Making a lead governor oversee the implementation of new school food standards “feels haphazard” and “risks being counterproductive”, ministers have been warned. Headteachers, governors and caterers have responded to the government’s consultation on the new school food standards, which would see high–sugar and deep-fried items removed from menus. It would also require schools to serve more healthy desserts, along with salad or vegetables with all grab and go options. Leaders welcomed many of the reforms, but warned others risked reducing uptake of school meals and turn pupils towards unhealthier alternatives. Here’s everything you need to know… 1. ‘Risks being counterproductive’ The Department for Education has proposed two main enforcement requirements for the new school food standards: having a named lead governor responsible for their implementation and making schools publish their menus online. They are also exploring an enforcement measure. A minister has suggested this could involve Ofsted. The National Governance Association said while the proposal for governor oversight was well-intentioned, “in practice it feels haphazard and risks being counterproductive”. “Governing boards are unlikely to have specialist expertise in school food and nutrition and so may find it challenging to determine what constitutes appropriate oversight and assurance. “Governance responsibilities are discharged by a collective body, and so the proposal runs counter to well established governance principles.” School leaders’ union NAHT and the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) also flagged concerns. NAHT said assigning responsibility to a governor “risks conflating governance with operational management”, while ASCL suggested it could negatively impact recruitment and retention to the role. NAHT also said requiring schools to publish menus online could be seen as a “small ask”, but existed within a wider context of pressure on leaders. 2. Risks reduced uptake The School Food People, which represents more than 3,000 school caterers, said: “The nutritional benefits of school food standards can only be realised if pupils continue choosing school meals rather than bringing packed lunches or purchasing food externally.” NAHT agreed that the new standards may risk pupil uptake, “particularly if these are implemented rapidly or without sufficient management”. Poor implementation could lead to lower uptake particularly among older secondary pupils, low-income families and some faith and ethnic groups, the NAHT warned. 3. Funding concerns The risks of lower uptake could impact school budgets, which could prompt staffing reviews, ASCL said. “Many members tell us that they simply do not have enough funding to run the school meals service without a deficit, with many schools using school budgets to prop up the service.” This could particularly impact those serving disadvantaged communities where leaders have less capacity to absorb financial hits, NAHT said. NAHT said without increases to school funding, schools and catering services will need to make trade-offs that could lead to reduced portion sizes, lower food quality or limited choice. ASCL pushed government to give practical guidance and an equality impact assessment to “avoid widening inequalities”. 4. Challenges to implementation The DfE wants primary schools to meet the new standards by September 2027 and secondary schools by September 2028. NAHT, which mainly represents primary headts, said there were a number of practical challenges to implementation. It wrote that many schools and trusts were tied into multi-year catering contracts or framework agreements, which limit flexibility. Schools in rural areas face supply chain constraints with less procurement options, NAHT added.