Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Bill C-252, which will support healthy food environments for children across this country. I’m pleased to indicate that the government is fully supportive of Bill C-252’s objectives. I would also like to thank Senator Dasko for sponsoring this bill.

We all know that nutrition plays a critical role in promoting health, and we know that developing healthy eating habits early in life is important in supporting children’s growth and development. We also know that poor childhood nutrition harms physical and cognitive development, and is a risk factor for obesity and diet-related chronic disease.

National survey data show that Canadian children have diets high in sodium, sugars and saturated fat. Health Canada’s latest scientific evidence review found convincing relationships between increased intakes of these nutrients and their impacts on specific health conditions such as high blood pressure, obesity, type 2 diabetes, dental decay and cardiovascular disease.

Maintaining a healthy diet is one of the most important factors in preventing obesity and diet-related chronic disease. Evidence shows that many factors in our food environment influence our ability to make healthy food choices and follow a healthy eating pattern.

The foods that we have at home and that we find in our schools, grocery stores and restaurants can have a major impact on our choices and make healthy eating a challenge for many of us.

Consequently, restricting children’s exposure to advertising for foods that contain excessive amounts of sodium, sugar and saturated fats will make it easier to make healthier food choices for children.

By supporting Bill C-252, we can help improve the food environment and support better eating habits for our children. This would be an important step toward addressing the national child obesity epidemic and creating healthier food environments.

We all understand the power of advertising, especially when it comes to influencing children’s food and beverage choices and consumption. Children are uniquely susceptible to advertising, and those under the age of 13 are particularly susceptible to its influence. Children under the age of 8 do not possess the cognitive abilities to recognize advertising and understand its intent. By the age of 12, most children understand the persuasive intent of advertising, but may still lack the cognitive abilities to fully defend themselves against its influence.

Our children live in an environment where hundreds of millions of dollars are spent each year advertising food and beverages. In 2019, based on an analysis of 57 selected food categories, advertisers spent an estimated $628.6 million on food advertising in Canada. Studies have shown that the vast majority — over 90% — of food and beverage ads on TV and children’s favourite websites were for products that undermine healthy eating. Fast-food restaurants are by far the most frequently advertised food category on television.

There is clear evidence that food advertising has a significant impact on children’s food attitudes, preferences, purchase requests and consumption patterns. These impacts often continue into adulthood. Bill C-252 aims to prohibit food advertising of certain foods to children under the age of 13. Colleagues, we have a responsibility to ensure that our children grow up to be healthy and are supported in making healthier food choices.

In June 2021, an updated self-regulatory advertising code was developed by four industry associations. Advertisers were asked to comply with this new code as of July 2023. While this represents a positive step, we must recognize that international and Canadian studies have consistently demonstrated that industry self-regulation has not been effective at reducing children’s exposure to certain food advertisements. The enforcement approaches of these self-regulatory codes are generally less effective than statutory restrictions as they do not carry the force of law and lack meaningful consequences for those who do not comply.

The commitment to introduce regulatory restrictions on the advertising of certain foods to children is in line with recommendations from global health authorities to combat the marketing of foods to children through government-imposed restrictions. Clearly, we need to take further steps to ensure that all advertisers are subject to the same ban on food advertising to children.

Bill C-252 has similarities to the former Bill S-228, which was considered during the Forty-second Parliament. At that time, both the other place and the Senate had extensive committee deliberations with stakeholders on the former Bill S-228. Both bills — Bill S-228 and Bill C-252 — share the objective of protecting children from the impacts of food advertising on children’s food attitudes, preferences, purchase requests and consumption patterns, and — ultimately — supporting healthy food choices.

Bill C-252 proposes that the prohibition cover advertising primarily directed at persons under 13 years of age. This amendment was also put forward by the other place in 2018, lowering the age limit from under 17 to under 13 to address industry concerns related to their freedom to advertise to adults. Bill C-252 also requires a five-year parliamentary review to assess the effectiveness of the prohibition, with a focus on whether there is an increase in advertising to people 17 years of age and under.

Colleagues, the key difference between the former Bill S-228 and Bill C-252 is the way in which food that is subject to the prohibition is characterized. Bill C-252 no longer refers to “unhealthy food,” which was a key issue previously raised by some stakeholders in Bill S-228. Bill C-252 is very clear in that it aims to address advertising of foods that have more than the prescribed levels of sugar, saturated fat or sodium. In addition, several important amendments were adopted by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health to clarify the prohibition and ensure adequate authorities to develop regulations. One of these key amendments is a change to the prohibition language under proposed section 7.1, which now refers to “. . . prescribed foods that contain more than the prescribed level of sugars, saturated fat or sodium . . . .”

Health Canada officials provided some clarification on how this could be operationalized, including a robust regulatory process that will take place to prescribe the types of foods and the levels of sugars, saturated fat and sodium. The committee in the other place heard about the science-based approach that Health Canada would need to undertake to develop a nutrient profile model to determine which foods would be subject to the advertising restrictions. This approach would be based on similar evidence underpinning Canada’s Food Guide and informed by best practices from other jurisdictions.

Another amendment introduced a new regulation-making authority, limiting the forms of advertising to which the prohibition applies. This provides the flexibility to take an incremental approach in restricting certain food advertising to children. When looking globally at other examples of efforts restricting food advertising for children, we see that it is not uncommon for countries to target advertising restrictions to areas of particular concern. For example, the United Kingdom is focusing its new food advertising restrictions on television and online advertising.

Bill C-252 also includes a coming-into-force provision, on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor-in-Council, that would ensure that supporting regulations are in place at the same time. This will ensure that Bill C-252 is operable and enforceable when it becomes law. The government will utilize this time to hear from stakeholders during regulatory consultations, which is a critical aspect guaranteed by the regulation-making authorities within the bill.

Understanding and learning from the experiences of other jurisdictions in this area is essential. Since the 1980s, the Quebec government has restricted commercial advertising, in all forms and media, of all goods and services intended for children, with a few exceptions. In contrast, the scope of Bill C-252 and the restrictions it contains are focused on the protection of children’s health and concern only the advertising of certain foods directed primarily at children, not all goods and services.

In conclusion, I believe that Bill C-252 represents a focused and comprehensive approach to addressing the national child obesity epidemic and supporting a healthier food environment for our children. As we move forward, I believe that we have a tremendous opportunity to make a positive impact on promoting healthy food environments and eating habits for our children. By supporting Bill C-252, we can send a strong message to Canadians that the health and well-being of our children are a priority for all of us. I urge that we move this bill to committee as quickly as possible.

Thank you.

Senator Gold, will you take a question?

Of course.

You made reference to the food and beverage advertising code developed by industry and said that it was insufficient to meet the goals of this bill. Can you clarify if the shortcoming of that voluntary code is that it is voluntary rather than mandatory, or is it that the provisions of the code itself do not address the objectives of Bill C-252?

Thank you for your question. Though the code is a positive step, I believe that its central shortcoming is that it is a self-regulatory framework. I don’t have it in front of me, so I don’t want to speculate on particular content.

As I recall from the debate on the previous bill, there is no question that the industry standards would be consistent with the objective of promoting healthier choices for children, but I don’t know whether they are as focused as Bill C-252 is on the particular products and the saturated fat, sodium and sugars in the food. That is something the committee will have ample opportunity to discover.

You said the voluntary code might address adequately all of the objectives of this bill. Would the government be open to incorporating the voluntary standard into law as a mandatory standard through the mechanism we have, known as “incorporation by reference” — that is to say, taking work done by industry, consumers and other stakeholders, achieving the same goal and incorporating that into our law — so that it respects the work of the stakeholder community?

Thank you for your question. Again, this is a private member’s bill, as you may know, so I’m not entirely aware of what the government may plan to do beyond expressing its support for this bill. However, again, that is something that can be raised and discussed at committee.

Thank you for your questions. I know of your ongoing interest in this and related matters.

Again, I believe your questions would be best addressed in committee to stakeholders and officials who are better positioned than I am to provide answers to them.

As I mentioned in my speech, although it has been a while since the sponsor, Senator Dasko, addressed this, the regulatory process is an important component of this bill, as it is in so many bills. The delay of the coming into force is precisely to provide all stakeholders with an opportunity to participate and provide input into those critical regulations as they are developed.