Today, a motion at a full meeting of East Riding Council that should have been a straightforward defence of choice was surprisingly voted down by a majority of councillors. Cllr Leo Hammond’s proposal to ban forced meat-free meals in schools was rejected, and in doing so, councillors may have overlooked an important set of rights for their residents. The motion was never about whether children should eat vegetables or if plant-based meals should be available in schools, or the fact most vegan food is highly processed and lacking essential protein —it was about ensuring children and parents retain the right to choose.
The text of the motion simply highlighted mandating meat-free meals limits choice in a way that many parents and children find unnecessary. Plus, East Riding Council should know, as many parents do, that you can’t ingratiate a child to anything (in this case, veganism) through force.
In a lively debate, opposition to the motion was led by Liberal Democrat Cllr Tom Astell, who chose to take on the matter as something of a ‘culture war’ in which he would defend the international organisations working with schools to deliver meat-free days and which back the forced veganism of children and seek to severely limit agricultural economies like East Riding. As a rising Lib Dem star, one would hope Tom is well stocked up on hummus and other plant based gruel, but residents may feel this an unsuitable basis for him deciding the diets of growing children across East Riding.
Parents and children have voiced their concerns many times not least to the Hull Daily Mail last year , emphasising that this issue is not just about meal quality, but about autonomy. Providing a variety of meal options, rather than enforcing a singular approach, would better serve the diverse needs and preferences of students. The forced veganism approach that the council has taken only alienates families who want a say in what their children eat.
Another critical aspect overlooked in this decision is its impact on local farmers. East Riding has a strong agricultural community, and ensuring continued support for local produce should be a key consideration. Passing this motion would have demonstrated the council’s commitment to balancing sustainability efforts with the economic realities of the region’s farmers.
Finally, councils across the UK face pressing challenges, including road maintenance, social care, and public services. East Riding itself just accepted a record deficit in its finances. So while sustainability and nutrition are important considerations, should they really be overreaching into people’s lives and telling them what to eat and what not to eat?
Cllr Hammond’s motion was a reasonable call for choice and balance. Though it was ultimately defeated, this is likely not the last discussion on the matter which will now go to scrutiny. As the debate continues, it remains important to focus on practical solutions that respect personal choice while also encouraging responsible food policies.