School food is where nutrition policy meets a hungry child and a budget that has not kept up with ingredient prices. After successive clampdowns on fizzy drinks, chocolate and the worst fried extras, the official picture is better. Independent checks inside canteens are less glowing.
Some trusts now serve lentils, fish and vegetables that children actually eat. Others still lean on processed meat, pale pasta and a salad bar that is more garnish than meal. Uptake of free school meals remains the dividing line: when the food is good, children eat it. When it is not, those who can bring in a packed lunch vote with their Tupperware.
Caterers say the constraint is money, kitchen kit and time, not ideology. A scratch-cooked dal is cheaper than some think, but it needs a cook, not just a regenerating oven. Recruitment is hard. So is competing with the shop at the school gate.
The case for universal free meals in primary schools is as much about attainment as waistlines. Hungry children do not learn well. The nutrition argument is simple: a hot lunch can deliver fibre, protein and vegetables that many evening meals still do not.
If ministers want a food strategy that reaches beyond press releases, the canteen is the most literal place to start.