One in five was the figure much touted in the National Government's education policy in the past. It used the figure when it introduced National Standards, aiming to lift achievement in schools, telling the public that one in five children leave school without basic literacy and numeracy.
There are many complex reasons why that may be so. More recently the Government's policy on lifting achievement has focused on improving quality teaching and leadership and it has invested $359 million in this.
Which is great as teachers are key to children's achievement. But so is a full stomach. And some of the reasons one in five kids are not achieving are socioeconomic.
The Government has increased funding to Fonterra and Sanitarium's KickStart breakfast programme, but as the problem escalates, is this enough?
Two bills which aimed to tackle the problem - one by Greens co-leader Metiria Turei and one by Labour's David Shearer - were defeated last month. Turei's food in schools bill which provided for state-funded breakfasts and lunches at all decile one and two schools wasn't a perfect solution, and hungry kids are not just in low-decile schools.
Shearer has argued that throwing money at the issue in terms of free food doesn't solve the underlying issue.
As this paper has pointed out before, Shearer's policy seems to have a lot of sense because rather than using money to give food, it wanted to provide all schools with resources to teach and deliver long-term food solutions, which could include children learning how to grow vegetables and cook.
What could be more fundamental to teach children alongside reading and mathematics? How to find food, and feed oneself is the most basic of human needs that children need to learn if their families are not showing it to them.
It is a shame that Shearer's bill didn't get in front of the select committee for further development. There were 60 votes for and 60 against meaning it could not progress. After the defeat, Bay of Plenty MP Todd Muller told the Bay of Plenty Times it was appropriate for the Government to support breakfasts in schools but there needed to be a contribution from everyone. Muller's response to the issue seems more open to further discussion than John Key, whose attitude seems to be "let them eat cake". Or not eat cake.
Before the two bills were up for discussion Key enacted a bizarre stunt by getting his Education Minister to call three schools to see how many children had brought lunch. He concluded the problem was not widespread.
While this works for a television programme - Campbell Live has done similar surveys on just a few schools - government policy should not be based on randomness. Key's attitude seems dismissive. Bay of Plenty Times deputy editor Dylan Thorne opined it was "insulting".
In an ideal world, it is the responsibility of parents to feed their children, the reality is that some do not - whether because they do not have enough money, do not know how to manage money or some other reasons.
But debating the philosophy and morality of a government programme does no good to those children going hungry.
Even if hungry children do not pull on heart strings, in pure economic terms it makes sense to invest in the next generation's health and well-being so that they can become well educated and good independent working members of society in the future. Hungry kids can also be angry kids, so feeding children makes for better behaviour and even less youth crime.
It's ironic the Government is getting more involved with fat kids but less so with hungry kids. The New Zealand Herald reported this week that doctors are proposing a traffic light system to possibly refer obese children to Child Youth and Family if their parents are not helping them lose weight.
Many people are concerned about child poverty. Hungry children at school has become a discussion point with voters of many different political parties. Key's dismissal of the issue could be costly - voters in Northland have already shown disapproval.
Even if it is just future fear of defeat that changes Key's mind, if a bill like Shearer's can be reconsidered it will change the lives of all children across the country.
If you have no breakfast or lunch, the Government's $359 million investment in quality teachers and school leadership is not going to help you. Some children don't need the best professionally-developed teacher with oodles of leadership skills, just a bowl of Weet-Bix and a cheese toastie.
