We received apologies from Deputies Ryan O'Meara, Aisling Dempsey and Jen Cummins, and Senator Shane Curley. Everyone is welcome to the meeting. I would like anyone attending remotely to mute themselves when not contributing so that we do not pick up any background noise or feedback. As usual, I remind all in attendance to ensure that their mobiles are on silent mode or switched off entirely. Members attending remotely are reminded of the constitutional requirements that in order to participate in public meetings, they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex.

As witnesses are within the precincts of Leinster House, they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the presentation they make to this committee. This means they have an absolute defence against any defamation action for anything they say at this meeting. However, they are expected not to abuse this privilege. It is my duty as Cathaoirleach to ensure that this privilege is not abused. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person or entity outside of the Houses, or an official of the Houses, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

On today's agenda is an evaluation of the impacts of the hot school meals programme. I warmly welcome the members of the interdepartmental group on the school meals programme. We have Mr. Simon Shevlin, principal officer and chairperson of the school meals programme, Department of Social Protection; Ms Siobhan Gaffey, head of shared services implementation unit and procurement, Department of Education and Youth; Mr. David Skene, chartered engineer, programme manager in the planning and development unit of the Department of Education and Youth; Ms Fiona Ward, policy adviser on obesity and nutrition, and CORU-registered dietician with the Department of Health; and Mr. Rob Phillips, chief specialist, environmental health, Food Safety Authority of Ireland. They are all very welcome. Ms Jane Foley, a fifth-year student from the Dominican College in Dublin 9, is also welcome. She is in the Public Gallery this morning. Jane participated in interparliamentary exchanges with the former committee and made some written submissions.

Before we begin, I note, in accordance with standard practice, that members of the interdepartmental group cannot comment on the details of any specific case where doing so might prejudice ongoing investigations or enforcement action. In addition, the interdepartmental group cannot comment on individual schools' live procurement processes.

I thank the joint committee for the invitation to attend to discuss the school meals programme. My name is Simon Shevlin and I am a principal officer in the Department of Social Protection and chairperson of the interdepartmental working group on the school meals programme. I am joined by members of the working group, Siobhan Gaffey and David Skene from the Department of Education and Youth, Fiona Ward from the Department of Health and Rob Phillips from the Food Safety Authority of Ireland. An interdepartmental working group was set up in December 2024 with members from the Departments of Education and Youth, Health, and Children, Disability and Equality and the Food Safety Authority of Ireland.

There has been ongoing engagement, with eight meetings, as well as other meetings with stakeholders, since that time.

The interdepartmental working group agreed a terms of reference at our first meeting, which were:

Procurement - ensure that schools have the support and advice they require to manage the procurement process;

School meals programme inspections, controls, guidelines and procedures - ensure the existing audit process needs are fit for purpose with a view to implementing a separate inspection of food quality and nutritional standards separate to assessment of procurement, financial and governance procedures;

Food safety and independent nutritional inspection-evaluation - work with key stakeholders to develop a process to ensure the food delivered to schools meets the nutritional standards;

Impact of the school meals programme - engage with stakeholders to gather any feedback and information relevant to the programme;

Health and safety relating to school meals programme within school buildings; and

Develop a set of contracting options for schools to simplify the process for school meals.

The objective of the school meals programme is to provide regular, nutritious food to children to support them in taking full advantage of the education provided to them. The programme is an important component of policies to encourage school attendance and extra educational achievement.

In budget 2025, it was announced that the hot school meals scheme would be extended to all remaining primary schools in 2025, meaning that approximately 3,200 schools and 550,000 children would be eligible for hot school meals in 2025, with a budget of €300 million. The programme for Government states that the roll-out of hot school meals to secondary schools will commence during the lifetime of this Government.

Under the school meals programme, the primary relationship is between the school and the supplier. The Department of Social Protection provides the funding for the meals directly to the school. It is the responsibility of each school to administer the programme in their school, including handling the procurement process in accordance with the rules and guidelines set out by the schools procurement unit of the Department of Education and Youth. Applications for the 2025-26 academic year commenced a number of weeks ago and applications continue to be received and processed. Funding under this programme is solely for food. Schools can carry over any unused funds from a previous year to the next academic year provided they are continuing in the schools meals programme.

This academic year will be the first year that all primary schools will be eligible for hot school meals. Once the academic year closes, analysis of the scheme will be conducted. We have engaged with 300 schools that have not yet signed up and, in most cases, this is due to a lack of demand among parents.

The working group continues to work to address key challenges and concerns about the implementation of the school meals programme, such as building regulations, food safety legislation and procurement compliance. It was agreed by the working group that these issues could be incorporated into revised procurement documents. No new legislation or change in the application of food law has been introduced. The working group also agreed that the procurement documents would be mandatory for the 2025-26 school year.

As well as the development of the procurement documentation, a CORU-registered dietitian has been employed to review the nutritional standards and menus of the food business operators and work with other key stakeholders. The working group also recommended that meals high in salt and sugar should be excluded from the school meals programme from the 2025-26 school year and this change is now in place. Issues have arisen regarding hot school meals for some rural schools. A total of 112 schools were affected by the withdrawal of two suppliers under common ownership with the same CEO. The Department of Social Protection has contacted each of these schools and the meals on wheels service in these areas. We are aware of 11 meals on wheels services providing hot school meals in rural areas. We are also engaging with officials in the Department of Rural and Community Development and the Gaeltacht to explore solutions that can support schools. Of the 112 schools, only 27 do not have a solution in place.

I trust this statement is of assistance to the joint committee. We are happy to help with any questions.

I thank Mr. Shevlin. We will now proceed to members’ questions. We are likely to have a second round because the roster is not too congested. First up is Senator Gareth Scahill.

I am a believer in the schools meals programme. It is a programme that I wanted to see. Research, included in the note provided, talks about the positive impacts such as improved physical health, attendance and even performance. I think it found that 74% of principals reported better physical health among students. That is wonderful to see and the programme provides a level playing field for everyone.

The programme is now being expanded to 3,200 schools, with over 500,000 children to benefit. How do the witnesses foresee maintaining nutritional quality at scale while avoiding a race to the bottom in terms of cost?

I will answer the first part of that question and then I will hand over to my colleague Ms Ward. Nutritional values are a concern and parents in some schools have raised concerns about nutritional standards. In 2023, research that was carried out suggested a very positive outcome regarding the nutritional standards of school meals. In 2019, nutritional standards for hot schools meals were established. Our new nutritionist is reviewing those and will supply a report to our Minister by the end of this year. My colleague will expand on that piece.

On ensuring that nutritional quality is met, that is why the nutritional standards were devised in 2017. The standards were based on food-based healthy eating guidelines that had been devised by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, FSAI, and published in 2016. That is in recognition of the public health concern that we have that overweight and obesity rates are on the increase, and that if people consume foods that are high in fat, salt and sugar, that can lead to chronic diseases both in later childhood and then into adulthood. That is why the standards were devised and they were devised by a technical subgroup that sits within the governance of the obesity policy and action plan.

On scalability, to put it into context, when you consider that 550,000 pupils are now able to avail of the scheme, that is five times the number of people who pass through Dublin Airport on a given July day. It is a massive challenge to be able to provide healthy food at scale on a daily basis, but the standards are there. We want to determine the current available options and that is why the dietician has been employed within the Department of Health, by the Department of Social Protection, to conduct a full nutritional analysis. We have the standards. The food-based organisations are complying with the standards when they enter into the contract. Now we need to double-check that those standards are being met and then we will work with the food-based organisations to ensure that with clever menu design they can continue to be met.

I am a parent and my two children benefit from the scheme. In an effort to highlight waste, the schools have recently produced lunchboxes and they send home any food that is not eaten. It is an opportunity for parents to see the menu. I have been blown away by how beige the food, unfortunately. It would not encourage a person to eat it. The menu is diverse but in some cases it is nearly too broad and the children are given too much choice. I would love to see a bit of colour thrown into the boxes.

I am concerned that as we scale up the programme, bigger players will become the only ones that can deliver at the scale that is needed, and I believe that the quality deteriorates as it is scaled up. We made a mistake in this country by ceasing the practice of local bookshops supplying books to schools. Now, as part of the school books scheme, there are only two or three major players that supply all the schoolbooks. I hope we do not go down the same route in relation to school dinners because I think smaller providers will give a more diverse and colourful menu. The scheme is more focused on smaller schools and procurement is one of the big things. Are we scaling the scheme such that only the major players will be able to deliver? Are we cutting out the little guys who, potentially, would act with more care and focus on the students benefiting from this in their own communities? I hope Ms Ward, as a dietician, can answer my broad question and some of rest of the witnesses might also answer.

I can answer some of that and then Mr. Shevlin might answer some of the questions related to procurement. On the colour of the food that is provided, the nutritional standards state that two portions of fruit or vegetables should be included in each of those meals. Again, because we are in the process of conducting a full nutrition analysis, I cannot comment on anecdotal stories.

I have pictures on my phone because I have taken the pictures of the lunchboxes every evening for the last couple of weeks.

It is really important for us to be able to do a full evidence-based analysis. We have eight big suppliers but there are many more who are also supplying. Mr. Shevlin can speak on that. Of the eight, there are 230 different menus. We are looking at that at the minute and applying the standards to that. Then we intend to do a deeper dive on the nutritional analysis. However, we need the menu information and the ingredients from those food-based organisations. That is a piece of work we are doing. When we have that information, we intend to work with the food-based organisations so that we can look at different menu options. We have a very good exemplar of how this was already done for the nutrition standards for the early learning care services. We would hope to replicate that type of approach so we can stand over the content of the meals and ensure they meet the standards whereby they offer a source of protein every day, a source of energy, two fruit and veg and-or dairy products.

I should have said at the outset that witnesses will hear me tapping a glass occasionally to keep to time. I allow an overrun. Invariably there are questions that may not have been fully answered so at the end everyone will get a chance to cover things that may not have been fully covered.

I was not here for the opening statement but I read it. I was in the Seanad raising another issue so I missed Senator Scahill's questions. I hope I am not repeating him. The biggest concern we have around this is there has been a lot of investment - a lot of money is being spent - so we need value for money, that the food is nutritious and serves the purpose, that is, that the students are eating it, that it is not an administrative burden on schools and there is not too much waste out of it. How does the Department monitor all this? How does it monitor waste, for example? I have students in secondary school and I hear different reports. They will not necessarily eat the food they get all the time. Sometimes it is they do not like it. It does not always sound the most nutritious to me. The officials say the Department does inspections. Are they unannounced inspections? How are the inspections of the food that is being served which is prepared by so many different operators being carried out to ensure they are what they are supposed to be?

On the inspections part, the Department of Social Protection carries out inspections, mostly on the financial side. We have to inform the school and give it a couple of weeks' notice because of all the paperwork so that all the paperwork is available to us when we come into the inspection. There is a visual check on the food at that stage, too. I will let Ms Ward come back on the nutritional standards as that was one of the questions that was asked previously about this.

On suppliers, there are concerns about the larger suppliers. There are 254 suppliers supplying to one school. We do want as many local suppliers involved as possible to make sure that nutritional standards are kept. I will let Ms Ward answer on nutritional standards. We have employed a nutritionist to review the nutritional standards as well.

Part of the work the dietician is doing is that, after we have conducted this full analysis, we need to devise a mechanism that we can check easily as part of these inspections to see if the meals are provided and eaten and consumed on site at the schools do comply with standards. That has been identified as a task within the whole workplan of this dietician that started with us only ten weeks ago.

There was a review carried out in 2023 which was published by RSM. Some 89% of the parents were happy with the meals at that stage. We need to review all that again to make sure because we have heard a lot of negativity on social media on that and the Senator made the point regarding his own kids. We do hear those stories and we need to investigate them further and understand what the issues are. The key part for us is the school has a contract with the supplier. If the school is not happy, it should have that conversation first of all with the contractor and they can move contractors. Our colleagues in the Department of Education and Youth have really strengthened the whole procurement process to give the schools a lot more powers to decide what they want in the schools and get the right provider in there.

I had a conversation with a principal. It was a few years ago, so it was possibly before the rates were increased because they were increased from January 2023. She said the rates being offered at that time meant they could not get anyone apart from one supplier to provide the food and it was not good quality. I think that school has changed providers since but that can also be an issue. Another school, which is a DEIS primary school, told me that before the hot meals were introduced at primary level, it was getting a packed lunch from a local provider and it was really successful. Is there a choice there? Do schools have to go for a hot meal or how is the funding affected if a school decides to go for a packed lunch rather than a hot meal?

The hot school meal is not mandatory. The school can decide if it wants to go for the cold lunch. The rates were increased in 2023. They were increased by up to 25% in some areas. I do agree that, for rural schools, there is not much competition in some of these areas and we saw recently, in August, a supplier pulled out. However, we have increased the rates. The Minister for Social Protection would also love to see more local suppliers involved in providing school meals to the schools. The schools can go for cold lunches if they wish to.

On options, the officials said in their briefing about options if someone is coeliac or vegetarian and so on. However, I have also heard from students who are vegetarian that options were not being provided. Is it compulsory that they provide these? I presume it is only a small number of students who would be availing of something that is slightly different.

Concerns were raised. My colleagues in the Department of education really strengthened the procurement documentation to cover those areas and the different dietary options. Again, if the parent is not happy that the child is not getting the right meals based on their dietary needs, they need to talk to the principal. The principal can then ask the supplier to do that. In the contract we have drafted, all that is covered. When the supplier signs that contract, they have to ensure they provide all the different dietary requirements.

The officials said there are 300 schools which did not sign up, I think because parents did not see a need. There could be families within those areas that have need, however. How are they facilitated? I did teach in a secondary school - we were a DEIS school. There was a meal provided that students could buy if they wished. We always catered for students once we were made aware, or became aware, that they had a need so they could get the meal for free. I remember talking to a first year one day and asking her did she not get the lunch here or did she bring her own and she said, “Miss, I haven’t eaten since 5 o’clock yesterday evening.” Straight away, I went to the home school community liaison and made sure she was on the list for the meal, but that was an accidental conversation. I am wondering how we ensure the children who really need this meal in schools where it is not being provided are getting it.

The reason we moved the school meals outside the DEIS schools is because we know there are a lot of children, as the Senator said, who do not have meals and they are in non-DEIS schools. Each school decides, with the board of management, if they want to participate in the scheme. We have contacted most of those 300 schools and a lot of them are planning to apply for the school meals now. I think 112 of the 300 had changed their minds. It is about us giving a positive message, going back again to nutritional value, because we have heard a lot of negative comment on social media about the standard of school meals. We need to get the message out there that we have a dietician involved, the nutritional standards are good and that we are endeavouring to ensure all school meals are of a very good standard. We need to tackle that negative news about the standard of school meals. The Senator spoke about his own kids. We need to ensure the standard is correct and get those other schools on board as well.

I hope we will get a second round of questions in shortly.

As a public representative, like others have said, I have heard mixed reviews on the hot school meals. One principal, however, told me it was amazing. It only takes her an hour and a half at the start of the year to get it all set up. The school has a great system around who manages it when it comes in and she is happy enough with the meal, which is good. Other schools have talked about waste, which others have brought up as well, and the quality of the food.

As a mammy, I have no experience of it because my kids still do not have it, which is incredible when we look at the numbers there.

Ironically, we got a text yesterday from someone stating they were finally seeing some progress with the hot school meals programme but that there was still a substantial amount of paperwork to get through. They add, in italics, that they are hopeful of getting started after Christmas. Although the numbers might have been mentioned already, how many schools are left, apart from the 300 mentioned, that do not want to opt in? How many of the schools that started four or five years ago have opted out of the hot school meals scheme?

Let me return to what Senator Tully asked. I do not know if the question was answered properly or if I misunderstood it. She asked about choice and cold meals. My kids love an auld salad roll or ham roll. It was said that the schools could make the choice to do cold meals. Does this mean they have the choice to get a supplier to deliver in this regard? If a local Centra or other local shop were told it had to provide to a school at lunchtime 100 ham rolls, or ham and lettuce rolls, which would not be that bad nutritionally, it would be delighted. I would love to see something like that happen. Do we envisage ourselves rolling out more suppliers in the future and providing the likes of rolls?

I will answer the last question first. If a school is approved for hot school meals, it can do a cold lunch. Schools can do what the Deputy is suggesting.

So, there are suppliers doing the rolls.

There is an option. If approved for the hot school meals, a school can do a cold lunch.

There are a few aspects to the paperwork. First of all, there is the application to our Department. The form is only four pages. We have videos on our website to guide schools and we have provided training. With regard to the new procurement documentation, our colleagues in the Department of Education and Youth have held webinars. I am not sure of the figures on how many principals got involved. Maybe Ms Gaffey might give them. There is ongoing training to assist the schools as much as possible with procurement and the documentation.

Does Mr. Shevlin think their saying that there is a substantial amount of paperwork is unfair?

I will let Ms Gaffey answer that. The Department of Social Protection has cut back on the paperwork for the application process. The biggest thing is that when we get the applications, we ask for a list of all the invoices and the menus. The biggest failure we have is that 58% of applications that have come through this year do not have that documentation with them. That is a problem for us. We need to smooth-----

What does Mr. Shevlin mean?

When a school applies to us, we need two forms plus the menu and invoices. Of all the applications that have come through to us this year, 58% were missing a document or were not signed off correctly. Last year, the proportion was 80%. We are trying to give guidance all the time. We are also looking into developing an online application process for the schools to make it much easier for them. Again, however, it is about attaching documentation so we can do a proper review.

One of the two principals in question is in a DEIS school, has been in the system for a good while and is therefore probably well used to the system. The other school is brand new and obviously has not got the meals yet. It could be about getting used to something.

I agree with the Senator. Many new schools have come into the process over recent years. There is a bedding-in process as well. Ms Gaffey might give some figures on the procurement process.

On the procurement documentation, the interdepartmental group, IDG, made a decision that it would be mandatory for the schools to use the schools procurement unit, SPU, procurement documentation. Our Department led on that with colleagues in the IDG. Many other organisations had an input regarding the tender documentation. We have standardised the documentation for schools. It entails a big document, but the schools do not now need to produce it. We have it done for them. What the school authorities now need to fill in is a table at the beginning, into which they need to put their unique logistical data on their schools, including roll numbers, the time they want their lunch, etc. On the next page of the document, they choose which service delivery option they want. That is the key part on the procurement documentation itself. It does not take a long time to fill it in once the relevant information is to hand.

Public procurement and using the eTenders system for our schools are new. The majority of schools, prior to the hot school meals scheme, would generally have been tendering in respect of amounts under €50,000. They would get three quotes. For the first time, many of the schools are using eTenders. As Mr. Shevlin has mentioned, the SPU, the support unit for schools, has made available many videos and guides. Mr. Shevlin mentioned that we had webinars. Between all of them, over 2,010 attended.

To be fair, over 800 are going through the process at the moment.

Eight hundred at the moment. These are probably the ones expected for January.

Yes, that is right. We have been auditing those daily to keep an eye out and to make sure things are done correctly. The main issue is that they may not have included all of the documentation, for example, the licence agreement.

How many have opted out since the start? Are there many?

I am aware of only one school that has opted out. That was among the 112 in August that have not continued.

Since it started.

Yes.

Gabhaim buíochas le gach duine as ucht bheith anseo inniu.

I have experience with the hot school meals as a múinteoir. My school was a pilot school. As a mammy, I have two children in primary school. One of them has dietary issues, let us say, and the other will eat anything. One of them is getting the meals and one of them has opted out. I have noted much debate online, on social media and among parents and teachers about hot meals. The reason we have the hot meals in schools is so children will get a meal. The high-salt, high-fat, high-sugar diet has been removed, which is great. I am delighted that my daughter eats the healthy meals, but there are children whom we would like to ensure get a meal. I would love to hear about the debate among the officials when the decisions are made. I have heard the debate on radio and that among parents. One school used to have the option of a pizza slice or chicken nuggets and goujons – on a Friday, say. My son was delighted about that day. Now, he is excluded completely. There were many children in my class who just ordered plain pasta.

Ms Ward stated there must be a source of protein, dairy, fruit and vegetables. Is it just a case of these being on the menu? Are we allowed to have plain pasta? If we have all of what is required on the menu, can we also offer plain pasta, plain chicken goujons and potato cubes for the children who just will not eat? I just want to hear about the debate from the other side.

Portion sizes came up in my school. I had naíonáin bheaga and the following year I had rang a sé. The infants were getting the same size meals as sixth class. There was a lot of waste. I was like a mammy asking children to have just a little more, just one more spoonful. In sixth class, the students were always starving. We tackled the waste by putting all the extra meals owing to children who did not show up on a given day into the seomra foirne. Sixth class would come back after lunch and would be delighted to see what else was available and eat what was left over. There was a huge difference between what was eaten by one child and the next, but there were no differences in portions. I do not know if that applies throughout the State or whether it was just my experience.

Historically, the treat option was in place for Fridays. However, when we investigated further, we realised that children were getting it every day, causing an issue. The treats were supposed to be available only on a Friday, but with the parents using apps, treats could be picked every day. We decided at that stage, based on advice from the nutritionist, that we should take away the option.

Each supplier has its own menu. We are looking at what the Department of children did regarding preschools, where there are set menus. It is a question of asking whether, over the next 12 months, we set the menus for all schools, allowing for all the different dietary options as well.

The third point the Deputy made was on portion sizes. She is right, in that a child in junior infants gets the same as a sixth class pupil. We need to examine portion sizes. The hot school meals element of the scheme was introduced in 2019. We need to consider portion sizes because, as we know, a child in sixth class could be 5 ft 10 in. whereas another could be 4 ft 10 in. This all has to be considered. Even in sixth class, there might be a need for different portion sizes for different children. We need to look into this, including in regard to the procurement process.

I will hand over to my colleague Ms Ward on the nutritional aspect.

One thing about the school meals scheme is that it involves an iterative process. We have the standards, and the menus were given. Anecdotally, we are hearing, as Mr. Shevlin has said, that the treat options were being offered every day. To protect the majority of children, we had to then remove that option. However, once we have the full nutritional analysis, we will work with the food-based organisations to try to come up with a menu and solutions to cater for the majority of children.

It is difficult when there are so many competing demands. The whole purpose of the school meals scheme is to not leave anybody behind and ensure that everybody has a even playing field. That will take some time. We need the evidence first.

The Deputy is right about food waste and portion sizes. This comes up in research we are dealing with from an obesity perspective all the time. We are very cognisant of it and as dieticians, we are acutely aware that no child who is four or five should be eating the same as a 12-year-old boy who is very physically active. If we tackle portion sizes, we will be able to reduce food waste. That is all being looked at as part of our work plan. We will get through it.

On food waste, in the procurement documentation by our colleagues in the Department of education, we have incorporated that suppliers need to take away the food waste and come back with a process in relation to green schools because I agree that there is food waste. It is important parents only select food they think their child will eat and make sure they do not ask for food when their children are not in the school because that happens a fair bit. We need to stop that as well.

Are the schools still getting the money? For example, my son has opted out. I know I can log back in at any stage and order him food. He does not want it. He will not eat any of it. He will not even eat the plain pasta. Is the company still getting the money for all of those kids who have opted out?

No, the company should not be getting the money. If there is a school of 100 pupils, we give the school money for 100 pupils but 80% of schools have money left over at the end of the year in their accounts from school meals because of, for example, the situation the Deputy outlined where he son did not ask for the meals. Therefore 80% of schools are not paying the full amount over, therefore the suppliers should not be getting it. We have a cancellation policy now in the new procurement process - I think it is 48 hours so there would be payment to the supplier.

The portions issue is interesting. I had not thought about that. I was a teacher but school meals had not come in by the time I was elected and removed from the school setting. The difference between a junior infant and sixth class child and things being very standardised was interesting. I call Deputy Roche.

I apologise for my late attendance. I had stuff to do for radio, which is important too. I welcome the witnesses. This is a worthwhile discussion. Long gone are the days when I went to school and brought my bottle of tea, it would be heated on a stove. I am not ancient but I remember that. People brought lunch in their lunch box and if they forgot, they went hungry and it was their own fault. The school meals happened as a consequence of surveys that suggested some children were attending school hungry. There may not have been an awful lot but there were indications and evidence that some were. I compliment the Department in that regard because we can afford to have this scheme. Like the previous speaker said, one issue my our office dealt with was raised by a school principal in recent times, which was they now have more waste than they ever had before. Regardless of how well we think school meals can be managed, it would be an impossible task that every pupil would get just what they like and have that in the nutritional value as well as the wholesome value, which is important too. I was glad Mr. Shevlin said it is up to the provider to take away food waste but the ultimate would be to try to avoid any food waste. It is futile producing it and there is cost to produce it. The profit margins a very low in that regard, for the people providing meals to the schools. I had a concern when that principal reached out to say thee waste was costing the school and it never before had such a packed bin. He wondered about the value of the scheme. That is just one instance and perhaps there are others. That is why it is prudent to have the discussion. Is what is working constantly evaluated? What can be avoided in terms of providing for schools and targeting the food waste element that concerns the school and everyone else? It is left in bins sometimes overnight, sometimes over the weekend depending on food waste collection. There is another problem with what happens with food waste anywhere in that it encourages the undesirable creatures. That is another issue. It is about managing the scheme to the best of one's ability to make sure that it is working and that those who require nutritional food get it and value it and those who do not want it are taken off the list. It is a loaded question.

Food waste starts with the child not eating the meal. Ms Ward and her team are working to make sure the meal is nutritious and looks good to the child so they eat it. That is the key part we need to get to. We are working towards that. With our colleagues in the Department of education, we have updated the procurement documentation to ensure the responsibility for food waste sits with the supplier. That is one thing we put in. It is a legal responsibility for the supplier. It is about minimising the food waste, which is why we want to ensure the children eat the meals they get and parents select meals they believe the child will eat. There are a few pieces we have to work through and we are trying to join the dots on.

Independent research was carried out in 2020 and 2023 regarding the school meals programme. There was quite positive feedback. However, we will carry out more research next year. There is an organisation called the School Meals Coalition under the World Health Organization. The Minister for Health signed us up to it this year. That was based on a recommendation from the previous joint committee on social protection. It will do research for us in relation to how our scheme is run here and a longitudinal study regarding how this benefits kids in the long term. International research shows school meals are the biggest support structure for kids in poverty. We want to see how we work that in Ireland because, back to what some members have said, we hear a lot of negative stories. We want to find out how deep that is across the whole organisation. We hear a lot of positive stories. Even yesterday evening on RTÉ Radio 1, parents were interviewed outside a school. Three were very positive about it and two had question marks about it. There is a mixture we need to find as well.

Part of the nutritional analysis is establishing what is happening on the ground because we are not privy to it just yet from a scientific perspective. Then we can work on designing the menu so that portion sizes reflect or are appropriate for different age groups. That will contribute to reducing food waste. It will help with cost management and all of that. We are planning to set up an evaluation tool that can be used by staff from the Department of Social Protection who do inspections regularly.

I thank all the witnesses for being here today. I have a number of questions. There is the saying: eat the dinner in the middle of the day or I heard someone say recently eat like a king early in the day and eat like a pauper in the evening. Is there a risk a child is being given a substantial dinner at 12.10 p.m. or 12.15 p.m. and some going home and having a second dinner at 5 p.m. with the rest of their family? They are having two dinners in the day. Has that been factored in?

The nutrition standards were based on the food-based dietary guidelines. The standards were set out to reflect one third of a child's energy intake for the day.

In theory, most children will eat three meals a day, and two of the meals usually have in and around the same amount of energy. We have applied the different food groups that they need to consume to meet their nutritional targets, which are all based on the food pyramid. The standards describe the amount of protein that children need, so they give an appropriate portion size for protein and for carbohydrates, for example, having a small amount of, for example, lean mince in a bolognese, with two vegetables in it. One is the tomato sauce and the other is vegetables that are added into the sauce, then there is the energy source, which is the carbohydrate or pasta. You know that you are not overconsuming if you have the correct amount that is being offered as the portion size, and that sticks to the standards.

We certainly do not want children, parents or anyone obsessing about food and nutritional intake, but when a school commences the school means programme, does any guidance note go home to parents to say if their child eats this meal, they will get a certain amount of calories, vitamins and nutrition? People are far more informed about food now. I see people now going through supermarkets, flipping over a product and reading its nutritional value before it goes into a trolley. Is any cheat sheet given to parents so that they know their son or daughter is getting something in school and therefore they need to do something differently in the evening?

There is not a cheat sheet as such but the nutrition standards are widely available on the different websites and it clearly marks out what should be included as part of each of those meals, and gives suitable examples. It references why we need to have protein or whatever and the purpose of each of the different components of a meal.

I was listening with interest to what Deputy Ní Raghallaigh said because this idea of portion size is very relevant. I have a younger daughter and older son, and what they eat is so different in terms of portion intake, as is what they need in a day, given the energy, the growth rate, and so on. Is there really not only one way going forward to fix all of this, whether it is the fussy eater, the nutritional needs or the portion size, which is by having in-school prepared meals? The Irish family make-up has changed utterly over the decades. The day of dad working, mum at home and the dinner being prepared at the stove is truly gone. There is now Deliveroo, takeaways coming in, microwave meals, batch cooking of meals and heating them up during the week. We also have transience of schools. We now have children staying in bed and breakfast accommodation, hotels, and homeless families.

This is a fabulous scheme, but is it unintentionally saying something when a van pulls up at the school gate and trays come in? Is it ingraining further takeaway culture? I use the term "fast food" loosely because there is a quality to the food, but it is ingraining something in children's thoughts, that the meal is not brought from the oven to the table, but it is coming from a tray. Can the witnesses address what Deputy Ní Raghallaigh said about portion size, nutrition quality or having it prepared in school? The sixth-class boy who is now taller than the teacher, playing sport and running around all day long in the yard, will get an extra ladle of bolognese compared with the child in infants. A teacher could even have the intuition to triage a little and spot that a child is not eating right. When we get to that model, like they have in other jurisdictions, like Britain and America, we will only then have a proper in-school meals programme that works.

I am not sure if I am the right person to answer that question.

Is it being examined?

The reason we have the model we have is there were not facilities in schools to create meals.

I accept that.

I will let my colleague Mr. Skene, who is in charge of the school construction part, come in in a minute. We will roll out to secondary schools over the lifetime of this Government. Some of them have canteens. We would say that the food is better in the canteens. We would not be funding any kind of hot school meal delivery. That is what we endeavour to do. Our current model is based on the facilities that primary schools have at this moment in time. There are no facilities to prepare the food. We would love to see kitchens in the schools and so on, but it is not there at this moment in time. We have to use this model at the moment.

We have more than 3,000 primary schools, as the Cathaoirleach is probably aware. They tend to be of a very different nature in their size and location, going from very small schools with one or two teachers, up to primary schools with more than 400 pupils. Having catering accommodation in a school is challenging. We find it difficult to be able to put in catering facilities, given the health and food safety aspect of catering that is required.

With new school builds, is this being stitched into design to future-proof schools?

In new primary schools, we have for the past 30 years had our general purpose, GP, halls and a survey space which is associated with that GP hall. We have increased the size in March this year from 8 sq. m to a 20 sq. m survey space that will facilitate more opportunities, particularly regeneration and regeneration heating, but also potentially cooking too.

I am out of time. That is positive, but there are several teachers in the room who are elected Members. It is very rare that a GP hall is used as intended in the design. Most are used as autism classes or spillover rooms for PE. A school would want about three or four GP rooms to fulfil what the Department expects a school to actually be running in a day. I appreciate the point, but I think, while addressing all of those situations, which is a big mountain to climb, is costly and will be complex, and I know the witnesses covered different strands of the programme, but the nutritional value needs to be properly and fully addressed. It will instil a more positive food culture rather than trays coming from a van into a classroom. I will probably come in with a second round in a while. We will go to Deputy John Connolly, who is not a member of our committee but who is very welcome.

I thank the Chair. As the Chairperson said, many of us are teachers. I was a school principal. We embraced the scheme enthusiastically when it was introduced to the school. I understand there are good, valid questions about it but as a measure to try to tackle the impact of child poverty, it has been significant. It was used by a very small number of children in the school I worked in, less than could be counted on a single hand, but it was really great for them. It allowed us to make sure that everybody was treated equally. The children did not notice any differentiation with a child not having lunch, so that was very positive.

When it came initially, it was a really straightforward process. A number of providers came to the school, we sat down with them and discussed the options, but it seems that, since then, it has become more complex. Maybe there is good reason for that but it has made it more difficult for schools. On top of that, I heard today that some schools do not have the service yet. I am aware of some schools in remote communities that had a service and lost the service provider. I spoke to the principals of those schools about what happened. I would like to give the witnesses evidence of two cases. One is a school with 80 to 90 pupils in a community. In the same community, there were two smaller schools with 20 or 30 pupils. The larger school facilitated the company to come in to heat the food there, and from there, it was delivered to the smaller schools. Somebody put a stop to that. They said the meals were not allowed to be heated in one school and brought to the other schools, so now those two schools have no service.

Another example is that of a local provider who was servicing two to three smaller schools. There were not very significant numbers. There were not very significant pupil numbers, with a maximum of 70 or 80, and maybe 30 to 40 in the other school. He tendered for a bigger school not too far away. When he tendered, one of the details of the conditions of the tender was that he had to be providing already to three schools. I cannot recall exactly, but I think that all three schools had to individually have 60% of the numbers of the bigger school for which he was tendering. That has limited his ability. Essentially, those smaller schools in that community are saying he is not sure if he will continue the service into the future. I do not think anyone else will be interested in that. It is a concern that the procurement, whatever necessity is behind it, is limiting the smaller providers, and that will have an impact on the service in schools.

I will answer some of the questions and then hand over to my colleague Mr. Phillips. I agree with the Deputy. Universal is the way we need to go. We know the in the UK that it is not universal and kids are stigmatised because of that. I dealt with the query about Galway. It is not about providing to three schools. It is that they are giving meals to the local GAA club or a festival in the town, to show that they can provide school meals.

It is not to schools. The procurement documentation says that you can provide it to three different kinds of organisations, which could be the local GAA club, soccer club or whatever, to show that you can provide the meals required. That is all it is asking. It is not necessarily being provided to three schools.

Where does the 60% come from?

The 60% is to provide assurances to the schools that the provider they go with can meet the demand of the schools and have demonstrated that from the previous contracts it would have had. As Mr. Shevlin mentioned, the procurement documentation clearly calls out that it does not have to be school meals. It is specifically called out.

The provider has to have provided to some organisation that he can show-----

Some 60%.

-----is at 60% of the numbers of the bigger school. Okay. I thank Ms Gaffey.

My colleague, Mr. Phillips, will address one other question.

I thank the Deputy for the question. It gives an opportunity to clear up some of the ambiguity around the report, in particular about the smaller schools and the changes last summer. There was no food law, food regulation or change in application that led to those changes. The changes we introduced are very much around the framework of the scheme and the procurement. Those are intended to respond to issues raised with us by the national environmental health service, which had concerns about the circumstances it was finding, where some schools inadvertently entered into contractual arrangements that put them in a position where they became food businesses and teachers became food business operators. That was never the intention of the scheme. We set out to address, through the mandatory arrangements in place, that accountability and legal responsibility rests squarely on the food business operators which are contracted to perform the service. That has realigned that accountability. We have done it in a number of ways. If the Deputy bears with me, I can give some examples.

We have a mandatory clause where the prospective tenderers have to visit the school to ascertain whether the facilities and arrangements are suitable for the delivery model they propose in the tender proposal. We have increased the range of models that we have signposted. It could be production on site, such as the canteen, a reheating area, or a hot drop, where hot meals are delivered directly to the point of consumption. That has been inclusive so that all schools can participate in the scheme with an appropriate, legally compliant way of working. Conversely, all types of food businesses can partake in the scheme. A small rural scheme at a small rural school may not be attractive for the bigger national operator with the delivery model that it puts forward, but a small, local food business can participate. The scheme is being inclusive in its redesign, but it is being done on a basis where food safety and legal compliance are a priority. We are moving from a more reactive system, dealing with problems in a piecemeal way as they arise, to one where we prevent these issues from happening in the first place.

I know the witnesses evaluate the benefits from the school meals programme. How do they do that, especially as the numbers increase and more and more schools are involved in it? They have the holiday hunger pilot scheme, which I think is really good. How is that managed? I know some poor children may not get much to eat when they are not in school. How do the witnesses identify participants, how food is provided to them, and so on?

We carried out an evaluation of the school meals programme in 2023. We got a private company - consultants - to do it, RSM Global. As I said to the Senator's colleague earlier, we will be bringing in the School Meals Coalition next year. It is an international organisation, with more than 119 countries signed up to it. It is under the World Health Organization. It deals with school meals across the world, from South America to Africa to Europe. We want to bring it in next year to look at both what we did in 2023, to see if there is much change in that, but also to do a longitudinal study on the benefits to the children. This will happen next year.

On the other question about holiday hunger, that is part of the Department of Education and Youth's summer school programme. We engaged with the Department of education. Around 40,000 children participate in the summer school programme. If those schools are already on the school meals programme, they can actually give school meals to children for those two or three weeks during the summer school programme.

So it is not necessarily children from disadvantaged backgrounds.

It is part of the summer schools programme run by the Department of Education and Youth. If they already have a contract for school meals, we allow them to extend that for an extra two or three weeks. If those cases where they do not participate in the schools programme, we will allow them to get meals delivered and we will pay for that too.

Mr. Shevlin is talking about the benefits to children. How do the witnesses measure that when they are doing an evaluation? He said that physical improvements or whatever are noted.

That is why we are bringing in experts, because I cannot answer that question myself. We will be bringing in the people who know how to do this. That is why we are bringing in the School Meals Coalition, which has done this in other countries. All international research shows that the school meals programme helps with attendance, concentration and the children in the school meals programme. We want to make sure that what has happened internationally is matched in Ireland too.

On evaluation, I know the RSM project was qualitative research. A number of different focus groups used information from parents plus teachers. We have a scheme under the obesity policy and action plan that measures different aspects of health and well-being, which is called the cosy initiative. We have completed the sixth round of that, which was published just last year. There is another healthy school-aged behaviour and children, HSBC, study, which looks at different measurements of health and well-being. They are two mechanisms present in schools at the moment.

Following on from something that Deputy Connolly talked about regarding small providers and scaling up to bigger providers, I do not have the figures in front of me, but there is an inhibiting factor there with the maximum threshold that smaller providers can get to before they are liable for much higher public liability protection, as far as I know. Ireland is an outlier. We are coming in below the European number for that. Small providers can only really provide meals for about three to four schools before they hit the threshold and require a much more significant cost for public liability. They need €7 million or €8 million for protection. I would like to follow up with the witnesses on that.

I welcome, in April 2025, the directive on high in fat, salt and sugar meals being removed from the menus. It simplifies it and is a very good initiative. One thing that I come across when I go out to schools is the portion sizes and the difference between the younger students and older students. I heard Mr. Phillips' accent and would associate him with rugby playing or something like that. Maybe the Cathaoirleach would be in a similar position. If they received the same portion size as Senator Nelson Murray here, they might not be as happy-----

Is the Senator saying we are big guys?

I would not be happy, because I have seen the portion size. In the nutritional review, will the portion sizes for the different years benefiting from the meals be looked at?

Obviously insurance needs to be looked at. Are my colleagues looking at that?

As we were developing the call for tender, CFT, documentation, we engaged with the State Claims Agency. We also spoke to the insurance providers for the schools, so we got all of their input too, as well as that of the Chief State Solicitor's Office. We had that expert input into the CFT about what insurance, indemnities and so on should be.

We touched on portion size but it is no problem to do so again.

That is part of the work we are doing with the nutrition analysis. While the school meal itself represents maybe a third of a portion size for the daily intake for a child, we acknowledge that at the moment they are standardised portion sizes and we need to be able to adjust them according to age and energy requirements. That is part of the work we are doing.

I thank Ms Ward. I will have a look back at the answer from earlier as I had to pop out there for a moment. Going back to something that was said earlier about the administrative burden on the schools, potentially looking at an online system and trying to simplify the templates and stuff like that, my experience of the providers of the school meals is that they have an unbelievable online system where every week we can go in and change the menus for all our different students. Considering the money that is being allocated to this sector, would it be worth seeing if they could integrate that system and ensure applications are not missing detail? It seems like a very simple thing.

We are out of time but I would like to hear an answer to that specific question.

The question is whether we would develop internally an online application system for school meals.

I think the providers generally have that system already. Would it be as useful to put the onus on them to ensure applications that are coming are not missing elements? That is a major flaw and it is a major delay to anything when things are missing. An online system will not allow you to complete the application if it is missing something.

We are looking at developing an online system for the schools applying to us for the funding. That is where the issues we have are at the moment. As I said in response to the Senator's colleague, 58% of applications were incorrect because, going back to the Senator's point, the documentation required was not attached, so we are looking at it ourselves. However, we have to be mindful there are 254 small suppliers providing to only one school, so whatever we do, we have to make sure we are inclusive of all those suppliers and the schools. I am not sure whether that answers the Senator's question.

I thank the witnesses.

It is really positive that we are providing this. It is great that we have it. It has been 46 years since I started primary school and the nuns would come around in the morning and ask who did not have their lunch at school. You would get a hot cross bun and a carton of milk and they were gorgeous. Sometimes you got them on your birthday as well. The nuns were definitely providing some lunches back then.

Going back to what was said about the School Meals Coalition, I had a look at the website. We need to update our details on it because we give the impression we are serving 261,000 kids in 2025, whereas we are actually serving 467,000, I think. It is great that we have the programme but we seem to be behind. Finland has had all its primary and secondary schools registered and serving food since 2021 and it is the same for Sweden and France. Even Ukraine has had it since 2023, as has Latvia. The statement we have on the website says the commitment is to reach all primary schools by the end of 2025. We know that is not going to happen because it is going to be 2026. Then we will begin extending to secondary schools. What are our targets for secondary schools? What have we learned from this coalition since joining? I think it was said earlier that the coalition is coming over next year to have a look at what we are doing.

As a mammy, I would love to know if my child has eaten the food. Is there a policy on the food coming back to the parent in some sort of container or is there a little report? When my kids were in preschool, we got a little sheet every day or at the end of every week to tell us what they had eaten, which is good if you want to know what your children are eating during the day.

I thank the Senator. On the secondary schools, we will be looking at that next year, how best to roll it out. It is in the lifetime of the Government. However, the model we have for primary schools may not work for secondary schools, so we have to agree what kind of model we are going to use. Some secondary schools have canteens, so that could be something we look at. The second phase, if we are looking at it, will be DEIS secondary schools because there are kids leaving sixth class in a DEIS primary school, going into secondary school and not getting any food during the day, so we need to see how we would do that. I will put this politely: primary school children are a captive audience. In secondary schools, kids are in and out of the school all day so it will be a different model that we will use for them. We do not know what it is yet and we need to discuss it.

On the learnings from the School Meals Coalition, the Senator mentioned some countries but there are a lot of other countries that are not like us regarding universal. Interestingly-----

I was only looking at European ones.

Yes. Interestingly, I was talking to our colleagues in Sweden, which has had school meals in place since after World War Two. Sweden has it through the local authorities and there are kitchens that cook the meals, but it has exactly the same issues with nutrition and different standards across the board. No matter what model we use, we are always going to be facing these issues, but we have to make it as easy as possible for us-----

There are great learnings from all that.

Exactly. Romania is the only country that has the same model as us. Other countries have the canteens and that kind of stuff.

On that, as children we would be watching all the American and English programmes with canteens in them. Is that our future plan?

I will turn to my colleagues in the Department of education.

It would be great for it to be a future plan. Within the national development plan and the funding we have for the next five years, we are still really prioritising special education needs and special education needs places. That has to be our first priority in terms of numbers. It would be great to get to that position but in terms of funding at the moment, that is our primary focus.

I am going to ask my colleague Mr. Phillips about bringing the food home. There is an issue here that we had to tackle in relation to our procurement process.

There is one consideration we had to bear in mind when we, as a group, discussed the issue of taking home waste. It is really evidence based that there were instances where the food taken home was consumed much later by other members of the family.

That could be unsafe.

Exactly. These meals are produced to a certain standard with a durability date, the use-by date that applies. They are kept under temperature-controlled conditions in a cold room-----

I understand that. Could we start doing it by letting the parents know via some sort of note?

That means more work.

It is more work for the teachers, yes.

The key part is informing the parents. Bringing the food home could be a risk to the family.

I understand that part.

Some teachers were. I was ringing some parents if there was a pattern to their child not eating something to change it, or not, but-----

That would be good to know.

-----not every teacher is doing it and you cannot put more work on them.

True.

Deputy Ní Raghallaigh is next.

I have heard reports of children receiving non-Irish products in their school lunches, such as cheese. As part of the development of the procurement policy, was there consideration of mandating Irish products? This is publicly funded. Should we not encourage buying Irish products, especially in view of the Mercosur deal? Is there a worry about lower quality food? We are worried about this with beef, etc., when we discuss Mercosur.

In relation to the cheese, we were asked around 12 or 18 months ago about Dutch cheese, but we are in the EU so there is public procurement. Irish cheese is sold in the Netherlands, I assume. We have something marked in the procurement process. I might hand over to Ms Gaffey to answer on that.

Mr. Shevlin is absolutely right that we have to adhere to EU procurement rules, but one piece where we do have input is the GPP or green procurement. As part of the award criteria, we call out around the environmental aspect. Obviously, food that is imported has a larger carbon footprint. That is the only piece in the tender documentation that promotes more local produce. As Mr. Shevlin has clearly called out, we have to adhere to EU procurement rules.

Okay. I have another minute left. This issue has been touched on by Senators Tully and Scahill. A couple of bodies have been on to my colleague and me about the extra burden on the principals and the school staff to administer this. It is a huge scheme involving massive work for them but no additional resources are provided. When my school was putting it out to tender, we chose mostly based on the fact we did not need to have an oven or extra staff to manage. The food arrived and the boxes were taken away.

The RSM 2023 review did mention delivery costs for schools. We have incorporated those delivery costs into the new procurement process. Something we and the Department of education probably have to discuss for the budgetary process is the requirement for administrative costs for schools, but it will not be discussed probably until budget 2027. Is that okay?

Okay. Gabhaim buíochas leis na finnéithe.

I am up next. I will not mention specific schools but I know of two that have been caught in this crux where a contractor fell through and they could not get someone else. They are rural DEIS schools and what makes them DEIS schools is that they are way over and beyond the hills. One is way down a peninsula, a long way from a local provider, let alone a provider that trades nationally, so they just cannot get someone. The rural isolation makes them DEIS schools but that is the same stick that is now beating them, so they cannot get the scheme that was designed for schools like them. The witnesses might comment on this.

I have to declare that I am a farmer myself, and I am involved in the organic scheme that a lot of farmers are in now. There is a Government strategy that runs from 2024 to 2030. We are about to get to the midway point of that next year. It does not seem to me that the school meals programme is plugged into that, somewhat along the lines of what Deputy Ní Raghallaigh said. There is a national strategy to increase organic grains and vegetables. I am an organic beef producer. We had a discussion on this at the agriculture committee in the last Dáil. Nothing was agreed, by the way, but prison meals, school meals and hospital meals were discussed. These are meals for which the State has a function in terms of providing what goes onto the plate. How much organic produce should go onto each plate was discussed but I do not think it is stitched into this at all.

I did not know about this until last year, but there is a website called toogoodtogo.com. A lot of restaurants and hotels are on it. If they have leftover meals or dishes at the end of the day, they advertise them and people can buy them for a pittance. This is all about not having food waste. I think a social enterprise is running this. It means that there will not be food waste and somebody who needs a meal gets one for low cost. Again, I am thinking of these rural isolated schools where 35 or 40 meals could be brought to a school. Seven or eight of them might not be used. They are either binned or, as sometimes happens, the teacher might have it at their own desk or whatever, but there is waste. Is there any way that the schools could also be plugged into this website? In that rural area where there are only 15 or so houses in the village, maybe an older person could have one of those meals if it is not going to be used?

In the procurement documentation, there is a requirement that 10% of food must be organic.

I think that is very low.

That is what we have at the moment but we can look at it in the future. In relation to rural schools, there will be pockets of rural schools. I am from Mayo myself, so I understand the position. Luckily, the Minister is also responsible for the Department of Rural and Community Development and the Gaeltacht, so we have met representatives from there. We are going to work with the Department on a few areas. I know that Údarás na Gaeltachta is funding a place in Connemara and it might deliver school meals. I think around 15 schools in Connemara have issues, so we will look at those.

There is also the community services programme, the local enhancement programme and CLÁR. Within our own Department, we have the community employment scheme, the rural social scheme and Tús. We are putting together an information note for the schools about the meals on wheels in those local areas to let them know what is available. It is a combined effort by us and the Department of rural and community development to offer as much as possible. We are going to contact the schools and the local meals on wheels services. I have met the meals on wheels services in Mayo and Galway to ascertain what they are lacking at the moment and what the issues preventing them from providing school meals in these areas are. We have to go through the procurement process first, and then we and the Department of rural and community affairs will give them as many supports as possible to help these rural schools.

I think there was one other question.

In terms of trying to increase access to Irish-grown produce and including it in the food scheme, there are a number of different initiatives that we work on with the Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine to give children the exposure to home-grown fruit and vegetables. We have the food dudes scheme and the incredible edibles scheme. They also deliver on the EU milk scheme.

In terms of procurement, we are in the process of developing the new obesity policy and action plan. While we had a ten-step programme for this version, the next version is trying to look at more of a whole-of-system approach to improving the quality of food that people are able to eat or access. We have been involved in two projects that look at procurement across all sectors within Departments. One of them was the Best-ReMaP project that finished in 2023 and was replaced by the JA PreventNCD project, and we are on that working group. This is a European-led project. Addressing procurement through all sectors will be looked at as part of the obesity policy and action plan.

As I listened to Mr. Shevlin, I noted that there appeared to be great innovation going into this, so I compliment him for that. I think it is a great scheme. We have complicated it somewhat and we have issues with it, but the witnesses are certainly trying to tackle those, so I commend them for that. I recall when we first entered the scheme in the school, the provider advised us that the choices given to the children meant that, by Friday, there was a certain nutritional value that they would have. I do not know if this was a company-specific thing but they could not select the chicken nuggets and chips every day. The app did not allow for that and so, by Friday, they had to have a combination of food that gave a certain nutritional value. I understood at the time that this was statutory, or that this was coming from the Department, but I am not sure whether the company itself was doing it. It seemed to me to be really great and very innovative.

On the point about the milk scheme, I remember that our school signed up to the milk scheme because we got the free fridge. The dentist comes to schools not as frequently as they should any more, but when the dentist used to come to our school, he would advise us that the best time he could spend was talking to the children. He asked us to introduce a policy for lunch that would limit the options for drinks in the school to milk or water so as to try to stop children bringing in fruit drinks, smoothies, etc., because of the impact those had on their dental hygiene. Could we expand this scheme to look at the provision of milk or water for all children? Maybe we are going too far, but I think it would be beneficial.

On the 60%, is that one contract that has to show that they can provide 60% of the meals in the school, or do they have to show three contracts that provide 60% of the meals in the school?

We can answer that one first, because it is the quick one of the three.

In terms of meeting the nutritional requirements, from a Department of Health perspective, the standards are there and they should be met on a daily basis. There is no guide that would say it should be over the course of a week. That is not in the standards, so that would be reported on by the food-based organisation themselves. I am glad to hear that the innovation is there that certain types of food can be restricted, if necessary, but that is not what we are hearing anecdotally.

In terms of the dentist, the Deputy is correct that the standards clearly suggest that water is the optimum drink along with milk and that if fruit juice is being made available, then it should be limited to just 150 ml and only once throughout the day. I know that other jurisdictions are looking at removing fruit juice, but because we know that Irish children are very limited in their fruit and veg intake, this has not been removed just yet. It can be looked at as part of this process, though.

Do many schools go in for the milk scheme still?

As far as I know, the Department of agriculture is doing a review and evaluation of the milk scheme. I think that within society itself there is a move away from dairy, which is unfortunate, because milk is far superior to other alternatives that are on the market. Hopefully, that may change in time.

Before I let Deputy Currie in, I want to say that our committee is doing four separate meetings on this body of work. At the end of it, we will compile a report. I am picking up bits of members' contributions that I think should formally be stitched into the report. Where the report goes will ultimately be up to the Minister but I think the suggestion of milk or water drinks featuring on school menus should be part of the report. I would like to formally note Deputy John Connolly's suggestion.

I think Deputy Shonagh Ní Raghallaigh's suggestion regarding dairy produce and that there should be more emphasis put on Irish cheeses, using the environmental criteria of green public procurement, is also a good one and should be stitched into our report.

I also think that the stipulation that 10% of food should be organic should be increased, in line with other Government strategies.

Finally, before I allow the Deputy in, I want to address the school buildings issue.

We cannot go to the school building unit and say that every school has to have a kitchen and a food preparation area. Certainly, where a new build is being planned, we should not assume that the GP hall can be used to factor all of this in. It should be within the specification of a new build design that there would be a kitchen and a food preparation area within it.

I apologise for missing the earlier part of the meeting. I have two committee meetings on Thursday mornings. I have to attend a Dáil Business Committee meeting at 11 am. I am really excited by this project because it is relevant to what is being talked about at the school gates, on parents' WhatsApp groups and by children. My little girl did a students' union pitch a couple of weeks ago and one of them was about the school lunches.

I feel a little bit of negativity about the school meals has crept in. That is normal. It is a new initiative and people are excited, first of all, and then they have to get used to how it works. When was the last time there was a survey of parents and their feedback on hot school lunches?

In 2023.

That is included in this. The numbers are still very good. In the context of the figures the officials have provided, it seems that teachers, SNAs and parents are all in the same grouping. Can we pull those groups out in order that we can see the percentages among teachers and parents?

That is in the report. We can actually share the report with the committee if members would like. The breakdown of feedback from the children, teachers and parents is in the report.

That would be beneficial. Was it just quantitative research, or was qualitative research carried out by means of asking parents questions about how it works?

There were certain questions asked about how it worked and what their feedback was in relation to it, what changes they would like to see done and what were the negatives. Overall, it was a questions-based survey.

My perception is that there are a lot of parents who do not know there are more options available for their children. Some of the providers will go to great lengths to accommodate individual preferences.

That is correct. It is important, as we said previously, that either the principal or the board of management has a relationship with the supplier. If there are needs in a school, only the principal or teachers will know this. We will not know it on this side of the table. They need to inform the school, children and parents that there are options available. Our colleagues in the Department of Education and Youth have produced a really excellent document regarding the procurement process and all that it covers. These options should be there. When the principal and board of management sign this contract, they have all the powers in the contract to ensure that all the needs of the children in the school are met.

I imagine that might boil down to time for a principal. I sometimes feel they have become more like general managers. Is there a support base within the Department of Education and Youth or the Department of Social Protection when they need supports?

We have our own call line for all the schools. We got over 2,000 queries within three or four months when all the new procurement documentation came out. We also give guidance and video guidance regarding filling out the application forms and the whole process. Our colleagues in the Department of education have done webinars on the procurement process. All that stuff is happening in the background. Ms Gaffey has the figures for the number of principals who attended the webinars.

We did a number of webinars and over 2,000 attended them. We also have the schools procurement unit as well as the DSP help desk providing one-on-one support to schools as needed. Going back to the Deputy's question and the role of principals, in relation to dietary requirements, the expectation is set out in the CFT that the provider will engage first with the school board of management before menus are agreed. That is post-contract signing. After that, it will be a case of engaging with parents directly. We have the GDPR aspect covered as well within the CFT. Whether it is through their apps or however else, the dietary requirements of the children are known to the providers.

I would fear that we will overcorrect. We are starting from of a lack of awareness about how much involvement there is, from a parental point of view, monitoring and providing choices. We could end up overcorrecting based on that. I very much believe that engagement with parents through the likes of WhatsApp surveys would be very beneficial. My friends have very strong opinions about hot school meals. My friends who are teachers also have very strong opinions on it. A body of work needs to be done in the context of bringing people on board before we make too many changes to how it is managed. There are obviously lots of improvements that can be made, particularly in relation to the providers and how we bring the message of farm to fork and principals around good eating in general.

On schools that have not signed up, the officials have given a reason for that in the report. I cannot remember what it was but it did not sit with me in terms of what the reason is. I have a school that has not signed up because they say they do not have the space for it. Is there a way to sit down with schools to persuade them of the benefits and reassure them about the impact on their buildings and how much resources will go into this? We have schools that are under tremendous pressure in lots of different areas, yet this is hugely beneficial and we want them to take it up.

There are no legislative changes at all. All we are trying to do is make it easier for schools to participate. Our colleagues in the Department of education have updated the procurement documentation to ensure that schools can join the scheme more easily. We are only updating the nutritional guidelines to ensure that they are adhered to across the board. That is what our colleagues in the Department of Health are doing.

The Deputy missed this part of the discussion. There were 300 schools and around 130 of those schools have expressed an interest to come into the scheme. I agree regarding the facilities part. What we have done now in the procurement process, because the model they were looking at was having ovens in the schools, is that we have four options now in the procurement documentation. There are four different options. It is not just about ovens, there are other options available to them. We are trying to make as many options available to the school as possible so they can pick which one best suits their facility. That is happening on the ground.

How do you reach those schools that, perhaps, have the shutters down in respect of this issue?

We have to wait for this procurement process to work through. There are going to be a few gaps. There will be gaps in the rural schools and we are working with the Department of rural affairs on them. There will be other schools that have not participated at all. We will contact them all. The Deputy referred to the note we provided, which stated that in respect of the majority of these schools, the parents did not see a need in their areas. There was mention of facilities and the size of the school. That is why we had the four options. We will communicate with all those schools again and give them the four options available to them.

It would be great if there was outreach there to persuade them to come on board.

There will be.

Has the number of providers increased or decreased since the programme started?

I have the current figures. There are over 300 different providers at this time. There are 254 providers that are only delivering to one school. There are around six to eight large suppliers that are either regional or national. There are a lot of providers out there. Some of them are national models with different business models. There are smaller rural ones as well. There is a big mixture of them.

I know there are question marks over waste and how it is managed. From my own selfish perspective, my school sends home the box, which is biodegradable, and I can see what my child has eaten or not eaten.

I have seen the quality of the food. Sometimes the reason it not eaten is not that the children do not like it but that they are too busy chatting. However, it is very reassuring for parents to see what their children are getting and what they are leaving behind. Of course, there is much we can do to make this better, but it is a great initiative and I thank the witnesses for their work on it.

We are pretty much done with the questions. As I said, the committee will be doing a report on this issue. Deputy Ní Raghallaigh is not here at the moment but her points about portion size were very relevant. We would like to see some reflection of that, going forward. It is going to become very relevant if we are going into the sphere of second level. That should be placed under active consideration.

I do not know if any of the witnesses have ever seen "Peppa Pig", but there is a character called Miss Rabbit. She does everything. She is the local dentist, firefighter and pilot. She has a few other jobs as well. She does a bit of everything. I would make the point to Mr. Shevlin that there are probably a few Miss Rabbits in each community. I have also made this point to the Minister. With our taxation and social welfare policies, and our family situations, a lot of parents are staying at home. This is a matter for the Minister, but I want to make the point generally. People need to be there to do the school drop-off and collection. There might be an elderly parent to care for. They also need to do the housework. There are certain chores they need to do during the day. Their day is bookended by the school drop-off and collection. Those people could be doing a huge amount of work in the community, be it providing childcare, care or perhaps even going to the local school where there is an in-school food preparation facility where they could be preparing food. It is not a matter for the witnesses to resolve, but there is a whole workforce there. Mr. Shevlin is from the Department of Social Protection. There are many people in communities whose potential could be unlocked. À la Miss Rabbit, they could be doing many things. Policy confines people and tells them that they can collect their children in the morning and afternoon but for those five hours in between, the social welfare and taxation systems mean they cannot work in paid employment. There must be some tweaking done. I would love to see a model whereby there was a food preparation facility down the corridor so a meal is only travelling 20 or 30 ft on a tray, hot from the oven, prepared by a local mum or dad who has a little bit of training on food preparation, food safety standards and nutritional standards, and that it is run in-house and not by some supplier up the country. I am not disparaging such suppliers, but would it not be fabulous if we could eventually get to that point?

I sincerely thank the witnesses. It was a meeting of good value. Parents appreciate this issue. There are levels of frustration. In all of their contributions, the witnesses accepted that tweaking is needed. The programme is going to need an overhaul as it goes on to second level.

Over the coming weeks, other stakeholders will come before the committee. I hope we will listen to young people, teachers and any others. We hugely appreciate the input of all the witnesses. It has been beneficial and informative.