Responsibility Deal: the right path?

In excess of  270 food and drink manufacturers have signed up to the government's Responsibility Deal, which was launched in March with the aim of improving public health and wellbeing.  Currently, it is estimated that diet-related illnesses combined with the alcohol abuse and inactivity cost the NHS £9billion a year.

The initiative focuses particularly on trying to cut down on chronic obesity and alcohol-related illnesses - through calorie labelling on packaging, reduced alcohol content drinks, and less prominent displays and advertising of products that are bad for you.

Widespread criticism

Although many big-name businesses including Coca-Cola, Tesco, Asda and Pizza Hut have signed up to some of the pledges, there has also been widespread criticism.

Chief executive of Diabetes UK, Barbara Young said: "Diabetes UK has decided that it should not yet sign up to the Responsibility Deal until it has been strengthened further." She explained: "We recognise the importance of action by business.  However, we are disappionted that the Deal is not ambitious in its vision, as many of the pledges replicated existing standards."

The strategy has attracted criticism from many other prominent health organisations, which say that the pledges do not go far enough.  The British Hearth Foundation, Alcohol Concern and the British Liver Trust have accused the government of not being tough enough on the drinks industry.  The Responsibitilty Deal is in essence a series of pledges looking at five main areas:

• Food
• Physical activity
• Alcohol
• Health at work
• Behavioural change.

However, there is cynacism that deals involving food and drink companies would always be at odds with a strategy to improve the health of consumers.

Against their own interests

Professor Anna Gilmore, an expert in public health at Bath University and the UK Centre for Tobacco Control Studies states: "These large corporations, whether they sell tobacco, food or alcohol, are legally obliged to maximise shareholder returns.  They therefore have to oppose any policies that could reduce sales and profitability - in other words, the most effective policies."  Professor Gilmore cited a common criticism of the Responsibility Deal - its voluntary aspect: "There's no evidence that voluntary approaches work."  Using smoking as example, she said: "The internal records of the tobacco companies became available when they were sued.  They show that companies pushed voluntary approaches specifically in order to avoid binding legislation."

Full article available in Community Pracitioner, page 16 and 17
By Chloe Harries, Assistant Editor