Brussels, 30/01/2014 (Agence Europe) - As anticipated (see EUROPE 11002), the European Commission adopted, on Thursday 30 January, a proposal aimed at grouping within a common framework two programmes for the distribution of farm products in schools. The programmes are currently separate EU-funded distribution programmes, the school fruit scheme (SFS) and the school milk scheme (SMS).
After a debate in the European Parliament and Council and the approval of the new legal and financial framework, the reformed programme for schools should take effect in 2016.
In the current context of a fall in the consumption of milk and fruit among children, the aim is to “address poor nutrition more effectively, to reinforce the educational elements of the programmes and to contribute to fight against obesity”.
Under the slogan “eat well - feel good”, the strengthened programme, conceived on the model of the scheme from farm to school, will place emphasis on the educational measures aimed at making children more aware of healthy eating habits, the range of farm produce available and also sustainability, environmental and food waste issues.
The programme for milk distribution in schools was set in place in 1977 and that for fruit in school in 2009. Both programmes benefit nearly 30 million children every year (over 20 million for the milk scheme and 8.5 million for the school fruit scheme).
Dacian Ciolos, European Agriculture Commissioner, told the press that the problem of obesity is still prevalent in the EU for a third of children “between 6 and 9”. These programmes have therefore not attained their goals. He explained that it had therefore been decided to put the two programmes together in order to make their impact still greater. The Commission is proposing to simplify the programmes (by merging the two programmes into a single European programme), to act in a more targeted manner, and to call on the EU countries for multiannual planning. Between 30% and 50% of the administrative burden will disappear thanks to this new proposal, Ciolos says.
The commissioner went on to point out that participation in these programmes is voluntary. He specified that the proposal will aim to give countries greater latitude in implementing them (in the choice of products to be distributed, for example). In addition to drinking milk and/or fruit and vegetables the member states may add a number of specific products such as olive oil, yogurts or honey.
National health authorities will also be involved in the project as they must be consulted in order to decide, for example, on the fat content of the milk to be distributed.
There will also be educational measures to be chosen by the countries (visits to farms, gardening, etc.)
Furthermore, the countries may define a tailor-made programme depending on their needs and their preferences (choice of target group, the age group targeted, the duration of the programme, the frequency and the method of distribution, etc.)
Budget. Budgetary neutrality is respected but the impact will be strengthened, the Commission promises. As planned in the multiannual financial framework 2014-2020, the new programme, once adopted, will have a budget of €230 million every school year (€150 million for fruit and vegetables and €80 million for milk). By way of comparison, the 2014 budget amounts to €197 million (€122 million and €75 million respectively). The countries of the EU will have the possibility of transferring up to 15% of funding from one programme to the other, depending upon their priorities or specific needs.
European competence. Currently, only Finland, Sweden and the UK have chosen not to take part in the Fruit and Vegetables programme. All member states take part in the milk programme (Croatia and Greece rejoined the programme during the 2013/2014 school year). Some countries are questioning why these programmes should exist (national responsibility, or even parental responsibility for some). Ciolos justified them. “Agriculture is a European competence and the EU is competent in health programmes. Here, it is a combination of the two aspects. Some countries have specific national programmes. That is why there is nothing obligatory. But many countries do not have the budgetary possibility of financing this type of programme. The problem of obesity is a horizontal problem, so we have the responsibility of proposing this type of programme on the European level” (our translation). (LC/transl.jl/fl)