Hartley Ann: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hartley Ann: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:641;Page:11645] 
1. ANN HARTLEY (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: What initiatives does the Government have under way in the food industry to improve nutrition and reduce obesity? 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Health) 
: 
 The Government has an accord with the industry which is now some years old and has started to deliver some really good results. Nestlé for example has removed 73 tonnes of trans-fatty acids from all of its products out of its Wiri factory and Hubbard’s Foods has removed 42 tonnes of sugar from breakfast cereals. In addition the National Heart Foundation’s Pick the Tick programme is also working—33 tonnes of salt have gone from breads and cereals and fibre has been increased in over 100 products. 
Ann Hartley 
: Noting that progress is the Minister satisfied that it is sufficient; if not how can we do even better? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: No it is nowhere sufficient. It is however a really good start. More is obviously needed although the industry warns that people’s tastes change slowly. We are working with the industry to settle some realistic targets with it. I should acknowledge that Coca-Cola Amatil and Frucor have decided to remove all full-sugar drinks from schools—a world first. 
Ann Hartley 
: Has the Minister seen any expert commentary on the Health Committee’s report on the inquiry into obesity and type 2 diabetes? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: I have. Robert Quigley a public health specialist—the gentleman whom John Key rushed to quote incorrectly—earlier this year on children who skip breakfast said: “The National Party’s response within the Health Committee Report on the Inquiry into Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes is simple-minded”. He said: “It’s almost like the National Party want to make our Kiwi kids fatter—they really couldn’t have got it more wrong.” 
Dr Jonathan Coleman 
: Has the Minister seen any reports from experts who are not Labour Party supporters who say that the Minister cannot reverse the obesity problem unless he changes sociocultural attitudes to food; and does he understand that the Government’s agenda of regulation compulsion and control lacks insight into the underlying causes of obesity? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: The member is correct in saying that the causes of obesity are multifactorial. The point that I think Mr Quigley was making is that he has come to the view that National’s approach to this issue is one that is based on cant and hypocrisy. It is one that is full of hand-wringing but one that ensures that nothing will ever be done. That is not good enough. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Was that an acceptable answer? Was it within the bounds of what is reasonable in Parliament? Were all of the words used by the Minister appropriate for Parliament? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Is the member taking objection to the words that were used? 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I am seeking guidance because if the Minister gets away with that answer then we will most certainly take your lead and use that sort of approach as well. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The reason I am hesitating is that I am trying to reflect on the answer again. Certainly Mr Brownlee is correct—if there was a personal reflection of hypocrisy on a particular member then that was out of order. I ask the Minister to clarify that that was not the case. 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: It certainly was not but let me give the answer again and change it a little because I can understand that the member is distressed. I think Mr Quigley has come to the view that National’s approach to obesity and type 2 diabetes is based on cant—that is that National has put together a minority report that is full of hand-wringing but that is apparently devoid of any real action. This is probably the most important public health issue this country faces. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Does the Minister agree with the Health Committee that advertising marketing and promotion help to condition food preferences and normalise unhealthy food and can undermine parental authority and that the broadcast media should therefore restrict their advertisements on television for unhealthy food before 8.30 at night? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: The member raises a good important issue. However I think that the starting point in reply is to acknowledge freely that the main television companies in this country have come to the Government themselves and said: “We will remove certain types of advertising from programmes that are particularly watched by children.” I might add that this does not extend until 8.30 p.m. In addition they are funding programmes that will help to change people’s attitude to food in general so that is a remarkable and positive step. The select committee quite properly challenges the Government to ask whether more should be done. 
Sue Kedgley 
: I seek leave to take a document that shows that children watch television until 8.30 and 9.30 p.m.— 
Document not tabled. 
Dr Jonathan Coleman 
: I seek leave to table an article quoting MP Sue Kedgley: “Fat-fight MP plans Happy Meal ban”. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? Yes there is objection.