Read on Twitter
Has @BorisJohnson realised yet that for his anti-obesity drive to be sustainable and effective, he will need to take a v tough stance against US trade lobby (and the businesses it represents) to take his anti-obesity strategy ‘off the table’ in a US-UK deal? THREAD (1/n):
(2/n) An advertising ban may be challenged during future trade negotiations or, perhaps more likely, subject to a threat of litigation citing a future deal or existing WTO rules https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/obr.12081
(3/n) Eg a measure that restricts junk food advertising on television could be said to impact trade in advertising services as well as television broadcasting services. US could claim this violates international trade rules.
(4/n) How do we know this could happen? US trade lobby has repeatedly opposed obesity policies citing costs they create and trade rules they violate. See eg our analysis of WTO challenges https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/related?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002590
(5/n) These types of challenges or threats can have a significant effect on national policy as disputes take years to resolve & incur enormous legal fees. Our paper linked above identifies several instances where governments changed policy following a threat to avoid these costs
(6/n) WTO is not the only forum where obesity policy can be challenged. E.g. in talks to re-negotiate NAFTA, US tried to limit the ability of the pact’s members to warn consumers about the dangers of junk food using nutrition labels… https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/20/world/americas/nafta-food-labels-obesity.html
(7/n) Canada & Mexico rejected this. This shows the importance of taking a tough stance. Although, the the final deal still contains several provisions that could lead to trade disputes. https://theconversation.com/the-new-naftas-assault-on-public-health-116918
(8/n) The US trade lobby has also cited trade rule violations to oppose regulations seeking to limit sugar content of certain foods. See eg this extract from WTO meeting about Saudi-Arabia’s sugar limit (cc @alikjones):
(9/n) ... And Saudi Arabia appears to have subsequently backed down (cc @alikjones)
(10/n) The challenges to sustaining an anti-obesity drive due to these threats of litigation are likely to be compounded by any reduction in tariffs on ingredients used to make calorie dense foods e.g. High-Fructose Corn Syrup https://www.cmaj.ca/content/189/26/E881.abstract
(end) So, @BorisJohnson has said that the NHS will be ‘off the table’ in US trade deal negotiations… will his anti-obesity drive be off the table too?
