Uphill struggle in the battle against obesity

Date: 01/09/05

The phenomenon of obesity presents a challenge for the European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection, Markos Kyprianou. He is convinced of the importance of tackling the problem. But he is confronted with a legislature which is not keen to legislate.

The Council of Ministers, representing the national governments, is less enthusiastic than the commissioner to expand the EU's remit on health matters, even if those national governments are increasingly concerned about obesity.

The European Parliament, subject to intense lobbying from industry groups as well as consumer campaigners, is divided on the merits of a legislative remedy.

The EU's remit to legislate on health matters has been growing steadily ever since a breakthrough in the 1997 Amsterdam Treaty. But health legislation, when it is proposed, is still most often based on the need to ensure a single market. Consumer groups believe that this approach is justified in the case of regulating the food industry. Unless there is a common EU approach, so the argument goes, variations in national law, for instance on food labelling, will prevent the free movement of goods across the EU.

But Kyprianou's difficulties are compounded by the current context of politicians demanding more consumer protection but less red tape from the EU.

In a vote before the summer break, MEPs voted narrowly to alter legislation proposed by the Commission which would limit the use of health claims; 'eat this and you'll get thinner', 'drink that and you're dieting' and rules on adding vitamins to food. MEPs threw out a requirement for nutrition profiling (see page 22).

The proposal now goes for a second reading, with the Commission hoping that the Council of Ministers will stick to its preferred text that would include nutritional profiling.

Few disagree that obesity is a problem. Physicians describe it as a pandemic, ranking a close second, behind smoking, as the leading threat to personal health in Europe, with all the knock-on effects for the health services and the economy that entails.

But the food and drinks industry, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and healthcare professionals differ on what to do about it.

There is limited agreement on what causes obesity and how to deal with those causes that they do agree on. In response, the Commission appears to be taking a new tack.

In March this year the Commission's directorate-general for health and consumer protection convened a discussion forum, the Platform on Diet, Physical Activity and Health.

It is about "multi-stakeholder actions", trying to get all sides to agree to actions that will promote a healthy lifestyle and inform consumer behaviour.

If the growth in obesity has several causes, then, according to the Commission, obesity must be tackled in various ways.

The areas already earmarked for action are the composition of foods, labelling, marketing and advertising, education, promoting physical exercise.

Industry and NGOs still disagree on whether the platform should lead to more legislation or simply self-regulation but the Commission has put the questions of how and whether to legislate on hold to see what the platform throws up.

According to Francesco Montanari, food policy officer with Euro Coop, a network of consumer co-operatives, the initiative has few precedents. "It is a kind of self-regulation," he says, "I don't think there is anything similar going on in other areas of the EU."

Arguments over the consumer's freedom to choose and right to protection have already been rehearsed over drinks vending machines.

Last week in the US, the American Beverage Association (ABA) announced a code of conduct on limiting the availability of soft drinks in schools.

The Council of Ministers, representing the national governments, is less enthusiastic than the commissioner to expand the EU's remit on health matters, even if those national governments are increasingly concerned about obesity.

The European Parliament, subject to intense lobbying from industry groups as well as consumer campaigners, is divided on the merits of a legislative remedy.

The EU's remit to legislate on health matters has been growing steadily ever since a breakthrough in the 1997 Amsterdam Treaty. But health legislation, when it is proposed, is still most often based on the need to ensure a single market. Consumer groups believe that this approach is justified in the case of regulating the food industry. Unless there is a common EU approach, so the argument goes, variations in national law, for instance on food labelling, will prevent the free movement of goods across the EU.

But Kyprianou's difficulties are compounded by the current context of politicians demanding more consumer protection but less red tape from the EU.

In a vote before the summer break, MEPs voted narrowly to alter legislation proposed by the Commission which would limit the use of health claims; 'eat this and you'll get thinner', 'drink that and you're dieting' and rules on adding vitamins to food. MEPs threw out a requirement for nutrition profiling (see page 22).

The proposal now goes for a second reading, with the Commission hoping that the Council of Ministers will stick to its preferred text that would include nutritional profiling.

Few disagree that obesity is a problem. Physicians describe it as a pandemic, ranking a close second, behind smoking, as the leading threat to personal health in Europe, with all the knock-on effects for the health services and the economy that entails.

But the food and drinks industry, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and healthcare professionals differ on what to do about it.

There is limited agreement on what causes obesity and how to deal with those causes that they do agree on. In response, the Commission appears to be taking a new tack.

In March this year the Commission's directorate-general for health and consumer protection convened a discussion forum, the Platform on Diet, Physical Activity and Health.

It is about "multi-stakeholder actions", trying to get all sides to agree to actions that will promote a healthy lifestyle and inform consumer behaviour.

If the growth in obesity has several causes, then, according to the Commission, obesity must be tackled in various ways.

The areas already earmarked for action are the composition of foods, labelling, marketing and advertising, education, promoting physical exercise.

Industry and NGOs still disagree on whether the platform should lead to more legislation or simply self-regulation but the Commission has put the questions of how and whether to legislate on hold to see what the platform throws up.

According to Francesco Montanari, food policy officer with Euro Coop, a network of consumer co-operatives, the initiative has few precedents. "It is a kind of self-regulation," he says, "I don't think there is anything similar going on in other areas of the EU."

Arguments over the consumer's freedom to choose and right to protection have already been rehearsed over drinks vending machines.

Last week in the US, the American Beverage Association (ABA) announced a code of conduct on limiting the availability of soft drinks in schools.

The measure has specifically been linked to combating childhood obesity, with the ABA recommending that school districts should ensure that vending machines in elementary schools (for the youngest children) should stock only bottled water and fruit juice. But the ABA's announcement is only catching up with reality: already in the US, 14 states have introduced legislation on vending in schools and several of the drinks companies have drafted their own guidelines.

In Europe, the drinks company Coca Cola has begun repositioning its branding, emphasising that its range of products is not just about sugar-rich, fizzy drinks.

Coca Cola's competitors such as Pepsi, Nestlé, Mars and Unilever have also been quick to participate in the Platform.

Undoubtedly what gives bite to the platform's discussions is that a legislative sword of Damocles hangs over the process.

The Commission has warned participants, particularly the industry representatives who are wary of new legislative burdens, that legally binding measures will be introduced if significant progress is not made towards promoting healthy eating.

Food advertising legislation is squarely in the Commission's firing line if the project falls flat.

But in a political climate calling for less and better regulation, Kyprianou faces a difficult balancing act.

In March this year the president of the Commission José Manuel Barroso set out his "package for 'Better Regulation' aimed at reducing red tape and stimulating economic growth". Commissioner for Enterprise and Industry Günter Verheugen has pledged that cutting red tape will be his "hobby-horse" over his tenure in office.

Barroso has described the use of co-regulation and self-regulation as the priority of the Commission's new approach.

But how successful can Commission be in creating consensus on healthy eating?

Industry is undoubtedly pleased that the EU appears less likely to fall back on its legislative power.

"We have seen in different areas that there is a great acceptance of the need for better regulation," says Oliver Gray, director general of the European Advertising Standards Alliance.

He says the UK presidency and the Commission are now committed to looking at the way the EU legislates.

For his organisation, which lobbies for the advertising industry to regulate itself, this is something of a victory. "We have been waiting quite a long time to get this on the agenda," he says.

But in order to convince NGOs that they will not have to sign up to a charter of self-regulation, authored by industry, monitoring working groups have been set up and in October the Commission will meet with advertising and industry representatives and NGOs to look at how successful current self-regulation in the food advertising sector has been.

Daniela Israelachwili, secretary-general of the Confederation of the Food and Drink Industries of the EU, says she is happy with the Commissions approach to the platform.

"As for the substance, let's see. A lot of the substance is up to us. Somewhere the Commission will need to decide, shall we give a try to these voluntary efforts?

But the industry is not, she stresses, going along with the platform just to avoid legislation. "We are taking this seriously," she says.

Fat Facts

• More than one billion adults world-wide are overweight
• 300 million people are clinically obese
• The highest instance of obesity is in urban Samoa where over 75% of people are obese.
• China has the lowest levels of obesity (5%) although this rises to 20% in urban areas.

Source: World Health Organisation

Major analysis feature looking at the European Union's anti-obesity policy.

• Primary Source