The government’s chief food adviser condemned what ministers called an important national plan to fight food poverty and obesity, saying it was “not a strategy” and warned it could mean more children would go hungry.
Henry Dimbleby’s verdict is another piece of bad news for Boris Johnson, as the White Paper is a direct response to last year’s comprehensive review of the British food system, which was led by the restaurateur.
Johnson’s plan was announced as the first such plan since 75 years ago, positioning Britain as the world’s leading food and environmental leader after Brexit. But the final plan removes many of Dimbleby’s key recommendations.
“This is not a strategy,” food chain founder Leon said of the final document shown to him. “He does not give a clear vision of why we have the problems we have now, and he does not say what needs to be done.”
The document, which will be submitted to the House of Commons by Environment Minister George Justis on Monday, is virtually unchanged from an expired draft released by the Guardian last week.
In his paper, Dimbleby made a number of important proposals, including a significant expansion of free school meals, better environmental and welfare standards in agriculture, and a 30% reduction in meat and dairy consumption.
Instead, several specific policies chosen by the government include increasing tomato production and making it easier for deer hunters to sell wild venison.
Dimbleby said the cost of living crisis meant there was an even greater need for free school meals than when he devised his own plan, which required up to 1.5 million children in England to receive them.
“Inflation, such as the amount spent on free school meals, is significantly lower in real terms than a year ago, and the number of people who need it is significantly higher. let’s deal with it, “Dimbleby said.
“I hope this is being addressed, people are inflating poverty and food suppliers are inflating not to produce healthy food,” he warned.
He also criticized one change between the draft seen by the Guardian and the final version, which included lifting commitments to facilitate the import of food with high animal welfare and environmental standards.
He said: “Again, the government has deviated from the question of how we do not just import food that destroys the environment and is cruel to animals – we cannot create a good system of fair agriculture and then export this damage abroad. I thought the government would handle it, but it didn’t. “
Dimbleby’s recommendations on diet and public health, such as the use of a tax on sugar and salt to fund healthy food options for those in poverty, were also ignored and moved to the forthcoming White Paper on Health Inequalities. “There was really nothing to do with health,” Dimbleby said.
The plan also does not include the ambition to reduce meat consumption, with the Dimbleby report noting that 85% of agricultural land in the UK is used for either livestock or meat production.
“They said we needed alternative proteins, but did not mention the inevitable truth that meat consumption in this country is not compatible with an agricultural system that protects agriculture and captures carbon,” he said.
Opposition parties also expressed concern. Jim McMahon, the shadow Labor and food minister, said the government had “absolutely no ambition” to deal with the food price crisis.
He said: “This is nothing more than a statement of unclear intentions, not a concrete proposal to address the main problems facing our country. Calling it a food strategy borders on the absurd. “
Tim Farren, a Liberal Democrat rural spokesman, said the lack of protection over food import standards risked being a “complete betrayal of British farmers”. He said: “Again and again Boris Johnson has promised one thing and then done the opposite. It simply shows that this government cannot be trusted to stand up for rural communities. “
TV presenter and climate activist Hugh Fernley-Whitingstal condemned the lack of any plan to reduce meat and dairy consumption, calling it “just lazy and invertebrate and subject to the food industry’s status quo.”
Rob Percival, head of food policy at the Soil Association, said: “It seems that what violates this strategy is not a lack of good intentions, but a narrow-minded ideology that believes the government should not intervene to change diets. .
Louisa Casson, head of food and forestry at Greenpeace UK, added: “Ignoring climate scientists and their own experts in favor of industry lobbyists, the government has published a strategy that will ultimately only perpetuate a broken food system and see our planet. cook for yourself. “
Announcing the food plan, Johnson called it “a plan to support farmers, boost British industry and help protect people from the effects of future economic shocks by protecting our food security.”
Add Comment