Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to address this very important bill, the Protecting Children from Junk Food Advertising (Broadcasting Amendment) Bill 2008, because it is an essential component of addressing the level of obesity in children in Australia. I agree with Senator Birmingham that this legislation is not the only solution, but I think it is part of the solution. It is acknowledged that we need a comprehensive approach to dealing with obesity in the same way that we need a comprehensive approach to dealing with alcohol—and advertising is certainly part of that approach.

Senator Birmingham, I hope when you have children that you will actually understand what it is like to be a parent trying to help your children make decisions. Until you experience nag power, you have never experienced true lobbying. Nobody can lobby like a child, particularly one who is between, say, the ages of four and 40, probably. It is from the time when that child can speak until the time you can reason with them, which is perhaps about the age of 15 or 16. That is why we need to put in place provisions around advertising of junk food. As has already been stated in this place during the debate, obesity costs the Australian community a lot of money—around $58 billion a year, according to the latest survey by Access Economics. Australia has the fastest growing rate of childhood obesity in the world. I know that people are debating and questioning the notion of what is overweight and what is obese, and so they would question those figures. The fact is that we have too many children who are overweight and too many children who are sliding into obesity. We believe that we need to be restricting advertising during children’s television viewing hours, because they are particularly vulnerable to it.

A study undertaken in September 2008 by the Centre for Overweight and Obesity at the University of Sydney and published in the journal Health Promotion International looked at all food advertising on TV and then rated the number of ads promoting non-core foods or junk foods with premiums such as a toy or other enticing offers. Remember that that is how advertisers also attract children. The study then matched how many of these ads appeared during key children’s viewing times. This study of more than 20,000 ads found children’s TV viewing times were being targeted by such ads. The report found that the promotion of all food advertisements containing persuasive marketing was significantly higher during children’s peak viewing times. The rate of food advertisements for all foods and non-core foods using promotional characters was substantially higher during younger children’s popular programs. The rate of non-core food advertisements containing premium offers was more than 18 times higher during children’s popular programs compared to adults’ popular programs and premium offers included with food products encouraged children to pester parents—pester lobbying—to purchase these products. This is particularly the case when premiums are offered as collectables, such as sets of toys provided with fast food meals.

There is no doubt in my mind that restricting advertising during children’s TV viewing hours will significantly lessen not only pester power but also children’s exposure to junk food, which undoubtedly plays a highly significant role in the overweight and obesity problems our children are facing in Australia. We should approach this issue in the same way that we approach alcohol advertising, for example. Other than for some loopholes, which we think need to be corrected, alcohol advertising is not permitted during children’s viewing times. As a community, we have made a decision that we do not think it is appropriate to put certain ads on during children’s viewing times. The Greens believe that ads for fast foods or junk foods fall into that category. So we think the provisions in this bill are very important. It is pleasing to see that speakers all agree that we have a significant problem with obesity in Australia. But it is unfortunate to hear people say that we need a comprehensive approach, that this legislation is too soon and that provisions in the bill may have unintended consequences. The fact is that we need to get going on dealing with this problem, which is overwhelming our children and our society.

We think this is a very important step in protecting children. The name of the bill says it all: Protecting Children from Junk Food Advertising (Broadcasting Amendment) Bill 2008. We believe this is a significant first step and we commend it to the Senate. I am pleased to have co-sponsored the Greens’ dissenting report of the inquiry into this bill. Senator Brown and I were both convinced by the evidence given to the committee that this is an appropriate step in dealing with junk food advertising, and so I commend this bill to the House, as do the Greens. In fact, I move:

That the question be now put.