Last summer, the government announced that regulations restricting the advertising and promotion of HFSS (High in Fat, Salt or Sugar) foods would come into force from January 2023.
The new rules, which were primarily concerned with pre-watershed (9pm) TV advertising and paid-for online ads, will now not be implemented until at least January 2024. Further rules governing ‘multi-buy’ deals – such as buy-one-get-one-free or BOGOF – which were due to come into effect in October this year have also been pushed back by 12 months.
The government’s reasoning behind the delay has been vague, although it has indicated that its decision was linked to the crippling cost-of-living crisis currently gripping the nation. It also highlighted its desire to give the advertising industry more time to prepare for the upcoming changes.
Is the HFSS delay welcome news for marketers?
On the one hand, the news has been heartily welcomed by advertising industry bodies, including the Advertising Association (AA) and Incorporated Society of British Advertisers (ISBA), who had long been calling for a delay.
Andy Mahood, commercial director at retail marketing specialists Colateral, said that the delay was “necessary to give retailers and their manufacturers a chance to create alternate ways of giving customers the added value they now expect” and that a “significant number will be welcoming the delay decision.”
From a technical perspective however, the delay may prove more of a hindrance than a help. Dominic Watkins, partner and global lead consumer sector at law firm DWF tells Marketing Beat that although the measures will be broadly welcomed by the industry, “Businesses had started laying the groundwork for implementation of the new regulations and delay for delay’s sake is not necessarily a good thing.”
Moreover, many smaller, HFSS-compliant brands have reacted with dismay at the government’s decision, accusing it of pandering to the heavyweights of the food and drink industry.
Founder of non-HFSS brand Fitbakes, Ella Rauen-Prestes has expressed frustration at the delay, saying “Selling healthier products means more expensive ingredients, so the big brands don’t want to give away their margin.
“Giving them more time is not for them to adapt, it’s so they can get larger margins for a bit longer. This was a result of the pressure of the food industry giants.”
These sentiments were echoed by Rushina Shah, the founder of Insane Grain, another HFSS-compliant brand. Shah commented: “Unlike large corporates, healthy challenger brands are much more agile and mission-led brands have always had the consumers’ health as a top priority.
“It was, therefore, easier for challenger brands to adapt as we only had to make small tweaks to fit with the legislation.
“Larger corporations needed longer and the delay has been pushed by them rather than smaller, more agile and mission-led brands.”
Do the HFSS regulations have a future?
The government has now set in motion a consultation with industry leaders. Taking place over the coming weeks, hopes are that it will better codify and clarify the nascent regulations.
With an election just over the horizon in mid-to-late 2024, one wonders whether the pressures exerted by the major players in the FMCG industry on the pro-business Conservative government might lead to the ad ban being scrapped altogether.
Shah believes that with this latest snag, anything is possible, saying: “The legislation continues to be delayed with no real rationale as to why.”
She notes however, that major grocers, such as Tesco and Sainsbury’s, will be pushing forward with HFSS-compliant store reconfigurations regardless. “Even if the proposals are officially scrapped, it is great to see that some retailers are continuing to go ahead with their HFSS compliant plans regardless.”
Watkins also believes that while a potential scrapping of the regulations is a possibility; “it is unlikely at this stage given both the high-profile publicity and apparent support these measures have.”
He instead believes that the government should focus on giving the industry clear, precise and workable guidelines to follow.
Many industry professionals also feel that big businesses, notably the major grocers, have invested too much time and money for the government to consider scrapping the rules.
Rauen-Prestes adds: “To follow the original restrictions, supermarkets had to plan massive layout changes in their stores, big products delisting and new listings, budget approval, marketing campaigns. So even if the whole regulation was to be scrapped, inside the stores the change will happen.”
Also casting his vote against scrapping the regulations is Mahood, who says: “Advertising has a direct effect on its target audience, to implement this ban pre-watershed is not solving the problem of obesity and is more likely a move to shift the blame.”
“We have to weigh up whether it’s more important to protect the profits of large corporations, or to protect the health and lives of our citizens.”
Would the HFSS measures really impact obesity?
With the UK currently in the grips of a childhood obesity epidemic, tighter controls on the promotion of HFSS foods has been regarded as increasingly necessary by successive governments. Alarmingly, statistics gathered over the last two years indicate that as many one in four Year 6 students (10 and 11 years old) are obese.
The need for greater regulation becomes apparent when the extent to which large food and drink businesses rely on sales of HFSS foods is laid bare. According to a recent report by the Access to Nutrition Initiative, multinationals such as Mondelez and Nestlé derive at least 80% of their sales from foods with a low nutritional value.
However the key question remains; will a blanket ad ban actually help to solve the obesity crisis?
Rauen-Prestes points out it is a huge burden on the Downing Street purse: “The NHS spends over £6billion per year in obesity related illnesses. That is more than the budget for police, fire departments and judiciary systems combined!”
“Our population is ill, our children are ill, and we have to take serious measures about it. Of course banning online ads alone will not solve the issue, but it will be a great help.”
Taking a different stance is Watkins, who argues that the ban would be largely ineffectual, believing instead a more root-and-branch review is needed.
“It is a much more deep-rooted and multifaceted problem,” he says.
“While perhaps the advertising and placement of food is part of the answer, getting people moving and reducing sedentary behaviour will have a much more direct and greater impact. When that is coupled with better food education in our schools it has the prospect to deliver benefits for life.”
Mahood concurs, adding: “To implement this ban pre-watershed is not solving the problem of obesity and is more likely a move to shift the blame to parents and carers.”
The government has once again kicked the HFSS can firmly down the road, but with the UK’s damning levels of childhood obesity showing no signs of abating, the resulting calls for action are not set to go away any time soon.
Click here to sign up to Marketing Beat’s free daily email newsletter
