I did see the final episode– it ended on a very hopeful note, and Critchlow seemed to have been made a believer. Maybe. It's hard to tell with editing. Also, thanks to the efforts of series hero Natasha, it appears that several other towns might adopt the pass it on program, but I generally distrust politicians (most of all when they have several cameras on them!) and I'll believe it when I see it.

As to what Jamie was trying to achieve, I can only say, I admire his conviction to the cause. I suspect that his efforts will make some smaller difference to a few families, though nothing like what I see he appeared to be aiming for.

Thank goodness he's trying though. While I agree with previous comments (and forgive my late comments here please) that some people don't enjoy cooking, that really isn't the point. If you are a parent, you have an obligation to cook (mostly) healthy food for your children. Cooking is an important life skill, you need to cook for and with your children wherever possible.

If you're single or an adult couple and are happy living on cruddy food, fine, but bring innocents into the equation, and things have to change.

From a financial point of view, I don't buy into the suggestion that take away is cheaper. Fresh (maybe not organic) vegetables, legumes, pulses, cheaper cuts of meat (and I mean 'cheap' in terms of rump vs fillet here, not sausage mince vs crayfish) will easily give you meals for mere cents compared to dollars. Heck you can even buy Puy style lentils at subparmarkets these days, so you can eat very well on very little.

Good on Jamie for at the very least, keeping such an important subject in the front of the community's consciousness.

This point about wanting to cook is key, i think, as both Manggy and you have mentioned. The process of cooking is perhaps not enjoyable for lots and lots of people, which makes the result potentially less valuable to them — takeaway or someone else's cooking becomes much more attractive. There's analogous behaviour in people with more money, though it's rarely (ever?) discussed — dining out at any price point is not just about deliciousness or status or convenience-after-a-hard-day… many of those moneyed diners are the same can't-cook/won't-cook type. Their food choices are just more varied (or just 'respectable').

What impressed me about London, was the abundance of local markets. Ours was Dalston (NE London), not dissimilar to the market depicted in "East Enders". I know the markets are still in swing, not just the fancy Borough market but local temporary ones that are in operation a couple of times a week. You can get fresh food in most neighbourhoods for reasonable prices.

I think Manggy is onto it with the comment that some people don't want to cook. I mean, the English culinary heritage is not a huge incentive to master the art. The only good food I ate in England in the '80s was vegetarian or Indian. Go figure.

All in all, not very well-planned and such a disappointment.