Two leading figures of policy think-tank, IMANI Centre for Policy and Education, Franklin Cudjoe and Selorm Branttie have expressed strong reservations over the government’s universal school feeding program.
The policy think-tank’s Vice President, Selorm Branttie, in a scathing critique, strongly opposed the government school feeding program, arguing that the responsibility of feeding children should primarily lie with parents.
Mr. Branttie asserted that “parents have to feed their kids“, adding that “It’s the least they can do”. He pointed out that while the government should support parents in providing school uniforms and other essentials, the provision of food should not be a governmental burden.
Mr Branttie suggested that if any governmental support is to be provided, it should come in the form of heavily subsidized food rather than a full-scale feeding program. This approach, he contended, would ensure that parents do not shirk their fundamental responsibilities of taking care of their children.
The Vice President of the IMANI Centre for Policy and Education further proposed making exceptions for the 50% of regions with the highest levels of multidimensional poverty.
In these regions, Mr Branttie advocated for the promotion of community farms, where produce could be purchased to feed school children, thereby boosting local economies and ensuring a more sustainable solution.
Mr. Branttie criticized the current top-down approach of the universal feeding program as “clearly unsustainable” and failing to deliver even suboptimal results. He insisted that his stance is not politically motivated but rooted in “basic common sense”.
Franklin Cudjoe’s Critique of the School Feeding Program
The Founding President of the policy think-tank, IMANI Centre for Policy and Education, Franklin Cudjoe re-echoing Mr Branttie’s remarks, also criticized the government’s school feeding program.
According to Mr Cudjoe, the Government of Ghana spends a meager GH₵1.20 daily to feed one basic school pupil, a figure that he considered insufficient.
Mr Cudjoe further pointed out that the allocation of GH₵1.20 daily for public basic school children under the school feeding program constitutes a “state-sponsored malnutrition program” and a severe violation of children’s rights.
The Founding President of IMANI Centre for Policy and Education further asserted that the situation is worse at the government senior high secondary schools across the country under the free senior high school policy.
He underscored the inadequacy of the current funding and its implications on the health and well-being of children across the country.
He highlighted that the financial constraints and mismanagement within the current system not only fail to provide adequate nutrition but also potentially harm the very children they are meant to support.
The concerns raised by Mr. Cudjoe and Mr Branttie are crucial as they touch on fundamental questions about sustainability, efficiency, and the most effective ways to support vulnerable populations.
The universal basic school feeding program, while well-intentioned, in recent times faces significant challenges that in the view of several experts require a reevaluation of its implementation, funding mechanisms, and sustainability.
In an earlier call, the Executive Director of Africa Education Watch (Eduwatch), Kofi Asare, expressed the need for the Ministry of Finance to revise its medium-term expenditure allocation to the school feeding program.
According to him, the monies allocated to basic schools for feeding are woefully inadequate and must necessarily be increased. This, he explained, is to ensure an improvement in the quality of food being served to students.
READ ALSO: Kofi Karikari Outlines 3 Important Things Bachelors Should Consider Before Marriage
