The government’s launch of a consultation to ramp up its HFSS advertising ban and the promotions restrictions in store has sparked a major response.
The DHSC published a consultation yesterday on the new nutrient profiling model (NPM), to run until June.
Industry bosses reacted angrily to the move and said the government timetable for the introduction of the new model by 2027 would be ”impossible” to achieve.
But health campaigners warmly welcomed the decision and said it was a key day in the fight against obesity.
Kate Halliwell, chief scientific officer, FDF:
“We have serious concerns that changing the nutrient profiling model so soon after it has been put into law, will undermine the progress and investments manufacturers have made to develop healthier food and drink for consumers.
“It’s vital government listens to industry’s expertise, including ensuring unintended consequences to consumer choice, as well as the inflationary impact on food prices, are accounted for in the impact assessment.
“We’ll be reading through the consultation to understand the government’s proposals in more detail. However, suggesting a 12-month implementation period clearly demonstrates government does not understand the scale of the change they are proposing or the complexities of reformulation.”
Andrew Opie, director of food and sustainability, BRC:
“The consultation ignores the fact that the new NPM is currently not workable, nor enforceable. Until this is resolved, it would be inappropriate to try and apply it to the existing regulations on advertising and promotions.
“We want to work with government to resolve the fundamental problems with the new NPM, but that will mean more than simply releasing further guidance.”
ISBA spokesman:
“The government has today launched a consultation on applying a new nutrient profiling model to restrictions which only came into force three months ago – and to apply it from 2027.
“Given the long process that accompanied the ‘less healthy’ food restrictions, and the promise that the impact of those changes would be reviewed after five years, this proposed moving of the goalposts is disruptive at best and self-defeating at worst.
”If officials push ahead with applying this new NPM to the 9pm TV watershed and online ban, swathes more products which have not been considered ‘unhealthy’ – indeed, products which have been reformulated – will be barred from appearing in ads, from yoghurts to cereals. Having spent millions of pounds on changing what goes into our food and drink, manufacturers will now be told that they cannot market them anyway. The disincentive to future reformulation is obvious.
“ISBA will of course respond to the consultation on behalf of our members, but it is striking that the government is considering this move before the impact of the LHF restrictions on UK broadcast sector revenue is clear, and that they are doing so at a time of anaemic economic growth. Advertising is a growth multiplier and was identified as a key area in the Creative Industries Sector Plan, but going ahead with this proposal would be a fresh blow to an industry which has constructively engaged with government on matters of public health.”
Advertising Association spokesman:
“It is deeply concerning that the government has issued a consultation on a policy that would limit advertising of a vast range of products without any assessment of the impact on ad-funded media. This omission must be addressed at the earliest opportunity.
”These additional restrictions – suggested less than three months after the less healthy food (LHF) rules were first introduced – threaten to significantly reduce advertising investment in the UK and reduce spend on ad-funded media across broadcasters, journalism, online media, and digital tools.
“That is completely at odds with the ambitions set out for the advertising and ad-funded businesses in the government’s Creative Industries Sector Plan. It must be urgently reconsidered.
”The consistent conclusion across hundreds of studies, large-scale reviews and meta-analyses is that advertising restrictions have limited or no causal effect on either long-term childhood obesity or BMI, while positive public health campaigns have proven benefits. Advertising largely drives competition between brands, not overall consumption.”
Katharine Jenner, executive director, Obesity Health Alliance:
“Current regulations do not fully protect children from exposure to unhealthy food and drink marketing, whether on TV, online or at the checkout, which is why updating how foods are classified is a necessary and sensible next step.
”Some products can look healthier on paper than they are in reality; a stronger model ensures advertising rules actually reduce children’s exposure to less healthy options.
“If we are serious about improving children’s health, making the food on sale genuinely healthier is the first step to real change.”
Anna, Bite Back youth activist
“We welcome this consultation. It shows the government is starting to listen to young people and take action on junk food marketing.
“Right now, we’re surrounded by ads and deals pushing unhealthy food everywhere – on our phones, on our streets, even on the way to school. We’re not being supported to be healthy, we’re being set up to fail.
”This is an important step, but it needs to lead to real change so young people aren’t being targeted at every turn, and we can grow up in environments that actually support us to be healthy.”
Fran Bernhardt, commercial determinants co-ordinator, Sustain:
“The nutrient profiling model has been crucial for progress on children’s health. By allowing us to differentiate between healthier and less healthy foods and drinks, it’s been the cornerstone of several successful policies. One of its key strengths is its simplicity – it’s easy for businesses and policymakers to use and understand, and that must be preserved as the model is updated.
“Opening this consultation is a welcome step, as unanswered questions remain around how to implement these changes. We urge the government to work closely with experts to ensure the necessary data and guidance are in place, so the updated NPM can continue – and strengthen – its role in safeguarding children’s health.”
No comments yet