Draft Calorie Labelling (Out of Home Sector) (England) Regulations 2021

Alex Norris Excerpts

Thursday 17th June 2021 General Committees

[Alex Norris (Nottingham North) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Murray, as we debate these very important draft regulations. The importance of tackling obesity and how it really ought to be a national priority was well rehearsed in a recent debate on the Government’s obesity strategy. Two thirds of us adults are overweight. The figure that the Minister just used—three in five children leaving primary school overweight—should be a sobering warning about the future of health in this country, and a call to action.

We know that excess weight has a profound impact on life outcomes; it creates a much-elevated risk of heart disease, diabetes and cancer, and potentially limits opportunities at work and at home. It is an unequally distributed problem, with hospital admissions due to obesity nearly three times greater in the poorest communities than in the best-off. Again, all that is a significant call to action. It is also a worsening problem, and one to which our response has weakened over the past decade.

The most effective interventions are community-based—ones that intervene early and promote a life of healthy cooking and eating. The evidence for such projects is really strong, but the cuts to public health over the past decade have put local authorities in an impossible position of trying to deliver those services. I remember having responsibility for the public health grant in Nottingham for the three years before coming to this place. Once demand-driven services such as sexual health services and services to tackle drugs and alcohol addiction have been funded, there really is not very much left for anything else. Full proposals to tackle obesity really ought to include the reinstatement of the monies lost.

The instrument forms part of the Government’s obesity strategy, which we broadly support. We want to see strong national leadership and action. I have raised concerns that the Government’s approach has been too consultation-heavy, so I am glad to see something concrete today and hope that this statutory instruments is the first of a series.

As we have heard, the purpose is to require large businesses—those with 250 or more employees—to display the calorie information of food and drink items that they sell to eat and drink. That information must be available at the point of choice for the customer, such as on menus, menu boards, online menus and food labels. In paragraph 63 of their impact assessment, the Government estimate that that happens already in about 59% of such venues, so this is a top-up measure. The aim is to ensure that there is clear and consistent information at the point of choice, so that we can all make healthier choices for ourselves and our families.

I think that the real value from the measure in the medium and long terms will be derived from transparency about the calorie content of meals, and the impact that will have in the reformulation of products and portion sizes. It is embarrassing for a big firm that has corporate social responsibility statements, and presumably seeks to have good public relations, to have a 3,000 calorie meal on its menu. I think that the measure will have a significant downward impact on that too.

To press the Minister on a number of concerns, in addition to displaying the calorie information of each item businesses are required to display the statement that

“adults need around 2000 kcal a day”

where it can be seen by customers when making their food choices. According to the NHS website, the recommended daily calorie intake is 2,000 calories a day for women and 2,500 calories for men. Although I appreciate the value of putting the calories for each item into a broader context, individuals’ total daily energy expenditures vary significantly and are based on a huge number of factors, some of which we have control over but some of which we do not. Of course, although this information is targeted at those consuming more energy than they burn, it will be visible to all. There is no mention of that in the impact assessment, so I hope the Minister can explain the divergence from NHS guidance in this case, and what consideration has been given to the impact of the recommendation, especially on those whose total daily energy expenditure is significantly less than 2,000 calories.

More broadly, calories are a very crude measure of what we put into our bodies. It is crucial that we understand better how much sugar and salt we consume. I know that there is an implied understanding that when we eat out, we generally eat less healthily than we do at home, but the playing field is very uneven between the retail sector and the out of home sector. Today’s measure will start to close the gap a little, but I am keen to understand what consideration the Minister gave to a model much closer to what we see on packets in supermarkets. That does not seem to have been considered in the options appraised in the impact assessment.

I do not intend to divide the Committee, because this is a yes or no proposition and we support the principle. More information is a good thing; more action on obesity is a good thing. I expect that we will be back in Committee in due course to extend this more widely, perhaps to medium-sized businesses, and I hope to hear a commitment today that before doing so the Government will seek to grow the evidence base. The evidence available is supportive, but far from perfect. The 2018 Cochrane review combined studies to show a potential reduction of about 8% to 12% per meal. That is a significant prize, but it is very much developing evidence. Will the Minister talk a little more about whether expansion is being considered and on what sort of timeline, and give an assurance that the research base will be grown before action is taken?

As we heard, the Government’s impact assessment gives a best estimate of net benefits amounting to over £5.5 billion over the next 25 years. The impact assessment makes it clear that most of the benefits come from a change in personal decision making, but my understanding is that the evidence base on reformulation is stronger. It is particularly important that an evidence base around personal choices is acquired, so that we can have fuller conversations based on all the evidence.

The Minister touched on those living with eating disorders. We all want to have a population approach to making society healthier, but none of us wants unintended consequences to make life much worse for an, admittedly smaller, group of people on whose lives the issue has a profound impact. It is striking that just four of the 230 paragraphs in the impact assessment relate to this issue. I have heard multiple Ministers say that they have listened to concerns about the impact that the measure will have, and the movement on schools is welcome, but I still do not think that enough has been done to mitigate the impact.

The Minister mentioned the option for a venue to offer a calorie-less menu option on demand. Why is that not being mandated? It would be relatively easy to do, and would mean that those for whom calorie counting is terribly triggering would have an alternative, albeit an imperfect one. There is still time between the decision that we make today and the implementation next April for the Government to continue to engage with those who have legitimate concerns about the draft regulations, to seek to address some of those points. Will the Minister make that commitment?

Similarly, we know that covid has turbocharged the growth of eating disorders in the UK, and the provision of services in the country is not good enough. We are failing people, especially children and adolescents. We must do much better there, so I hope again to hear a commitment that there is a plan for a national strategy and proper investment to catch up and to deal with the impacts of covid and the growth in such disorders that we are seeing more generally.

We want people to have the fullest information about what they put into their body. We wants to see bold action to tackle obesity in our population. What is on offer today is a step forward. On that basis, we will not oppose it, but we want to see a more thoughtful method of introduction and a more creative way of ensuring that it has the maximum positive impact. I hope that the Minister can address those points.