Deep-fried foods banned from school lunches and puddings cut to twice a week in new childhood obesity war
The UK government is overhauling school food standards in England, banning deep-fried items such as chips from lunches and requiring every meal to include vegetables or salad, as part of efforts to tackle childhood obesity. From September, staples like fish and chips will still be available but must be oven-baked, while sweetened desserts will be limited to twice a week in secondary schools and once a week in primary schools, down from a daily allowance previously.
The Department for Education standards, drawn up with nutritionists and backed by figures including Jamie Oliver and Dame Emma Thompson, also require bread to be at least half wholemeal, restrict processed meats like sausages and nuggets to once a week, and ban chocolate spread and full-sugar ketchup. Breakfast clubs must drop pastries, fried eggs and sugary cereals, and schools will need to publish menus online and appoint a food governor for accountability. Education Secretary Lucy Powell called the changes "once-in-a-generation," citing figures showing a third of children leave primary school overweight or obese, though the Conservatives dismissed the move as misplaced priorities and school leaders warned funding may not cover the added costs.
- Deep-fried school food banned in England from September 2027… actually September next year
- Puddings cut to twice weekly in secondaries, once in primaries
- Move aims to curb childhood obesity; critics question funding and priorities
New here? Start with this
Deep-frying chips and other foods has long been standard practice in school kitchens across England, alongside daily puddings and processed items like sausages and nuggets. Concern has grown over child obesity rates, with figures showing roughly a third of children are overweight or obese by the time they leave primary school, prompting calls from health campaigners, nutritionists and public figures for tighter rules on what schools serve.
The changes come from the Department for Education, which sets the food standards that state schools in England must follow, and are being introduced under Education Secretary Lucy Powell. They form part of a wider government push on childhood health, developed with input from nutritionists and supported publicly by figures such as chef Jamie Oliver and actress Dame Emma Thompson, both known for past campaigns on school food and children's diets.
The plan has drawn debate beyond nutrition itself. The opposition Conservative Party has questioned whether this is the right priority for government attention, while school leaders have raised concerns about whether extra funding will be provided to cover the cost of switching to healthier ingredients and cooking methods.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters argue that with a third of children leaving primary school overweight or obese, government has a clear duty to act, and school meals are one of the few levers where diet can be shaped consistently across the whole population regardless of home circumstances. They point to the standards being developed with nutritionists and endorsed by prominent health and food campaigners as evidence this is a considered, evidence-based intervention rather than a token gesture. Requiring vegetables at every meal, wholemeal bread and fewer fried and processed foods is, on this view, a proportionate and overdue update that could meaningfully reduce future rates of diabetes, heart disease and related NHS costs, while accountability measures like published menus and food governors ensure schools are held to the new standard.
The case against
Sceptics, including opposition politicians, question whether central government mandates on lunch composition are the right priority or the most effective tool for tackling obesity, which many nutrition experts see as driven more by wider food environment, deprivation and activity levels than by school menus alone. School leaders warn that reformulating kitchens, retraining catering staff and sourcing different ingredients carries real costs that funding may not cover, risking either higher meal prices, increased food waste if pupils reject less familiar options, or budget pressure diverted from teaching. Others raise a values-based concern about the state prescribing detailed dietary rules, such as limits on ketchup or chocolate spread, arguing that parents and schools should retain more discretion over food choices rather than having a single national standard imposed on all.