Keir Starmer’s plans for a pre-watershed ban on junk food advertising branded ‘nanny state over-reach’ as PM warned controversial policy would cost TV advertising industry hundreds of millions _ Hieuuk
Keir Starmer ushered in a new era of the nanny state yesterday by unveiling plans for a pre-watershed ban on junk food advertising.
In a bid to crack down on childhood obesity, the Prime Minister announced he will block junk food ads on television before 9pm – and put a total stop to paid-for online advertising.
But critics said it would do little to tackle Britain’s bulging waistlines, while hurting businesses and consumer choice. Sir Keir has already faced a backlash over draconian plans to ban smoking in pub gardens and sports grounds.
He also wants to introduce supervised toothbrushing for young children and ban energy drinks for under-16s.
But yesterday the Prime Minister opened the door to more nanny statism – hinting that he was willing to consider sugar taxes or social media restrictions.
Critics say Sir Keir Starmer’s plans to ban junk food adverts before the 9pm watershed will hurt business and consumer choice
‘I know some prevention measures will be controversial but I’m prepared to be bold, even in the face of loud opposition,’ Sir Keir said.
His comments came after a damning review by former health minister Lord Darzi warned that the health of the nation has deteriorated, impacting the NHS’s performance. More than 2.5 million children and young people in England are affected by excess weight or obesity, according to figures cited in the report.
Read More
Ban on junk food advertising online and on TV before 9pm is confirmed as ministers bid to tackle ‘childhood obesity crisis’… but it won’t come into force until October next year
Yesterday the Government announced that it would bring in the advertising restrictions in October 2025 – a pledge previously set out by the Tories before it was repeatedly delayed amid a backlash, partly around the definition of junk food.
Previous attempts at making adverts healthier have seen Transport for London ban a promotion featuring strawberries and cream during Wimbledon. Benjamin Elks, of the TaxPayers’ Alliance branded the announcement as ‘even more nanny state over-reach’.
‘A clampdown on daytime advertising for junk food will do little to tackle obesity and simply hurt businesses and consumer choice. The Government should bin this pointless ban,’ he said.
Tory grandee Sir Iain Duncan Smith said: ‘It seems like Labour aren’t going to stop at taxing and taxing us, they now want to lecture us and get rid of choice. Why not persuade rather than pummel and persecute?’
Former Tory Cabinet minister Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg added: ‘Mary Poppins thought that a spoonful of sugar helped the medicine go down but Nanny Starmer wants to ban all fun and indulgence.’
Health minister Andrew Gwynne said the new measures were needed to tackle the childhood obesity crisis: ‘These restrictions will help protect children from being exposed to advertising of less healthy food and drinks, which evidence shows influences their dietary preferences from a young age.’
Products deemed by the Government as ‘less healthy’ will be covered by any ban
Tory grandee Sir Iain Duncan Smith said that the Government should be trying to persuade people rather than to ‘pummel and prosecute’
It is understood that products deemed by the Government to be ‘less healthy’ will be included in any ban. They will likely rely on the nutrient profile model, developed by the Food Standards Agency, to analyse the nutritional composition of food and drink products.
Brand expert Ron Cregan said the advertising ban would have ‘a big commercial impact’. He told the Mail: ‘Three years ago it was reckoned the TV advertising industry would lose £200 million a year from a junk food ban. It will be way, way in excess of that now.
‘This does feel like using a lump hammer to crush a nut. I much prefer education to regulation. Brands will find a way to continue to do what they do. And it’s going to be very difficult to police TikTok and influencers.’
Ministers have looked at introducing taxes on foods high in sugar and salt, but Health Secretary Wes Streeting yesterday insisted there were no such plans.
