Calorie labelling in the out of home sector: consultation analysis

5. Types of food and drink and possible exemptions

Q5. Pre-Packed for direct sale foods

Question 5 - The intention is that pre-packed for direct sale (PPDS) foods would fall within the scope of the policy. Do you agree with that proposal?

Overview

A total of 638 respondents provided an answer to the closed element of question 5. The majority (54%) of those who responded to this question did not think that PPDS should fall within the scope of the policy while 33% thought that it should. A further 13% said that they did not know.

Again, there was a significant cohort of respondents who did not think that PPDS should be within the scope of the policy because they did not think that mandatory calorie labelling should be implemented at all.

A higher proportion of organisations thought that PPDS should fall within the scope of the policy (61%) compared to individuals (30%). Across different types of organisations there was varying degrees of support for this; while OOH providers were least likely to think this should fall within the scope of the policy, a majority of industry representative bodies thought that it should.

In total, 297 individuals and 59 organisations provided responses explaining their answer to question 5.

Views against the inclusion of PPDS

As noted above, the majority of respondents did not agree that PPDS should fall within the scope of the policy. Reasons given for this were fairly consistent with responses to previous questions.

Again, several respondents expressed concerns around the negative and triggering impact this could have on individuals with eating disorders, particularly given that PPDS foods are regularly sought after by consumers. This sentiment was summarised by one respondent who argued that:

"…applying calories to prepacked food will, in my own experience, cause adverse effects to those suffering from an eating disorder. By attaching the calories to the food item, it makes the number unavoidable for the consumer, and can cause individuals with eating disorders to fixate on it, making eating out an unenjoyable and upsetting challenge instead of a fun occasional treat." [Individual]

Another perspective was that the policy could have an insignificant or unsatisfactory impact when considering the relative costs of implementation. A few respondents were already familiar with the presentation of calories on PPDS labels but queried how effective they are when used in isolation:

"This really already happens but not sure it has the impact desired without a public health campaign and funding for education and the availability of affordable healthy options for those in low incomes this is likely to have little to no impact." [Individual]

Views in favour of the inclusion of PPDS

Those who believed that PPDS should be included in the scope of policy felt that this would enhance the ability of people to make healthier food choices.

Various individuals mentioned that whilst most products in supermarkets provide calorie information alongside ingredients and allergens, data on the latter two points are sufficient for small businesses, such as small bakeries selling wrapped sandwiches or pastries. However, others expressed that there was no reason why PPDS should fall outside the scope of the policy, particularly where its exclusion might cause ambiguities:

"Such products should be required to display calorie information and it should be the responsibility of the original producer/supplier of the products to ensure the correct calorie information is displayed. Exempting PPDS would just create a loophole and may encourage the use of more packaging in order to avoid labelling." [Organisation, Third Sector]

As alluded to above, many respondents stated that they believed that PPDS food already had nutritional information listed in many settings.

Q6. Food and drink exemptions

Question 6 - Should the foods and drinks listed below be exempt from calorie labelling?

• Non-standard menu items prepared on request
• Alcoholic drinks
• Menu items on sale for 30 days or less
• Condiments added by consumer

Overview

The consultation asked respondents whether certain food or drinks should be exempted from the policy: non-standard menu items, alcoholic drinks, menu items for sale for 30 days or less and condiments added by the consumer.

The consultation paper sets out that the Scottish Government envisages that all of these food or drink items would be exempt from the scope of the policy.

Overall, the majority of organisations and individuals who responded to these questions (total number of responses for each element can be seen in Annex 1) felt that all of the items listed should be exempt from the policy in line with the position set out in the consultation paper. There were similar levels of support for the exemption of non-standard menu items (80%), menu items for sale for 30 days or less (72%) and condiments added by the consumer (75%). There was greater variation in views on the exemption of alcoholic drinks, as 59% of respondents felt that these should be exempt from calorie labelling.

In total, 318 individuals and 60 organisations provided responses explaining their answer to question 6.

Views seeking exemptions

A key recurring point was that the inclusion of these items would be impractical across the sector and would create substantial additional work for service providers:

"Non-standard [menu items] is extreme for restaurants to have to figure out; and accuracy will suffer severely for these." [Individual]

Similarly, respondents expressed that the need to calculate calories on non-standard items and condiments would be stressful and onerous on consumers and service providers.

In particular, calorie counting minor 'add-on' items such as condiments was considered unnecessary, and even excessive, by a number of respondents. There were specific practical concerns around (in)accuracy when applying calorie labelling to condiments, given that consumer choice and preference play a significant role in portion sizes, making standardisation difficult.

Moreover, there were worries that providing information to this level of detail would have a negative impact on those suffering from eating disorders.

Several respondents expressed the view that, given that the harms of alcohol extend beyond the number of calories in alcoholic drinks, it should be part of a different public health campaign rather than subject to this legislation.

Views not seeking exemptions

Many who felt that there should be no exemptions stated that if the policy was to be rolled out then it should apply to everyone, so that information is readily available for all purchases in OOH settings. Several respondents believed that blanket coverage was required in order for real impact to be achieved.

Several respondents felt that alcohol should not be exempt from the policy, noting that calorific information would be useful and practical due to the short ingredient list and that alcoholic drinks tend to be higher in calories than people realise. Therefore, the inclusion on alcoholic drinks would have a positive impact within the policy.

Q7. Exemptions for menus marketed for children

Overview

Question 7 - Should menus marketed specifically at children be exempt from calorie labelling?

The consultation asked respondents whether menus marked specifically for children should be exempt from calorie labelling. A total of 645 respondents (572 individuals and 73 organisations) provided a response to the closed element of question 7.

The majority (76%) of those who responded to this question thought that menus marketed specifically at children should be exempt from calorie labelling. Around a fifth (19%) felt that these menus should not be exempt, while 5% said they did not know. Many of those opposed to mandatory calorie labelling in principle agreed that children's menus should be exempt.

Most individuals (78%) and a slight majority of organisations (53%) felt that these menus should be exempt. A higher proportion of organisational respondents said don't know (22%) than individual respondents (3%). Industry representative bodies were particularly likely to agree that children's menus should be exempt while third sector organisations who responded to this question gave mixed responses.

In total, 401 individuals and 64 organisations provided responses explaining their answer to question 7.

Views in favour of an exemption for children's menus

A view that was repeatedly raised regarding the presence of calories on children's menus was that this could have a negative impact on children's relationship with food and heighten the risk of children developing eating disorders. The perceived negative influence of parents'/carers' 'control' over their child/ren's calorie intake - in terms of shaping future relations with, and anxieties around, food - was also mentioned:

"I do not know a single adult who counts the calories of their child's food. I think this is wrong and runs the risk of the child developing an unhealthy relationship with parents and/or food. I think children should be taught about healthy eating, but not calorie counting especially since most eating disorders develop during adolescence." [Individual]

Instead, several respondents argued that there were other, more suitable, ways of promoting healthy eating and diet among children. Examples of alternative methods to promote healthy eating included educating children on where their food comes from and how to incorporate foods of a 'rainbow' of colours into their diet, encouraging regular physical activity, and serving nutritionally balanced meals in settings frequented by children.

Views in favour of the inclusion of children's menus

Among those who felt that children's menus should not be exempt, there was some consensus that calorie information could be a useful tool for parents when making choices for their children in OOH settings:

"Often food aimed at children is higher in calories. Displaying the nutrition would enable parent and carers to make the choice for them" [Individual]

Similarly, respondents felt that the availability of this information could allow children and parents to make informed choices in OOH settings and could teach children about a healthy diet. This was seen as a particular advantage in the context of high levels of childhood obesity.

An additional point raised by a third sector organisation was that these menus should not be excluded as discretionary foods were much more likely to be purchased out of home when children were present.

Q8. Calorie information on request for children's menus

Question 8 - Should businesses be required to provide calorie information about options on children's menus to parents and carers on request?

Overview

The consultation asked respondents whether businesses should be required to provide calorie information about options on children's menus to parents and carers on request. In total, 642 respondents provided a response to the closed element of this question (570 individuals and 72 organisations).

The majority (53%) of those who responded believed that businesses should not be required to provide this information on request. Around four in ten (37%) thought that this information should be provided on request, whilst a further 10% said they did not know.

Similar levels of individual (54%) and organisational respondents (49%) said that businesses should not be required to provide this information (54%) than organisations (49%). OOH providers and industry representative bodies in particular felt that businesses should not be required to provide this information.

In total, 318 individuals and 57 organisations provided responses explaining their answer to question 8.

Views expressed

Many of the themes identified in question 8 were consistent with the views expressed in question 7. A few respondents reiterated that the availability of this information could encourage an unhealthy relationship with food and that there were more suitable alternatives to calorie information on menus, with the role of parents/carers also deemed influential:

"Education and advertisement about portion sizes would be better." [Individual]

"Whilst I understand that parents will want the most nutritional meal for their children, forcing the child's decisions to be guided by a calorific number should not occur. Children should be able to go out for meals without having to think about their calorie consumption, and no parent should feel the need, unless for strictly medical purposes (e.g., diabetic child who needs to be aware so that they can regulate their insulin levels), to police what their child eats based on calorie count." [Individual]

Others also felt that to mandate businesses to provide calorie information about options on children's menus on request was impractical, came with cost implications, and would add a further layer of complexity for business at the point of service. A few respondents suggested that whilst it may be that some businesses do this in response to their customer base, it should be for businesses - who may know their customers best - to decide. It was also recommended that only businesses of a certain size be mandated to provide this.

Another emerging theme was that there should be a wider range of nutritional information available than just calorie content. Others noted that it would be useful to have calorie information about options on children's menus available upon request so that if people - namely parents/carers - want to know then they have a choice to access this information.