
All told, it took 15 months to close the deal. Policy-making always operates in slow motion in Canada, and policy implementation is even slower. But, in most cases, it’s more important to get it right than to do it quickly.
The process of pursuing bilateral agreements rather than creating new federal programs has a lot of advantages.
The National School Food Program, for example, doesn’t require a new bureaucratic structure. Rather, it’s designed to bolster existing provincial and territorial programs, while allowing them to maintain their regional flavour.
The key to these deals is not just the cash; it’s found in the small print. The deal Ottawa is proposing calls on provinces and territories to embrace six key principles:
First, that a national school program should be accessible, in that “children and youth can participate in school food programs without stigma or barriers.” It should also be “health-promoting,” in that the food served is “consistent with healthy eating recommendations in Canada’s Food Guide.”
The program must also be inclusive, so that “children and youth have access to culturally appropriate, relevant and inclusive school food programs”; it must be flexible, with food sourced locally “where possible, and reflective of local and regional circumstances”; sustainable, both environmentally and by being adequately resourced; and accountable – the program must have “consistent and transparent monitoring and evaluation to ensure that programs are achieving policy objectives.”
The national school food policy also calls on partners to “work progressively toward the long-term goal of universal access,” and echoes nicely the approach of the Coalition for Healthy School Food.
Currently, Canada has a hodge-podge of school food programs. Some schools serve breakfast, some lunch, some snacks, or a combination. Some programs are free, others are pay-what-you-can.
Bottom line: Only a fraction of the country’s five million students are getting fed at school. Too many are still missing out.
According to Statistics Canada, 8.7 million people lived in a food-insecure home in 2023, including 2.1 million children. That’s roughly one in four children not getting enough food daily. As food prices soar, so, too, does the number of hungry children.
The good news is that a lot is happening on the ground. There seems to be a lot of momentum and a recognition, finally, that school food is a key element in the social safety net.
Feeding kids at school – breakfast, lunch and snacks – makes good sense from an economic and health perspective. Learning to eat (and sometimes prepare) healthy foods can set children up for adopting better habits for the rest of their lives.
Research has shown that universal school food programs also contribute to better academic results, higher graduation rates and higher incomes for graduates.
We can’t afford not to invest in our kids’ well-being.
As Newfoundland and Labrador’s Premier, Mr. Furey, said at last week’s signing ceremony: “You can’t reach your full potential unless you have a full belly.”