Should we have a National Food Service?

The NHS is never far from the news headlines. This is especially true since the Covid pandemic. Its costs are rising inexorably as the population ages, creating a substantial burden on the public finances. 

Governments of all persuasions have attempted to improve it. Public satisfaction with the service is measured by the British Social Attitudes Survey. The most recent measure relates to 2023 and is 24%. This is the lowest since the survey began in 1983, at which point satisfaction was 55%. 

If the NHS didn’t exist today, would we invent it? 

Most people in the UK would probably answer ‘yes’ to this question, because the survey referred to above also highlights the strong support for healthcare being free at the point of use (91% support).

To prompt some thought, we would ask you to consider whether the UK should offer a National Food Service as well. After all, we all need to eat to survive. It’s arguably as important to us as healthcare. So, here’s how a National Food Service might work, and how it would most likely feel to you as a consumer. 

How It Would Work

• Every citizen entitled to free food at the point of use, funded by taxation.
• The government owns and operates food production, distribution, and retail.
• Supermarkets and restaurants would either be state-run or heavily regulated.
• The system would prioritise nutritional needs rather than consumer choice or luxury.

Consumer Experience

Availability & Choice 

• The food selection would likely be standardised—staples like bread, milk, vegetables, and basic proteins would be widely available.
• More expensive or luxury items (e.g., steak, exotic fruits, fine wines) could be rationed or require additional payments.
• Seasonal availability would be government-controlled, with quotas on production and imports.
• Foods considered poor for health eg desserts containing sugar, high fat items, would not be on the menu at restaurants or available in supermarkets

Quality & Innovation 

• Since there’s no market competition, food options would be bland, uniform, and slow to change.
• Innovation (e.g., new recipes, diet trends) could be bureaucratic and slow rather than market-driven.
• Food production efficiency might suffer without profit-driven incentives.

Customer Service & Shopping Experience 

• Food distribution could involve state-run supermarkets, resembling a Soviet-style rationing system or basic public cafeterias.
• Waiting times and bureaucracy might be a problem—long queues at distribution centres, shortages of popular items, and rigid allotments per person.
• Customer service would likely be slow and impersonal, as employees would have little incentive to provide better service.

Personal Responsibility & Waste 

• Since food is "free," individuals might waste more or lack incentive to make healthy choices.
• The system might need enforced portion control or ration cards to prevent hoarding or black markets. 

Potential Outcomes

✅ Pros: 

• No one goes hungry.
• Basic nutrition is guaranteed for all.
• Less financial stress on lower-income families
• With better nutrition, many people would extend their healthspan

 ❌ Cons: 

• Reduced choice and innovation.
• Lower efficiency and potential for bureaucratic mismanagement.
• High taxation burden to fund the system.
• Loss of personal responsibility in dietary choices.

Is this something you would favour? If not, has it made you feel any differently about the NHS? Could there be a better alternative? 

Let us know your thoughts.