Day 047 - 07 Nov 94 - Page 31

     
     1
     2        "Public health policy places increasing emphasis on good
     3        dietary behaviour as a means of preventing illness and
     4        promoting health and attaches particular importance to the
     5        diets of children, since eating habits established in
     6        childhood may persist throughout life."
     7
     8        Would you agree with all that?
     9        A.  Yes.
    10
    11   Q.   Would you say that is a view which is now so widely
    12        accepted as to be unquestionable, virtually?
    13        A.  I do not think unquestionable, but it is certainly
    14        widely accepted.
    15
    16   Q.   Further down that page, it says:
    17
    18        "It is important that such competitive product advertising
    19        should not undermine progress towards national dietary
    20        improvement by misleading or confusing consumers or by
         setting bad examples particularly to children."
    22
    23        So is there a concern, reflected in this, that advertising
    24        may have been or, in fact, is setting some bad examples,
    25        particularly to children?
    26        A.  No, I do not think there is.  I would like to read
    27        those sentences differently from the way you read them.
    28        The sentence in the middle of that paragraph says:
    29        "Competitive product advertising cannot reasonably be
    30        expected to perform the same role as education and public
    31        information."  Then it goes on to say: "It is important
    32        that such advertising should not undermine progress" -- the
    33        emphasis there should on the word "undermine".  In other
    34        words, if an advertisement, in fact, recommended practices
    35        which were contrary to the broad principles set out in the
    36        Health of the Nation, then that would be a problem.  So it
    37        is saying that an advertisement must not undermine.  It is
    38        not saying that advertising does undermine.  It is saying
    39        that that must not happen.
    40
    Q.   So it could happen that way then, that the effect----
    42        A.  Not with these rules.  They have added a rule or a form
    43        of word which recognises the existence of public policy
    44        objectives and says now, for the first time, no
    45        advertisement should undermine those objectives.
    46
    47   Q.   One of the ways for undermining those objectives could be
    48        "by setting bad examples, particularly to children"?
    49        A.  That would be possible.
    50 
    51   Q.   So it is not just a question of an advert attacking healthy 
    52        eating; it is also a question of an advert setting a bad 
    53        example of unhealthy eating; is that correct?
    54        A.  That would be a possibility, yes.
    55
    56   Q.   If we compare this, I think, to the May 1993 section 11, we
    57        can see that point (a) is a new point (a); is that correct?
    58        It is talking about "excessive consumption of any food
    59        should not be encouraged".  So that is a development, is it
    60        not?