Nanny-statism, a heavy-handed approach to food manufacturers, a lack of joined-up thinking between government departments and little or no consensus between the industry and the authorities. This is how obesity is being tackled by the Labour government. But, would it be any different under the Tories?

After almost a year-long consultation it appears David Cameron and his party are readying to unveil a very different blueprint. Voicing its support for The Grocer's Weigh It Up! campaign, the Conservative Party this week pledged to review the Nutrient Profiling Model (see pp6-7). But rather than focusing, with single-minded zeal, on the role that HFSS food plays in the obesity debate, it aims to take a holistic approach, considering issues such as exercise and parental responsibility, says shadow health minister Steve O'Brien.

"When it comes to childhood wellbeing - of which obesity is one of the, if not the, key issue - there clearly has to be a sharing of the responsibility between all agencies such as schools, the community, the health service and parents," says O'Brien. "It is absolutely vital, for example, that parents are given encouragement and support where necessary, but above all the expectation that they have a very real and valuable role, which has to be played to benefit their children."

These issues will be addressed at the Conservative Party's obesity summit, which is planned for July this year, and will take into account the views of all industry stakeholders. News of the summit will be heartening to many in the food industry who believe they have been unfairly singled out for censure as the only actionable culprits and that most of their counter-arguments and attempts to encourage a wider debate have fallen on deaf ears. The Tories' willingness to embrace a number of agencies in order to resolve the crisis has also been welcomed.

"The multi-stakeholder approach [announced by the Tories] is very encouraging," says a director at a leading food manufacturer. "There is a clear belief that no one power should be driving change. [Under Labour] we have got the feeling that industry is on one side and the government is on the other." Adds the CEO of a major supermarket: "The Food Standards Agency's position, and the position of its chair, has been: 'You are entitled to any opinion, as long as it is ours.'"

The summit may also help to appease those who were alarmed by earlier pronouncements by Cameron on the obesity debate, which appeared to promise further draconian measures to control the marketing of food to children. The Opposition's first public salvo around the question of the nation's expanding waistlines came at a meeting at London's Borough Market in January. Vowing to take a lead in shaping a new outlook to food, the Tory leader said individuals needed to be more socially responsible by buying local produce and spending time preparing proper meals.

"Instead of valuing fresh, quality food, carefully prepared - the kind of food culture you see in other European countries - we've created a junk food society," he told traders. "There is a price to be paid for it in our health, our environment and our culture."

Having previously accused Labour of fostering a nanny state with its prescriptive policies on what we eat rather than respecting individual lifestyle choices, these public statements appeared to mark an ominous change in strategy. And a further proposal to give manufacturers strict quotas for producing fatty and sugary foods caused further concern in industry circles.

According to O'Brien, however, advertising, labelling and other marketing restrictions will not be reformed until the NPM has been reformulated. Nutrient profiling has [already] had a serious knock-on effect on marketing, he says, and the NPM's use of the 100g measure to score food as good or bad has to be tackled first.

"The NPM is at the root of Ofcom's jurisdiction to ban foods such as cheese and honey from advertising on children's television," he says. "The flawed 100g measure is also used as the basis for the FSA's crude traffic-light front-of-pack labelling system, on which it has wasted millions of pounds of taxpayers' money advertising. None of these issues can be tackled until the Nutrient Profiling Model is reviewed."

On advertising, too, there appears to be a recognition that an ad ban is unlikely to solve the obesity crisis. "An ad ban alone will not result in healthy kids," Hugo Swire, the shadow secretary of state for culture, media and sport said recently. "We need to adopt a more holistic approach across the whole of government, including a commitment to competitive sports in schools. It is also important for parents to take responsibility for the health of their children."

As well as questioning the effectiveness of the ban, the Opposition believes that restricting television advertising would unnecessarily take away an important source of revenue from the UK television production industry, and children's programming could suffer. The move could even lead to British-made programmes being replaced by cheaply made American versions, many of which contain overt product placement for just the type of products the FSA is trying to keep off the small screen.

Cameron has identified the obesity debate as one of his party's main priorities. And further insight into his thinking can be found in the Conservative Party's Working Group on Responsible Business (WGRB), which was set up by the Tory leader last July. While the WGRB is a wide-ranging consultative paper aimed at making all business more responsible, childhood obesity is singled out again and again as a key issue to be tackled.

Since they were first launched, the proposals have been discussed in a series of meetings with food and consumer groups. The consultation process ended late last month.

And although early reactions from organisations who have attended these meetings are mixed, there is a palpable atmosphere of optimism about the discussions so far with the Tories and the inclusiveness of the process.

"They have a more logical strategy than the government and have put a lot of effort into forming fair and workable policies in this area," says the head of public affairs at a leading food manufacturer. "And everyone has been pleased to be given the opportunity to be part of the consultation process."

The industry has welcomed, in particular, the emphasis on shared responsibility. In the WGRB paper the Tories declare the need to "replace the current culture of blame".

"Companies are not, of course, solely responsible for the causation of social ills, nor can their improved behaviour represent the entirety of an approach to solving them," says the WGRB paper. "Responsible business practices will only go so far in addressing the problem [of obesity]. Parents need to take more responsibility for their children's diets and exercise regimes; government needs to take responsibility for the quality of school meals and physical activity; and individuals need to take responsibility for their diet, activity and general health."

The lack of sporting facilities in schools has been identified by the Tories as a key obesity issue.

"[There is a] clear correlation [between] the worrying rise in obesity levels and the cut in funding for sport from lottery funds from 25% in 1998 to 16% in 2006," says O'Brien. "Sport not only enhances social wellbeing but is also a necessary part of a child's routine. Lottery funds are not part of, and were never intended to be part of, the government's personal piggy-bank. It is crucial they are returned to the good causes that the lottery funds were originally designed for."

While the Tories have stopped short of answering the call for an 'obesity tsar' to galvanise a public health drive - a solution first raised by MPs on the Commons public accounts committee earlier this year - they have made it a priority to have a single government department leading the fight against childhood obesity.

At present, it comes under the jurisdiction of no fewer than three separate government departments: health; culture, media and sport; and education. This divided responsibility has been blamed by many for producing confusing solutions, as illustrated by a convoluted flow diagram first published in The Times.

Shadow health secretary Andrew Lansley says sharing the responsibility between three departments for such a complex issue shows "a lack of joined-up thinking on the many factors needed to tackle obesity."

Under Cameron's blueprint, the secretary of state for health would be tasked with addressing the issue. Indeed, all enquiries from The Grocer to other shadow ministers, in education, and in culture, media and sport, were instantly and firmly redirected to the Conservatives' health, work and pensions office.

"The issue does cut across Whitehall departmental lines and I will work closely with my colleagues in both shadow education and culture, media and sport, but the health agenda is the prime mover within the argument, by necessity," adds O'Brien.

The plan to streamline responsibilities for tackling the nation's diet into just one department has been welcomed by the industry, in particular the role of Conservative shadow health minister Andrew Murrison, a doctor with qualifications in medicine and public health.

"At least we will have someone in charge who knows what they are talking about," says the CEO of a dairy manufacturing company.

Another potentially heartening sign is a Tory proposal to lighten the regulatory burden for "responsible" businesses.

According to the WGRB, obesity has been pinpointed as a "pressing current issue" with which to road-test so-called 'responsibility deals'. The onus of the strategy would be rewarding good behaviour rather than punishing bad behaviour - the approach being taken by Ofcom in its ban on advertising HFSS foods to children.

"Regulation all too often makes managers focus on box-ticking rather than on developing imaginative solutions to the challenges they face," says the WGRB plan. "Companies would have the opportunity to argue their case for why certain expectations are unrealistic and also to put pressure on other parties to play their respective roles."

The Tory Party also appears to be distancing itself from earlier proposals to give food and drink manufacturers strict quotas for producing fatty and sugary foods.

Manufacturers wanting to produce more high fat content foods would be required to buy credits from companies who produce less, according to the WGRB paper revealed in January - proposals that have been described by the FDF as "unworkable" and "unwarranted".

But it is believed they won't make it off the drawing board. While the Tories say they want to table as many ideas to tackle obesity as possible, the industry has been assured that following consultation, the party's final proposals are likely to be more sympathetic to industry.

The Tories have promised to continue public consultation on the issue of obesity, and the hope is that the July summit will throw up further solutions. But the tenor of the party's approach has been set. And with an immediate review of the Nutrient Profiling Model at its heart, and a joined-up view of this complex crisis, it looks like a calorie-burning step in the right direction. n

Topics