Develop better voluntary schemes or face regulation, Scottish manufacturers warned

Photo: World Obesity Federation

Food and drink manufacturers have been given 12 months to come up with effective non-regulatory approaches to help reduce levels of obesity.

“In 15 years we have made no progress towards reaching the Scottish Dietary Goals,” noted Food Standards Scotland (FSS) in board meeting papers published this week. “Given the unsustainable current and future obesity prevalence, and the associated personal, societal and economic cost of continuing to fail to achieve change, the case must now be to justify not regulating.”

Obesity is estimated to cost Scotland €2.73bn (£2.37bn), and as such poses a “major risk” to the economy – and the situation is not improving.

FSS singled out the out-of-home sector for particular criticism, whilst noting that retailers and manufacturers have “gone some way” to effect change – progress has been made through salt reduction programmes and voluntary front-of-pack labelling schemes for example. FSS is also happy with the current approach to reformulation, though more challenging time-bound targets are needed; there should also be more support for small and medium-sized businesses so they’re not “left behind”.

Are you interested in reducing sugar in your products? Are sugar taxes biting your business? Think firms need a regulatory kick?

Whether you’re a manufacturer, ingredient supplier, R&D scientist or public health expert, get involved in the debate with our online event on sugar reduction. Sign up here.

Elsewhere, the regulator is far from convinced industry-led initiatives are working. “Regulation would create a level playing field for industry, and without it, we face the very real prospect of increasing diet-related ill health and unsustainable burdens on the NHS and our economy,” explained FSS chair Ross Finnie.

Lay down the law

Having reviewed “robust evidence” FSS has concluded the “current voluntary approaches alone will not work”. New regulations on promotions for high far, sugar and salt (HFSS) products are deemed “essential and should be taken forward as a priority in Scotland”. The first step will be a full assessment of current legislation.

Tougher laws to limit advertising of unhealthy foods are also needed, FSS claimed. New industry rules to limit the advertising of HFSS products across children’s broadcast media will come into force this July, but the decision to allow use of licensed characters and celebrities to endorse products was a “retrograde step”.

FSS used the new paper to argue that “without regulation to limit the availability, advertising and promotion of HFSS food and drink, insufficient progress will be made towards tackling diet and obesity in Scotland”.

The regulator also criticised the UK Government’s action plan on childhood obesity, which has taken an industry-led approach. The plan “doesn’t go far enough” FSS said as it urged Scottish ministers to “continue to argue strongly to UK ministers for restrictions on children’s advertising and to include the introduction of advertising restrictions on non-broadcast media”.

David Thomson, CEO at the Food and Drink Federation Scotland said he was disappointed that regulation on promotions is seen as a priority. “This is a hugely complicated area for legislation and limits choice,” he said in a statement sent to FoodNavigator. “We would urge FSS to consult widely and effectively on the financial, practical and legal implications of this before seeking to change the law.”

Sweet on wider sugar tax

Health minister Aileen Campbell has already called for advertising laws to be devolved. The Scottish Government has also confirmed that it will publish a national obesity strategy this year – and there are signs that ministers will be pressed to take a tougher line than their counterparts in Westminster.

An expansion of the sugar tax beyond beverages is under consideration. FSS’s response to the UK Government’s consultation on the proposed levy on sugar-sweetened drinks suggested it was “to narrowly focused”. FSS claimed that taxing more foods and drink would be “more effective”.

This week the UK Government said the money raised from the drinks levy – due to be introduced next year – will be less than expected because firms have already set about reformulating their products. Brands such as Irn Bru, Ribena and Lucozade have already committed to reducing sugar content in an effort to reduce the tax or avoid it altogether.

This reaffirms the argument that a broader tax is required, said FSS, as it called on Scottish ministers to “actively consider how a sugar tax may be introduced and at what rate”.

It would be a controversial move. FSS therefore challenged the country’s food industry to come up with an alternative acceptable solution to a sugar tax within 12 months. The sector was also given a similar deadline to develop voluntary measures to rebalance promotions in favour of healthier products.

The proposals come against a backdrop of increasing awareness of Scotland’s poor diet and the potential health consequences it brings. Some 61% of Scots know they need to do something to eat more healthily – up by 10% in a year.

Related News

© iStock/GoldStock

Product visuals more impactful to parents than nutritional information: Study

©iStock

Row over UK front-of-pack labelling intensifies

© iStock/MaciejNoskowski

Scotland launches hard-hitting snack campaign as government confirms 2017 obesity strategy

Scotland’s health minister could push for advertising laws to be devolved unless the UK government implements tighter restrictions on junk food. ©iStock

Scotland wants advertising powers following “disappointing” UK obesity strategy

Scotland has published its first five-year strategy this week and a three-year corporate plan on how it will tackle obesity. ©iStock

New strategy: Scotland weighs up food taxes and ad bans

UK childhood obesity on the up

The Scottish government is seeking to define the new food body's scope

Scotland seeks to define scope of independent food authority

Comments (1)

Mo - 13 Mar 2017 | 09:21

This is why we're going to hell in Europe

We have no respect for the Non-Aggression Principle. We let people threaten and coerce producers , as we force taxpayers to pay for the bad health decisions of the obese. We will get what we deserve as we are taken over by groups to whom might makes right even more.

13-Mar-2017 at 21:21 GMT

Submit a comment

Your comment has been saved

Post a comment

Please note that any information that you supply is protected by our Privacy and Cookie Policy. Access to all documents and request for further information are available to all users at no costs, In order to provide you with this free service, William Reed Business Media SAS does share your information with companies that have content on this site. When you access a document or request further information from this site, your information maybe shared with the owners of that document or information.