Why your vote could affect food security in the UK
Food insecurity and food poverty are key topics of debate during the run-up to these elections. Why? Because, since their opening in 2000, the demand for food banks has increased exponentially. The graph below demonstrates the increasing demand for these charitable services with a steady uptick in emergency food parcels from 2005/06 to 2021/22. The Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) reported that 3% (2.1 million) of the UK population used a food bank in the years 2021/22. Finally, and most shockingly, the Trussell Trust reported a 94% increase in its services in the last 5 years. Alarming statistics!
Despite the political propaganda and victim-blaming narrative the media uses as to ‘why’ someone may use a food bank there are plenty of families who not only need food bank parcels but wholly depend on them.
Political Policies Related To Food & Nutrition
The Conservative Party
The Conservative party is making a concerted effort with a three-pronged attack that prioritises UK agriculture and food trade by championing our farmers, reducing food insecurity and targeting high-fat, salt and sugar (HFSS) food advertising.
Firstly, championing our farmers. They have committed an additional £ 1 billion/year in the national budget to adjust to inflation. They have vowed to provide supplemental support for farming equipment, soil and nutrient management. The hope is that this will have a knock-on effect on the yield and quality of food produced, thus, reducing national food insecurity. Moreover, They have vowed that 50% of food served in the public sector must be grown/produced locally. For food and drinks that are imported into the UK, the policy suggests that there will be more stringent checks to ensure that imported goods meet higher UK health standards. Finally, they state that they want to tackle adult and childhood obesity by removing advertising of the products, and by investing more in research on the impact of HFSS foods.
The Labour Party
The Labour Party has made promises to tackle food insecurity at a multitude of levels - international trade, food production, emergency food parcels, food bank use, fair trade and food costs. In addition, making improvements to 2nd and 3rd-party factors that determine poverty with benefits trickling down to the general public. Including, freeing up a higher household budget to afford a nutritional diet. Lastly, they have made commitments to improving NHS funding and resources, in addition to making breakfast clubs available to all children within the UK. Labour too, are tackling childhood obesity by banning advertising of HFSS to children under the age of 16 years.
At a sourcing level, Labour vows to support British farmers by championing UK trade without jeopardising our local resources and environment. Much like the Conservative Party, Labour too, have committed to a target 50% of all food purchased across the public sector to be locally produced or certified to higher environmental standards.
An overarching requirement is the lack of a household budget due to the increasing rise in costs of energy bills, household bills and cost of food. They rightly recognise that increasing demands and unreactive wages are creating a widening gap in food poverty. They aim to target poverty at its most profound level by increasing the minimum wage to an actual ‘living standard’ whilst reducing the cost of basic human needs. In turn, they hope that this will redistribute the household budget. This is all part of their anti-hunger strategy. One issue they refer to as a ‘moral scar’ is the increasing dependence of many households on emergency food parcels. The Labour party commits to eliminating the need for food banks by 2030. The hope is that with these improvements, emergency food crisis groups such as food banks will move towards co-operative food clubs which embody community spirit.
Labour too, has made commitments regarding banning advertising of HFSS for under 16s in hopes that this will reduce rates of childhood obesity and in turn the effect this will have on the NHS. With these goals in mind, they have stated that they want to make the next generation of children the healthiest yet. Adding to this they have pledged free breakfast clubs to all pupils of primary school age, which is set to save households £400/year per child.
Liberal Democrats
The Liberal democrats have taken a slightly different approach by focusing on food label education, farming quality and animal welfare.In addition to removing HFSS advertising before the watershed to minimise obesity rates in children under 16 years. Additionally, the Liberal Democrats aim to extend the ‘Soft Drinks Levy’ to all drinks high in added sugars. Announced on the 14th June, they have labelled their approach the ‘National Food Strategy’ which aims to tackle rising food prices and end food poverty. Moreover, they hope to improve the health and nutrition of the nation to end food insecurity and back British farmers.
Another of their 2024 policies, champions food production and procurement, with a particular focus on minimising environmental damage and improving the UK’s growing environment to improve a quality yield. Moreover, they hope to raise the quality of food produced to create more nutritious food sources for the general public. Lastly, they want to empower consumers to make confident decisions about the food that they eat, instilling confidence in the consumer that they are choosing the most nutritious choice. Additionally, they have vowed to overhaul the food labelling system to make it more robust and clear to understand.
Green Party
Much like their name suggests the Green Party Manifesto focuses on the food industry improving standards for the climate as well as the population. Within the introduction of their policies, they reference the current food system contributing ⅓ of greenhouse gas emissions as well as, food demands polluting local habitats and our riverways. The Green Party have taken a broad approach to tackling the food chain, food biodiversity, nutrition education, food access and food waste. Of all the parties, unsurprisingly the Green Party seems to have the most comprehensive approach to food adversity.
If elected, the Green Party will aim to reduce chemicals and pesticides used in farming. Meanwhile, they have vowed to provide all children up to Year 6 a daily free school meal and breakfast clubs. Additionally, they aim to teach children to grow, prepare and cook their own food bridging the gap in practical nutrition education so many children miss out on. Finally, they are adapting their policies to ensure that good quality food surplus will never been wasted and is distributed into places of need.
Reform Party
Unsurprisingly, the Reform party’s policies focus on keeping food British with the mandate that if an institution is funded by the UK taxpayer 75% of the food must be sourced from the UK. Moreover, they are recommending tax breaks for smaller food processors to stimulate economic growth. Lastly, they are encouraging ‘clearer’ labelling of food to allow the consumer to make informed choices about what they are eating. Frighteningly there is not one mention of food poverty, insecurity or poverty in the full manifesto.
A Nutritionist’s Opinion
Overall, there are some positive movements in the government’s policies. However, I think a lot of the policies are tone-deaf to the very present threat of food insecurity. Not only that, some of the policies lay the blame for ‘unhealthy eating’ at the feet of the person, rather than the wider issues, but lets discuss.
Banning ‘junk’ food advertising before the watershed, or entirely. Sure, we all know that advertising can serve as a sensory reminder of flavour, and sensation which can in turn lead to cravings and seeking out the food. However, for fast food giants such as Mcdonald’s, KFC, Burger King, Subway etc, most people are aware of them, know what the food tastes like, may walk past one every day or have the autonomy to decide on consuming their food. One of the popularly cited reasons for feeding children ‘junk’ food is because it is cheaper than cooking at home. According to a Which consumer study, the average cost of supermarket ingredients and therefore family meals has risen by 27% in just one year. Talking Retail reported that a traditional roast dinner (the nation’s favourite meal according to a poll) cost £2.45 per head or £9.82 per family of 4 and this doesn't count the cost of electricity. The suggestion that banning junk food would remove the urge or craving for such foods is ridiculous. For it to be suggested as the main driver for childhood obesity is also… ridiculous. It’s a small factor but not the main contributor. Better policies would address nutrition education, exercise clubs, and funding for fruit and vegetables or full meals.
Breakfast clubs and or free school meals. This policy I love and I hope that regardless of party this rule is upheld. Research conducted by Kellogg's found that more than 1in 7 children go to school without eating breakfast. Key findings from this review found that 2.4 pupils in every classroom in England and Wales will arrive at school hungry at least once a week and that 28% of teachers have witnessed a rise in children arriving at school hungry. A 2017 cross-sectional study found that skipping breakfast can have detrimental effects on mental, emotional and physical wellbeing including increased central adiposity, reduced physical activity, poorer concentration and inconsistent emotional well-being. Breakfast clubs give children a fair playing field, meaning no child gets left behind.
Labelling informed choices. Very little detail was given about this but dependent on how they manage to conduct this, I think it could be helpful for the general public to understand where a snack or food item sits in their day. What part of the Eatwell plate it contribute to, or whether it is seen as an HFSS food item?
What would I like to see?
Greater focus on food and nutrition education to minimise the gap in personalised health education and allow everyone a fair chance and having autonomy over their health decisions. Taught in schools and online resources for parents and adults.
A focus on minimising waste, and national campaigns related to storing and canning food for longevity.
A focus on educating the public on growing their own fruits and vegetables. Or using supermarket veg scraps to grow their own.
Greater funding for farmers and small food manufacturers to increase their income to a fair wage and ability to provide good food to the nation.
A focus on sustainable farming techniques.
A reduction in food costs to ensure every household can afford balanced plates.
Better support for people living in poverty with greater support for bills, or purchasing essentials.
A concerted effort to reduce the public’s dependence on food banks. In a 1st world country, this shouldn't be the answer. The government should recognise this as the crucial issue that it is.
No matter what else you do this 4th of July, don’t waste your vote. Even if you believe you’re voting for the best of a bad bunch, every vote counts, every vote matters. As a Nutritionist who volunteers at a Food Bank, I urge you to vote for the party that you believe has made commitments to take care of its people, especially the ones that need it the most. Put the ‘Unite’ back into United Kingdom and please VOTE for a healthier future.
If you are concerned about the UK’s children living in food poverty read more about the Food Foundation’s ‘Feed the Future’ Campaign, and support their petition by adding your signature HERE