In spite of its worthy aim of focusing on improving the diets of at-risk lower-income families, a new UK government healthy meals campaign has attracted criticism from campaigners. Ben Cooper reports.
Such is the scepticism surrounding the Public Health Responsibility Deal agreed between the UK government and food companies last year that the launch of the Supermeals initiative last week was immediately overshadowed by suggestions that the retailers involved are gaining publicity and kudos while doing very little.
Go deeper with GlobalData
This is a shame as the ‘Supermeals’ concept, launched as part of the Change4Life programme, is in essence a positive step.
Most crucially, it targets lower-income groups which have higher incidences of diet-related health problems, eat more processed food of questionable nutritional value and are generally less receptive to positive dietary health messaging, whether from public health bodies or companies.
Added to this, the timing is perfect. Lower-income consumers may generally be harder to influence, but consumers of all hues have a heightened sensitivity towards health and diet in the post-Christmas period.
There have been two primary strands of criticism.
US Tariffs are shifting - will you react or anticipate?
Don’t let policy changes catch you off guard. Stay proactive with real-time data and expert analysis.
By GlobalDataFirst, it is suggested that the retailers involved – The Co-operative, Aldi and Asda – are not doing anything with the pricing of the healthier foods included in the Supermeals recipes that they would not be doing anyway at this time of year. The promotions – or other very similar ones – would have been available anyway, and are also to be found in supermarkets not participating in the scheme.
Secondly, some commentators have been critical that the recipes include processed foods such as packet cheese sauces, which may for example have a high salt content and cannot therefore be considered as particularly healthy, let alone ‘super’.
The first criticism appears hard to counter when Aldi openly states that it has not reduced any prices for the featured products as it was already offering low prices on those foods.
On the other hand, Asda did confirm it was rolling back prices on “hundreds” of products, while the Co-operative said it was discounting nine products and offering multibuys on a further 50.
Speaking to just-food, Charlie Powell, campaigns director for the Children’s Food Campaign, called for the government to clarify what agreements had been made with the retailers, adding that his organisation was considering making a Freedom of Information request to the Department of Health (DH).
He said the public had “no idea” whether the retailers were doing this because of the scheme or would have been doing it anyway while benefiting from “government-backed marketing”.
“It is unclear whether any more healthy products are being promoted because of this. It seems to be a lot of hot air. We just don’t know.”
While conceding that the “basis of making healthier food available to low-income families is of course a good one”, Powell added: “This doesn’t seem to be the route to do it because alongside the promotions for the healthy food are equally compelling ones for junk food and that clearly is contradictory.”
When asked about the possibility that retailers would be running these promotions anyway, a DH spokesperson said: “The Supermeal discounts are on products specicically selected to coincide with the recipes to provide healthier meals for under GBP5 or to contribute to a healthier/more balanced diet.”
With the objective of helping families “to prepare healthier meals on a budget”, the campaign aims “to help make it as easy as possible for people cook at home and try healthy foods in order to encourage long-term behaviour change in this area”.
But, in light of Aldi’s remarks in particular, wasn’t the term ‘discount’ itself rather misleading?
The DH sent back the following statement: “Commercial partners pulled together a wide range of offers on healthier food and drink under the Supermeals banner for the first time, making it clear to customers what constitutes a healthier choice and using this as an opportunity to communicate wider messages about healthy eating for example in point of sale, recipes and in-store advertising.”
The debate over precisely what the retailers are contributing and gaining is a regrettable distraction but arguably illustrates why health professionals are so often wary of corporate involvement in public health initiatives.
On the other hand, it could be argued that their engagement must be positive at some level. The DH said working with partner organisations allowed it “to reach a wider target audience”, but cost-effectiveness also appears to be an important factor.
The spokesperson added: “Their support enables the campaign to become a social movement and less paid for by government. We have chosen to work closely with The Mirror, Asda, Aldi and The Co-operative for this campaign, as they were able to offer the best value for money for the taxpayer.”
As the objective is to target lower-income groups, the involvement of these particular partners has added value, given their core customer base and focus on the budget end of the market.
The emphasis on lower-income families is also extremely relevant when examining the fairness of the second primary criticism.
Shefalee Loth, senior food researcher at consumer advocacy group Which?, was among the commentators who criticised the inclusion of ingredients like packet sources.
However, the DH spokesperson countered: “The point of the campaign is to help people to make quick, healthier, inexpensive meals. We are providing a wide range of recipes – some contain a few ready-made ingredients as a short-cut, and others use simple, affordable fresh ingredients.”
While critics may contend that rustling up a cheese sauce from scratch is straightforward, the reality is that such skills are missing in many of the families being targeted by this campaign, so there does appear to be a degree of pragmatism here on the part of the DH.
However, Powell says this is a pressing challenge in its own right that the government should be addressing
“The lack of cooking skills is clearly a problem,” Powell said. “That’s why we campaign for cooking to be a compulsory part of the curriculum in schools, because people need not only the knowledge but the skills to cook healthy meals from scratch.”
The benefits of such education would be considerable but, even with political backing, progress to reverse trends seen over decades would be slow.
In the meantime, the pragmatism in evidence in the Supermeals initiative may be the best option available.
However, regarding the involvement of commercial partners, the prevailing atmosphere of scepticism stems directly both from the nature of the Responsibility Deal strategy and the fact that the pledges secured from the food sector left something to be desired in terms of ambition.
The controversy over the retailers’ participation in this initiative has certainly done nothing to foster renewed faith in the policy.
