Government initiatives to improve the nation’s health made 2004 a challenging year for the industry
The industry saw red this year as the government finally unveiled its Public Health White Paper and food companies braced themselves for the possible introduction of traffic-light labelling.
While manufacturers, retailers and industry bodies are still assimilating the tome, the general view is that government has gone for short-term populism. In a rather cheeky move, it has called on food companies to dig deep into their pockets to help fund education programmes, while at the same time pushing them to reduce advertising of ‘unhealthy’ products to children (see right) and to help with the development of signpost labelling.
The paper, published on November 16, has proved unpopular with anti-industry lobby groups, who argue its voluntary-based approach does not go far enough. CBI director general Digby Jones, on the other hand, protests that the industry is under attack from “the advancing forces of the nanny state”.
The publication was the culmination of a year in which the industry has been firmly under the spotlight when it comes to health. At the end of 2003, The Grocer warned this would be the biggest issue facing industry in 2004 - and so it proved.
As the year wore on, it became obvious that food companies were failing to get their message across to a media and government persuaded by the vocal health and consumer lobbies. Such is the sensitive nature of the issue that, with a few notable and praiseworthy exceptions, food companies chose to remain silent.
So, for the first time in its history, The Grocer launched a campaign urging influencers to look beyond the spin and redress the balance of the debate. In particular it highlighted the flaws in simple solutions, such as traffic-light labelling, and the lack of attention hitherto given to the vital ‘calories out’ part of the equation: exercise.
The campaign caught the attention of national and local media as well as politicians - and The Grocer secured interviews with Melanie Johnson, minister for public health, and the Conservative and Liberal Democrat shadow health secretaries.
The White Paper did at least acknowledge the steps the industry has taken in reformulating foods and that personal responsibility is key to improving the nation’s health. It also recognised that the European single market meant it needed to rely upon voluntary, not legal, compulsion.
However, there was not such good news on the labelling front, with prime minister Tony Blair saying he would use the UK’s presidency of the EU to press vigorously to simplify nutrition labelling and make it mandatory on packaged goods.
Both the labelling and advertising issues now await the outcome of the consultation on nutrient profiling.
The consultation document was released on November 25 and industry has until February 25 to respond. The FSA has proposed a “simple scoring system”, whereby points are awarded for the content of eight nutrients in 100g of food.
The jury is out on whether the formula is practicable, but the view of the industry and this publication has not changed. Simplistic solutions to complex issues will not work. In 2005 the industry must pull together and take control of its destiny - otherwise government will do it for you.
Health and alcohol
The old days when all booze suppliers had to think about was making, marketing and flogging the stuff are gone. Today’s buzzwords are “responsible retailing” and “sensible drinking”, and no more so than in 2004, when the industry came under increasing scrutiny from the government.
Downing Street set the tone in March with the launch of its Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy, aimed at cracking down on binge drinking and under-age consumption.
The industry quickly realised it had to prove it could successfully self-regulate or face more legislation, and rallied around a series of initiatives co-ordinated by the Portman Group. Voluntary best practice codes on promoting and selling alcohol quickly followed, and brewers such Coors and Scottish Courage led the way by putting responsible drinking messages on packaging.
A summer sting operation against under-age sales, led by the Home Office, then followed - described in some quarters as a political stunt rather than a genuine effort to change drinking culture.
Attention then turned to how alcohol is advertised on television, with new Ofcom rules in the autumn aiming to cut out any link between booze, youth culture, sex or glamour.
Health and advertising
It’s fair to assume that the brethren of the food and drink advertising community have sprouted a few grey hairs over the past 12 months.
Calls for bans and the outlawing of celebrities appearing in kids’ food commercials were heard right from the new year as Gary Lineker and Kellogg’s Tony the Tiger drew hatred from some members of the audience gathered at the Food Standards Agency’s January public debate on child obesity.
Things got worse before they got better as marketing boffin Professor Gerard Hastings, leading an FSA-commissioned review of existing research into advertising to children, concluded that it did indeed influence their dietary choices.
Meanwhile, advertising regulator Ofcom did its best to push the opposite view by producing other research that showed there was little or no effect. Last month’s Public Health White Paper ensures the debate is far from over.
A review on the codes governing advertising to children will be held next spring following the completion of the FSA’s nutritional profiling trials.
The government’s deadline for the advertising industry to come up with a satisfactory code is early 2007. In the meantime, the threat of legislation still looms large.
Health and smoking
The tobacco industry has taken more bashings than Rocky and 2004 proved no exception, with the Public Health White Paper and a proposed ban on smoking in public just some of the further blows to the industry.
Companies were still trying to get to grips with the advertising ban, introduced in 2003, and its implications for promotional activity and product launches.
Imperial Tobacco tried to push the limits of the new restrictions but failed when it was formally cautioned for a Superkings cigarette card promotion in an important test case.
The trade tried in the autumn to legally challenge restrictions on point of sale material that will restrict store activity, but was turned down by the High Court.
There was more bad news for tobacco chiefs with the publication of the White Paper. Health secretary John Reid announced plans to restrict smoking in most public places as well as higher fines and powers to ban retailers who sell tobacco to under-age children.
Despite this, the cigarette market in the UK was still worth £9.36bn at the start of September [ACNielsen], albeit growing at a declining rate.
“People will always smoke. Our job is to meet that demand while it’s still a legal product,” said a trade figure.
The industry saw red this year as the government finally unveiled its Public Health White Paper and food companies braced themselves for the possible introduction of traffic-light labelling.
While manufacturers, retailers and industry bodies are still assimilating the tome, the general view is that government has gone for short-term populism. In a rather cheeky move, it has called on food companies to dig deep into their pockets to help fund education programmes, while at the same time pushing them to reduce advertising of ‘unhealthy’ products to children (see right) and to help with the development of signpost labelling.
The paper, published on November 16, has proved unpopular with anti-industry lobby groups, who argue its voluntary-based approach does not go far enough. CBI director general Digby Jones, on the other hand, protests that the industry is under attack from “the advancing forces of the nanny state”.
The publication was the culmination of a year in which the industry has been firmly under the spotlight when it comes to health. At the end of 2003, The Grocer warned this would be the biggest issue facing industry in 2004 - and so it proved.
As the year wore on, it became obvious that food companies were failing to get their message across to a media and government persuaded by the vocal health and consumer lobbies. Such is the sensitive nature of the issue that, with a few notable and praiseworthy exceptions, food companies chose to remain silent.
So, for the first time in its history, The Grocer launched a campaign urging influencers to look beyond the spin and redress the balance of the debate. In particular it highlighted the flaws in simple solutions, such as traffic-light labelling, and the lack of attention hitherto given to the vital ‘calories out’ part of the equation: exercise.
The campaign caught the attention of national and local media as well as politicians - and The Grocer secured interviews with Melanie Johnson, minister for public health, and the Conservative and Liberal Democrat shadow health secretaries.
The White Paper did at least acknowledge the steps the industry has taken in reformulating foods and that personal responsibility is key to improving the nation’s health. It also recognised that the European single market meant it needed to rely upon voluntary, not legal, compulsion.
However, there was not such good news on the labelling front, with prime minister Tony Blair saying he would use the UK’s presidency of the EU to press vigorously to simplify nutrition labelling and make it mandatory on packaged goods.
Both the labelling and advertising issues now await the outcome of the consultation on nutrient profiling.
The consultation document was released on November 25 and industry has until February 25 to respond. The FSA has proposed a “simple scoring system”, whereby points are awarded for the content of eight nutrients in 100g of food.
The jury is out on whether the formula is practicable, but the view of the industry and this publication has not changed. Simplistic solutions to complex issues will not work. In 2005 the industry must pull together and take control of its destiny - otherwise government will do it for you.
Health and alcohol
The old days when all booze suppliers had to think about was making, marketing and flogging the stuff are gone. Today’s buzzwords are “responsible retailing” and “sensible drinking”, and no more so than in 2004, when the industry came under increasing scrutiny from the government.
Downing Street set the tone in March with the launch of its Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy, aimed at cracking down on binge drinking and under-age consumption.
The industry quickly realised it had to prove it could successfully self-regulate or face more legislation, and rallied around a series of initiatives co-ordinated by the Portman Group. Voluntary best practice codes on promoting and selling alcohol quickly followed, and brewers such Coors and Scottish Courage led the way by putting responsible drinking messages on packaging.
A summer sting operation against under-age sales, led by the Home Office, then followed - described in some quarters as a political stunt rather than a genuine effort to change drinking culture.
Attention then turned to how alcohol is advertised on television, with new Ofcom rules in the autumn aiming to cut out any link between booze, youth culture, sex or glamour.
Health and advertising
It’s fair to assume that the brethren of the food and drink advertising community have sprouted a few grey hairs over the past 12 months.
Calls for bans and the outlawing of celebrities appearing in kids’ food commercials were heard right from the new year as Gary Lineker and Kellogg’s Tony the Tiger drew hatred from some members of the audience gathered at the Food Standards Agency’s January public debate on child obesity.
Things got worse before they got better as marketing boffin Professor Gerard Hastings, leading an FSA-commissioned review of existing research into advertising to children, concluded that it did indeed influence their dietary choices.
Meanwhile, advertising regulator Ofcom did its best to push the opposite view by producing other research that showed there was little or no effect. Last month’s Public Health White Paper ensures the debate is far from over.
A review on the codes governing advertising to children will be held next spring following the completion of the FSA’s nutritional profiling trials.
The government’s deadline for the advertising industry to come up with a satisfactory code is early 2007. In the meantime, the threat of legislation still looms large.
Health and smoking
The tobacco industry has taken more bashings than Rocky and 2004 proved no exception, with the Public Health White Paper and a proposed ban on smoking in public just some of the further blows to the industry.
Companies were still trying to get to grips with the advertising ban, introduced in 2003, and its implications for promotional activity and product launches.
Imperial Tobacco tried to push the limits of the new restrictions but failed when it was formally cautioned for a Superkings cigarette card promotion in an important test case.
The trade tried in the autumn to legally challenge restrictions on point of sale material that will restrict store activity, but was turned down by the High Court.
There was more bad news for tobacco chiefs with the publication of the White Paper. Health secretary John Reid announced plans to restrict smoking in most public places as well as higher fines and powers to ban retailers who sell tobacco to under-age children.
Despite this, the cigarette market in the UK was still worth £9.36bn at the start of September [ACNielsen], albeit growing at a declining rate.
“People will always smoke. Our job is to meet that demand while it’s still a legal product,” said a trade figure.
No comments yet