Ruth Kelly’s switch of policy on school meals has been trailed in the media for so long that it seemed almost stale when finally served up to the Labour Party conference. The Education Secretary’s declaration that she would implement the recommendations of the School Meals Review Panel is, nevertheless, welcome. It is, as she said, a “scandal” that junk food is served daily in school and ludicrous that unhealthy snacks and drinks should be sold in vending machines on school property. That there will now be serious nutritional standards set for schools and a prohibition on these machines is a positive development. It is, though, only a beginning.

The responsibilities of, and on, the Government here are manifest. It is the State which, correctly, compels children to attend schools; it thus has an obligation for their welfare while in charge of them. There have been disturbing signs of a rapid increase in childhood obesity in recent years as well as compelling evidence linking diet to mental alertness. It is wholly counter-productive to attempt to educate children either side of lunchtime and then contribute to their physical and intellectual decline in the canteen. If ever there were a case for “joined-up government” between the Education and Health departments, it is this one. That it took a television series by a celebrity chef — Jamie Oliver — to draw attention to this matter is little short of shameful.

Dubious ingredients are, however, only one aspect. It is the amount of money spent on school meals as well as their dietary quality that is un- acceptable. To move from a system of cheap and unhealthy food to cheap and less unhealthy food is modest progress. “Let them eat salad” is not a slogan to impress lunch queues of feisty teen- agers. Unless the overall standard of what is placed on the plate not merely at lunchtime but for breakfast clubs and after-school activities is sharply improved, children will nibble at what they are offered by dinner ladies and stock up with sugar and salt from the newsagents around the corner.

Britain is light years away from the enlightened approach to school food displayed by some of our neighbours. In Spain and Italy, schools spend about three times as much in producing meals of which a decent restaurant would be proud. Ministers need to re-examine budgets and redirect resources to this area. Ms Kelly referred to her announcement yesterday as a “step change”. What is really needed here is a sea change.

Much of this involves challenging cultural attitudes that extend beyond the classroom. Manufacturers of food aimed at the young have a special responsibility. The Secretary of State cannot abolish junk food by personal fiat. Yet the state of children’s bodies should be as much her concern as the state of their minds. Elsewhere in her speech yesterday, Ms Kelly said that schools should be “reaching out to their community, with their doors open from 8am to 6pm, or longer”. If children are to be in schools for ten hours or more, food for thought should be on the menu.

Explore Health News

• Swine flu

Times Recommends

• Iran arrests relatives of opposition leaders
• Banksy rival has final word in art feud
• Electrician travels 175 miles to change bulb