Feature

Time to get things rolling

That food poverty still exists in Britain is a scandal which should be tolerated no longer — and there’s plenty that could be done, argues Jacqui Webster

Hardly a day has gone by in the last year without genetically modified foods, E-coli, BSE or other food-related stories featuring in the news. In the face of such public scrutiny, food safety and standards remain high on the political agenda.

But while food and health campaigners nervously await the outcome of the final negotiations on the government’s proposals for a Food Standards Agency, one factor is often forgotten — food poverty kills more people than all the cases of food poisoning added together.

Over 13 million people live in poverty in Britain. Unable to secure an adequate diet, poor people have increased risks of heart disease, obesity, diabetes and some cancers. The lifespan of people on low incomes is, on average, 10 years less than their better off counterparts. Welcome as it is, the proposed Food Standards Agency is unlikely to have much impact on this serious health problem.

In August, the National Food Alliance food poverty project published Food Poverty: what are the policy options? This pulls together a range of practical proposals for tackling food poverty made by different organisations and individuals over the last 10 years.

‘A debate on the options for food poverty policy is definitely needed’, says Tim Lang, professor of food policy at Thames Valley University, in his introduction to the report. ‘The political map may have changed in May 1997, but the high hopes that there would be a 1945-style assault on poverty, engendered by the new Labour government’s landslide election, has been subsumed by a new realism. This document should help both the government and the food poverty movements take stock and make decisions on how best to move forward.’

Food poverty is a complex problem. To try to clarify the issues, the policies (over 70 of them) are grouped according to which aspect of food poverty they address. For example, suggestions to increase benefits in line with average earnings and provide extra help for pregnant women on benefits are grouped under poverty and inequality. In the section on education and training there are proposals to include all aspects of food and nutrition, including shopping, budgeting, growing food, and the origins of food as a compulsory part of the National Curriculum for girls and boys up to the age of 14.

Ideas for encouraging retailers to source food locally and buy produce in season are in the farming section. The community support section suggests that well-equipped community centres and school kitchens should be made more readily available for cooking clubs and community cafes, and that there could be local ‘community chests’ to fund local food projects.

Most of the policy options are linked to one or more organisation, expert in or working on that option. In this way, people who want to find out more about particular policy options can do so easily. The paper has also attempted to identify which agencies — local or central government, various departments and/or professions, the private sector, and the voluntary sector — might be responsible for devising and implementing the policy options.

The previous government did make some attempts to address food poverty. It set up a Low Income Project Team (LIPT) as part of the Health of the Nation’s Nutrition Task Force. In April 1996, LIPT published its final report. This made recommendations for a co-ordinated national approach to food and low income, including local food partnerships and a national network and database of food projects. But following publication, the group was disbanded, leaving no mechanism to ensure the recommendations were implemented.

The National Food Alliance was unique in taking forward these recommendations at a national level. Since January 1996, it has been developing the food poverty network (see box) and, in March 1997, it published an influential report dispelling the myths surrounding healthy eating on a low income. This latest NFA policy report identifies the key problems of food poverty and outlines the many policy changes that could be implemented to address these problems, inviting wider discussion across a whole range of governmental and non-governmental sectors.

In his introduction, Tim Lang examines other recent developments in the fight against poverty and inequality. He questions the benefits of the government’s ambitious Welfare to Work programme but says we should be more encouraged by other steps. These include attempts to establish a minimum wage, the enquiry into Inequalities in Health chaired by Sir Donald Acheson, former Chief Medical Officer, and the Green Paper on Public Health. The latter’s ideas for Healthy Living Centres and Health Action Zones are both seen by the NFA as potential vehicles for addressing food poverty.

Other debates outlined in the paper include how we demonstrate that a project ‘works’. Much research remains to be done on policy evaluation. Too often the evaluative ‘spotlight’ has been shone on community projects but not on other national or local policy issues. There is also a real issue about which policy level might be most effective, from advice to individuals at one end of the spectrum, to changes in global food trade policies at the other.

Finally, there is the question of morality. Should we be pressing for policy change because it is in the interests of the majority to eradicate food poverty, or should we argue that it is a moral issue, that everyone has a right to adequate food and it is therefore society’s obligation to fulfil this right? The report does not attempt to answer these questions, but highlights the various strands of the debate and urges further discussion.

The NFA food poverty project has four broad aims for this document. We hope it will:

• open up the debate to more people, particularly those with experience of food poverty;
• encourage the process of establishing some priorities among the options;
• continue to support people devising practical ways of implementing policies; and
• help to raise the issue of food poverty higher on the political agenda.

Says Tim Lang: ‘It is up to us to ensure that pressure remains on the government. We should invite it at every opportunity to adopt our ideas. We should continue building a coherent analysis. We should always listen to the experience of those at the front-line; those who perform the daily miracle of juggling impossible budgets to put food on their table. Above all, we should remember that the UK is an immensely rich country by any historical or current comparison. The existence of food poverty is a political failure that should be deemed intolerable’.

Food Poverty: what are the policy options? Price £12 (£5 for Food Network members) inc. p&p. National Food Alliance, 94 White Lion Street, London N1 9PF. Tel: 0171 837 1228. Fax: 0171 8371141. E-mail: nationalfoodalliance@compuserve.com