Will Liz Truss finally roll back nannying anti-obesity policies?

Within weeks of becoming prime minister, Liz Truss had to go into ‘damage limitation mode’ to calm the markets and deal with mounting political opposition. In her speech today she sought to steady the ship but having spent a wad of political capital and still U-turned on the top rate of tax, there is a distinct possibility that she will ultimately backtrack on other elements of her agenda.

After a tumultuous first few weeks, it’s easy to forget the controversial announcement of the government’s official review of its entire anti-obesity strategy. This was yet another break for current orthodoxy based purely on the prime minister’s libertarian instincts and bound to face sustained opposition.

A coalition of 70 health organisations quickly expressed their “profound concern” about the policy review and urged her to “reconsider any plans to weaken the public health measures” designed to tackle “junk food”, arguing that it would be “absolutely scandalous” to go ahead.

I have written for Reaction several times in the past opposing meddling, ineffective nanny state policies and warning that the demands will never stop. After the sugar tax on soft drinks, came demands for the tax to be extended to cakes, sweets, pizza, and any other foods deemed to be “junk”. There have been calls to clamp down on promotions of certain meat and fish products. It is never enough.

The trouble is, Britain does have an obesity problem. We are one of Europe’s fattest nations and projected to become the fattest. It is estimated that 63% of British adults are overweight or obese, which is double the percentage figure in 1990. The pandemic has exacerbated the situation, with childhood obesity rates increasing significantly.

Freedom is great, but freedom alone isn’t going to address this problem.

Our lifestyles have changed significantly over recent decades and in many ways we haven’t fully adapted. We now have cheaper and more abundant food with far more choice, we have a thousand ways to spend our leisure time sat on our backsides and many of us are sedentary throughout our working day.

We drive everywhere and prioritise convenience. Even central heating can contribute to weight gain according to some studies. The modern world, which has provided us with so much comfort, has also made it more difficult to keep fit and healthy without making a concerted effort to do so. There is no government strategy on how to mitigate this, so in lieu of one we have trivial and illiberal sin taxes and lifestyle regulation.

To reduce obesity, we need a multi-layered approach and a long-term vision. We need investment that pays off in the long term in reduced costs for the NHS. The government should focus on empowering people to improve their lifestyles through education, access to information and means of getting active.

There must be unapologetic intervention in schools and doctors must never spare anyone’s feelings when tackling what is a serious medical problem. GP’s surgeries should be like health centres where people can learn to use diet to address their weight and manage illnesses like diabetes. There are a million success stories out there because losing weight in theory is simple, eat fewer calories, exercise more and have a consistent, balanced diet.

The main focus to address obesity over the long term should be to target childhood obesity and to help educate parents. The city of Amsterdam provided a localised example of a multi-pronged approach to obesity. In 2013, one in five children in Amsterdam were found to be overweight or obese. To tackle this the Council and Health Department of Amsterdam set out to develop a long-term approach which became the ‘Healthy Weight for All Children’ Programme. Within three years it achieved a 12% drop in children who were overweight and obese and Amsterdam received a European Health Award in 2019.

The programme was a package of extensive, targeted government intervention. Children in Amsterdam began to be regularly weighed and tested for agility and balance. Overweight children received early intervention and they were told, along with their parents, that they were overweight and referred to a nurse. They were then offered a package of help including access to gym classes, health centres, home visits by volunteers and dietary advice.  

This is how we should tackle our obesity problem. Combining public services with third sector organisations and voluntary networks to fully address the crisis as part of a long-term plan. Early intervention in schools, funding access to health services, activities and gyms, improving PE and health education in schools, this whole systems approach would reap benefits in the long term.

Sadly, that requires investment, ambition and a long-term vision, which simply isn’t going to happen under Trussonomics. Since coming into government in 2010 the Conservatives have always preferred to hack the public realm to the bone for short term savings without considering whether the long-term costs rendered this a false economy. Schools, GP surgeries, third sector charities and children centres would all be essential means of delivering a proper strategy to tackle obesity, but all have faced steep budget cuts since 2010.

Cuts in yearly years support were linked to childhood obesity in a 2021 study which stated that “the cuts correspond to 4575 more children with obesity or 9174 more overweight/obese children between 2010/11 and 2017/18 than would have been expected had funding levels for the centres remained the same”. Deprived areas were the hardest hit by the cuts, and that is likely to have widened the “obesity gap” between the richest and the poorest children, according to researchers.

Like so many societal problems facing the UK, short termism and a lack of imagination have prevented an effective response to our obesity problem. Abolishing the obesity strategy will be a short lived victory over the “nanny state”. The same policies and worse will inevitably be implemented by a new government because the only way to defeat bad ideas is with good ideas, and this government has none to offer.  

Write to us with your comments to be considered for publication at letters@reaction.life