Skip to main content
menu

Action on Sugar

Are we really all in this together?

Holly Gabriel RNutr, Nutrition Manager, Action on Sugar

February 2021

Cast your mind back to June 2018, the heady pre-pandemic days, where those working in public health awaited the release of a much-anticipated publication, and suspense for a sequel had not been this high since Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. 

Chapter 2 of the Childhood Obesity Plan was finally published by the Government, under the then Health Minister, Jeremy Hunt. Whilst headlines featured phrases such as ‘supermarkets targeted’, ‘battle against obesity’ and ‘nanny state policies’, our response took a different tone. Despite welcoming the Government’s intention to halve childhood obesity by 2030, we were sceptical as to why it had taken so long given the original plan was published two years previously.

The consultation to restrict price and location promotions of products high in fat, sugar and salt (HFSS) came in January 2019 – following the Government’s gold standard formula of ‘big aim + slow action = little progress’. Bizarrely, the Government’s response to this consultation was released (quietly) nearly two years later, on 28th December 2020, when we were all trying to enjoy a bit of leftover turkey and repeats of Gavin and Stacey.

Promotion of HFSS products will be restricted by location and volume price as follows:

  • Location restrictions to apply to store entrances, aisle ends and checkouts and their online equivalents (that is, entry pages, landing pages for other food categories, and shopping basket or payment pages).
  • Volume price restrictions to prohibit retailers from offering promotions such as "buy-one-get-one-free" or "3 for 2" offers on HFSS products.

We welcomed the announcement, as place and price promotions have such a huge role in influencing unhealthy purchasing behaviours. However, our second thought was, sweets on checkouts? Didn’t we tackle that years ago? Supermarkets have been making pledges voluntarily predating 2013.[i]

A technical consultation, which closed on 22nd February 2021, sought views from businesses and enforcement bodies about how best to enforce the proposed restrictions. This consultation did not seek views on scope as seemingly they are happy with that element – although many food industry spokespeople were up in arms. But is this outrage justified? Let’s take a closer look.

Food and Drink Categories

The Government decided that the restrictions should apply to product categories that are significant contributors to children’s sugar and calorie intakes and are heavily promoted, and therefore are the categories of most concern for childhood obesity. But these definitions need to go further in order to capture all food and drink that has no place being heavily promoted, and to avoid unintended consequences, including salty foods which also impact our health.  The success of the salt reduction programme can be attributed to the comprehensive nature of the food categories covered – all the companies really were ‘all in it together’. Whilst it’s clear to us that these categories aren’t broad enough, we have already seen evidence of breakfast cereal companies lobbying DEFRA to secure exemptions from the proposals. More to follow I’m certain.

Implementation time

These regulations will not come into force until April 2022– four years since the Government committed to this. Manufacturers have (and have always had) an opportunity to improve the nutritional quality of the food and drink they sell and, for many, these policies are ‘business as usual’. But this is a public health emergency and everyone should be playing their part: this should be their priority. We have one of the highest obesity rates and the highest death toll from Covid-19 in Europe, and more needs to be done to stop the flood of unhealthy commodities into our food system.

Businesses in scope

The Government has decided that the restrictions will apply to medium and large businesses - defined as having 50 or more employees - including franchises and symbol groups (a form of franchise of convenience shop). Without giving it too much thought you can see this excludes a vast array of businesses, including convenience stores, which are frequented by young people on their way to and from school and are sometimes the only stores available to big parts of our society. It has also been reported that this may discourage small stores from joining a symbol group to avoid restrictions[ii]. The Association of Convenience stores have said that being part of a symbol group can improve the food offer of smaller stores (e.g. more availability of fresh food). If stores are put off from joining due to these restrictions it may have a devastating impact, limiting access to healthy food by those who need it the most. I know we are sick of hearing the term, but we must have an all too vital ‘level playing field’.

Types of Price Promotions

Government defines the promotions covered by this policy as follows:

In scope

Out of scope

Volume promotions (‘multibuy’ promotions and ‘extra free’ promotions) of pre-packaged HFSS products

All other types of price promotions, for example, temporary price cuts

Free refills of sugar-sweetened beverages in the out-of-home sector

Price promotions for meals in the out of home sector, for example, ‘2 courses for £12’, ‘kids eat free’


To expand on the ‘out of scope’, this policy excludes all types of meal deals despite Action on Sugar research in 2017 finding that certain food and drink combinations contain a staggering 30 teaspoons of sugar, which is more than four times an adult’s DAILY maximum intake of ‘free’ sugars (30g / 7 tsp) in just a single lunch.[iii] Bargain price ‘sharing’ or ‘grab’ bags are also excluded, and yet we’ve shown they can contain up to 29 teaspoons of sugar. A Grocer poll revealed at the time that over one in five adults (22%) don’t share, but eat sharing bags alone, in one go. The figure was even higher for 16 to 24 year olds at 36%.[iv]

But the list goes on - loyalty card promotions, temporary price cuts, unlimited ice cream or desserts, free fizzy drinks with meals, all excluded.

We need to ensure that we come out the other side of this pandemic with a fresh outlook, and not simply go back to the old ways of heavily promoted, excessive portions of food that do nothing for our health. It was only six months ago that our Prime Minister was promising big action to support the nation, to live healthier lives and protect the NHS. For a healthy, resilient population we need responsible companies to do the right thing, along with comprehensive future proof policies that identify and address loopholes and provide support to those that need it. We need to ensure equity for everyone, everywhere in the food system, if we truly are ‘All in this Together”.

Read our response to the technical consultation: Restricting Promotions Technical Consultation [PDF 266KB]

[i] https://conversation.which.co.uk/food-drink/sweets-at-checkouts-supermarket-policies/

[ii] https://www.thegrocer.co.uk/health/symbol-groups-to-be-hit-by-governments-hfss-crackdown/652285.article

[iii] http://www.actiononsugar.org/surveys/2017/lunchtime-meal-deals/

[iv] https://www.thegrocer.co.uk/confectionery-report-2014/revealed-one-in-four-binge-on-chocolate-sharing-bags/369836.article

Return to top