It is, as Phil Collins and Margaret Thatcher both observed, ‘a funny old world’. This week both the main evening TV news and the tabloids were led by a food story.
Sadly though for the industry’s self-respect, it wasn’t the publication of the latest national food strategy that captured editors’ attention, but yet another twist to the sorry tale of Gregg Wallace.
I confess that the shouty former greengrocer has never particularly appealed, nor has the ridiculous way he and his – now also former – Aussie mate present the results of their deliberations. I’m sure Wallace has a great career ahead of him on GB News, but the fact that he became a national figure by presenting a cookery programme tells us rather a lot about the crucial place food and drink occupy at the core of our national life.
The food strategy
That place is acknowledged throughout the newly-published food strategy for England. It is a document which repays our attention. Nicely, if a bit piously, written, it proclaims “food is the beating heart of our economy” and that it has “a story which should be proudly told”.
It sets the worthy goal to “become a world leader in sustainable, healthy food production – tackling climate change, boosting resilience, and securing our food future” while confronting “the challenges of rising obesity, food insecurity, and environmental degradation”.
The strategy lists tackling obesity, environmental sustainability, resilience and food security as its priorities. These are essential and legitimate goals. Equally welcome is the commitment to extensive industry involvement in their accomplishment.
Putting business action at the centre of the strategy’s delivery is no small achievement. Health secretary Wes Streeting has championed this approach against a choir of naysaying health campaigners – led by people like the high priest of ultra-processed food Chris van Tulleken – who would exclude industry from the room when policy is being discussed. Such a move would be ridiculous and undemocratic.
Alongside Streeting, the excellent food minister Daniel Zeichner has done well to orchestrate the practical commitment of industry bigwigs and the major representative organisations (though it would be even more positive to also acknowledge the engagement of the wider community of trade associations). The strategy also offers a nod to the vital work of Professor Tim Lang to identify the concerning lack of resilience in our food system. Also rightly credited is Henry Dimbleby for his exhaustive and controversial 2021 draft.
The profit imperative
But – and it’s quite a big but – there is one major omission in the strategy which is most concerning. Amid many sections on economic growth, improved productivity and the opportunities for innovation, I could not find a single reference to the need for the industry and its thousands of companies to make a profit.
I totally accept the social duty we have to deliver healthier choices – as the report points out, we have an absolute interest in healthier shoppers and consumers. Similarly, only by investing in all aspects of sustainability will we be around into the long term: climate change is already manifest every day.
But none of this can be done unless our companies are profitable. Without profit we can’t employ people, attract investors to put their money into our plans, or grow our businesses. Profit is the lifeblood of a healthy economy. Those of us in the commercial world should never, ever be ashamed to say so.
It really is time that we start being clear about the critical importance of making a profit. Of the 14 members of the Food Strategy Advisory Board, at least eight spend their lives being accountable to shareholders and investors for meeting and, if possible, exceeding their profit expectations. Yet somehow they appear to have forgotten that when they approved the report. That’s a real pity.
We should all welcome the strategy. We should all commit to its objectives and advancing the co-operation through which they will be achieved.
But we should worry that profit appears to be seen as unwelcome, and as unsavoury as Gregg Wallace has been judged to be. That kind of thinking is utterly wrong. If we don’t excise it from policy formulation it will be massively to our detriment. More important, the Food Strategy will fail.
Ian Wright is partner at Acuti Associates
No comments yet