Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

JOINT COMMITTEE ON HEALTH AND CHILDREN díospóireacht -
Thursday, 6 Jul 2006

Marketing of Food Products to Children: Presentation.

Today we are discussing the marketing of food to children. I welcome Ms Maureen Mulvihill, the health promotion manager of the Irish Heart Foundation, Ms Janis Morrissey, dietician at the Irish Heart Foundation, Mr. David Kennedy, chairman of the National Heart Alliance, Ms Margot Brennan, public relations officer of the Irish Nutrition and Dietetic Institute, Ms Geraldine Quinn of the Food Safety Promotion Board, and Ms Muireann Cullen of the Food Safety Authority of Ireland to the meeting.

Before asking the visitors to make their presentation I draw their attention to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege but the same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. This committee does not associate itself with any comments made in respect of specific named products in the presentations.

Mr. David Kennedy

I thank the Chairman for the invitation to address the committee. We will make a brief presentation on behalf of the Irish Heart Foundation and the National Heart Alliance and will then be open to questions from the committee. I do not need to introduce the members of our panel, as the Chairman has already done so.

The people present are all professionals in the area of public health, nutrition and dietetics and in that capacity have helped prepare a position paper published by the National Heart Alliance last November, and the presentation which we make today. The theme of the presentation is the marketing of unhealthy foods, specifically those that are high in fat, sugar and salt to children.

The National Heart Alliance is a non-governmental organisation comprised of more than 30 members which consist of statutory bodies, such as the Health Service Executive, and various professional and voluntary organisations. The list of members is in the paper which has been distributed to committee members. That alliance has come together in several areas recently to help formulate and develop national policy on the major determinants of heart health in Ireland, with particular reference in the past to tobacco control and physical exercise for young people, and today to the marketing of unhealthy food to children.

In the position paper which we put forward last November, we expressed concern about aggressive marketing of unhealthy products to young people. This does not include conventional marketing methods. Similar concern is being expressed in several European countries, so we are far from being alone in this. Ms Mulvihill will address this in the presentation. We see no reason for Ireland not to take a lead in this area, as it did in the area of tobacco control with the ban on smoking in public places. The professionals here today and the various bodies they represent perceive this as a major issue in respect of heart health.

Ms Maureen Mulvihill

On behalf of the Irish Heart Foundation I thank the Chairman and members of the committee for the opportunity to make this presentation. I offer apologies on behalf of our chief executive, Michael O'Shea, who is unavoidably absent today. The Irish Heart Foundation is the only national charity working to reduce premature death and disability from heart disease and stroke and it is celebrating 40 years in operation.

For several years we have had a policy of not accepting sponsorship from any food companies. Today, as Mr. Kennedy indicated, we are talking about the marketing of certain types of foods, namely, snacks, fast foods, confectionery, sweetened cereals and soft drinks. These foods are mainly found on the top shelf of the food pyramid and are classified as high in fat, sugar and salt. They are high in energy, contribute a high calorie count to the diet and encourage passive over-consumption, for example, when people stop at the petrol station and buy chocolate bars to snack. This would be on top of the standard daily meals. They often displace other healthier foods.

Marketing of these foods to children takes place on a massive scale and is a serious public health issue. We will outline some of the evidence to support that and show the links to children's health. We will illustrate some of the marketing and give a chilling account of how it affects children. We will also outline some policy actions cited in our position paper.

The committee is familiar with the excellent report published by the national task force on obesity which sets out a very good case for action across the population. We are, however, focusing on one strand, today, although we are conscious that it is not the only strand and we need various approaches and policies to support and address the issue. We have singled out an action to protect children and have stated publicly that we are concerned about the slow implementation of the report.

One in five children aged between five and 12 is either overweight or obese. We are slightly ahead of Europe in this regard and only slightly behind the United States, although we are quickly catching up with figures there. Obese children are developing early signs of type 2 diabetes. At a presentation in Europe recently, it was shown that 0.5% of obese children have type 2 diabetes. That is a lifelong serious problem with which these children must deal. As they become adolescents, more overweight and obese children will develop type 2 diabetes.

They also develop signs of cardiovascular disease. Segments of obese children already show signs of raised blood pressure and cholesterol levels and respiratory problems. Heart disease remains the number one killer in Ireland. Sadly, an obese child is likely to become an obese adult.

The national children's food survey showed that our children's diet is a cause for concern. One fifth of Irish children's energy intake comes from foods such as sweets, snacks and biscuits, and the daily intake of soft drinks containing sugar averages two glasses a day.

The example in the documents distributed to the committee illustrates the high number of calories this amounts to for a four year old. This leaves less opportunity for the four year old to find essential nutrients in other foods, specifically those required for development and growth. On the other side of the equation, it would take two hours of physical activity to burn off 350 calories derived from fizzy drinks and a packet of crisps.

A document published by the World Health Organisation with the food and agriculture organisation of the United Nations stated that aggressive marketing of these foods to young children throughout the 1990s and into 2000 could increase their risk of obesity. The most significant report in the UK in 2003, commissioned by the Food Standards Agency, stated there is sufficient evidence to show that food promotion has an effect on children, especially in their food preference, and their purchase behaviour, including the effects of pester power and consumption. This report was challenged by the food industry and the Food Standards Agency asked another group to examine the evidence. It confirmed these findings and that the report had understated the effects of marketing. The Hastings review examined television advertising and did not consider other marketing activity and indirect effects such as the "pester power" effect on parents. The Hastings review confirmed the recommended diet contrasts strongly with the advertised diet. Approximately three quarters of food advertising to children is for those foods high in fat, sugar and salt.

More recently, the US Congress commissioned the Institute of Medicine through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to examine this issue. Its conclusions were similar to those of the UK. Marketing strongly influences children's foods preferences, their request for products and their consumption. It went further, to state that food and drink advertising on television is associated with the obesity of children and youth. It proposed that if the industry does not change its practices, Congress should enact legislation. Another study tracked the association between television advertising and obesity levels. It highlighted a trend in that association.

A report we were involved in, funded by the EU and representative of 20 heart foundations and other international organisations, was published last year. It examined the scientific review and attempted to get a snapshot of what is happening in each of our countries. The key findings show marketing of these types of food is on a massive scale. Most of the food marketed to children is unhealthy. It is a major spender on television advertising, but there has been a small decline in that regard. There are growing marketing areas in schools, the Internet and SMS. The report concluded that measures and a policy need to be imposed at national and EU level on food advertising.

The Green Party's study showed the majority of advertisements to children are for these foods and that it does not confine itself to television. Packaging, using fantasy, giveaways, linking with themes such as Christmas, television and movie character-licensing, and packaging encouraging children to link up with websites are other marketing ploys. For example, corn is promoted as a healthy product although the salt content of a packet of corn crisps is half the recommended salt intake for a child aged one to three years. Some of the websites link to texting for prizes to elicit further information from children. Product placement for these types of food contrasts with healthy food options which are not available to the children.

An area of concern to us is the increase of marketing these products in schools. In 2004, various food companies sponsored school sports and activities. Two studies by the Irish Heart Foundation will identify what is happening in schools in terms of marketing.

The European report examined deregulation, as did the WHO report. We know these reports are mainly directed at television advertising. Ireland has a code for children's advertising. It is a start but it is not enough because it does not adequately protect children. It does not take into account the cumulative effect of advertising and there is no control over segments broadcast per day. A company can have many advertisements for a particular product broadcast in the one day. Two out of three parents are concerned, echoing consumers across Europe.

Organisations supporting the National Heart Alliance position include us, the IMO, Barnardos, Children's Rights Alliance, the Consumers Association of Ireland and Rollercoaster. We are calling for various actions, many of them outlined in our paper. We need to protect children from all forms of marketing. We invite additional funding to support schools to introduce policies and to provide PE and IT equipment. These are sources of funding that schools look to the food and drink industry to provide. We want stronger controls on advertising to children, not just during children's viewing times but until 9 p.m.

There must be a strong review of the advertising code in 2008, not just examining compliance but if it has made an impact. As stated in the obesity task force report, we ask for all Members and MEPs to advocate a reform of the television without frontiers directive to protect children from advertising of these products. Underpinning all this, Ireland could employ some of the practices of the UK and the US in formalising tracking and monitoring of what food companies are doing.

I thank the witnesses for the presentation. What is remarkable about this issue is that while most ill health is caused by factors outside our control, in this instance it is within our control. Paradoxically, it is within the parents' control, those who want to do the best for their children. We have a serious epidemic of obesity and diabetes. When I was a young mother, all children were skinny. Now, children are phenomenally heavy and are losing out on good health. We have the capacity to put this right because of its nature. I thank the witnesses for pinpointing certain aspects of the solution.

I accept the need to control advertising. Do we need to concentrate on other areas? We have the experience of alcohol advertising. That is only a minor part of the solution. What would work, although it would be unpalatable to politicians, would be to increase the costs and restrict access to alcohol products. The advertising for children is broadcast to them all day. However, are there other measures we should be considering? Although we may control marketing nationally, children will still be exposed to global broadcasting. They are often influenced by television stations which have nothing to do with Ireland. That necessitates a global response. Perhaps the witnesses might comment on cost, access and tax, however.

We must also consider very carefully every school in Ireland and profile whether they have a sports hall, what time they spend on physical education, what is served in their canteen, if they have one, and what is available in the tuck shop. That must be done proactively, since otherwise it is left to such people as the Irish Heart Foundation to assess schools. That is not what one should be doing. The Department of Education and Science should do that. Perhaps the witnesses might comment on that also. There are schools in my constituency without a sports hall. The children cannot compete in certain championships because they do not have a place to bring visiting teams. That is a real priority.

I thank the witnesses once again. It is very apposite that they have raised these issues.

I get the impression class is a factor, since socioeconomic groups vary in their propensity towards obesity. I am not sure whether gender is an issue, for example, whether WeightWatchers should be brought into schools to educate young women about dealing with their weight and food.

Perhaps the witnesses might also comment on the fact that the only obesity clinic in this country, down the road from my constituency in St. Columcille's Hospital in Loughlinstown, has closed its doors. One can no longer refer a patient there owing to the length of the waiting lists.

We will take questions from two more members in this group.

I also wish to be associated with the warm welcome extended to the delegation. I attended the launch mentioned. Regarding Deputy McManus's comments, my mother also reared five skinny children. I ascribe that to the time in which I was brought up. I have a particular interest in this subject, since seven years ago I survived a heart attack, which was an interesting experience. It makes one think a good deal, and I remember talking to my youngest son about lifestyle, my childhood and what he should be doing now. He laughed it off by saying it would not happen to him for another 40 years and that he had nothing to worry about. He will not mind my saying that. I often make the point regarding this subject, and certainly regarding this presentation, that the challenge is such. People see heart problems and disease as something that happens to one's daddy or granny, and that is the issue.

A four year old was mentioned, and I have a four year old grand-daughter. I know her mother tries to get the message across to her about healthy eating, even at her age. If I take her out, she will ask if we can go to McDonald's, but I tell her she is not allowed. She assures me she will not tell. Children are picking up such things, and it is important to make the point that what is happening now will affect people in 30 or 40 years. I do not believe they understand the importance of that. I remember spending some time wondering where all this happened. When I had my little episode, I felt I was in good health and doing everything right. I remember the nice people in the cardiac rehabilitation programme in Tallaght talking me through many of those issues and helping me to understand. I want to support what the delegation is trying to achieve.

I listened to the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Hanafin, dealing with Dáil business on Tuesday. The question of what happens in schools and the influence they can have arose. She made the point that schools could make a contribution but that young people still go home and watch television. What the witnesses are trying to bring to our attention is very important, and I often highlight the significance of these hearings. Perhaps in the overall context people will not see it as a sexy issue, but it is important. We might not see the benefits of what the delegation is trying to achieve for many years, and it is our responsibility to help them in that regard.

As Deputy McManus pointed out, this may not be a popular thing to say. Regarding television advertising, we sometimes must be brave and say it is all right for all those companies to advertise to young people and get their messages across, promoting their products in schools and so on, and perhaps people think it a good use of money, reaching places where young people are helped. However, one then wonders what sort of harm is being done. I know there has always been a debate on sponsorship of various sporting organisations, and I was involved for many years with the Community Games, which was always careful that the companies it promoted were good for young people. I note the list provided, and I will not criticise any of the companies, except to say there is a conflict regarding what they are trying to achieve for their products and the health of young people.

I hope that, arising from today and the attendant publicity, the witnesses' positive message is promoted. I certainly wish them well in that regard. I am no different from any other colleague but for the fact that I am motivated by what happened to me. It drives me on, not in a virtuous way, but to get the message across. People ask me if I am on a diet, and I hesitate before answering. They ask me whether it is a nuisance or sad, but it is not, since eating normal foods such as chicken and fruit while avoiding sweets and crisps is all right. It does not mean one is having a sad life if one does that. Young people should follow that example. I congratulate the delegation.

I too thank the witnesses for the excellent presentation. The recommendations are very good, including such actions as protection from more marketing, limiting television advertising, and monitoring. It is literally impossible to protect anyone from advertising, given the Internet and so on. If there is one thing we have learnt, it is that advertising works. Companies spend money on it because they know that in children they are hitting an easy market.

I wonder why there is no strategy for a counter-advertising programme. For example, on cigarette packets, one sees warnings that smoking damages one's health or even kills, but we do not have that on food packages. Has consideration been given to putting such warning labels on food? For most people, if something tastes good, it is good. If it is sweet, it is also good. Many parents do not know what damage such foods are causing. Is there any strategy to put warning labels on packaging to counter the easy targeting?

I am not sure enough emphasis is put on sports and recreation in national schools. Many teachers will say the main emphasis is on insurance claims, and they often do not have the right facilities for children. That is a major issue, and I wonder what we might do about it. We must address physical activity. Children learn from a young age, and the lunch box is a main source of food. Most parents may be a little guilty of packing a convenient lunch box for their children. They will not always put in the best food. They will not get an apple every day of the week. They will most likely get a packet of crisps or bar of chocolate. We must get the message across to parents that we must have proper food labelling that lets people know the damage some foods cause.

Mr. Kennedy

I will pass several of the questions to Ms Mulvihill and then perhaps to Ms Cullen. We can take it from there.

Ms Mulvihill

The obesity report, which we fully support as members of the task force, articulates and sets out many of the issues we need to address, such as educating parents, food labelling, and the area covered by the Department of Education and Science in terms of supporting schools and improved facilities. To bring the focus back to marketing, the point about parental influence and controlling is very valid. Parents have a role, but we are trying to illustrate that marketing works. Parents are being influenced by the marketing of these foods in particular.

Within public health it is widely recognised that changing behaviour, whether it is stopping smoking, getting more active or changing diet, is very difficult and is not always within the individual's control. One can make that assumption where somebody has the necessary education, accessibility and can afford to make those changes. As regards children, first of all, they do not have control over their own lifestyle, but they have disposable income. We are becoming increasingly aware that they have more to spend and, as they get older, they take jobs so that they have access. However, the foods being promoted to them are the unhealthy ones.

On the issue of counterbalancing activities, I illustrated that three quarters of advertising budgets are spent on healthy foods. To match that would require a major investment by Government and public health institutes at a level that is beyond their capacity. I suggest also that it would probably create further confusion. However, I take on board Deputy Connolly's suggestion about better labelling and perhaps my colleagues, Ms Margot Brennan and Ms Muireann Cullen, might comment on the advances in signposting and better labelling, respectively, which are planned for the future.

On the undermining of national television measures by European initiatives arising from the television without frontiers directive, I appreciate that this is an issue. If we were to regulate, as indeed to some extent the code does in Ireland, this could be undermined by the television without frontiers directive which is being debated currently. It is proposed that a new directive be voted on by the end of December. However, only minimal measures are being proposed. We must look at our own environment and population to make judgments that are based on the issues and concerns in Ireland. As the chairman of the alliance has indicated, we have taken the lead in some public health measures. To illustrate further the difficulty about personal control, the obesity report sets out very well that personal behaviour is influenced by environment, culture, tradition, the school, the home and marketing. I have lost my track, but I just want to reiterate that point, which is well made in the report.

Another point relates to general responsibility. There has been a global shift in levels of obesity. Ireland is not unique. All countries across Europe and in the developed world are seeing this. The global shift in obesity levels cannot be explained by individual decision and choice alone because this is happening across populations. Our argument is that public policy measures are needed. It does not always have to be legislation. There could be better policies to support our schools, whether through facilities, promotion of sport and recreation etc. Perhaps a broad range of policies is needed to tackle that.

I want to comment on food labelling and legislation. As regards food labelling, it is not obligatory to have nutrition data on a pack unless a claim is being made about a particular nutrient. The nutrition label in general will be used by dieticians and nutritionists as an education tool to make consumers aware of the different areas of food and to show people what to look out for as regards diet and how to compare one food with another. However, not everyone in Ireland will be educated in this field because they have not seen a dietician. Normally, dieticians will be seen only in cases of illness.

However, proposed legislation is under discussion in Europe at present in the area of health and nutrition claims. The areas being looked at as regards nutrients are total fat, saturated fat, trans-fats, sugars, salt and sodium. While legislation is pending in this regard, there is no consolidated document as yet. The European Council developed the legislation and the European Parliament amended the document. If a claim is being made about a product, its nutrient content must be kept to specified levels. However, it is possible to exceed limits, for example, where a product might be low in sugar but high in fat. It is still possible to say that the product is low in sugar. Nonetheless, it must also be stated that the product is high in fat to make the consumer aware of this, so that it is not necessarily as it might seem if it were just labelled as low in sugar. These provisions are under way. Perhaps Ms Brennan might like to say something further.

Ms Margot Brennan

I want to comment on the points about schools, young children and the effects of advertising on them. At the moment children are undergoing the social, physical and health education programme, SPHE, in schools, so they are learning in some detail about the area of food and nutrition. Children are very familiar with the food pyramid and where foods fit into this. As a result, we feel an education policy is needed across all schools that would make this information much more concrete and help parents substantially in the morning when lunch boxes etc. are being put together. It is very difficult as a parent if there is no policy in the school and, as someone indicated, where people are putting chocolate bars and crisps in boxes while one is trying to do one's best for one's child. A simple thing like a school policy is very achievable. The Department of Health and Children already has guidelines in place, but obviously funding and facilitators are required to move that on. Nonetheless, it is very achievable.

We also need to look at the obesogenic environment we live in. Both parents might be working very hard, for long hours, and trying to do the best for their children, yet being bombarded with advertising from every area. While advertising is just one area, it fits into the overall obesogenic environment, which makes healthy living and eating much harder for parents.

As regards the various social groups in relation to obesity, one study in Ireland last year showed that there is a higher level of obesity in the lowest socioeconomic group, for which food poverty is obviously a major issue.

There are certainly worrying aspects to the presentation. I thank the delegates for the excellent presentation. I shall stay for a moment on the subject of parents. As a parent and someone who has been involved with people over a long number of years, I have noticed the practice, whether at home or in a restaurant, of salt being sprinkled generously on food before it is even tasted. Invariably, when those people are preparing food for their children, they do exactly the same. It could be safely said such people like food with their salt. It should be got across to people that this is a practice they might discontinue.

A question about obese children was raised in the presentation and I am very interested in the whole area of the incidence of diabetes. Ms Mulvihill said that one in five Irish children aged five to 12 years is overweight and obese. She also said 25% of obese children develop type 2 diabetes. Am I correct in that?

Ms Mulvihill

No, I was pointing to research which says that of obese children, 0.5%——

It is 0.5%.

Ms Mulvihill

Increasing levels of type 2 diabetes are developing among young adults into early adulthood. We have no data on that from the Diabetes Federation, which has asked for more research on it. However, when one considers obese children only, 0.5% have shown they have type 2 diabetes. Where it was traditionally a disease of middle age, it is now becoming a problem, especially for overweight and obese children. It is a small percentage but they are more likely to develop type 2 diabetes as they get older.

The incidence of type 2 diabetes in children has risen significantly in a ten to 12-year period, which was a point strongly made in the presentation. Given the incidence of diabetes overall, that is a worrying factor.

I strongly support Deputy Connolly on the issue of labelling. Cigarette packages carry a health warning. I wear reading glasses. If I wanted to read the ingredients label on some foods, I would need to borrow Deputy Devins's glasses to read them. If products exceed the accepted levels of sugar, salt or other ingredients, a fine should be imposed. There should also be random testing of food products. Perhaps this is in operation. Safety levels should be established and if products are found to exceed those levels, there should be penalties.

The education system has a pivotal role to play in the issue of healthy eating, particularly the preparation of food by parents. The INTO or other teaching organisations might not be pleased with being given additional responsibility, but there is a serious lack of information on healthy eating among children. There is no question that it all begins in the home, which refers back to the use of salt, which is only harmful when used to excess.

Like other members, I welcome the deputation. Mr. Kennedy referred to aggressive marketing. Will he give an example of what he means by this? He listed some of the companies engaged in marketing certain sports activities. There is a dilemma in this regard, but sports campaigns involve exercise. While companies are smart in picking that sort of activity, at the same time, if they were to be stopped from doing that, who would take over? Has Mr. Kennedy any suggestions on those lines?

Ms Cullen referred to calorie levels. I agree that most people do not relate a list of calorie levels on a food product label to what it means. If it is stated that a can contains 300 calories, that does not mean anything to most of us. However, if it were stated that this is one fifth of one's daily requirements, it would really hit home. The committee might consider making a recommendation in this regard.

I thank the witnesses for attending. I was interested in the reference to the global shift that is taking place and the suggestion that whatever attempts we make in Ireland, it is a global phenomenon. We need to consider the cause of this global shift, to which the witnesses alluded when they referred to convenience food and lifestyles.

In our part of the world, people are wealthier yet have a more unhealthy diet in many ways. It is clear the problem is bigger than just advertising; it is about lifestyle. I am struck by the use of role models and the way major companies use personalities to enhance their products through advertising. The most popular role models for the young are probably sports figures, who lead a healthy lifestyle because they must. We need to make the connection between the healthy lifestyle of a role model, say, a footballer, and healthy eating and living. It is strange this connection is not made because the young particularly look up to sports people. An opportunity is being missed and there is a lesson to be learned why that connection is not made.

On the question of obesity prevention and the question of ignorance, the Department of Health and Children every year during healthy eating week runs a competition for politicians. The challenge is that one must feed a family of two parents and two children on €16 for a day. I took part in this challenge and won it, but I thought it could not be done. However, while some of those who took part may have been a few cents over the budget, we all met the challenge and the four or five of us found healthy options. Therefore, a week of healthy eating for a family costs a small amount.

It struck me that the foods purchased during the challenge were exotic — fajitas and so on — and that we had all learned of these foods from travel or through being interested in food. The average person might not be inspired to cook or make food rather than taking a pizza for the children out of the freezer and sticking it in the oven. Healthy eating need not be expensive. Much work can be done to make healthy eating interesting as well as making it known that it is relatively cheap.

Most schools have a healthy eating policy. One does not need a decree from on high for a school principal to decide a school should have a healthy eating policy and that crisps or bars should not be allowed. Such policies work. Children need a peer group and a policy would not work if some children had nicer food than others. The issue is what we will do for our children when we have the authority to do it.

The banning of vending machines at sports halls and schools is a good idea so children do not have access to sugary soft drinks. It would be an easy policy to implement. Advertising is suggested as a more difficult practice to ban. However, we need to dwell on the positives. Ms Brennan referred to food poverty. What does that mean?

I agree with Deputy Devins about food labelling. We should label products in a different way so that people know instantly what they are eating. Nobody intends to eat bad food but we do it by accident most of the time. Following the success of bottled water, our consumption of water has increased immeasurably in recent years. People now drink huge quantities of water, which proves the success of food or drink which is available to the right people at the right time.

In their daily lives, people are under constant pressure owing to the need to commute and so on. They may not eat properly, for example, by not eating breakfast or by simply grabbing a cup of coffee in the car first thing in the morning before spending two hours commuting. We are all facing into a general election and are likely to put on a few pounds owing to the canvassing schedule and late nights. Our diet will be one aspect that will suffer because we will not eat at all or eat very late, perhaps calling into chippers when we realise at 10 p.m. that we have not eaten.

In my time as a teacher, I could not get over the number of children who came to school without a lunch. This still takes place, which is incredible given what one reads about the so-called Celtic tiger. Recently, I spoke to one of my former colleagues about the food scheme. I imagine that the situation in Carlow, where the local authority provides funding to school towards buying bread and sandwiches, applies everywhere else. I understand the diet in question has changed recently. While the scheme has been an enormous success, many children go to school without any lunch and depend on the school to provide it.

Such matters can be controlled and members can have an input in this regard. Until recently, the children only received bread and jam, which I imagine was not especially nutritious. While that diet has been changed, this issue should be considered and I am interested in the delegation's views in this regard. Do the witnesses liaise with the local authorities who provide funding for the scheme on what food should be distributed in schools? There is still enormous demand for this widely used scheme. The joint committee can have an input in this regard.

I visited Dubai a few weeks ago and was struck by the range of non-alcoholic beers available there. Obviously, it is a dry country. Everyone knows that when one drinks, a side-effect is that one's sugar and salt levels are somewhat depleted the following day. Consequently, one may eat much more food than one should. Is it worth considering increasing the range of non-alcoholic beers available, in order that people on a night out would have the option of not drinking? I am sure this is also a major factor in obesity. Much more should be done in respect of labelling and people should be given a greater choice. Drinking minerals all night might not be an option either. However, non-alcoholic beers could be used at least to provide people with an alternative. In addition, school lunches must be reconsidered.

Mr. Kennedy

I will respond to some of the questions before asking the experts on dietetics, as well as Ms Mulvihill, to make brief contributions. We will try not to take up too much of the joint committee's time.

A question was addressed to me on what I meant by aggressive marketing. While it can mean television advertising, as Ms Mulvihill pointed out in her presentation, there are many other, more subtle, forms of marketing which are used at present. These include product placement in films which results in the association of well known film characters with particular products, texting and the use of mobile telephone technology, all of which are specifically directed at young people. Overall, the focus on young people in the advertising and marketing gives us cause for particular concern.

As for the question of physical education, the point is well made. However, we are aware that schools have become dependent upon sponsorship in a number of areas for physical education equipment. This is somewhat worrying because it creates a dependency and means that such schools can only get their physical education equipment, facilities or whatever if they are prepared effectively to allow advertising within the schools for the products in question. This issue can only be addressed by ensuring that schools have access to proper facilities and have the requisite resources to acquire them themselves.

I was thinking in particular of examples such as McDonald's "go active" GAA campaign, Coca-Cola's marketing of rugby tournaments and similar matters. Obviously, if such food companies were removed from the scene, it is more than likely that such events would not go ahead. I cannot see where the money would come from. Do the witnesses have any ideas in this respect? Is this a matter for the Government?

Mr. Kennedy

I cannot form a judgment on that. As Ms Mulvihill noted earlier, the amounts of money available in marketing are such that it would be very difficult for Government resources to match them. We do not call for measures such as a ban on sponsorship of GAA matches or whatever, which would be excessive. We seek some form of regulation to ensure it does not become excessive. At present, we do not know all of the figures for the marketing spend. We possess limited information, all of which indicates that the sums in question are massive. However, more information must be acquired in this regard. Specifically, more information is required on advertising and marketing which is directly and specifically aimed at young people. This is something which we seek. It is a cause of concern for us that we do not have sufficient information in respect of many of these areas.

Perhaps Ms Morrissey and Ms Brennan will respond to some of the more specific dietetic issues raised.

As for parents, we know they have a major influence on children's eating habits and the habits formed by children during their earlier years are brought into adulthood. This was also backed up by recent Irish data which showed that the home and parents were by far the major influence on children. As for salt, while the addition of salt is an issue during cooking or at the table, approximately 70% to 80% of people's salt intake is from processed foods such as savoury salty snacks, packet soups, sauces, sausages etc. Many processed foods are quite high in salt, as well as fat and sugar in many cases. Hence, the advertised diet is at odds with what is recommended.

In respect of schools, we have the support of the INTO and the joint managerial body for secondary schools and both have supported our position paper on this issue. As for healthy eating policies in schools, as Ms Brennan indicated, many schools have healthy eating policies in place. Anecdotally, however, they appear to focus on the food available or brought into schools and may not address the broader issues regarding sponsorship and what goes on within a school's environment. Hence, there can be a conflict in this regard.

Ms Brennan

The only point I wish to address pertains to health warnings on foods. We must remember there is no such a thing as a bad food and all food has a place in a diet. However, our concern is with the disproportionate amount of advertising for one group of foods to the exclusion of the others. This will be a difficult issue to resolve. It should be recalled that balance and the frequency of intake are what is important.

I will explain the term "food poverty". Food poverty is not limited to income or money. It pertains to people's education skills, basic matters such as cooking skills, the ability to go shopping and whether there are local shops in an area. Quite often, local shops have closed down and only big shopping centres remain, which raises the question whether people have the means of transport physically to go to get food at a cheaper price. Hence, one must consider the entire environment.

As for the subject of food and money, towards the end of last year Ms Cullen produced a very important document within the Irish Nutrition and Dietetic Institute for the Department for Social and Family Affairs, which was presented early this year. She may wish to comment on some of the findings in this regard.

In general, the Department of Social and Family Affairs advises that someone on a social welfare allowance would spend approximately one third of his or her allowance on food. As a result of carrying out this work for the Department, I found that it depended on where one bought one's food and whether it was own-brand or branded food, as there is quite a difference in price in this respect. As Ms Brennan has pointed out, there are also other issues for a consumer such as transport because, more often than not, while one might have access to a smaller store nearby, it will be more expensive. Consequently, one ends up spending more money. Alternatively, one tries to find a way of getting to the bigger and cheaper stores.

In terms of resources, while promotions may be offered on bigger packs of certain types of food, the question arises of whether one has the freezer space, or indeed a freezer, in which to store the food to benefit from the promotions.

It was found that one could spend approximately one third of one's social welfare allowance on one's diet. However, this only applied to one individual on a healthy eating diet. It depends on where one can buy one's food and the other issues which one might face. It comes back to the issue of food poverty.

As for my question on lunch food, are the witnesses satisfied that it is nutritious? Some schools operate breakfast clubs, for which there is significant demand. Do the witnesses continually monitor the food which is distributed in such clubs, as well as the need for them, to ensure children receive the correct food to start the day? I am aware that this issue is beyond the delegation's remit but the special dietary allowance from the Department of Social and Family Affairs is being phased out. I find this decision amazing because many people who suffer from diabetes are not getting the new diet allowance. This appears to fly in the face of every trend.

Ms Mulvihill

I will answer the question about school meals. We have had discussions with the Department of Social and Family Affairs regarding the issue and we are aware that there are guidelines. As a charity, we have limited resources, so officially and formally we do not track what is provided in school meals. The research we are carrying out at second level will cover this issue.

In an ideal world, it would be wonderful if we could provide school meals in the middle of the day so that children from all social groups could get at least one nutritious meal every day. This is the way the UK is proceeding with the policy of streamlining, amending and addressing the provision of school meals from very poor provision to a very good standard, but that is beyond the resources of schools and education authorities for the moment. I will address Senator Browne's last question. I do not know if anyone else wishes to comment on it.

In respect of school meals, community dieticians around the country are involved with the Health Service Executive, and schools health promotion and low income groups would be within the remit of many of them. A considerable amount of ongoing work is being carried out on the ground throughout the country in respect of this area.

Ms Mulvihill

In addition, I acknowledge much of what members, including Deputy Fiona O'Malley, have said. There are many positive initiatives. The problem is that they are small-scale and largely ineffective because we must examine the problem in its totality as well as what the evidence presented by us today shows about marketing. The World Health Organisation has proposed in several reports that we also need to examine controls on marketing. I acknowledge that good work is being carried out.

In respect of the Department's national healthy eating campaign, which is being transferred to the HSE, we all know that behaviour change requires support and motivation. The capacity of the health service to provide one-on-one dietetic advice and support is limited.

The labelling and signposting of healthier foods has been tested in the UK and we are looking at how the signposting indicating whether food is green — healthy, or red — unhealthy, works. The Food Standards Agency has developed a profile of foods that could be classed as healthy and signposts food as green, red or orange. We should look and see how the evaluation works out. Two retail outlets in the UK have found that it works very well and that consumers like it. Tesco has introduced it on some of its packaging here. This may address some of the issues around labelling and consumers.

A report undertaken by the Food Commission in the UK last year published by Which? magazine outlined at least 41 repetitive marketing techniques used to target children. The reference to the report is provided in the document presented to the committee. We see that children’s loyalty is being bought from as young an age as two years, particularly through measures such as character association and the use of cartoon characters. I suggest that by the time they reach adolescence, children have built up quite a strong brand loyalty to various products. In the past, we examined using celebrities to get our message across but it is also an expensive route because such celebrities want to be paid. We are concerned that children, particularly those under the age of eight, are being targeted through very insidious activities such as cartoons on packaging. These cartoons are then seen in films and promoted through other mechanisms, perhaps the support of children’s activities or sporting events. These techniques and associations with characters are used in various arenas and have a cumulative impact on young people.

Ms Quinn

In its report, the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland, BCI, has prohibited the association of sports stars or adults with the promotion of food and drink to children. However, this prohibition only relates to Irish broadcasting, for example, that of TV3 and RTE, and does not extend to satellite television. However, at least this initiative has taken place and there is a recognition that young children associate particular products with their heroes. It has been addressed by the BCI's prohibition but, as Ms Mulvihill noted, it must be extended.

Mr. Kennedy

I take it there are no other questions.

I think all our questions have been answered.

Will the delegation answer my question about the special dietary allowance, which is being phased out?

I was the person who carried out the work. We provided information on the allowance and the different types of diet. Diabetic diets are healthy eating diets and should not cost any more than the diet of the average non-diabetic consumer. Dietitians would not promote the use of diabetic products because they are expensive and are not nutritionally beneficial to diabetic consumers. The matter is the responsibility of the Department of Social and Family Affairs but we provided guidance on the different diets listed on the dietary supplement allowance, the question of which diets were appropriate for the allowance and the costs of healthy eating and which diets were not.

In respect of food labelling and guideline daily amounts, issues raised earlier, it must be acknowledged that some sections of the industry are providing guideline daily amounts in their nutrition labelling, for which we commend them. Different formats in respect of food labelling and nutrition and health claims are being examined. A European-wide consultation took place on this legislation and certain questions were asked, one of which was the format in which this nutritional information is to be presented to consumers and the views of different countries on the issue. It is being considered. No matter what format is used, consumers must be educated on how to read it and make informed choices about different foods.

There is a vote in the Dáil so I must ask Mr. Kennedy to conclude to allow the committee to suspend.

Mr. Kennedy

I understand the committee's priorities and will sum up very briefly. I will repeat the three action points we wish to make. When we look at regulation, we are not just talking about television advertising; we are talking about a range of other areas of marketing which are relevant. There are some specific issues relating to television advertising, which are identified in our document and which we wish to highlight. Monitoring and data collection are important so that the area of policy can be articulated on the basis of information available to us.

To sum up, children deserve to be protected. There is a massive spend on advertising and marketing in respect of products, many of which are unhealthy. Some regulation is needed. We welcome the fact that some advertising and marketing is directed towards healthier foods and would like to see much more of it. I hesitate to use the term "heavyweights" in this context but the people who are here with me today and the people who have worked on the preparation of the position paper are heavyweights in nutrition, public health and diet in this country. They know what they are talking about. This is a very serious issue and these are the people who are putting their weight behind the recommendations before the committee today.

We talked about the links with Europe and the European Heart Network, which are important. We have seen what is happening elsewhere in Europe and we in this country do not have to sit back and wait.

Unfortunately, the committee must suspend. I thank the delegation for its presentation and for coming before the committee. We will adjourn for 20 minutes and hear the next presentation after that.

Sitting suspended at 10.50 a.m and resumed at 12.10 p.m.

I apologise because a number of committee members are in the Houses for the Estimates for the Department of Health and Children in the Dáil and for the Order of Business in the Seanad.

I welcome Mr. Paul Kelly, the director of Food and Drink Industry Ireland, and Mr. Ciaran Fitzgerald of Meat Industry Ireland to this meeting on the marketing of food to children. As our guests have observed, the format is for them to make a presentation and for members to ask them questions. Mr. Kelly can start.

I thank the Chairman for his introduction and for giving Food and Drink Industry Ireland the opportunity to make a presentation to the joint committee on the issue of marketing of food to children.

FDII is a business sector within IBEC that represents manufacturers and suppliers of food and drink. I propose to cover three areas, an overview of the Irish industry, the changing consumer and the industry's response to the changes.

The Irish food and drink industry has a turnover value of €23 billion and accounts for 9% of total gross domestic product. If internal economy links and capital flow are taken into account the sector accounts for almost 50% of the wealth generated by manufacturing industry in the economy. The sector employs 50,000 people directly and 60,000 people in distribution and other services. It purchases almost €5 billion worth of agricultural products from Ireland's 120,000 farmers annually.

The industry is uniquely regionally spread, constituting the most important business activity in 12 out of the 26 counties in Ireland. The sector is predominantly Irish-owned and key decisions on its investment and development are made in Ireland. It supplies 90% of the €7 billion food and drink products we consume annually.

Food consumption within and outside the home constitutes almost 20% of consumer spending and is the biggest single category of consumer spending. The sector exports almost €7.5 billion worth of food and drink products to 80 countries worldwide each year. With very little import content and a positive capital inflow from abroad through profit repatriation from global Irish food companies, the food and drink sector is the single most important sector in the economy.

The sector faces major challenges across a range of issues. From farm to fork, EU and world trade policy have a profound effect on the Irish food and drink sector. Common Agricultural Policy payments to farmers and market support systems underpin basic agricultural production. CAP-related quota regimes specifically control production of dairy products and, in the past, sugar. World Trade Organisation policies on the abolition of export subsides, reductions in domestic supports and greater market access have an impact on the sector.

While presented as responses to consumer concerns or best scientific practice, EU policies on food safety, food hygiene, environment, animal welfare, food labels and claims have a major impact on basic production costs and innovation routes to market in the food and drink sector. As Ireland is a surplus producer and exports 85% of the food and drink we produce, measures geared towards managing EU surpluses or reducing self-sufficiency have a greater impact on Ireland than on countries that have large home markets.

Pay and general business costs, a significant portion of which are generated by Government or local authorities, have increased by almost 50% since 2001. Food prices at retail level in Ireland have increased by only 4.5% and EU-wide food prices have increased by only 5% over the same period. The food and drink sector exports 30% of its output to dollar denominated international markets, so the fall in the value of the dollar has also reduced returns. The sector has been unable to recover increased business, labour and compliance costs in domestic or export markets. This erosion of competitiveness is not sustainable. Through a combination of increased food safety awareness and consumer demand for traceability, compliance costs in the sector have increased substantially and again are not being recovered in the marketplace. Increasing business costs and a greater regulatory burden thus reduce the resources that should be focused on innovation.

Consumers are busier than ever before because of changing work patterns, increased female participation in the workforce, more time spent travelling and more demands on time. The needs of consumers change dramatically depending on whether they are in busy work mode or relaxed weekend mode. The 2005-06 Bord Bia annual report noted that this has led to a polarisation in consumer choice between value and premium products, health and indulgence, and convenience and experience.

In the past, food was simply consumed for sustenance and enjoyment. Nowadays, with increased prosperity, food is recognised as a key determinant of physical and emotional well-being. Most people believe that good food can enhance body and mind. Treating and pleasure is more important for consumers. In recent years, food consumed outside the home has moved from a level of 20% of total consumption to over 35%.

We have seen growth in a trend known as income complexity. Consumers limit spending in some areas of their shopping so they can spend more on others, typically luxuries. Busy lifestyles and a demand for convenience led to a change from cooking from scratch to using ready prepared ingredients and ready to eat foods. While there is an increased demand for easy meal solutions, greater occasions of snacking and convenience consumption, there is also a demand for quality and a sense of wellness.

A balanced diet and an active lifestyle are the key preventive measures of obesity. At the launch of the national task force on obesity in 2005, the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment stated that obesity was a complex condition that had an impact on virtually all ages and socioeconomic groups. He also stated that while it was true that physical activity could protect against unhealthy weight gain, ongoing and regular physical activity was protective, not previous physical activity or temporary bouts of activity such as enrolment in exercise programmes.

Awareness of diet and nutrition has become an increasingly important factor in consumers' food choices in recent years. This increased awareness is a natural consequence of the rise in diet related health concerns, provoked by growing incidence of lifestyle related conditions such as obesity, diabetes, high cholesterol levels and hypertension.

The root causes of such conditions are multiple, complex and often difficult to disentangle. As well as diet, physical activity levels are very important. The food industry has a vital role to play in bringing expertise and understanding of consumers' motivation and choices to the debate. Industry seeks to address the issue with the involvement of all stakeholders, including consumers and Government.

Recent studies have identified that the decline in human physical activity could be a major cause of obesity. Human daily physical activity has declined dramatically in recent years while obesity levels have soared. In Ireland, numerous surveys support the claim that physical activity is of significant importance in combating obesity. Exercise has been identified as the number one area in which people feel they should do more to improve their overall health. Lack of time and motivation are the main reasons people do not adopt a healthier lifestyle.

The food and drink industry has demonstrated its commitment to addressing changing consumer needs, such as responsible advertising to children. Food and Drink Industry Ireland supports the fundamental objective of ensuring that advertising and marketing are legal, decent, honest and truthful. This is especially pertinent in the case of children to ensure that they are not misled.

Ireland was one of the first European countries to implement a children's advertising code successfully. This code, which came into force in January 2005, has strict criteria on how products aimed at children, including food and drink products, can be advertised on broadcast media or indigenous television channels, in what circumstances children can be shown them and what type of endorsements may be allowed. According to the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland, BCI, until recently only two complaints had been received. This is broadly in line with expectations as the children's code has further regulated a sector where there were historically low levels of complaints.

The BCI undertook a technical review of section 7 of the code, which deals with diet and nutrition. The review found that modest growth in advertising in the Irish television market had occurred. It also found that in the year since the code's introduction, one breach occurred of the diet and nutrition provisions in the 270 hours of programming monitored. No complaints had been received by the BCI or the Broadcasting Complaints Commission under this section of the code since January 2005.

In addition to statutory regulation and codes from the regulatory body, we have self-regulation. This means the adoption by the advertising industry of standards drawn up by and on behalf of all advertising interests. It involves the enforcement of those standards through the commitment and co-operation of advertisers, agencies and media. In Ireland, the Advertising Standards Authority for Ireland, ASAI, is the independent self-regulatory body set up and financed by the advertising industry. It is committed in the public interest to promoting the highest standards of advertising and sales promotion. Members of the ASAI are required to abide by codes and not to publish an advertisement or conduct a promotion that contravenes code rules. The code also ensures children are not misled by advertising in any way, which is detailed in appendix 2 of the presentation document. Furthermore, the Institute of Advertising Practitioners in Ireland and the Association of Advertisers in Ireland offer a children's advertising advice service that provides expertise to industry and the public on legal, decent, honest and truthful advertising to children.

Self-regulation has definite advantages over sole regulatory intervention in speed and flexibility. There has been increasing recognition of the effectiveness of self-regulation by authoritative and independent studies, most recently the study commissioned from the Hans Bredow Institute of Media Research by the European Commission.

Obesity has many causes and we do not have evidence that advertising is a factor. Few countries or provinces, with the exception of Sweden, Norway and Quebec, have banned TV advertising to children on ethical grounds. In fact, overweight obesity rates in Sweden are above the European average while the actual impact of advertising censorship to children has proved to have no impact on obesity in some countries. Recent studies identified the decline in human physical activity as a possible major cause of obesity. Human daily physical activity has declined dramatically in recent years while obesity levels have soared.

I will now deal with the second industry response, which is education on balanced diets and lifestyles. The Nutrition and Health Foundation was launched in January 2005 as an industry-led body that provides consumers with evidence based information on nutrition and physical activity, to enable them to make informed lifestyle choices.

I apologise for interrupting. Will Mr. Kelly read all of the script? I must attend another meeting but I will return.

Is there a shorter version, as I see it has 21 pages.

The script is only ten pages long.

I see. I apologise.

We must continue.

We have other meetings and votes to attend. Is it possible for Mr. Kelly to read only the important points?

Will Mr. Kelly be able to do that?

I will try my best.

I apologise.

Unfortunately we are under huge pressure from other influences.

The NHF has the support of a large number of Irish food and drink companies. It commissioned health and lifestyle research and a workplace wellbeing programme. As IBEC is an employer's organisation, the NHF primarily targets the workplace and professionals. A primary aim for 2006 is to encourage departmental membership of the NHF and to strengthen existing relationships with other stakeholders.

The third industry response concerns the national task force on obesity, NTFO, on which FDII was represented by my colleague Mr. Ciaran Fitzgerald. The NTFO made a large number of recommendations, a relatively small number of which were directly addressed to the food and drink industry. As an industry we responded proactively on the implementation of guideline principles for the marketing and promotion of food and drink to children, significant industry investment in research and development for healthier food choices and the development of the Nutrition and Health Foundation. Industry is eager to see the implementation of the remainder of the recommendations in the NTFO report and awaits formal notification from the Government on this development.

On industry research and development, a number of significant developments were made during the past year, including the establishment of a €150 million research and development centre last July by one company and a €28 million meat science centre by another in May. It is worth noting that both of these were supported by Enterprise Ireland.

The food institutional research programme is a joint industry, third-level and Government initiative. Significant sums of money go through it and it is one of the measures under the national development plan. To date approximately €55 million has been awarded for 115 projects in 20 research institutes, many of which have industry involvement. That research and development has produced better products for coeliacs through improved quality of gluten free products, nutritionally enhanced infant foods, bio-cheese which aids dental health, improved quality of ready-meals and healthier low-fat convenience foods.

A significant number of industry technical developments have been made, particularly on salt reduction on which we work closely with the Food Safety Authority. Last week the FSAI announced the current commitments made by industry, and it supported the actions taken by industry on salt reduction. Work is also being done on folic acid.

During the question and answer session in the previous part of the meeting, the issue of labelling was raised. I draw the committee's attention to the last page of our presentation document. It contains graphics on the labelling of guideline daily amounts. This is an industry initiative to provide detailed information in a graphical format that can be easily assimilated by people. It returns to the point made by a number of committee members that people need the information. The information will be based on a serving and will tell people what percentage of the guideline daily amounts the product will provide.

Regarding industry sponsorship announcements, as an industry we believe sponsorship can be useful and beneficial to promote the philosophy that a balanced diet and physical activity are key to maintaining good health. The vast majority of sponsorship initiatives are tied in with physical activity and that should be noted.

I mentioned that as an industry we face major challenges in the years ahead. The industry is consumer-led and recent years have seen significant changes in consumer lifestyle. We have also seen a significant decrease in physical activity. The industry is one of many stakeholders that responded positively through a mixture of self-regulation and adherence to national broadcasting codes, establishment of the Nutrition and Health Foundation, implementation of the relevant NTFO recommendations, research and development, reformulation of products, improved on-pack labelling and promotion of a balanced diet and healthy lifestyle.

I thank the delegation for its presentation. The issue of compliance costs was raised. We seem to have a higher standard of compliance than many of our continental competitors. I am amazed when I go to the continent and see farming practices which would be unacceptable by our regulatory body, the Department of Agriculture and Food. I saw practices 30 years ago which would be unacceptable now. The cost on the farm of food production has significantly increased because of regulations. We saw it recently with nitrates and before that with pollution control. However, the same standards do not seem to apply on continental farms and I have significant experience of Germany.

The European Heart Network report found the marketing of unhealthy food to children is on a massive scale, most food marketed to children is unhealthy, major spending is on TV, schools represent a growing market and the Internet and SMS are new and growing media. The Irish Heart Foundation, the National Heart Alliance, the Irish Medical Organisation, Barnardos, Children's Rights Alliance, the Irish National Teachers Organisation, the Consumer Association of Ireland and the parenting website are all strongly in favour of regulation rather than self-regulation. It is a strong body of opinion. Will Mr. Kelly comment on why those bodies are strongly in favour of regulation but Mr. Kelly's organisation is not?

I also thank Mr. Kelly for his presentation. He may have seen the presentation made earlier by the National Heart Alliance. One of the issues raised was sponsorship, and the association of a brand name with a particular sport. Mr. Kelly referred to sponsorship but he approached it from a different angle, stating it is a healthy activity.

How would Mr. Kelly answer their criticisms that the association of the brand name for a food which may be very high in calories with a sporting activity aimed at young children is not in the best interests of the children's health?

We accept that compliance costs are quite high in this country. We have no particular problems with high levels of compliance from farm to fork, in terms of everything from animal welfare through to hygiene standards at food preparation, primary processing and secondary processing levels or in the food services areas. Neither do we have problems in terms of the systems for traceability. From the point of view of the food industry, these are positive issues because they provide a guarantee that the food that ends up on people's plates is safe. The point we are making is that it is an additional cost burden——

My point is that if the level of supervision of such areas is not universal in every EU country, that places the Irish producer in a marketing difficulty because of the higher costs. While I fully agree with the need for compliance with high standards, if the EU is not insisting on the same standards in other countries, such as Germany, it places the Irish producer at a disadvantage.

I agree with the Deputy and it is a matter for the European Commission to assess the extent to which European regulations are being transposed and properly implemented in each country. I accept the Deputy's point that it tends to put us at a competitive disadvantage, particularly as the vast majority of our food produce is exported.

With regard to marketing, in addition to self-regulation, there is a significant body of regulation governing advertising. We have the overall broadcasting code from the BCI and the specific children's advertising code. Ireland was one of the first countries in Europe to introduce advertising codes of this nature at a regulatory level, to the extent that many countries across Europe view Ireland as one of the forerunners and are interested in learning from us in that regard.

The vast majority of the marketing of food products is disproportionately aimed at adults and is not directed towards children. With regard to the extent of advertising, one is mainly dealing with branded goods which by their nature means that an advertiser of one brand would be in competition with an advertiser of another brand in the same product category. Most advertising is aimed at convincing people to switch brands rather than to consume more.

Is Mr. Kelly saying that the analysis of the bodies to which I referred is wrong and that he does not agree with their view that the advertising of children's foods should be regulated?

I think the analysis is wrong because we have regulation in this country. Regulation was introduced in January 2005 and was further reviewed earlier this year. The proof of the pudding is that there is regulation in place and at the review point, the level of complaints received by the Broadcasting Complaints Commission and the advertising standards bodies was minimal.

We were shown a graph which demonstrated the correlation between the amount of advertisements for sweets and fatty foods on children's television and the prevalence of obesity among children in the population.

The point is that most of the products referred to are branded products, which means there will be a significant amount of advertising activity in that area. Research has shown that obesity is mostly causal in nature. We accept that and that we are one of the stakeholders but factors such as physical activity, education and the socioeconomic status of the individual also have an enormous role to play.

There is a strong correlation between time spent watching television and obesity. This analysis examined whether the correlation with obesity was between the amount of hours spent watching television or the content of what was watched. There is no doubt that the amount of time children spend watching television has increased substantially in recent years. Until the mid-1980s very little television was watched before 5 p.m. Obviously, in a situation where a child is watching television, he or she is not taking exercise. That in itself is a very strong cause of obesity in terms of the lack of physical activity involved.

May I reply to the question on sponsorship?

The vast majority of sponsorship activities tend to be tied into physical activity, which feeds into the idea of promoting a positive message regarding the importance of a balanced diet and a healthy lifestyle. The guideline principles that the food and drink industry has promoted through its members include the stipulation that branding should not appear in classrooms and that branding and brand names should be subtle and discreet and should not be festooned all over the sponsorship activity. Broadly, we would be of the view that sponsorship has positive benefits.

Are those guidelines followed?

I imagine they are, in the main. We do not have any research data on whether they are followed. We simply published what are guideline principles.

Is Mr. Kelly saying that if company A, for example, which makes a food that is high in calories aimed at young children and is sponsoring a sporting event, it should not put the name of the company or the product ——

It should not put it in the classroom and when the name of the company or the brand name is placed, it should be subtle and discreet.

We have heard from representatives of the National Heart Alliance who have found the opposite to be the case. They are very worried about the aggressive marketing that is taking place at the moment.

I do not agree with their point in that regard.

This makes for an interesting few hours. I would like to be associated with the welcome extended to our guests. I am sorry if the meeting has been a little disjointed, but it is the last day of term and we are under pressure to get back to the Chamber. Some members will want to have a healthy, "happy heart" kind of lunch, but that too will be rushed.

Does the Deputy have a question?

Perhaps we will do the heckling some other day when I have lots of time. I have seen a contrast between the two presentations and I am supportive of what was said in the earlier one. I have an interest in heart conditions because I survived a heart attack and that tends to focus one's mind somewhat.

I am trying to understand the points made regarding the promotion of healthy eating by companies, which is fair enough. I have no difficulty with that but I am concerned about promotions that try to persuade young people to partake of what could be unhealthy foods. That is in contrast to the encouragement to take more exercise, watch less television and so forth. I am trying to understand the contrast there. The representatives have made some fair points and have represented their interests very well. However, there is a stark contrast between what we heard in the earlier presentation and what we have just heard.

I live in Tallaght and always notice the name when it crops up in reports. The representatives have referred to the support Tallaght hospital is receiving from the food and drink industry. Furthermore, some of the products about which we may be concerned are manufactured in or distributed from Tallaght. Once again, there seems to be a contradiction in helping hospitals and promoting products that are not good for our health.

The products to which the Deputy referred are not sold as the be all and end all in respect of food intake. They are sold on as treats to be consumed in small amounts rather than to displace staple foods. Those who produce them recognise their responsibility in this matter, as does Food and Drink Industry Ireland. The message we transmit is twofold and recommends a balanced diet and a healthy and active lifestyle. Producers feel that they have a part to play by, for example, putting positive messages on packaging. They are of the view that it is appropriate, in terms of fostering links with local and national communities, to support physical activities by providing sponsorship for events. Sports and community bodies are free to decide not to accept this sponsorship and I imagine they consider the pros and cons before reaching a decision.

Deputy Connolly referred to the challenges created by parents who give their children lunch boxes full of treats. Does the industry have a contribution to make with regard to controlling the number of treats given to children by providing healthy options? What is the industry doing in terms of manufacturing healthier foods?

Two of my children attend schools that restrict the giving of treats to Fridays. To my mind, that is a positive measure because it reinforces the principle that treats are not for everyday consumption. With regard to the specific steps taken by companies, products are being reformulated through research and development so that reduced fat and reduced salt options will be available. Most producers of product categories, such as beverages or snack foods, provide a range of options in their portfolios. For examples, liquids would include the range of options including water, juices and zero-sugar to full-sugar drinks.

I thank witnesses for their presentations. We have heard from both sides and the committee will now be obliged to consider its response.

Sitting suspended at 12.55 p.m. and resumed at 1.35 p.m.

We will try to proceed because people want to leave before 2.30 p.m. Let us not start on the wrong foot.

Is that the solution?

We will get back to business.

The Chairman might have a solution.

I do not. It is up to the committee to find a solution. I am only trying to be helpful. We will try to reflect back to last Tuesday and pick up the pieces from there. This is a bad beginning to the afternoon's proceedings. Could Members——

Yes, we are here.

We are back to where we were last Tuesday and we did not come to conclusions. Members should remember that last Tuesday we went through the draft report. I proposed that we either adopt the draft report, further investigate the findings of the draft report or adopt the report as amended. To be meek about it, my proposal did not gain the support of the committee. I am not trying to get out of a corner on the issue of regulation. Members were genuinely concerned that by not adopting the report they would leave clinics without any regulation and put women's lives in danger. I do not want to be dramatic. I hope members will take time to read the letter, which I will circulate to them. This is not meant to be a rabbit out of a hat, but an attempt to deal with the issue. I will give people a chance to read it and see if we can talk to the Tánaiste about what can be done in the context of regulation.

The following is the response from the Tánaiste:

In the context of the detailed consideration by the joint committee on assisted human reproduction I would like to inform you that I have recently instructed the officials of my Department to prepare legislation for a specific scheme of statutory regulations on assisted human reproduction and to increase the number of officials allocated to this particular work. As the committee is aware, many substantive and complex policy issues need to be addressed and decided on in a considered and sensitive way. The work of my Department on a statutory form of regulation will also proceed in a way that is mindful of any developments in the courts on relevant constitutional issues.

I welcome this letter. It goes to show that what we do at committee does not seem to make any difference. The Minister has decided to proceed with a specific scheme of statutory regulation, which I welcome, in so far as I understand it. It is not clear exactly what a specific scheme is. What does the Tánaiste have in mind? It means she has pre-empted the sub-committee's report and will proceed in any event. It is important that, having agreed to send the sub-committee's report to her, we make her aware of our views.

There should be no question of holding hearings in this committee. It is not our job to determine the Constitution. The concerns we had over the prospect of the legislation being stalled are now being dealt with by the Tánaiste. We should acknowledge that and ask her what the specific scheme of regulation entails, send her a copy of our report so that she knows we are not happy with, for example, the provisions on surrogacy, and move on to other business.

I welcome the fact that the Tánaiste has responded to concerns this committee has raised for the past 12 months. Unfortunately, there is still no detail on what she intends to do. I expect a more detailed letter in the next few days, outlining exactly what she means. Will she establish a statutory regulatory body to examine clinics and regulate IVF? Does she propose to bring legislation forward? If so, what are the heads of the Bill and when can we expect to see them? What are the details and to what extent will the plans apply to IVF clinics alone?

She referred to developments in the courts regarding relevant constitutional issues. It appears the Tánaiste intends to take on board the recommendations on the status of the embryo, which is separate from IVF but linked to it. She seems to be proposing to adopt the whole report of the Commission on Assisted Human Reproduction and appears to have taken into consideration some of our views.

It is also important that we receive more details from the office of the Attorney General. I presume the case to which the Tánaiste refers is that of the woman who is trying to get possession of three embryos in the High Court but that case could be decided under contractual law, in which case the constitutional issue will not be tested. If the embryos are returned to that lady, that is the end of that case. It will not test the constitutionality of where the embryo stands in the law. The Attorney General is involved so we need to know where he stands on the issue. What exactly does the Tánaiste mean when she says she will bring forward regulations and take into consideration what is happening in the courts?

The committee should request a far more detailed letter from the Tánaiste as to how she intends to proceed on the report of the Commission on Assisted Human Reproduction. She has obviously taken our concerns on board.

Like previous speakers, I am delighted to see this letter from the Tánaiste. In many ways it reflects what we have said in the past two meetings. I note she is aware that there are many substantive and complex policy issues to be decided, and that she is mindful of potential developments in the courts on relevant constitutional issues. Our report, on the report of the Commission on Assisted Human Reproduction, will hopefully be of great benefit to her but I still hold to my position that it should not be forwarded to anybody until we know the outcome of the current court case.

I welcome the Tánaiste's letter to a certain extent but I am somewhat concerned at officials in her Department preparing legislation on a specific scheme without more detailed input from this committee. When the Commission presented the report to us its submission included the following statement: "Our report meets the two criteria set for the commission's work, namely to provide the medical, scientific and legal expertise for a detailed examination of approaches and to act as a catalyst for a subsequent public debate about the issues raised and our recommendations before any policy proposals are developed." Does this letter mean our input is at an end? I am not happy with that and would like an explanation.

At the last meeting I supported the proposal to hold full public hearings on the issue. I said regulatory issues over assisted human reproduction could be dealt with because everybody on this committee was in agreement on them. I would have no difficulty if the Tánaiste were to take that path. There are, however, many aspects of the report with which I am not happy and I feel this committee should have an input.

I was interested to hear what Deputy Twomey had to say. When we discussed holding public hearings, inviting legal experts and taking advice from people with knowledge and expertise lacking in this committee he was opposed. Now he wants the Attorney General's advice on the outcome of the High Court case. At the last meeting we were told the High Court case was of no relevance. It seems that he has changed his approach, which is fine. The High Court case has moved forward anyway.

I would like clarification from the Tánaiste as to what she is planning to do. I am not happy to relinquish input into this report at this stage.

I made this point at the last meeting but will repeat it. The Attorney General will have made submissions to the court and it is important we be given a copy of them. We also need clarity as to whether those submissions represent his independent view or have been arrived at in consultation with, or under the direction of, the Government. I do not believe we should discuss the issue of hearings again but I agree with Deputy Cooper-Flynn that we should have all pertinent information.

I welcome the fact that the Minister is pressing ahead because it is long overdue but we still require information from the Attorney General. I suggest we write to him.

In answer to what Deputy Cooper-Flynn said, my view has not changed dramatically. If the courts decide that the three embryos of the lady in question are a matter for contract law, the case falls.

Yes, but we do not know that yet.

It may happen, in which case the constitutionality of the embryos will never be tested in the High Court and will not come before the Supreme Court. The Attorney General is preparing a case and so will form an opinion. This is substantially different from what we were talking about last Tuesday, when we discussed the fact that we were being reduced to a talking shop. In the past 48 hours the situation has changed dramatically and we are coming to the point where we will need to discuss heads of legislation as put forward by the Tánaiste.

Legislation was always going to be the end game. It is more important for us to have advance input into the heads of any Bill to be drawn up, rather than responding to them after they have been prepared.

We have a report. We should send it in.

We have a report. It makes use of legal advice and advice from the public. In many areas it expresses quite radical views, given the hearings that took place. However, this committee, as a whole, might take a different view.

I am talking about the sub-committee report.

The sub-committee report is more acceptable than the original report. What is the Tánaiste doing? Is she taking the commission's report and working on it or she dealing with the sub-committee report?

She cannot do so until we send it to her. We should send it to her.

We should cool down a bit. Last Tuesday we spent time on the issue of regulation. The point was clearly made that by not adopting the draft report, we were putting women's lives in danger. I mentioned this information to the Tánaiste and asked her what would be dealt with outside of the courts and constitutional issues. That is her response.

I am not able to go any further on that other than to say that we have a commitment that the Minister will put officials in that specific area to try to bring forward legislation. I am not trying to stifle that with the issue last week of stalling talks etc. At the first opportunity we will have officials from the Department in here to explain how far the process will go and when. That will not take away from us the ownership of the report.

I propose we send the report to the Minister.

We have not agreed to that.

We would have to agree or disagree on the matter.

I am proposing it. We should agree on it.

If Deputy McManus wishes to do so——

What is the status of the report?

We were asked on that committee to report on the commission. We set up a sub-committee and it brought back a draft report.

I think this has gone beyond us.

The train has left the station.

We have a draft report and the sub-committee members put much work, effort and time into it. It was very difficult to get representatives of other parties, as has been pointed out previously. We have produced the report. Senator Henry presented it but I was unfortunately not here for that. As far as I understand it is still a draft report, and I do not think it appropriate to send anybody a draft report. It should be debated and agreed here. It can by all means be sent once it is an agreed report. We cannot go around with bits and pieces of a report.

I welcome the Tánaiste's letter. It is good to see the issue of regulation — a matter of concern — being dealt with and moved on quickly.

It is an excellent report.

Last week, Senator Henry read through the report but we did not debate the issue. Rather than drag the issue out, the committee will either adopt the draft report, have further investigations or adopt the report as amended. We will have to read the report at least, and go through each issue.

In light of Deputy Twomey's comments, which I agree with——

They have been put to light. I should repeat those comments.

I agree with the Deputy on seeking legal advice, and Deputy McManus's comments on the Attorney General's submission. In the draft report, many of the findings where the sub-group agreed with recommendations were based on the constitutional status of the embryo and legal advice. Before we agree the draft report, it would be appropriate for us to get those submissions and legal advice. That may be a starting point that we could all agree on.

What if the Attorney General does not give out advice?

The Attorney General gives advice to Government. He has not made submissions.

I am not asking him for advice on it. I am asking for a copy of submissions he sent to the court.

Is that not his advice? It can be requested but I do not think it appropriate.

It is in written form. We are just looking for a copy of it. I do not have a problem delaying this process. I am surprised as I would think that we would prefer the Minister to be informed by our report rather than there simply being a basis formed on the commission. I have problems with the commission report.

To be fair, she will.

She will not receive a report from this committee unless we agree to send it.

Unless we agree it.

Which we will.

In the meantime, however long that takes, legislation is being prepared with additional civil servants. The only report the Minister will have is the commission report. I have a problem with that report in the area of surrogacy, for example. The report done by the sub-committee is excellent. It is a pity we are not sending it on to the Minister.

We will send it to the Minister once we agree on it.

Was that not the issue last week, that by not adopting the report we were not regulating? Therefore it was argued we were creating difficulties for women etc. May I presume from that that these matters can now be dealt with? The central issue from last Tuesday is being dealt with in the Department as we move along, going through the report. There was never a draft report otherwise.

What is the point of producing a report when the process is over?

If there had not been a draft or full report, there would still have been a need to regulate clinics.

No. The process was that the commission report went to the Government. The Government kicked it back to us and stated that we had to consider it. The legislative process would then proceed. That was my understanding. We now find that we have been pre-empted by the Tánaiste in the legislative process. Good luck to her, as she has decided to proceed.

It would be useful and in our interest if she had our view at this stage. It may be that we could have an even better report if we took time over it, but I doubt it. It is a fairly straightforward matter. There were issues in the commission report that concerned the sub-committee. As a member of this committee I agree with the sub-committee. That should be relayed to the Tánaiste. The Government has a majority on this committee and it can do as it likes.

We are going to take a decision but we will not do as we like. I do not want to keep going over it but I will spend a minute on the issue.

Senator Henry has made the point here several times, as well as on the sub-committee, that the matter has always had regard for constitutional issues and the courts. It is a pity she is not here to confirm that. There was an issue regarding the regulation of clinics. If there had never been a commission report, the issue of unregulated clinics would still be out there. We are meeting the requirement of putting regulation in place through legislation. How can that take away from the process? Surely it is speeding the process up. The normal allegation would be that the Tánaiste is not responding to us.

I am not saying this to assuage the concerns of the Opposition members, but we took their concerns into account last Tuesday. The walk-out and certain points concerned us. I made up my mind that we should adjourn on Tuesday evening in order to try to speak to the Tánaiste to see if we could deal with the issue.

Rather than divide the mindset of the committees, this is an opportunity to allow that process to begin. People may think this is a shot to extend the matter beyond listening to the Government but that is not the issue. I ask that the committee be allowed to have hearings if necessary in September. That would be one month. We should have the Tánaiste's officials before the committee in September to outline the process for the legislation. When that process is over we will deal with the report. I do not see where we are threatening or using a majority on the issue.

The events have gone beyond what we were speaking about last Tuesday. The Chairman's comments make sense. In some respects there is no point in bringing in people for public consultation until the Department of Health and Children and the Tánaiste bring forward legislation. We might have consultations, the legislation would be published and we might find that many groups involved wanted to come back in to discuss the legislation as published.

Events have moved on dramatically even since Tuesday. We are moving the process we should have been moving then. The Tánaiste is guaranteeing to look at this matter as a legislative problem and will bring forward legislation to the Dáil, presumably, and the sub-committee at some stage.

When the heads of the legislation are published and we are making real progress — not reducing this committee to a talking shop — there will be no problem in bringing in groups for consultation. They will consult us on the basis of legislation going forward. That is very different to the position the committee took last Tuesday, with which we disagreed completely.

This morning's scenario is very different to what was being discussed last Tuesday. At the same time there is a great deal of ambiguity on what the Tánaiste is talking about. Over the next month we may all receive letters from the Tánaiste giving greater clarity to how she sees the process going forward.

We could not expect the Tánaiste to have a totally comprehensive response by this afternoon. The committee does not wish to divide on the issue. I do not want to go back on the charge that we were negligent or uncaring about women's health etc. We want to ensure we are not charged as such.

Perhaps I should make a contribution as I was away voting. I have missed what has been said. I welcome the letter. I do not know the Chairman's persuasive powers, but he should be congratulated on making the call and getting it.

It was out of general concern for the committee.

This is what everybody wanted at the last meeting. Everybody would like to see progress on regulation.

That is not what Senator Feeney said last Tuesday. She said it was nonsense then.

For the record, when the word "nonsense" was used I was quoting other members.

For the record, the Senator misquoted me on that occasion.

Deputy McManus said the words "silly nonsense".

Yes, however Senator Feeney misunderstood my point and lost the context of the statement.

For the record, the members let bygones be bygones.

I will check that on the record.

Does Deputy Twomey feel something might happen on this matter in the next month or two? I do not know if this is possible.

Legislation is being prepared, that is what is happening.

I am delighted with what I read in the letter. However, are we talking about a matter of months or years? I do not see the harm in our returning here in October and starting the consultation process with outside bodies.

I am not happy with the letter if the interpretation that almost everyone seems to have taken is accurate. How often do we complain about not having an input in the early stages of legislation? I understand that people think this might be a delaying tactic and we should put a timeframe on this committee's discussions.

This is an important issue and I feel the Irish people have a great interest in it. This committee should have input into the legislation in advance. I do not see the point in having consultations after legislation is published.

The Health Information and Quality Authority, HIQA, is the subject of the next major piece of health legislation. The heads of that Bill were published in May and were sent out to the public for consultation. A general overview of legislation has been circulated so that people can see what the Department envisages as the way forward. Then there is a two month public consultation period during which submissions are made. The submissions may change the legislation and then it goes through the five stages in Dáil Éireann. That is where we have an opportunity to change it. It is better to use this method than pluck it out of the sky randomly and wonder exactly how it will all end up.

That is a fair comment. However, I do not think that should prevent us from starting at this point. We do not know the heads of the Bill but we know the areas that will be covered in it. We should get started in order to move the process on quickly.

I am rather confused. Are we all reading the same letter? If one examines the letter carefully, one sees that the first paragraph states that the number of Department officials working on this is being increased. The Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children goes on to state that many substantive and complex policy issues need to be assessed and that the work of the Department will proceed in a way mindful of developments in the court.

I would not infer from this that heads of Bills will be published very quickly or slowly. The Tánaiste has stated in an up-front way that this is a very complex area that will require much thought. The work of our committee will be helpful to her but I do not think we should rush into making a report to the Tánaiste until the court case has been dealt with, irrespective of the outcome. We should also wait until we consider the report of the sub-committee.

The court case may be very relevant to this and that is a fair point. I do not want to embark on hearings, as that process has been carried out by the commission. It does not make sense to have hearings without the final word from the court. It is important that we have the information from the Attorney General. I suggest we invite the Tánaiste to indicate precisely what she means by a specific scheme of statutory regulation. Hopefully the court decision will not be delayed. We need to know the court decision, the Tánaiste's position and have the Attorney General's submission.

I favour hearings. One of the areas of dissent in the report related to the issue of surrogacy which, I accept, the sub-committee opposes. I do not remember who the individual was. The dissenting voice on the committee stated that, even given the research that had been carried out, the legal advice and the public response, the commission had achieved a position of considerable reach. Despite the hearings that had taken place.

I cite this as an example because had this committee had access to that information it might have reached a different decision. This sounds a warning that we might consider this area more closely.

I support Deputy Cooper-Flynn and also favour hearings. I do not mind when they are held but if we return in October, I would like it to be to meetings that are still on the agenda. I do not want to leave today having decided not to meet with anyone.

So far we are getting broad agreement on this matter. I want to involve everyone in this discussion. Some members feel there is no point in having further hearings and others feel there is. Those against them fear it will prolong the issue. I suggest we have hearings in September and October. Those who wish to participate are welcome, while those who feel the commission report is adequate need not attend. In the meantime I will ask the Tánaiste to clarify the contents of the letter. I will also request the information from the Attorney General and the Department officials involved be supplied to the committee before the end of October. Would all of this receive broad agreement?

It is much better to make a decision when we have all of the information.

I would agree with Deputy McManus on that point. We should wait until the court case is finished and a judgment has been handed down.

We should also wait until the information the Chairman is to seek has been supplied.

On the basis that things have moved on——

Is the plan to discuss this further when the court case is over and the Chairman has received more information from the Tánaiste and Attorney General?

To assure people that this is not an escape hatch we should clarify that we are referring to a tight timeframe of no more than a month.

We cannot forget about the court case.

If the Tánaiste and Department continue to do their work and the court case progresses at the same time we may have something substantial to discuss in September.

Are we agreed on that?

Others have paid tribute to the Chairman and I wish to do so also. He has made great efforts to bring the committee together.

I have no legal background and I think it would be helpful to get legal advice on the judgment when it is made if it is relevant.

I second that.

We all agree with Deputy McManus. Are there any other issues on which we can support her?

Peace has been obviously declared. I thank the members.

The joint committee adjourned at 2 p.m. sine die.
Barr
Roinn