Today’s news that the government is delaying the introduction of its main weapon in the fight against obesity, the ban on HFSS advertising before 9pm and online, is both a throwback to the behaviour of the previous government and a sign of the impossible policy clash facing the current one.

A decision to delay the watershed and the total digital ban on junk food ads until at least January next year carries all the hallmarks of Boris Johnson’s previous delays to landmark policies such as the promotions ban. Just like that, it too follows months of behind-the-scenes wrangling with the food industry.

But – just as significantly – it comes a day after figures showed food inflation jumped to 3.4% in April and the overall UK inflation rate reached its highest level for over a year, according to the Office for National Statistics.

The day before that, Keir Starmer was on Facebook boasting that the freshly inked deal with the EU would bring down food prices after years of them going up.

Against that backdrop, regulation that would ban “hundreds of millions” of brand ads, even those that do not specifically identify HFSS products, was presented to the government by industry as just one part of a wave of draconian regulation that flies in the face of both the growth agenda and the government’s hope that food prices will fall.

Health vs HFSS

It’s been obvious for a while that the competing policy priorities of tackling the obesity crisis and having policies that are “growth friendly” are not natural bedfellows for a government still trying to capture its mojo. Something had to give.

Quite why it has taken so long for ministers to get to this point is another matter, as it has been obvious for months that the poorly worded legislation – another throwback to the previous administration – meant this issue was hurtling headlong towards an inevitable clash in the courts.

The Grocer exclusively revealed in February that food companies had instructed lawyers to prepare a possible legal challenge against the junk food ban. This threat was repeated in April when, despite previous failed attempts by ministers to clarify the situation, food companies said legal action was inevitable unless it agreed to rewrite the legislation.

Now we are so late in the process that ministers had no option but to shelve the plans until next year at the earliest.

The government has, however, secured a voluntary agreement. It says this is backed by “advertisers and broadcasters, with the support of online platforms and publishers” that will see companies comply with the restrictions that would have come into force from October, albeit with no regulatory teeth in place to back them up.

“This means that, from 1 October 2025, and in line with government’s policy intentions, we would expect adverts for specific identifiable less healthy products not to be shown on TV between 5.30am and 9pm or at any time online,” today’s announcement stated.

The spirit of the law

Ministers say the plans for a new Statutory Instrument (SI) excluding branded ads from the rules will allow brands with HFSS products to continue to promote healthier products and health messages, in the spirit the original legislation intended but failed to nail down.

But that reassurance has understandably done little to placate the health lobby, which accuses Labour of betraying its promise to tackle the obesity crisis and to get tough on firms that stand in its way. Wes Streeting’s steamroller has indeed been notably out of action recently.

Campaigners say the backtracking means the legislation looks set to reintroduce the “Coca-Cola truck-sized loopholes” for brands it complained of when the draft interpretation of the legislation first appeared from the ASA at the start of last year.

“This promise is all about brands trying to wriggle out and get an exemption from the ban,” says one health campaigner. “It is bringing back all the loopholes that looked set to have been closed.

“The government has bowed to a co-ordinated lobbying campaign by the food industry in exactly the same way as its predecessor did.”

With food industry lawyers currently set to be studying the details of the government’s rowback, this is unlikely to be the end of the debate. The wording of the SI and exactly which brand ads will be given the all-clear still has to be decided and put into legal wording.

So instead of October heralding in the beginning of a new age of protection for kids on TV and online, we are still likely to still be right up to our necks in a bitter dispute over what advertising material is and isn’t to be judged X-rated. So much for clarity.

Topics