Day 054 - 24 Nov 94 - Page 54

     
     1        advertising'. The Committee: Concluded much advertising of
     2        course is irrelevant to children and, as such, is an
     3        intrusion on children's enjoyment of a programme.  But we
     4        were much more worried by advertising which was aimed at
     5        persuading children or their parents to spend money. Such
     6        advertising can encourage a degree of covetousness at a
     7        stage when children are unable to exercise sufficient
     8        discretion in assessing the merits of such an attitude to
     9        life."
    10
    11        I mention this because this refers back to a situation in
    12        the Scandinavian countries, which is that in Scandinavia
    13        culturally this is a situation which they have felt to be
    14        appropriate.
    15
    16   MS. STEEL:   Do you feel it would be a useful way to go to
    17        protect children?
    18        A.  I think that there are questions, serious questions,
    19        which are raised by the advertising to children of products
    20        which they themselves cannot be reasonably expected to buy.
    21
    22   Q.   What about in relation to sugary and fatty products?
    23        A.  My concern on this subject is primarily from a
    24        nutritional point of view.  That is where my interest lies
    25        and my work has been.  The view of the National Food
    26        Alliance on this is that they would like to see a much
    27        better balance of advertising messages on that children are
    28        exposed to in line with the recommendations for healthier
    29        eating.  They have looked at ways that could be achieved.
    30        There are two ways: either the level of advertising for
    31        foods which can be deemed, which are currently
    32        under-represented and could be deemed to be the kinds of
    33        foods that we are being encouraged to eat more of, could be
    34        increased to reach that balance; or the alternative would
    35        be to look at ways in which the level of advertising for
    36        those foods which should make up a smaller part of the diet
    37        should be advertisements could be decreased.
    38
    39        This is an area in which the National Food Alliance has
    40        sought to initiate discussions with other organisations and
         interests.
    42
    43   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  How would that work in practice?  I am not
    44        inviting you to be very long about it, but give me an idea
    45        of what kind of restriction you would have on, for
    46        instance, advertising foods which were thought to be
    47        comparatively high in fat or saturated fat or sugar
    48        content, would you restrict the number of times an ad could
    49        be shown?
    50        A.  From discussions we have had, because the idea of some 
    51        kind of quota system was raised, we have been informed this 
    52        would be unworkable.  So practically that seems to be a 
    53        solution which would not be acceptable.  The alternatives
    54        are to look at ways of funding; advertisement that is
    55        currently under-represented, i.e. through some kind of levy
    56        or through some government support.  Alternatively the
    57        option which the NFA has proposed is to restrict the level
    58        of fatty and sugary foods.  It has taken as the basis of
    59        "what would constitute a fatty and sugary food" as the
    60        national food guide which was published this year.  In