The Public Diner: Notes on a National Food Service

Recently, the Guardian reported that food policy NGO Nourish Scotland has argued for the return of the ‘British restaurant to the country’s high streets’, which they recast as the ‘public diner’ in their report. ‘British Restaurants’ refer to state-subsidised communal kitchens that were introduced in 1940 by Winston Churchill, and offered reasonably-priced, nutritious meals to all social classes during the Second World War. Nourish Scotland, however, believes that the Government could repurpose this idea to address food poverty and climate change.

The Food Standards Agency defines ‘food poverty’ as the ‘inability of individuals and households to secure an adequate and nutritious diet’, affecting ‘those living on low incomes, with limited access to transport and poor cooking skills’. According to Government figures from 2022/2023, 7.2 million people are living in food poverty, which equates to 11% of the UK population. This represents an increase of 2.5 million people from the previous year. In the same report, the Trussell Trust, a foodbank charity, noted its highest ever usage rate in 2023/4, distributing 3.12 emergency million food parcels, up 2.8 million parcels since 2012/2013. Crucially, more than 655,000 people used a Trussell Trust foodbank for the first time in 2023/4, reflecting the impact that the cost-of-living crisis is having on food poverty. How would restaurants tackle this issue? In their report, Nourish Scotland argues that the price of a meal at a public diner would rival that of a supermarket ready meal. The thinktank argues that the public diner would support those who do not have access to cooking facilities, such as those experiencing homelessness or in irregular accommodation. It is easy to see why public diners might help those working irregular shifts, households with intensive childcare needs, or those who have a disability, who might all struggle to prepare food for themselves or for those under their care. Most of all, however, public diners might prove a healthier alternative to fast food restaurants: in a recent House of Commons Committee report, ‘a fifth of UK households’ struggle to source ‘good quality food at reasonable prices’, forcing them to resort to ‘unhealthy, high-calorie alternatives’. Public diners serving healthier alternatives, by contrast, would provide a safety net for those who would struggle to afford the ingredients that form part of a varied diet.

The return of a national scheme of British Restaurants would not only tackle the issue of food poverty but also the consequent social impacts caused by a lack of nutrition. Alarmingly, 17% of those in food poverty are children. As a former teacher, I taught in a school where around 40% of the students were eligible for free school meals as their families required income support. In January 2024, the number of students eligible for free school meals totalled 2.1 million in England.  Food poverty has a direct impact on academic attainment because, simply put, students cannot focus when they are hungry. Public diners, beyond symbolically allowing different classes to mix, would at the very least support the education of the most socioeconomically marginalised.

In my personal opinion, I would also argue that making good food cheaper can also democratise urban space. Based on anecdotal experience from my time working in a school, it seems that food can constitute a significant expense when visiting urban centres. This could exclude lower-income families living on the fringes of conurbations from accessing theatres, cinemas, galleries, exhibitions and so on. For a large family under financial constraints, even attending a free gallery such as the National Gallery might seem out of the question when considering train tickets and a meal. Making food a national service, in other words, could improve access to cultural capital and social mobility by allowing inhabitants to move freely around their area and access the cultural experiences that their surroundings can offer.

One other crucial aspect of the public diner scheme is that it could provide local areas with a space for people to eat together and create a sense of community belonging. The obvious appeal of this experience is compounded by the fact that the ability to eat at even the most reasonable of restaurants has now become a luxury for many. One can envisage pew-style seating or long tables to encourage mixing (Massimo Bottura’s Refettorio Ambrosiano, a free soup kitchen detailed in his cookbook Bread is Gold, comes to mind). This might feel like optimistic posturing, but given how the Little C supper club I reviewed recently used a similar seating arrangement to turn an incredibly affordable and nutritious multi-course meal into a meaningful collective experience, I am partial to the idea of using space to shape how people interact. Beyond that, however, Nourish Scotland is keen to stress in their report that they envisage the public diner as a public institution that is open to input either directly or through the local authority. They argue that one particularly attractive aspect of this community-based restaurant management is that restaurants could cater to the food tastes of its local area, helping its community feel represented and validated.

Putting aside Nourish Scotland’s neutral label ‘public diner’ and returning to the idea of a national service of British Restaurants, such institutions might offer a good-quality and affordable outlet for ‘British food’ (however insufficient that label might be), and perhaps return some value to a much-maligned cuisine. There exists a significant gap between oft-lacklustre pub fare, and the restaurant-level British food served by fine-dining establishments such as St. John, often hailed as one of the best restaurants in the world. However, if this is to be a serious commitment, there are significant problems in the UK food supply chain that need to be addressed, even if Nourish Scotland argue that public diners could adapt for ‘agricultural gluts’ and partially support local producers. These issues include: the ageing crisis of UK farmers (38% of farmers are over the age of 65); the fact we do not grow enough food to feed our population; the risks that climate change and development pose to our farmland; and even the depleting quality of British soil. While we could use British Restaurants as a means of supporting British farmers by raising greater awareness of how to use local produce in British cuisine, this cannot be done without fixing the glaring issues with how we grow, sell and distribute our food.

British Restaurants or public diners present a wealth of advantages: they can tackle food poverty, social inequality and could make urban spaces and cultural capital more accessible. They might also restore a sense of community in local areas and, under the right circumstances, restore our relationship with British food. However, if they are to be built around sustainability, public diners also represent a challenge, as well as an opportunity, to fix our broken food system.