The government has confirmed that promotions such as BOGOGs on unhealthy food will be banned as part of a series of measures aimed at tackling the growing obesity crisis in the UK.
As well as restrictions on the promotion of foods high in fat or sugar, there will also be a ban on these items being placed in prominent locations in stores, like checkouts and entrances, and online. Supermarkets will also be encouraged to promote healthier choices and offer more discounts on food like fruit and vegetables.
Meanwhile, new laws will ban the advertising of food high in fat, sugar or salt (HFSS) on television and online before 9pm when children are most likely to see them. Ahead of this, the government will hold a short consultation on whether the ban on online adverts for HFSS should apply at all times of the day.
The new obesity strategy also extends into the foodservice sector with restaurants, cafés and takeaway businesses that have more than 250 employees required to add calorie labels to the food they sell. A new consultation will also be launched before the end of the year on plans to provide calorie labelling on alcohol.
The plan includes expanding NHS weight management services to support people that need to lose weight. A new ‘Better Health’ campaign, led by Public Health England, will also call on people to embrace healthier lifestyles and lose weight with a range of tools and apps providing advice.
Boris Johnson is said to have spearheaded the plan following his coronavirus scare. Recent studies have suggested that people who are medically obese are at increased risk of dying if they contract the virus.
The prime minister – who has lost more than a stone since he became ill – said: “Losing weight is hard but with some small changes we can all feel fitter and healthier.
“If we all do our bit, we can reduce our health risks and protect ourselves against coronavirus – as well as taking pressure off the NHS.”
The highly interventionist approach marks a U-turn for Johnson who has previously described his views on tackling obesity as “libertarian” and criticised “sin taxes”.
When implemented, the obesity strategy will lead to a radical change in the way food is marketed with industry bodies giving a hostile response to the plans.
Tim Rycroft, Chief Operating Officer at the Food and Drink Federation, pointed to data that suggests restrictions on promoting and advertising everyday food and drink will increase prices, reduce consumer choice and threaten jobs in the industry, with limited impact on people’s calorie consumption.
He said: “For more than a decade, our industry has worked willingly with successive governments to reduce salt, fat and sugars. Government is right in its renewed ambition for a healthier, more active population, but it is also time it put real money behind specific, targeted measures to help those most afflicted by obesity, rather than relying on headline chasing measures.”
Looking at the impact on shoppers, Rycroft said: “If price promotions are banned, already hard-pressed shoppers can expect to see their weekly shop become more expensive, at a cost of £600 per family. We have already seen evidence of this during the current crisis. Government policies should not put further pressure on rising food costs, which will disproportionately hit the tightest household budgets.
“Manufacturers, meanwhile, will see little point in introducing lower-sugar or lower-calories variants of their products into a market in which it will not be possible to advertise or promote them to shoppers. Since 2006, industry has worked in partnership with government and 100s of everyday products have been reformulated to make them healthier, in-line with government guidelines. Healthier choices will now fall foul of the government’s illogical rules. Start-ups and challenger brands will find it much harder to get ‘share of shelf’ against established brands without promotions to raise their profile, leading to less choice for shoppers.”
The new curbs mean both big brands and smaller companies will have to look for new ways to market themselves to consumers, with advertisers fearing a major hit to the industry.
Sue Eustace, director of public affairs at the Advertising Association, said the “extreme” and “unnecessary” measures would have little effect in reducing obesity, and warned they could have “wide-ranging ramifications” for food businesses and online publishers trying to financially recover from the pandemic.
She told BBC 5 Live’s Wake Up to Money programme: “We have some of the strictest [advertising] rules in the world already and children’s exposure to high fat, salt, and sugar adverts on TV has fallen by 70% over the last 15 years or so, but there’s been no change to obesity, so we don’t think these measures are going to work.”
Meanwhile, UKHospitality Chief Executive Kate Nicholls criticised the timing of the extra impositions on restaurants and pubs. “We are genuinely keen to work with Government to address obesity but the extra regulatory and cost burdens of measures like menu labelling could not come at a worse time,” she said.
“As we focus on securing jobs and helping the economy and communities to recover, a raft of costs and regulatory burdens would be a slap in the face.”
NAM Implications:
- If your brand depends on impulse…?
- Another issue will be whether ‘unhealthy’ depends on size of portion…?
- …or whether companies ‘could have seen this coming’?
- i.e. the real casualties will be those companies that should have seen this coming but are perceived not to have done sufficient about it.
- Meanwhile, if the government now decides to refine the ‘obesity’ model by applying principles of health-economics to the issue…
- i.e. by measuring the ‘obesity’ cost of hospitalisation vs the income from taxing to prevent/lower consumption…
- …then restricting the promotion of unhealthy foods could be just the start.
