Why I find the business response to Marcus Rashford’s free school meal campaign utterly depressing

After 322 MPs voted against Labour’s motion to extend the provision of free school meals on 21 October, the resultant nationwide charity response to fill the tummies of hungry children felt undeniably heartwarming.  

Even as the hospitality sector continued to struggle under the weight of the pandemic, over 1200 businesses across the country – from Newquay to Northumberland – came out in droves to offer resources to plug the gap left by the government.  

Determined to stave off child starvation, this community spirit – unwavering even in the face of social distancing – was the exact dose of altruism needed to offer a ray of sunshine in a gloomy 2020. But it would be naive to accept things the way they are.  

Togetherness aside, it should be more of an outrage that many of the businesses that have been hit the hardest by the economic impacts of covid have had to scrape together what little they have to do what the government refuses to. 

The uplifting notion of “all for one and one for all” may come to mind when seeing such generous displays of charity but it cannot and should not be forgotten that it is the government that is refusing to help supply one of the most basic tools necessary to the survival of many families this winter: food. 

Individuals should not be expected to do the jobs that the government is responsible for. Still, a statement has been made: food security cannot and will not be consistently ensured by the government. If you want help, ask someone else – appears to be the official line.

The normalisation of a decrease in state support has only been exacerbated by a correlational increase in non-profit aid. Of course, said support often lies in the decisions made by individuals to either help or abandon, with the former option being something of the obvious choice to those with a community spirit.  

This “pick up the pieces” spirit has been a key theme since the start of the pandemic. As virtuous as it is, it should not be the only option available. Cast your minds back to the tear-jerking scenes of Captain Sir Tom Moore – the 92-year-old ex-serviceman – completing 100 laps of his 25-meter garden and the country’s efforts to raise £30m to donate to the NHS in support of him. It was a lovely display of generosity. But we shouldn’t have had to rely on a 92-year-old man with a mobility aid to walk 2500 meters for NHS funding.  

The next star of the fundraising show was Marcus Rashford, who fought tirelessly to ensure children don’t go hungry. The concept of which is wholly necessary, but also completely ridiculous because we should not be living in a country – one of the richest countries in the world, no less – wherein there must be a fight to ensure all children get meals. This is not, of course, Rashford’s fault, who is simply using his large platform and the resources available to him to support those in need. This is a problem with our government.  

Truthfully, given its record, this kind of neglect isn’t entirely surprising. The government’s 2019 spending plans were last year predicted to lead to record levels of child poverty by the end of this parliament. We’re already seeing the results of that, as well as years of Tory austerity, today. And since the pandemic, we’ve also seen a soaring rate of foodbank use, the dependence on which risks growing further with the consequences of last week's vote.  

Despite the government’s seeming interest in celebrating kind and generous campaigners, with Sir Tom receiving his knighthood and Rashford getting his MBE this year, for example, their support is often surface at best. It’s great for a good headline, or for an opportunity to show that the government supports campaign efforts for those in need, but, when it comes to concrete policy – more money for the NHS, or the supply of free school meals when children and their families need them most – the governmental hand that once seemed too happy to reach out to the underdog seems to disappear.  

Supporting a campaign, or a supportive word from our prime minister is one thing, but it is a whole other – and much more necessary, yet currently unseen – gesture to action change to make these campaigns obsolete. We may lose some of the heartwarming community efforts we’ve seen, but that’s the point: hungry people should be fed and our NHS should be well funded. It is the job of the government to ensure that happens.  

Knowing that neglected children and families are being supported by a crowd of warm-hearted people may have helped to restore faith in the British public. But the ensuing warm, fuzzy feeling from looking at Rashford’s Twitter feed over the past few days should be a stark reminder that it is the British government that has forced these businesses into this.  

Charity support shouldn’t invoke an “aww” from the mouths of many. Rather, it should serve as a reminder to question the political culture and voting records that have led to this point.