I welcome the Minister, Deputy Calleary. He will speak first and he has eight minutes. The debate will conclude no later than 5.30 p.m.
School Meals Programme: Statements
Before I begin, I put on record my sympathies to the family of the late Seamus Carroll. This is a very sad day for our Leinster House family. Seamus was one of our best ushers, always welcoming and helpful, and he always had great pride in this place. I send my sympathies to his family this evening, including his wife, children and grandchildren, and to his Leinster House family as well. Ar dheis Dé go raibh a anam uasal.
I welcome the opportunity to address the House this evening on the school meals programme and, in particular, the findings of the recently published Nutrition Review Report of the Hot School Meals Scheme and the results of the IPSOS Behaviour and Attitudes survey. These reports give us an important evidence base as we work to strengthen and improve one of the most significant social support programmes delivered by the State for children and families.
Ensuring children are eating healthy, nutritious food is an important commitment under the programme for Government. We want an education system that works for all children, regardless of background or circumstance. The school meals programme, particularly the hot school meals scheme, is a vital part of that ambition.
There are currently some 300 suppliers in the school meals programme, the majority of which supply one to three local schools. Any registered food business operator, including not-for-profit suppliers, meals-on-wheels services, social enterprises, community organisations, co-operatives, local cafés, restaurants and caterers, can become a school meals provider by submitting a tender response to a school's call for tenders. My preferred approach is to have local suppliers involved insofar as possible. For instance, there are currently 11 meals-on-wheels organisations supplying 40 schools.
The programme is about much more than providing food. It is about ensuring children are in a position to participate fully in education, thereby improving concentration and well-being, supporting attendance, easing financial pressures on families and helping to tackle educational disadvantage. The scale of the programme today reflects the commitment of the Government to those objectives.
The hot school meals scheme, which began as a small pilot under the then Minister, Ms Regina Doherty, involved just 30 schools in 2019. Today, with the support provided by the former Minister, Ms Heather Humphreys, and me, it has grown to support approximately 3,200 primary schools and 550,000 children with hot school meals. Across all meal types, including breakfast clubs and snack provision, the programme now reaches 3,700 schools and approximately 682,000 children, providing up to 3.4 million meals every week. I am sure Members will agree these are remarkable numbers. They reflect the exceptionally significant expansion of this social support over recent years.
As the hot school meals scheme expands, it is necessary and appropriate that we assess how well it is operating and identify areas for improvement. While the scheme has been positively received by schools, parents and children since its introduction, concerns have been raised in regard to nutritional standards, menu options and food waste. For that reason, an interdepartmental working group was established in December 2024, bringing together expertise from my Department, the Departments of Health, Education and Youth, and Children, Disability and Equality, and the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, FSAI. The purpose of this group is to oversee the operation of the school meals programme and make recommendations on its future development.
In September 2025, I approved the secondment of a dedicated CORU-registered dietitian to the programme, working under the clinical supervision of the Department of Health. One of the dietitian's principal tasks was to undertake a detailed review of school meal menus and assess compliance with nutritional standards across suppliers participating in the scheme. The review examined 15 school meal suppliers and analysed 360 meals over a nine-month period. It included all nine major suppliers, which account for approximately 70% of schools participating in the scheme. Site visits were also undertaken to schools and supplier premises throughout the country.
I thank the dietician for her work on, and commitment to, the review. It found there is a wide variety of meals available under the scheme, with strong availability of nutritious and balanced options. It found that 82% of meal options reviewed did not contain foods considered high in fat, salt or sugar. The majority of principals and teachers reported positive experiences regarding meal quality, nutritional value and choice.
However, the review also highlighted areas where improvements are needed. While a range of healthy food options are available, the data showed that where meals with higher fat, salt and sugar options remained available, those options were often selected from the menu. The review also identified a need to increase fruit, vegetables, salads and wholegrain products, as well as the level of protein content in vegetarian and vegan meals. In addition, the same portion size is often provided regardless of age, despite the different nutritional needs of younger and older children.
The issue of food waste was also examined in detail. The review found that approximately 18.9% of meals remained uneaten daily. However, when absenteeism is taken into account, that figure falls to 11.1%. Waste was notably higher among older children. The evidence suggests that a combination of factors are contributing to the waste challenge, including meal preferences, menu choice and, in some cases, insufficient time during lunch breaks.
Alongside the nutritional review, my Department commissioned IPSOS Behaviour and Attitudes to undertake the largest survey ever conducted on the hot school meals scheme. More than 86,000 parents, almost 7,000 children, over 1,900 teachers, more than 500 principals and 47 suppliers participated. The results demonstrate clearly that the scheme is deeply embedded within school communities. Some 81% of parents reported that their child avails of the scheme, while 85% of children said they liked their lunch or found it satisfactory. The survey also highlighted a broad recognition of the scheme's benefits, particularly in DEIS schools. Among parents who viewed the scheme positively, the most frequently cited benefits were the provision of regular meals, children's enjoyment of meals and the inclusion of core food groups. Importantly, the findings of the IPSOS survey align closely with those of the nutritional review.
At the same time, respondents identified challenges. Parents and schools highlighted concerns relating to menu choice, dietary requirements, perceptions around processed foods and the need for greater flexibility, including options for both a hot and cold meal. School contracts with food suppliers currently provide either hot or cold meal options, but not both, to schools. Food waste was also identified as an issue requiring attention.
The value of these two reports is that they not only identify where the scheme is working well or where there are challenges, but they also set out clear recommendations. Those recommendations include the development of a standardised menu cycle, improved nutritional compliance, larger food portions for older children, better accommodation of special dietary requirements, stronger auditing arrangements and greater flexibility regarding meal choice. A review of the current food catering models to assess which most consistently meet the nutritional standards will be undertaken. The potential to use a weighting system in the tender evaluation process will also be examined. The reports' recommendations provide a very clear roadmap for the next phase of the scheme's development. Work has started with suppliers and the other stakeholders on their implementation. Tomorrow, the dietician will brief the education spokespersons of all the parties on her work.
The success of the hot school meals scheme should not be measured solely by the number of meals served but also by the positive impact it has on children's health, well-being and educational outcomes. The reports confirm that the scheme is succeeding on a significant scale. However, we are not hiding from the practical measures needed to make it even better.
I thank the officials in my Department for their considerable commitment to the roll-out of this scheme since 2019. This is a major commitment, budget-wise and personnel-wise, on the part of my Department. It is my Department that leads the roll-out and the work on this on the ground, and I acknowledge that.
I look forward to hearing the views of Senators during today's debate, and as I look around the Chamber, many of them have already engaged positively with feedback on the scheme, and I acknowledge that. Go raibh maith agat.
I thank the Minister for his opening remarks. I, too, welcome the opportunity to speak on the statements on the school meals programme, in particular on the recent nutrition review and survey findings.
I begin by saying clearly that I am supportive of the school meals programme. I believe it is one of the most important supports we can provide to children and families across Ireland. The programme is about much more than providing a meal at lunchtime. It is about ensuring that a child can sit down in school alongside their classmates and have access to nutritious food without being dependent on their family circumstances or household income. It is about health, educational opportunity, reducing pressures on families, and, importantly, tackling inequality and child poverty.
The programme has grown enormously, as Minister said, since it began as a small pilot back in 2019, and today approximately 550,000 primary school children are eligible for hot meals across 3,200 schools, and the wider school meals programme supports approximately 682,000 children. That scale tells us something important. This is no longer a small or peripheral scheme. It is a major national programme and a major investment in our children, and we should be proud of that.
The purpose of the programme is clear: to provide regular, nutritious food to children so they can fully participate in and benefit from their education. The Department of Social Protection recognises that the programme is an important part of policy supporting children's attendance and educational achievement. There was a lot about children's attendance at school in the news today, and it is important that if they have a regular meal, it is actually a factor of attending school as well.
There are also other important health dimensions. The nutrition standards for school meals were developed under the Healthy Ireland framework and are intended to align school meals with our national healthy eating guidelines. The Healthy Ireland guidelines promote vegetables, fruit, wholemeal, wholegrain foods and balanced meals, while encouraging appropriate portions and healthier choice. That matters because the food that a child eats is not simply about satisfying hunger for one afternoon. It is about growth and development, concentration and well-being, and establishing healthy eating from a young age. In some cases, the meal provided in school will represent a particularly significant part of the food that the child eats during the day, so we have a responsibility to make sure the food we provide is nutritious, balanced and of a high standard.
I compliment the Minister and his Department on engaging with a nutritionist and bringing a nutritionist on board to support. That has to be recognised because there was no nutritionist at the start, and the Department brought the nutritionist in to ensure it had that done.
It is important we acknowledge the positive findings. The review found a wide variety of meals being offered across the scheme with good availability of nutritious and well-balanced options, and as the Minister said, it found that 82% of the meals analysed did not contain foods considered high in fat, salt or sugar. Teachers and school leaders also gave positive assessments of the meals, with 78% of teachers rating their nutritional value as acceptable, good or excellent, and 79% giving the same rating for quality. The national Ipsos B&A survey also gives us strong evidence that the programme is valued. It gathered responses from more than 95,000 people, including parents, guardians, children, teachers, school leaders and suppliers across 747 schools. The findings show that the programme is deeply embedded in participating primary schools and that its benefits are particularly recognised in DEIS schools.
So, when we discuss improvements to the programme, we should not lose sight of what is working. We should build on it. The review does, however, identify some areas where improvements are needed. There is need for greater consistency in nutritional quality, and there should be increased provision of vegetables, fruit, salads and wholegrain foods. We need stronger and more inclusive options for children with different dietary requirements, including vegetarian and vegan children. There is also a need for age-appropriate portion sizes.
We must also address food waste. The review found an average of 18.9% of meals were uneaten across all classes, although that fell to 11.1% when absences were taken into account. That is an issue we cannot ignore. Equally, food waste should not simply be treated as a reason to question the principle of providing meals. Better menu choices, appropriate portion sizes, greater flexibility and ensuring children are offered food that they will actually eat can help. Any of us who have reared kids at home ourselves know that we can always have that one fussy eater in the house. I have three, and Covid left me a vegan, so I understand the challenges trying to cater for 650,000 kids. It is not simple, but we will do our best.
There is another issue I want to raise today and it is one that requires attention. This is the access to the programme for four primary schools on the Loop Head peninsula. These four schools are currently unable to secure a provider for the school meals programme. This is particularly concerning because all four are DEIS schools. These are schools serving communities experiencing social and economic disadvantage as well as very real challenges associated with rural isolation. There is a particular irony in this because the school meals programme was designed to support children and schools where need is greatest, yet we have four schools in an area of rural disadvantage that are struggling to access the very programme intended to support them. These schools were also part of the original cohort of schools to receive hot meals before the programme was expanded nationally. There is a real sense of disappointment for those schools and those families that, having been among the early participants, they now find themselves in a position where they cannot secure a provider.
We need to recognise the practical reality of delivering services in rural Ireland. The Loop Head peninsula is geographically remote, and I thank Councillor Rita McInerney for bringing it to my attention last Sunday in Ennis in relation to the four schools. I do not think she knew I would be discussing the hot meals programme today when she was telling me all of this. I told her that I, as a Senator, would do whatever I could to help her and that of course I would do my very best, so I am raising it here with the Minister. Councillor McInerney really wants to support these schools. She is providing meals through the cold meals programme because she really wants to support them. At the moment, it is down to costs, to be quite honest, but there are four schools there.
I raise this issue not as a criticism; quite the opposite. I raise it because I believe so strongly in what the programme is trying to achieve. We have invested significantly in creating a national programme. We have established nutritional standards. We have expanded it to reach hundreds of thousands of children. We have independent evidence telling us that parents, children and schools value it, and we have evidence showing that the meals being provided are, in the main, nutritious and balanced. We also have evidence showing us where improvements need to be made.
I compliment the Minister and his entire team on the school meals programme. Can we look at the Loop Head issue? If there are other situations like the one in Loop Head, they should also be considered.
I welcome the Minister and thank him and his team for coming here. I acknowledge the very important work that is the school hot meals scheme.
As I was coming up the stairs to the House, I was reminded of a great Kerrywoman, who was the principal of a school in north County Dublin. She asked me to come into the school. This school had been through great difficulties. It was under the patronage of the Catholic Diocese of Dublin and was eventually divided into two schools because the numbers were so large. It was before there were ever any DEIS designations. She told me that what she could achieve was a yearning for learning and for people to come to school feeling secure and safe.
I walked around the school with the principal and she asked me to ask one of the kids a question, which I did. I think I must have picked the boldest and most brazen little kid in the school. She had blonde curly hair, and she first asked me, "Mister, are you Ms McGrath's boyfriend?", and everyone laughed. I then asked her about the importance of school and what she liked most about the school.
She said she liked walking over from the flats to the school because Ms McGrath gave her mam and all mams that came there a mug of coffee and a cigarette. It was most unconventional, but remember that this was a Kerrywoman who had fought well with the diocese, the bishop and the Department of education. She was one of the first non-teaching principals in Ireland. She said that she had moved out of the designated office in the hall because she could not see the point in her sitting in the office. She allowed that to house a coffee machine for parents to go to because she wanted to build relationships with the parents. She believed that if she could build relationships with the parents, she could build relationships with the children.
From that, she discovered that many of the parents could not read or write. There were numeracy and literacy problems. She realised that she needed to engage, but then she was not getting the same uptake, so she introduced sandwiches after school and suddenly parents of children were coming and children were staying back and eating sandwiches. That is my first experience of that sort of social interconnection between family and school. I believe in the importance of food. I believe in the symbolism of breaking bread around people's tables and bringing people together. It works.
I wish to turn to two of the last sentences in the Minister's speech. He said:
The success of the hot school meals scheme should not be measured solely by the number of meals served but also by the positive impact it has on children's health, well-being and educational outcomes. The reports confirm that the scheme is succeeding on a significant scale.
The first is the key lines. I 100% agree with the Minister, in that it is about the welfare of our children.
Going back to the same school, when asked of some children what was wrong with them when they were sent to the principal later, it was consistently that they were hungry. One does not have to be in a DEIS school to see it - one could be in the best schools in south or north county Dublin or, indeed, in Donegal or Cork - but there are children who are presenting to school without uniforms or school bags, without having the opportunity of having a bath for three or four days, and without food. Not only are they hungry, but they are also thirsty. That is the reality of it for so many people. This is important. If there is a high percentage of waste, it is not satisfactory. That is a concern.
This is a good programme. I acknowledge the Minister's predecessor, Heather Humphreys. When I first was talking about this, she asked me to come over to her office one day and she was on fire with enthusiasm and excitement about this. She ran with this, as did her officials. She was very proud of it. I acknowledge the very significant role that she played. She is gone out of politics, but this was one thing that she was passionate about, as I know the Minister is too.
The issue of absenteeism in our schools and how that is connected to waste raises a bigger issue, not about the waste but about absenteeism. I note the Government's campaign on the radio and television on why children are absent from school. That is a bigger issue for another day and another debate. Hopefully, there is cross-collaboration between the Minister and the Department of education because bells have to be ringing if children are not presenting themselves to school. There are issues and problems. However, this is not about condemning anyone. It is about putting the necessary supports in place to address why children in this State are not attending education and enhancing their skills and, eventually, life potential.
When we look at the whole school meals programme, we have to put it into context. There will be difficulties, but we know that the school meals programme supports approximately 682,000 children. The scheme supports the largest catering operation in Ireland with up to 3.4 million meals provided each week. Of course, there are going to be slip-ups and problems on the side, but this is a fantastic operation. This has gone way beyond what we could have possibly dreamed of. The school meals programme is funded by the Minister's Department. I know he is absolutely committed, and his officials are equally committed, with a budget of €286 million in 2026. Wow. These are huge figures, a huge number of meals and a huge commitment. One of the great things about our debate today is that we are putting this out into the public domain. A lot of people do not know the vastness of this operation. We will never know or ever be able to measure the absolute success, but if one is putting food in children, one is reducing expenditure in the family home. It is making them as happy and content as possible. One is giving them the potential or at least assisting them with that wonderful thing - yearning and learning. If that is all one can do as a teacher, that is a wonderful achievement.
I congratulate the Minister and his Department. As someone who sits on the agricultural panel here, I am always conscious of the importance of meals, vegetables, fruit, salads and whole grain foods and, where possible, of them being Irish. It is important. I said yesterday in the Seanad that we were importing over €2 billion in value of fruit and vegetables into a country that can grow broccoli, turnips, cabbage and cauliflower most of the year round. With supports, cloches and various technologies around energy, we could do even better for most of the year. However, that is for another day. Well done to the Minister. I ask him to continue to drive it. There will be imperfections, setbacks and problems. The numbers are enormous and we will never be able to measure the impact, but from everyone I have talked to - I am sure it is the same for everyone else in this House - it is an exceptionally positive initiative and is going in a way that it is targeted because it is going to the children and the people who matter. I wish the Minister and his Department well as they go out and tweak and fine-tune this important food programme in our schools.
I thank the Minister for coming here to discuss the hot school meals programme. I thank him and his team, particularly Mr. Craig Dwyer in his Department, for being so proactive and engaging. It really makes a big difference to us as Senators to be able to get a call back from a Department within minutes or an hour.
I imagine we will be changing the name from the "hot school meals programme" to the "school meals programme" with all the changes that the Department is going to make. Similar to Senator Rabbitte and others, I completely believe in the hot school meals programme. It is one of the most important investments that we have made in our children. We should be proud of how far this Government has brought the programme in a very short space of time. We talk about how it was in 30 schools only eight years ago and is now in 3,200. That is an extraordinary expansion in a very short amount of time.
Behind every statistic is a child sitting down at lunchtime knowing that they are going to get a meal. I spoke to a principal two weeks ago who said that the children in the school were absolutely starving. Last year, 112,000 people went to the Society of St. Vincent de Paul for food assistance. That is how important this scheme is.
I always try to use a bit of my own life in politics. I recall the nuns coming into the class when I was in school about 45 years ago. They would come in and ask who did not have a lunch that day, and the hands went up. It separated them from the children who had a lunch. They got a carton of milk and a hot cross bun, but it made everyone feel a little bit different. Sometimes, they would ask who was hungry and the hands would go up. Sometimes, if it was your birthday, the nuns would give you one of those hot cross buns, which was lovely. I remember it so vividly, but I also remember the children who put their hands up.
Today, no child needs to put their hand up. They have an automatic right to a meal if they are in a primary school and if their school has opted into the programme. For many children, that meal is welcome. For many families, it is a significant saving. It is money that can be used elsewhere. My life has changed in the mornings not having to get lunches ready, but for some children, it is an absolute essential.
I acknowledge the work that has been done by the Minister, the Government, the Department, schools, principals, teachers, staff and the suppliers who have helped to build this programme. I wish to encourage any school that is listening here today that has not opted-in to this programme to give it a real chance because it is a good thing for students. I acknowledge the positive changes that are now being made because this is exactly what good policy should do. It is what working together should do. Earlier this year, I put out a survey on the hot school meals programme following many people's comments on a post that I made. I received 8,000 responses. I visited and chatted to some distributors, called to some schools and listened to my own children, who get the meals. The joint Oireachtas committee on education also produced a report following many witnesses coming in to discuss hot school meals. The Minister got an unbelievable response to his survey and the work carried out within schools.
I do not think anyone could actively say that we have not listened to people. This is a brilliant example of when we introduce a programme that we listen to the people using it, examine the evidence, identify what is not working as well as what is working, and then improve it. That is exactly what my report and the Minister's report sought to do. The message I heard was not to get rid of the hot school meals. The message was to keep them but make them better. That is the important distinction. Parents overwhelmingly recognised the value of the scheme, but they wanted their children to eat the food. There is no point in having a meal that is nutritiously perfect on paper if a child does not eat it. I remember a guy in the joint Oireachtas committee on education saying that perfection was the enemy of good. This really relates to this scheme. My survey found that 78% of respondents said that their children did not enjoy the variety of food, citing taste and presentation, and 80% said that children would be more likely to eat a fresh cold lunch than a hot school meal.
Those figures should not be ignored and the Minister has not ignored them. However, neither should we ignore the very positive evidence. The Department's own nutrition review found a wide variety of meals and good availability of nutrition and balanced options. It found that 85% of children were ordering meals on average across the classes audited. Teachers were broadly positive about the nutritional value and the quality of meals. The answer is not to choose between nutrition and enjoyment. We need both.
That brings us to the changes being proposed. I especially welcome the move towards age-appropriate portion sizes. It never made sense to me for a child in junior infants to get the same portion as a child in sixth class. The Department's review identified exactly this issue, as did my survey, and it is recommending clear instructions for suppliers to provide different-sized meals for different age groups. That is welcome.
I also welcome the recommendation to improve fruit and vegetable content and vegan options. Importantly, the Department has recommended that schools be given flexibility on a hot or cold lunch from September 2027. That is something for which I specifically called, as did the Minister, and choice matters. Not every child wants a hot meal every day. A fresh sandwich, fruit, salad or soup can be perfectly good options. We should not confuse the word "hot" with the word "healthy" or the word "cold" with the word "unhealthy". It is important to remember that what matters is what is actually in the container and whether the child eats it. Another recommendation is to offer different menus for children in special schools or special education classes. I am delighted with that.
However, there are still some areas where we need to go further. The first relates to special dietary requirements. Senator Rabbitte mentioned those with coeliac disease. A universal school meals programme should be genuinely inclusive. The second is food waste, which was mentioned. The Department's own review found meals were uneaten 18.9% of the time, on average, although that fell to 11% when absences were taken into account. However, that is still too much food going into bins. It is too much money going into bins. I would like us to measure food waste properly, school by school and supplier by supplier. Is it 100% of the lunch? Is it 75% of the lunch? Is it half of the lunch? The changes to portion sizes will make a big difference to the waste, but my report showed that 80% of parents who send in a lunch have not opted out of the hot school meals scheme. We need to encourage parents. If they are not going to avail of the scheme, they should opt out. We should encourage suppliers to encourage parents to opt out of the scheme if they are not using it. If a child is sick, and I know this through first-hand experience with my own kids, you cannot cancel the meal for that day. You have to give 48 hours' notice if you are cancelling the meal.
A balanced approach is required between highly nutritious food and food that is actually eaten. Removing the high salt, sugar and fat content has to be a good thing, but if the food tastes totally different from the food the child gets at home, it should be considered. I am not advocating for bad food or a high salt intake, but we must take a balanced approach. Some examples on the new guidelines suggest not adding oil or butter to potatoes, rice or pasta, not adding salt to the water when cooking rice or pasta and not putting in bacon, so the famous pasta carbonara that everyone loves is going to change. The guidelines suggest no sausages, which has been really popular, even though sausages were covered in seaweed in many instances. The guidelines also suggest no tinned tuna. We eat a lot of tuna in our homes but it will not be allowed. All chicken curries will have to be served with brown and not white rice. Although this all sounds fabulous, it is very different from what children eat at home. We need to balance this out.
We need to look at the time available for children to eat. It is not in the Minister's remit, but I will be talking that to the Minister for education to see can something be done.
I would like to look at local and community-based food provision, particularly for small rural schools where the current model can be difficult to make economically viable, as in the places that have been mentioned. We also want to consider how to roll out the scheme in secondary schools.
We now have an opportunity to move from a programme that has been rolled out quickly to a programme that is refined, evidence-based, child-centred and genuinely world class. My message today is certainly a positive one. I ask the Minister not to stop or pull back. I know he is not going to. I ask him not to allow legitimate questions about quality, nutrition or waste to undermine the fundamental principle of feeding children in school. Instead, let us listen, as we have, let us measure, as we have, and let us improve, as the Minister absolutely is doing. Let us give children nutritious food that they want to eat because the success of the hot school meals programme should be measured by a simple question: did that child sit down today at lunchtime, receive a nutritious meal, enjoy it, eat it and leave the desk ready to learn? That is the standard we should now aim for and I believe we can achieve it.
I am a member of the Committee on Education and Youth, as are Senators Nelson Murray and Scahill. We have done a comprehensive bit of work on the hot school meals programme. We started approximately one year ago. Many witnesses have attended the committee. We have visited schools. Senator Scahill and I visited St. Ultan's integrated school in Ballyfermot. I have to say it is an excellent school all round. Additional supports have been brought in at the school to support not just the children but the parents. Senator Boyhan talked about a principal who would bring in the parents. The school in Ballyfermot brought parents into the facility. They could pop in in the morning, get a breakfast, with a cup of tea or coffee, and get help with form filling or anything like that. It was good. The school has a canteen on site so the food is cooked. There is a rota. It is a big school with many students and there is a rota. The younger ones go in first. The cutlery and dishes are there and everything is washed. There is no waste in that format. We tried the food and it was lovely. We saw the menu choices and everything else. We found when we were doing our study that where there were canteen facilities on site, it worked best. One of the recommendation in the committee report was that a canteen should be considered for inclusion in all new builds, going forward.
Talking to other schools, there was a mixed response. Most of it is positive and most people agree that hot school meals programme is positive. It is a large investment by the State so you want to get it as right as possible, bearing in mind that nothing will ever be perfect. Where there is good availability of local suppliers, it works well. In some of the primary schools to which I have talked, the supplier is local and can deliver the hot food at lunchtime for the children to eat immediately. However, other schools have said that they do not know about that and there is a lot of waste because the food is delivered in the morning. It is hot when it is delivered. The schools have facilities to heat it, but when you have hot food in a container with a lid on it and it is allowed to cool, condensation forms and the food, including the pasta, gets soggy. One supplier came to talk to the children and they gave her the feedback about the food being soggy sometimes. However, the supplier did not seem to take it on board. It was not an easy issue to resolve because the food has to be delivered at that time for different reasons. However, it is about ensuring the food is hot when delivered to the school, where possible. It should be prepared on site, where possible, or delivered hot, where possible, or, as a last resort, heated up.
I am delighted with and welcome the cold meal option. I know of another school with DEIS status that was getting meals delivered before the hot school meals programme. They were cold meals comprising sandwiches, fruit and milk. The school reported that it was good and it preferred that option to the hot school meals. There is a mix there. It is about considering everything.
Some of the principals who fed back to us said that the tendering process for the supplier was tedious and put a lot of work on them. They had to interview the different providers and give feedback to those who were not successful, if they required it, and so on. Perhaps it is a matter for the Minister for education to address but those principals think we could come up with a better way of ensuring the burden of additional bureaucracy does not fall on their shoulders.
The quality of the food was mixed, but a lot of it was good. Everybody wants to limit processed food. We want nutritional and tasty food. That the portion size was the same for all of the children, regardless of whether they were in sixth class or junior infants, came up again and again. That is an issue the Minister is going to address, which is welcome. There is also a need to ensure diversity in the food being supplied. We have students from different backgrounds. We have students who are vegan or vegetarian. We also have children with additional needs who have sensory issues around certain types of foods. We must try to include everybody.
Food waste came up quite a bit. It was not just about the food waste itself. It was about the waste of the material the food is delivered in if dishes are not available in the school. That is not an option for a lot of schools because they do not have the facilities for washing or even storing plates and cutlery. Even if it is all recyclable, and it is, there is still an awful lot of production and waste to deal with every day. That is an issue that needs to be considered.
Not-for-profit local providers are the best option if the food cannot be produced on site. It means fresher food and supporting local organisations that employ local people. They are not there to make a profit. Therefore, they can charge less for the food and make it more nutritious. They do not have the pressure of trying to make a profit all the time. I taught in a secondary DEIS school for many years.
Because we had DEIS status, meals were provided on site but students and staff could provide the meals and they produced lovely food there. If the home school liaison officer or any member of staff became aware that a student was hungry or from a deprived background and did not have a meal, they could recommend that child receive a meal but nobody else knew the child was not paying.
The unfortunate part about that is someone could have been missed so it would have just been that we happened to find out about it one day. I recall sitting with a first year class one day and they were called out early for their lunch because there was a very popular lunch on the menu that day. There were huge numbers of pupils. Therefore, they let the first years go out of the class a bit earlier and maybe five of six students stayed behind. I asked them if they all had their own lunches and whether that was why they were not going and they all said "Yes, miss". Then one of the girls said to me that she had not eaten since 5 o'clock the day before. I immediately recommended that she be given a meal and she was from then on but it was just due to a chance that I asked the question and she answered. I might never have asked the question or it may never have come to anyone's attention. I even asked the home school liaison officer if she had visited this family and she said she had and everything seemed fine, but it was a notified visit. If it is a notified visit, the home school liaison officer will not walk in on what is happening. There was an addiction issue in the household.
The school meals programme, whether it is hot or cold, is a great idea because it makes sure every child has a meal, there is no stigma attached and we are not fearful of missing anyone. It is a large investment on behalf of the State so we want to make sure the food provided will be eaten by most people and that there is the minimum amount of waste.
It has not been mentioned yet, but the holiday hunger programme is really important too when children are out of school, especially over the summer because it is two months or maybe more and then there is Christmas and everything else. I know it is working well in some areas but it is not available everywhere so we need to come up with a way that every child that is possibly hungry can have access to food over holiday periods. Dealing with food poverty is very important and this is a very important part of that but it cannot be the only part. It is often found that giving cash to families that need it is the most important way so they can ensure they have sufficient money to feed themselves.
I want to be associated with the vote of sympathy in relation to Seamus Carroll, who was a great character and we always had a bit of banter around the hurling in Kilkenny and Tipperary. He will be sorely missed here.
Like others, I do not want to repeat points that have been raised, but the school meals programme has been transformative. There is no doubt about it. The review that took place was most welcome and very comprehensive. Many important elements that were considered in it will now be added into the scheme. For families, particularly those experiencing food poverty, it has really been a transformative programme.
I want to raise a couple of points about the food security crisis we are heading into. A discussion is thankfully starting to take place around local food production and our vulnerability towards future shocks to food security, particularly in the horticulture and growing sector in Ireland that is unfortunately in freefall because of supermarket prices and many other factors. It would be wonderful if we could put a direct link between the growers and consumers; and the consumers in this case are children of school-going age. It makes that bridge and connection for life between them if we can, insofar as possible, connect local food producers into the school meals programme and incorporate them into the food programme, if it was hot meals or it could be fruit as well. It is my understanding that there could be some element of organic food as well with a certain percentage being organic food. Reducing the level of pesticides young people and children ingest is important as well.
The other point goes back to the one Senator Tully made about school kitchens. There is a really positive connection where there are school kitchens in place and where children themselves could be involved in the preparation of food and learning how to prepare a number of meals per day. All of that could be part of their education programme and really important. It is this connectivity with food because we have grown disconnected from it because of our busy lifestyles and consumer patterns over many decades. There is also the ability to perhaps even have their own school gardens, bring the vegetables in from the school gardens and have a school orchard. I was involved in putting in a lot of school gardens down the years and giving children that gift of being able to grow food themselves, see where it comes from, actually using it and bringing it from the garden onto the plate is important. I would love to see if the programme could be expanded out into having a wider connection and conversation about where food comes from, food security and about educating children to be able to prepare a number of basic meals and bake bread. I know it is a big ask but I would love to see if it could be done and it is important. It will give children a greater appreciation throughout life of our food systems.
The other point relates to my previous role. We set up a deer management forum between the Department of agriculture and ourselves so there will be a lot of venison on the market in the coming years. Is it possible to include venison at local level? There are hotspots around the country where deer are particularly problematic. It is a solution. There is very cheap organic meat out there that would be a source of protein for children. It is accessible and the best quality meat we could have. If there were a way of incorporating it into the school meals programme, even on a pilot basis at a local level, it would be worth doing. I will leave it with the Minister but it is an interesting point. Sustainably caught fish in local coastal communities could also be used. All of this creates a connection between children and food. I would love to see the scheme being broadened like that.
My final issue is on food waste. I agree with Senator Tully's point about schools that have their own facility where cutlery, plates and all of that is there. If all of the materials that are compostable could be brought to a central facility it would reduce food waste quite significantly. That could be tied in with the Minister of State, Deputy Dillon, from the point of view of the circular economy. There are a couple of points. It is a really transformative programme but I would love to see it broadened out into wider education around food and food growing in Ireland.
I have two minutes left and Senator Scahill had to depart so he asked me to raise two more points with the Minister. He received feedback that sometimes the children who may need the programme the most can actually be the children who miss out. The system depends on parents or guardians engaging with an app or online system but the Senator said we need to recognise the reality that, for a number of reasons, a parent may not be able to complete the registration or may fail to place an order. Sometimes the household experiencing the greatest difficulties may also be the household that is least likely to engage consistently with an online process. I know that in the review it is stated that at a local level schools can identify a child who is in need so that issue will be addressed.
The final point the Senator asked me to raise is that principals and teachers know their children and if a child arrives into school without a meal having being ordered and school staff know the child needs to be fed, there should be a mechanism to provide that meal.
I welcome representatives from Prosper Fingal to the Gallery, who are guests of Deputy Duncan Smith.
I strongly support of the hot school meals programme. Despite some ongoing negative commentary from some quarters, I believe this is a really good programme. It is a programme that is designed to do something simple, practical and important, which is to make sure children have access to a decent, nutritious meal during the school day. We need to keep this basic principle at the centre of this debate.
Sometimes, when I listen to the commentary around the hot school meals programme I am genuinely dismayed. I am dismayed by some of the negativity that has been whipped up around the scheme simply to suit the algorithm, generate likes and have a video go viral. This is absolutely disgraceful. I am dismayed when legitimate questions about how we can improve the programme are turned into sweeping claims that the programme itself is somehow a failure. I am particularly dismayed when a few sensational headlines, a few photographs or a few examples are used to create an impression that does not reflect the experience of the hundreds of thousands of children and their families who actually use the scheme every week.
Of course we should scrutinise public programmes, and especially ones like these that are costing a lot of money. We should ask difficult questions. We should review nutritional standards regularly. We should look at food waste. There is, however, a difference between scrutiny or reviewing and scaremongering and undermining commentary. This programme is making a real difference. It is now available in approximately 3,200 primary schools and supports more than 550,000 children and their families. Some 3.4 million meals are provided every week, as outlined already, and this is significant. We need to think about it for a moment; millions of meals provided free of charge every week. That is progressive. That is modern. That is what a caring society with resources does. It is now deeply embedded in the primary school system right across the country. For some children that meal might be the only hot meal they get that day or even that week. We cannot lose sight of that. We cannot have a debate about the appearance of a particular meal, or whether it lives up to the exacting standards imposed by privileged commentators with little real-world experience, while forgetting about the child sitting in the classroom who is hungry. Hunger affects children. It affects their concentration, energy levels and participation. It affects a child's ability to get the full benefit from his or her education. It also leaves deep and long-lasting psychological scars. I spoke with a woman at an event recently who spoke with tears in her eyes about how she felt being a hungry child in school many years ago. Many years later, this experience still haunts her.
Professor Katriona O'Sullivan and her story are incredibly important to this debate. Her memoir Poor tells us in very stark terms what childhood poverty and hunger can mean. She has spoken about being hungry for food but also hungry for love, care and nourishment. In one account of her story, she recalls her need for school dinners and contrasts that with the other children who could afford to be choosy. She wrote of the other children, the "loved ones" as she called them, who could complain about what was served while she would have eaten anything. This is an incredibly powerful reminder of the difference between discussing food from a position of security and experiencing hunger yourself. When we talk about the school meals, let us remember who we are talking about. We are talking about children who did not choose the circumstances into which they were born. We are talking about child poverty, which is a huge stain on society and something we need to eradicate. Children should be able to sit down at lunchtime knowing there will be food to eat. It is as simple as that. Because of the hot school meals programme, this is now a reality for children in Ireland and I am proud of this Government for making it possible.
This programme is not just about families experiencing the most severe poverty. It is also about ordinary working families and financial pressure. A family with two children in primary school can save approximately €1,152 a year through the scheme, which is significant. As a mother of two young children who has packed lunches for many years, I know it is about more than the money saved; it is also about time saved, it is about the head space and the shopping, the preparation, the lunch boxes, the decisions about what put to into them and the mental load of thinking about lunches every single evening. Have we bread left? Do we have fruit? Will they bring it home again? In north county Dublin, people get up incredibly early every morning. People commute long distances. They are paying large mortgages and high rents. People are working extremely hard. People are trying to manage work, childcare, school, bills and all the pressures of modern family life. When the State steps in and takes away one of these pressures, it matters. It gives people a bit of a break. My son's school will be introducing the programme shortly. The kids are excited but I can tell you the parents are more excited.
I feel strongly about the universality of the scheme as well. Everybody gets a meal. Everybody sits down together. Everybody gets on with their school day and everyone is equal. The children learn about food from their peers and they try new things and new food that they might not try at home. Yes, there are things that we need to improve. The rapid roll-out of the scheme means there are teething issues. The Minister, Deputy Calleary, has moved quickly to deal with them and I commend him. The two reviews, including a detailed nutritional review and a major survey of the children, parents, teachers, principals and suppliers, were really welcome and have identified areas that need improvement. They will be improved and the Minister has outlined what he will do there. We should be proud of all that the State has achieved. Children in school in Ireland get free school meals and free schoolbooks and they receive one of the most highly regarded educations in the world. This is something to be proud of. Our careful management of the economy and our resources by the Government has meant that we are in a position to do this. I commend the Minister and his colleagues in government on all the work they have done on this and every other scheme that benefits families and children in schools across Ireland. Go raibh maith agat.
Gabhaim buíochas le gach Seanadóir as an díospóireacht úsáideach seo agus a dtuairimí ar scéim na mbéilí scoile. I think there seems to be broad agreement across the House about the significant support to children and to families the hot school meals scheme is. It addresses child poverty and it addresses nutrition. The debate reflects a shared commitment across the House to ensuring that every child has access to nutritious food during the school day and that no child who is disadvantaged because of hunger or food insecurity has to put their hand up, as Senator Nelson Murray said.
Our reports provide us with a strong evidence base for the next development of the scheme. Importantly, they confirm that the hot school meals scheme is working. It is delivering real benefits for children, for families, for parents, as Senator Clifford-Lee has said, and for schools across the country. The overall programme reaches almost 682,000 children and delivers up to 3.4 million meals each week. Anybody who is stressed about planning one lunch of a night should think about planning 3.4 million meals every single week. Yes, there will be challenges with that volume. I want to acknowledge Senator Tully, as I meant to do in my opening remarks, and give my thanks to the Joint Committee on Education and Youth for the huge work they did in this space. Some 682,000 children and 3.4 million meals is a significant outturn. The findings of the reports show a high level of support among parents, children and schools, with the vast majority reporting that they enjoy their meals. The schools recognise the positive impact the school meals scheme is having. I also want to place on record my thanks to school communities and the school leadership teams. Senator Tully has pointed out the challenges of the procurement system. That is something we try to make easier but it is taxpayers' money and we have a responsibility. We are very conscious of that as well.
Senator Rabbitte rightly referred to the challenges being faced by schools on the Loop Head Peninsula as they seek to access the scheme. This time last year we had 112 rural schools, similar to the four schools in Loop Head that she mentioned, which did not have access to the scheme. As a result of the work of the team in my Department, we have brought that number down to 12. There is a lot of work going on in that space and in that area in trying to come up with a solution that works. We want this scheme to be given to and have access in every primary school.
I will reflect on the improvements. We will introduce a standardised meal cycle that will ensure consistency in nutritional standards. It will allow parents to plan. We have to improve the fruit, vegetable and wholegrain content of meals. We have to ensure that the vegetarian and vegan options provide sufficient protein and that there are options available for those with different dietary requirements. We have to deliver age-appropriate portion sizes. We must tackle food waste and packaging waste. I put it to Senators Noonan and Tully that this is built into the procurement space in terms of how we minimise the packaging but it is definitely something we are very conscious of. We are focused on that cold meal. With regard to Senator Nelson Murray's comments, let us not confuse a cold meal with an unhealthy meal, and a hot meal likewise. There is certainly a big need for that.
We are not putting these reports on shelves to come back to in ten years. We have started the work already. When we launched the report, our officials were briefing the main suppliers in a simultaneous exercise. We will begin the work of implementing the recommendations and keep in touch and in communication with them. Clearer instructions will issue to suppliers on immediately addressing portion size, on improving fruit, wholegrain and vegetable content, and on the standardised menu cycle. We are also examining the hot and cold food options ahead of the academic year beginning in 2027.
Nutrition will be key, as will the work in terms of partnerships with schools, suppliers and other Government Departments.
School food waste is a major challenge, but it always was. That was one of the reassuring aspects of the parent survey in particular. Approximately 42% of the 80,000 parents who responded said that food waste was always a challenge. It was touched on by all Senators in terms of their personal experience. That is not to say we are taking it lightly. Factors including absenteeism, menu preferences and meal choices are going to be crucial in that.
On Senator Scahill’s point about the app and ease of cancelling meals, that is a challenge because we have to look at the procurement models as well. I agree 100% in terms of local input. Personally, I would prefer local, community and not-for-profit models, ideally. Given where we have come from, we have a very good basis in relation to this programme.
I have to say that if Senators had told me at the end of January 2025, when I became Minister for Social Protection, that we would be spending as much time as we have dealing with school meals, hot or otherwise, I probably would have looked at them strangely. It is such an important investment from our Department. I owe it to my two predecessors, and to the officials who have worked incredibly hard, to drive it on.
In terms of Senator Noonan's suggestion, I cannot speak to venison but I agree that local food content is important. Yes, in a fishing community, they should have fish. That comes to protein, nutrients and dealing with so many of the areas.
Senator Tully mentioned the holiday hunger programme, which is something we did this year. We funded it in conjunction with the Department of education in some schools around the country. I will get the Senator a note on it. We are in the middle of budget discussions around it again for next year. It is absolutely crucial, particularly in schools for children with additional needs, that we keep that connection through the summer period.
As I said, this has been a very useful discussion. A dietician from our Department who is based in the Department of Health will be briefing the education spokespeople of the parties and the Chair of the committee tomorrow, if Senators wish to come along to that. It will be a very interesting conversation. There will be an opportunity to get her perspective and engage with her on what she has come across and what we need to do. As I said, we have an implementation plan. We are engaging with suppliers and school communities. It is inevitable that these changes will not happen overnight, but we are on a trajectory and travelling a road in relation to this programme which will enhance it and ensure that the overall benefits are retained while we address many of the challenges. Gabhaim buíochas le gach Seanadóir. Bhí sé usáideach cloisteáil uathu. Táimid ar thuras an clár seo a dhéanamh níos fearr agus tá sé sin mar thosaíocht dom agus don Rialtas.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire agus le gach Seanadóir who participated in the debate. When is it proposed to sit again?
At 9.30 a.m. tomorrow.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
Cuireadh an Seanad ar athló ar 5.05 p.m. go dtí 9.30 a.m., Déardaoin, an 1 Deireadh Fómhair 2026.
The Seanad adjourned at 5.05 p.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 1 October 2026.