UK’s National Food Strategy proposes sugar and salt tax to “level playing field”
15 Jul 2021 --- Part Two of the UK’s National Food Strategy has been met with mixed reactions by members of the F&B industry. Among other things, the proposal for government calls for a sugar and salt reformulation tax, a £1 billion (US$1.4 billion) innovation fund to improve the food system and a pilot of doctors prescribing fruit and vegetables.
The independent report was commissioned by the UK government in 2019, with the first part being released last July. The second part lays out four main objectives:
- Escape the junk food cycle to protect the National Health Service (NHS).
- Reduce diet-related inequality.
- Make the best use of land.
- Create a long-term shift in food culture.
“Some of our recommendations will be met with protests from those industries whose business models are shaped to fit the current food system. Change is never easy. But we cannot build a sustainable, healthy and fair food system by doing business as usual. This is an interventionist strategy,” the report acknowledges.
Overall, it recommends that by 2032, fruit and vegetable consumption increases by 30 percent and fiber consumption increases by 50 percent. Meanwhile, consumption of food high in saturated fat, salt and sugar will have to go down by 25 percent, and meat consumption should reduce by 30 percent.
The project is helmed by Henry Dimbleby, who co-founded the Leon restaurant chain and now serves as a lead non-executive board member of the department for environment, food and rural affairs (Defra).
The strategy aimed to be informed by the broadest possible range of experiences, demonstrated by locations the team visited (Source: The National Food Strategy).
Major reformulation incentives
One of the key suggested reforms is introducing a sugar and salt reformulation tax, with some of that revenue going toward getting fresh fruit and vegetables to low-income families.
The report recommends a £3 (US$4.2) per kg tax on sugar and a £6 (US$8.3) per kg tax on salt sold for use in processed foods or in restaurants and catering businesses. This could create an incentive for manufacturers to reduce the levels of sugar and salt in their products by reformulating their recipes or reducing their portion sizes.
“The CEOs of major food companies have told us privately that they cannot make these changes without government intervention. They need a level playing field if they are to start making their products healthier, otherwise the competition will simply move in and undercut them,” details the report.
However, the Food & Drink Federation (FDF) argues that the tax would impact families who are already struggling to make ends meet.
“After many years of cost pressures, businesses in our sector are already operating on very tight margins, and any further costs would simply have to be passed on to the consumer in the form of higher food prices,” argues Kate Halliwell, FDF’s chief scientific officer.
She says that it is hard to view the proposals that the taxes raised will pay for additional health plans with anything but skepticism. “The same promise was made ahead of the introduction of the soft drinks industry levy but was quietly dropped shortly afterward.”
Narrowing diet-related inequality
Another recommendation to help stop the junk food cycle is introducing mandatory reporting for food companies with more than 250 employees. Every year, they may be asked to publish a report detailing aspects like the sale of unhealthy foods, protein types, fruits, vegetables and major nutrients, as well as food waste. 
The report stresses that the food system of the future should make populations well instead of sick (Source: The National Food Strategy).
The report also proposes a new “Eat and Learn” initiative for schools to ensure that children understand how to feed themselves and others both affordably and healthily.
To reduce diet-related inequality, the report recommends extending eligibility for free school meals, funding the Holiday Activities and Food program for the next three years and expanding the healthy start scheme.
The government is further encouraged to trial a “Community Eatwell” program to help people with low incomes improve their diets. This would give GPs the option to prescribe fruit and vegetables – along with food-related education and social support – to patients suffering the effects of poor diet or food insecurity.
“This is exactly the sort of radical disruption of the current food system that we need to see,” responds Ben Reynolds, deputy chief executive of Sustain.
“Furthermore, we wholeheartedly support the recommendation that this be used to support local food infrastructure and businesses, such as fresh food markets and box schemes, which have the added benefit of providing more jobs and money in local communities.”
Bolstering funding
At present, most of the government money that goes into food-related innovation is directed toward scientists and academics. According to the report, many of the other areas where innovation happens – like farms or business start-ups – have seen a funding drought.
Therefore, it proposes a new “challenge fund” worth £500 million (US$692 million) over five years, with investment distributed by UK Research and Innovation (UKRI). Crucially, the money would be spent on projects that make the food system better in practice, rather than simply on new ideas.
Defra has already budgeted £280 million (US$387 million) to support innovation as part of its Agricultural Transition Plan. The report calls for a further £50 million (US$69 million) toward building shared facilities in a commercial “cluster” for entrepreneurs and scientists working on alternative proteins.
It also asks for endowments of £150 million (US$208 million) and £50 million (US$69 million) for new centers that focus on diet and farming methods, respectively. 
Nearly 2,000 respondents from businesses, NGOs and academia submitted over 5,000 suggestions.
Room for improvement?
ProVeg UK, which was consulted by the National Food Strategy team in the creation of the report, is now encouraging the government to redesign the Government Buying Standards for Food in line with the recommendations to encourage the public sector to serve less meat and dairy and more whole grains, fruit, vegetables and pulses.
Meanwhile, Ruth Westcott, campaign co-ordinate on climate and nature for Sustain, says that it’s not fair for consumers to take responsibility for meat and dairy emissions when there is so much availability.
“We would also like to see targets and standards to be put in place for public sector food, so more taxpayer money is spent on sustainable, higher welfare (preferably British) produce,” she states.
She hopes that British farmers will be supported to transition to higher welfare, more sustainable farming and to ensure they aren’t undercut by low standard, low welfare produce from overseas.
Halliwell of FDF is positive about contributing the organization’s ideas to Defra, including via the Food and Drink Sector Council report due in September. “We look forward to seeing the government’s white paper in six months’ time that will have considered a wide range of inputs.”
In anticipation of the release of the National Food Strategy’s second half, a report published earlier this week argued that UK food policy needs much greater diversity to deal with future shocks.
By Katherine Durrell
