Asked by: Charlotte Nichols (Labour - Warrington North)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if she will make it his policy to increase the price of unhealthy food to subsidise healthier foods.
Answered by Andrea Leadsom - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
We have a comprehensive strategy to improve diets, and to make the healthier choice the easier choice. The Government’s measures with regards to healthy food are focused on consumer behaviour and providing a safety net to those families who need it the most.
Between 2015 and 2020, we have reduced the sugar content of soft drinks by 46% through the Soft Drinks Industry Levy, and our voluntary sugar reduction programme has reduced sugar in breakfast cereals by 14.9%. We are also supporting families from low-income households to eat a healthier diet by investing in the Healthy Start scheme, and our School Fruit and Vegetables Scheme has provided nearly 415 million portions of produce to approximately 2.2 million pupils in 2023/24.
From October 2025, we will be introducing an online and television watershed to restrict advertising of unhealthy food and drink, as well as restrictions on the promotion of less healthy foods by volume price, restricting offers such as three for two, both in store and online.
Asked by: Lord Taylor of Warwick (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking (1) to strengthen the resilience of the UK's food supply chain, and (2) to enhance food security, in the face of external disruptions and challenges.
Answered by Lord Douglas-Miller - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The UK has a highly resilient food supply chain and is well equipped to deal with situations with the potential to cause disruption.
Our high degree of food security is built on supply from diverse sources; strong domestic production as well as imports through stable trade routes. We produce 60% of all the food we need, and 73% of food which we can grow or rear in the UK for all or part of the year, and these figures have changed little over the last 20 years.
UK consumers have access through international trade to food products that cannot be produced here, or at least not on a year-round basis. This supplements domestic production, and also ensures that any disruption from risks such as adverse weather or disease does not affect the UK's overall security of supply.
Defra has well established ways of working with the industry and across Government to monitor risks that may arise. This includes extensive, regular and ongoing engagement in preparedness for, and response to, issues with the potential to cause disruption to food supply chains.
Recognising the importance of food security, in the Agriculture Act 2020, the Government made a commitment to produce an assessment of our food security at least once every three years. The first UK Food Security Report was produced in 2021 and the next will be published by December 2024. This report serves as an evidence base for policy work.
Starting this year, the government is also strengthening our food security monitoring by introducing the annual Food Security Index in addition to the three-yearly UKFSR.
Published to coincide with the second UK Farm to Fork Summit on 14 May 2024, the 2024 Food Security Index sets out how Government will track UK-wide food security on an annual basis, monitoring domestic food production, land use, input costs, and farmer productivity.
The Index looks at shorter-term trends that change year on year, complementing the UKFSR’s comprehensive assessment and attention to longer-term trends. The 2024 Index shows that the UK farming sector is at its most productive since records began.
A further package of measures to support farmers and grow the UK’s farming and food sector was announced by the government at the Farm to Fork Summit on 14th May 2024.
This includes a new Blueprint for Growing the UK Fruit and Vegetable Sector (see attached), setting out how industry and government can work together to increase domestic production and drive investment into this valuable sector. The plan involves ensuring the sector has access to affordable and sustainable energy and water, cutting planning red tape to make it easier and quicker to build glasshouses, and looking to double to £80 million the amount of funding given to horticulture businesses when compared to the EU legacy Fruit and Vegetable Aid Scheme which will be replaced from 2026 onwards.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether she has made a comparative assessment of the impact of ultra-processed foods on public health in (a) the UK and (b) other countries; and whether she has made an assessment of the impact of the UK exiting the EU on levels of consumption of ultra-processed food.
Answered by Andrea Leadsom - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
United Kingdom dietary recommendations are based on independent advice from the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN). In July 2023, the SACN published a position statement on processed foods and health, summarising a scoping review of the evidence on food processing and health. The statement can be accessed via the following link:
The statement included an evaluation of the methods of applying the ultra-processed food (UPF) definition in the UK, the suitability of such methods, and consideration of the availability and quality of evidence on food processing and health.
It made reference to international policy and recommendations with respect to food processing and estimates of processed food consumption in the United States and France. The statement notes that estimated average UPF consumption in the United States was comparable to estimates conducted for the UK. Estimated average UPF consumption in France was somewhat lower than the UK. However, it is unclear if this is due to differences in dietary patterns, data collection methods, the methods used to estimate UPF consumption, or a combination of some, or all, of these issues.
The SACN concluded that observed associations between UPF and health are concerning, but it is unclear whether these foods are inherently unhealthy due to processing or due to their nutritional content. Given the SACN’s concerns, the committee has added the topic of processed foods to its watching brief and will consider it at its next horizon scan meeting in June 2024. No specific assessment has been made of the impact of the UK exiting the European Union on levels of UPF consumption.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether she has made a recent assessment of the potential impact of consumption of ultra-processed foods on health.
Answered by Andrea Leadsom - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
United Kingdom dietary recommendations are based on independent advice from the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN). In July 2023, the SACN published a position statement on processed foods and health, summarising a scoping review of the evidence on food processing and health. The statement can be accessed via the following link:
The statement included an evaluation of the methods of applying the ultra-processed food (UPF) definition in the UK, the suitability of such methods, and consideration of the availability and quality of evidence on food processing and health.
It made reference to international policy and recommendations with respect to food processing and estimates of processed food consumption in the United States and France. The statement notes that estimated average UPF consumption in the United States was comparable to estimates conducted for the UK. Estimated average UPF consumption in France was somewhat lower than the UK. However, it is unclear if this is due to differences in dietary patterns, data collection methods, the methods used to estimate UPF consumption, or a combination of some, or all, of these issues.
The SACN concluded that observed associations between UPF and health are concerning, but it is unclear whether these foods are inherently unhealthy due to processing or due to their nutritional content. Given the SACN’s concerns, the committee has added the topic of processed foods to its watching brief and will consider it at its next horizon scan meeting in June 2024. No specific assessment has been made of the impact of the UK exiting the European Union on levels of UPF consumption.
Asked by: John Hayes (Conservative - South Holland and The Deepings)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what his Department's policy is on the procurement of (a) food and (b) drinks produced in Britain for use in its canteens and restaurants.
Answered by Paul Maynard - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
The DWP’s FM supplier has investigated the sourcing of food and drink in its canteens and restaurants. They confirm that all food and drink has to meet the Government Buying Standards, as well as their catering sub-contractor’s (Compass) own non-negotiable standards that have to be met in relation to animal welfare and quality assurance.
In order to achieve this, Compass have a set of strict food sourcing standards that their suppliers have to adhere to. These are split up between:
• Dairy and eggs
• Fruit and Veg
• Animal Products
• Fish and Seafood
• Meat sourcing
• Grocery and Savoury
For instance, for dairy liquid milk they state it must be from British Origin and red tractor assurance. All our eggs are cage free (liquid and shell). All shell eggs are from the UK.
Compass have set the net zero target of 2030, so have banned air freight in their business.
Asked by: Alex Cunningham (Labour - Stockton North)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what steps her Department is taking to reduce the proportion of ultra-processed foods in school meals.
Answered by Damian Hinds - Minister of State (Education)
There is no universally agreed definition of ultra-processed foods. The term defines foods by how much processing they have been through rather than their nutritional composition.
The standards for school food are set out in The Requirements for School Food Regulations 2014. These regulations are designed to ensure that schools provide pupils with healthy food and drink options and to make sure that pupils have the energy and nutrition they need throughout the school day.
The ‘School Food Standards’ define the foods and drinks that must be provided, those which are restricted and those which must never be provided. The standards already restrict foods high in fat, salt and sugar, including crisps, confectionery and high-sugar drinks, as well as low quality reformed or reconstituted foods. They also ensure that the right foods are available for children every day. For example, one or more portions of fruit must be provided every day and at least three different fruits every week.
Compliance with the standards is mandatory for all maintained schools, academies and free schools. School governors and trustees have a responsibility to ensure compliance and should appropriately challenge the headteacher and the senior leadership team to ensure the school is meeting its obligations.
The department believes that the standards provide a robust yet flexible framework for school food provision. The government continues to keep the standards under review.
Asked by: John Hayes (Conservative - South Holland and The Deepings)
Question
To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the House of Commons Commission, what the House of Commons' policy is on the procurement of (a) food and (b) drinks produced in Britain for use in its canteens and restaurants.
Answered by Charles Walker
The House of Commons complies with UK legislative standards when procuring food and drinks from suppliers. Its procurement approach supports and where possible prioritises the purchase of food and drink produced in Britain. For example:
Certain regulations, such as the Government’s Procurement Policy Note of December 2020 and increased use of the UK-based Catering Framework, have allowed for additional freedom for spend on goods and services below certain price thresholds. Within the limits of these regulations, the House where possible seeks to hold competitions which only target producers within the UK.
Asked by: Daniel Kawczynski (Conservative - Shrewsbury and Atcham)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with reference to the NFU's report entitled Farming for Britain's Future, published in December 2023, what steps his Department has taken to increase confidence within the agricultural industry.
Answered by Mark Spencer - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
In 2020 we published the Agricultural Transition Plan (ATP), setting out our plan for farmers, allowing them to make business planning decisions with confidence. Since then, we have launched our reforms, aiming to give farmers more choice and ensuring there are offers available for all farm types and locations. This includes the rollout of the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) and our Innovation and Productivity schemes such as the Farming Investment Fund (FIF).
We also continue to expand and improve our offers in response to farmers’ feedback. Recently, the Government has confirmed farmers will benefit from the improved SFI from July this year, following the announcement by the Environment Secretary Steve Barclay in January. The improved offer includes a 10% increase in the average value of agreements in SFI and Countryside Stewardship (CS); a streamlined single application process for farmers to apply for the SFI and CS Mid-Tier; and around 50 new actions that farmers can get paid for.
Furthermore, to aid the transition, and to give farmers confidence in their choices and the best chance of benefiting from our reforms we are also providing support via the Future Farming Resilience Fund. This fund is designed to provide free business support to farmers and land managers in England during the early years of the agricultural transition.
Lastly, on 14 May 2024 we published our Blueprint for Growing the UK Fruit and Vegetable Sector, which aims to boost production of fresh produce and reduce reliance on imports. This is backed by our new Horticulture Resilience and Growth Offer, where Defra will look to double to £80m the amount of funding given to horticulture businesses when compared to the EU legacy Fruit and Vegetable Aid Scheme, which will be replaced from 2026 onwards. We are also unlocking the opportunities of gene editing with £15m investment into Genetic Improvement Networks, helping to boost access to more resilient crop varieties, that require fewer inputs and cut farmer costs.
Asked by: Viscount Waverley (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they will take to ensure that the introduction of import controls does not result in lengthy administrative processes for businesses.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
The Border Target Operating Model (BTOM) has been designed with traders and consumers at the forefront. Our global risk-based approach harnesses data and technology to help reduce administrative burden for businesses. Further, most fruit and vegetables are currently treated as low risk and will not require any additional paperwork or checks. A limited number of meat and dairy products have been categorised as medium-risk. For these, simplified and streamlined certification is available.
Through the BTOM, we are piloting world-first Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Trusted Trader schemes. These will allow businesses, including some SMEs, to utilise their own processes to provide us with the assurance normally achieved through border controls, reducing administrative burden, time and costs. Further pilots that allow some traders to be approved to carry out their own checks at point of destination are now being rolled out.
Central to our support for businesses is our commitment to deliver a Single Trade Window (STW) with a further milestone this autumn. When fully operational, the STW will provide one digital gateway for users, where they can provide all the data once that is needed to fulfil their border obligations.
We continue to explore new ways to harness technology and streamline trade. Through the Ecosystem of Trust pilots, which developed theoretical models for ‘frictionless’ trade, the government partnered with industry to test new approaches to the use of technology and data at the border. These new approaches are now being taken forward via what we are calling “Border Trade Demonstrators” - aimed at improving border processes through better information sharing and improved governance.
Asked by: Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 14 March (HL2919), whether the inflationary impact model will be updated on the basis of (1) the announced Common User Charge, and (2) the application of the Common User Charge to the additional fruit and vegetables that have been classified as medium rather than low risk.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
The approach and plans set out within the Border Target Operating Model (BTOM) remain unchanged. We will continue to support business readiness throughout the implementation of checks and take a sensible pragmatic approach to enforcement.
The government’s consumer food price inflation model for the BTOM included an assessment of policy measures likely to affect the cost and/or quantity of traded products, including the Government-run BCP operating costs that will be recovered via a Common User Charge. Estimates of the cost and impact of the Charge were included in the modelling of the inflationary impact of the BTOM and we stand by these estimates.
This data includes a mix of published and unpublished commercially sensitive data sources. To publish only a partial picture of that data would not be in keeping with statistical propriety.