Podger pays model to encourage healthy food in schools
Sometimes I think the Green party seriously overestimate the electoral value of Sue Kedgely. Particularly when she is banning chips.
To be frank I have always found Kedgley's approach to issues rather shallow. This issue is no exception.
And why on earth is the Labour party, behind in the polls, going along with this nonsense of banning so called 'unhealthy' foods from schools? Perhaps Labour don't mind this particular 'Green' policy as it does not challenge their carbon filed neoliberal economic model. Perhaps Labour are giving the Greens some credit for this because they suspect the move will be unpopular. Yes, they really are that mean to the Greens.
Sure, kids like chips. But I can think of another good reason why kids tend to buy unhealthy food - a lot of it is mass produced, thus making it cheaper.
A Red approach to this issue would look at why so many families cannot afford to give their children regular healthy meals. Why do so many children go to school hungry? Provide free school meals, fill the bellies, and the kids will have less need for the tuck shop. I would also get rid of the Coke/Pepsi vending machines, particularly where the multinationals give schools backhanders for erecting these Tardis shaped advertising vehicles.
I would of thought a more Green approach to this issue would be to adopt the 'podger pays' principle. Inflate the prices of the 'unhealthy' food, and use the surplus to subsidise the sandwiches.
Of course the kids will jump to fence to visit the chipper down the road - but the Kedgley inspired food bans make this a certainty. But at least under the podger pays model, the podgers are unlikely to want the exercise, and thus are more likely to participate in the tuck shop carcinogen trading system.