20/03/2026
We are in an Election year. David Seymour is being an absolute idiot. whats next.
If you donation your a theif; so wrong.
Thank you to our schools who donate left overs
Lunches or Looting? David Seymour Sparks Fierce Debate Over Surplus Food Donations
A fresh political debate has ignited after ACT Party leader David Seymour suggested that donating surplus school lunches to communities, without proper authorisation, could be comparable to shoplifting. His comments have divided opinion across New Zealand, raising questions about legality, morality, and common sense in times of need.
At the heart of the issue is intention versus process. Supporters of Seymour’s stance argue that taking or redistributing food without permission—regardless of good intentions—undermines systems, accountability, and property rights. They say rules exist for a reason, and bypassing them could open the door to broader misuse or even organised exploitation.
However, critics say the comparison to shoplifting is extreme. Many see surplus lunches as wasted resources that could help struggling families, especially amid rising living costs. For them, feeding people in need is a moral priority that outweighs bureaucratic hurdles.
Still, there are real risks that can’t be ignored. Food safety is a major concern—improper storage or handling of surplus meals could lead to illness. There are also liability issues: if someone gets sick, who is responsible? Schools and providers could face legal consequences, even if their intentions were good. Additionally, poorly managed redistribution systems could create inequities or be taken advantage of.
This debate ultimately raises a bigger question: should rules be strictly followed, or adapted to better serve communities?
So what do you think, New Zealand?
Is redistributing surplus lunches an act of compassion—or does it cross the line into something closer to theft?
Have your say below.
