The second helping of the government’s strategy is an improvement on Chapter 1 but still leaves big questions unanswered. By David Burrows.
When the government published Chapter 1 of its childhood obesity strategy in August 2016, the reviews were not five star. Theresa May, at that time the new prime minister, had chewed up the prose written by David Cameron and spat out something far more conservative. Gone was any mention of strict new regimes that would strip advertisers of the powers to push more calories at people, or indeed any mandatory targets to reformulate food, drink and meals. The out-of-home sector wouldn’t even be asked to provide calorie labels on its menus.
But this was just the “start of the conversation”, of course. This week the government published Chapter 2, so is the sequel any better?
At 33 pages, it’s certainly fatter than its elder brother. The level of detail has certainly improved and the three pages of references suggest May’s advisers are now doing their homework. There is mention of a clampdown on promotions for unhealthy foods, a ban on sweets and treats at checkouts, improved public procurement standards and a possible ban on selling energy drinks to children. A target to halve childhood obesity by 2030 has even been reinserted – which Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall called a “real breakthrough”.
However, start to pick through the pages and it soon becomes clear that this is more wish list than wonderful new strategy. Most of the proposals are only being opened up for consultation, for example:
- We will explore what additional opportunities leaving the European Union presents for food labelling in England that displays world-leading, simple nutritional information as well as information on origin and welfare standards.
- We intend to ban price promotions, such as buy one get one free and multi-buy offers or unlimited refills of unhealthy foods and drinks in the retail and out of home sector through legislation, consulting before the end of 2018.
- We will consult, before the end of 2018, on introducing a 9pm watershed on TV advertising of HFSS [high fat, salt and sugar] products and similar protection for children viewing adverts online.
In fact, there is only one notable commitment that, at this stage at least, appears to be set in stone: “We will introduce legislation to mandate consistent calorie labelling for the out of home sector (e.g. restaurants, cafes and takeaways) in England, with a consultation before the end of 2018.” Given that only 25% of out-of-home food has a calorie label beside it, and 79% of people want the information available, this is good news.
However, UKHospitality isn’t so keen. The organisation’s CEO said it could increase food waste, reduce the use of seasonal products and add significant costs to smaller businesses.
How the new law will affect smaller firms is not yet clear. The government has said that “micro-businesses” (definition not yet available) could possibly receive a pass, or a longer lead-time, in publicising the information. But this will make it impossible for consumers to compare. And what does it mean for the likes of Just Eat and Deliveroo – companies that sell millions of takeaways from thousands of businesses? These are platforms that have already managed to circumnavigate advertising restrictions.
Marketing has been the focus of many health campaigners’ lobbying efforts. The current voluntary rules were recently called a “sham”, while politicians in Scotland seem to be moving towards tighter restrictions, if Westminster will let them. The likes of the Food and Drink Federation, meanwhile, have been urging ministers to resist such “headline-chasing measures”, while the Advertising Standards Authority believes the evidence shows that the influence of advertising on children’s food preferences “is not so great”.
As it happens, both will need to prepare for another bout of lobbying, with a decision on advertising – including a 9pm watershed – punted away until after another consultation. But there is a whiff of change in the air.
In Chapter 1, the prime minister ignored the advice of her own advisers – Public Health England reviewed all the evidence on how to reduce sugar consumption and recommended that the government “significantly reduce opportunities to market and advertise high sugar food and drink products to children and adults across all media including digital platforms”. However, the tone of the second chapter suggests the government is growing tired of industry’s promises. It’s going to consider whether the self-regulation approach is working or whether legislation is necessary. Also, “more could be done” to build on current restrictions to protect children from HFSS adverts, it said.
Chapter 2 is certainly better than 1, but in opening everything up to consultation again it has created a lot more work. Some of the questions are the same and there is little in the shape of clear commitments, but did anyone expect anything different?
