Publication - Consultation analysis

Reducing health harms of foods high in fat, sugar, or salt: consultation analysis

Published: 13 Sep 2019

Independent analysis of the responses to the consultation on proposals to restrict the promotion and marketing of foods high in fat, sugar, or salt, and have little to no nutritional benefit.

106 page PDF

1.9 MB

106 page PDF

1.9 MB

Contents
Reducing health harms of foods high in fat, sugar, or salt: consultation analysis
Annex 5: Response to individual questions

106 page PDF

1.9 MB

Annex 5: Response to individual questions

Questions Number of responses % of total responses (n=726)
Q1 To what degree do you agree or disagree that mandatory measures should be introduced to restrict the promotion and marketing of foods high in fat, sugar or salt to reduce health harms associated with their excessive consumption? 709 98%
Please explain your answer. 584 80%
Q2 Should this policy only target discretionary foods? (confectionery, sweet biscuits, crisps, savoury snacks, cakes, pastries, puddings and soft drinks with added sugar)  714 98%
Please explain your answer. 453 62%
Q3 Should this policy treat ice-cream and dairy desserts as discretionary foods? 693 95%
Please explain your answer. 446 61%
Q4 Please comment on our approach to defining categories and exclusions of particular foods/products from those definitions (paragraphs 9-11)? 533 73%
Q5 In relation to the foods being targeted, should this policy seek to… Restrict multi-buys Restrict sales of unlimited amounts for a fixed charge  Not restrict temporary price reductions Not restrict multi-packs?
686 683 645 649 94% 94% 89% 89%
Please explain your answer 509 70%
Q6 Please comment on the approach we are proposing to take to restricting forms of promotion and marketing outlined in section 5. 651 90%
Q7 Should the restrictions apply to any place where targeted foods are sold to the public, except where they are not sold in the course of business (e.g. charity bake sales)? 688 95%
Please explain your answer 436 60%
Q8 Please comment on whether, and if so to what extent, restrictions should be applied online. 596 82%
Q9 Should restrictions to displaying targeted foods at end of aisle, checkouts etc., not apply where there is no reasonable alternative to displaying them elsewhere? 683 94%
Please explain your answer. 449 62%
Q10 Should food marked as discounted because it is close to expiry be exempt from.. Positioning restrictions (end of aisle, checkouts etc.)  ‘Promotion of value’ restrictions? 672 665 93% 92%
Please explain your answer. 444 61%
Q11 Please list any other exemptions we should consider. 95 13%
Q12 Please comment on our proposals for enforcement and implementation outlined in section 8. 592 82%
Q13 Please comment on the proposed flexible approach outlined in section 9. 495 68%
Q14 If you sell, distribute or manufacture discretionary foods, please comment on how the restrictions in this consultation paper would impact you. 56 8%
Q15 What support do sellers, distributors and manufacturers need to implement the restrictions effectively? 245 34%
Q16 How would the proposed restrictions impact on the people of Scotland with respect to age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, ethnicity, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation or socioeconomic disadvantage? Please consider both potentially positive and negative impacts, supported by evidence, and, if applicable, advise on any mitigating actions we should take. 429 59%
Q17 Please outline any other comments you wish to make. 478 66%

Contact

Email: Leigh.Edwardson@gov.scot