Health — Issue No. 11 — Tuesday, September 5, 2006 (HTML)

2006 Legislative Session: Second Session, 38th Parliament
SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON HEALTH
MINUTES AND HANSARD

1. The Chair called the Committee to order at 12:08 p.m. The Committee met in-camera to review its proceedings from 12:08 p.m. to 12:59 p.m.

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
(Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON
HEALTH

Chair:	* Ralph Sultan (West Vancouver–Capilano L)
Deputy Chair:	* David Cubberley (Saanich South NDP)
Members:	Dave S. Hayer (Surrey-Tynehead L) Daniel Jarvis (North Vancouver–Seymour L) * John Nuraney (Burnaby-Willingdon L) Valerie Roddick (Delta South L) * Katherine Whittred (North Vancouver–Lonsdale L) Katrine Conroy (West Kootenay–Boundary NDP) * Michael Sather (Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows NDP) Charlie Wyse (Cariboo South NDP) * denotes member present


Witnesses:	John Bishop (Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices Association) Warren Erhart (Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices Association; President, White Spot Restaurants) Calla Farn (Refreshments Canada) Cathy Loblaw (President and COO, Concerned Children's Advertisers) Phyllis Tanaka (Food and Consumer Products of Canada) Mark von Schellwitz (Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices Association)

R. Sultan (Chair): I will call the meeting back to order. This is the meeting of the Select Standing Committee on Health. I would remind those who may be reading this transcript in future Hansards or who may in fact be listening to the live broadcast of this proceeding through the miracle of the World Wide Web that we are meeting in public session to hear witnesses on the subject of childhood obesity.

The Legislative Assembly in February agreed that this Select Standing Committee on Health should be empowered to examine, inquire into and make recommendations with respect to finding effective strategies to change behaviour and encourage children and youth to adopt lifelong health habits that will improve their health and curb the growing rate of obesity to achieve the great goal of leading the way in North America in British Columbia in healthy living and physical fitness. That is our charge.

We will be reporting to the Legislature of British Columbia at the end of November on our findings and our recommendations. We have had extensive consultation with the health and wellness experts, particularly focusing on community and public health aspects but also much medical evidence. It is important that we hear from all points of the compass on this issue. Today is primarily devoted to hearing representatives of the food and restaurant industries and the promotional arms of those important industries on their view on this important public policy issue.

Before we begin with our first witness, I would suggest that the members of the committee present here today may just want to briefly introduce themselves. Could we start with our researcher Jonathan.

K. Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk Assistant and Committee Clerk): My name is Kate Ryan-Lloyd. I serve as a Clerk to the committee.

K. Whittred: Katherine Whittred. I am the MLA for North Vancouver–Lonsdale.

C. Shore: I'm Carla Shore. I'm the media consultant to the Health Committee.

R. Sultan (Chair): Thank you. The witness list this afternoon consists of, first of all, Cathy Loblaw, president and chief operating officer of Concerned Children's Advertisers, an association.

Secondly, we will be hearing a presentation by Phyllis Tanaka, the director, food and nutritional policy, with the Food and Consumer Products of Canada organization. Next we will hear a presentation by Calla Farn, who is director of public affairs with Refreshments Canada, another trade association group.

Finally, there will be a presentation by the Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices Association — Mark von Schellwitz, vice-president for western Canada, and John Bishop, director. They may be joined by Warren Erhart, director and president of White Spot Restaurants, which hardly needs an introduction as an organization in this town.

So without further ado, we would turn the meeting over to our first witness, Cathy Loblaw.

Cathy, perhaps you could begin by just explaining who you are and who you represent.

Good afternoon, and thank you very much for receiving us here today. I'm actually going to stand so that I can run the PowerPoint presentation while we talk.

I very much appreciate the opportunity to bring forward to you what I hope you will find to be an informative presentation about advertising and marketing to children and, most importantly, what we're doing to contribute to the solution side of healthy, active living in response to the very real and very concerning health crisis that is facing our children.

I thought I'd begin the presentation on your question, telling you first a little bit about who we are as an organization and then, from there, go very specifically into what we're doing specific to this issue, and look forward to and be happy to answer any questions, either through the presentation or at the conclusion.

Let me begin by saying that Concerned Children's Advertisers is a non-profit consortium of 24 companies

that largely market products and services to children and their families. We came together in 1990 from the perspective that if we wanted to be perceived as being a responsible, contributing, caring organization and industry, we needed to actually be a responsible, caring, contributing industry.

CCA was founded with the mission and mandate to ensure that as an industry we were the credible, caring and authoritative voice of responsible advertising and communications to children and, perhaps most importantly, to express that by using our collective skills and resources, both within our membership and the broader industry, to create and implement initiatives that would educate, empower and benefit the well-being of Canadian children.

It all sounds quite lofty and grand in statement. I think what's really important for our discussions today is how that expresses itself out directly in terms of our actions and our codes of conduct.

Essentially, Concerned Children's Advertisers has two core mandates. The one mandate is to ensure that all advertising and communications to children in Canada is done in a manner that is responsible, regulated and age-appropriate to the child audience and respects the inherent vulnerabilities of children. Equally, we also want to use the resources and the know-how of industry to contribute back to the health and well-being of Canadian children on issues of societal concern and relevance.

Our two primary instruments when we talk about responsible advertising to children…. The chief instrument is the broadcast code for advertising, which governs all television and radio-television ads directed to children in Canada and ensures that every ad is precleared against a specific code that talks about what you can and what you can't do when you speak to children and also ensures that that code is administered through a representative committee that includes parents, educators, regulators and industry. I'll give you some details of that code as we move through the presentation.

The second component is making sure that we have a responsive complaint system, so that if there are any concerns from a parent or an individual, there is a place they can go to. The Canadian code of advertising standards, also administered by Advertising Standards Canada, ensures that it only takes one complaint to trigger a review of any ad in any medium across the country. It hopefully provides a very concrete place for issues to be addressed, and requiring only one ad, of course, means that it is very responsive to the individual and does not require an entire city block or PTA.

The second component, which is perhaps what we're most known for, is making sure that we're using the skills and resources of industry against societal issues. Every year for the past 15 years we identify a different issue of challenge for Canadian children — be it bullying, self-esteem, saying no to drugs, media literacy — and we work in partnership with the relative issue expert from Canada to develop television commercials that talk to kids about those issues, and then we marry that by extending the learning potential of those commercials through a classroom and parent and community program that's delivered by leading Canadian educator Linda Millar.

Our intention as an organization is to try and be a living demonstration of responsibility and contribution for the industry; to make sure that in the business of marketing and advertising, we have mechanisms to be responsible and respectful to the child audience; and equally, to make sure, as an industry, we're contributing back through social initiatives that keep pace with the issues that face children.

One of the great outcomes of the work we have done over the past 15 years has been what a trusted voice we have become in the Canadian community. I've had the great privilege of being with CCA for 14 years, and I can tell you it was an extraordinary dream we had in the beginning to be able to use the resources of industry to give back in meaningful ways.

When we flash forward 14 years later, it's remarkable to know that through research that we have done, and independently throughout Canada, 94 percent of kids say that CCA talks to them about things that really matter in their lives and that parents see us as a friend that helps children deal with life issues, be it bullying or self-esteem and also, obviously, media issues.

Where does that lead us? Hopefully, where it leads us is that we have a great foundation. We have a foundation of demonstrated action and caring on societal issues and media issues relative to children. Of course, when we look at the current issue at hand, the challenge becomes: how do we apply that against what is no doubt a worldwide health crisis that we are all feeling in our own provinces, in our own communities and in some cases, in our own families?

Childhood obesity is certainly an alarming and concerning issue in and of itself, but equally as it contributes to preventable chronic diseases. As we all know, over one in three children is overweight or obese. Today's reality is that levels are rising, which of course is the reason we're all gathered to speak today. The trends are very similar for both boys and girls, which for us from a solution perspective means that this is not a gender issue. We need to be talking to both boys and girls.

While the rates vary by province, the percentage increase doesn't necessarily vary to the same degree. The most current statistics that came out in 2004 show that Quebec and Alberta have the lowest rates of overweight and obesity at 22 and 23 percent respectively, with the highest rates being in the Maritimes — as high as 36 to 34 to 32 percent. I think what's important when we look at this is that the Canadian average is 26 percent, which of course is exactly where B.C. is at. I think what's most distressing about this is that when we look at the originating levels from 1980 for each of these, every province has experienced a two- to three- to fivefold increase, so we're all trending in a very negative and concerning direction.

When we look at it from a societal perspective, of course, the real nugget is that not only are we concerned for the health and well-being of children today,

but we're also concerned about the reality that 80 percent of those overweight children may remain overweight or obese into adulthood. What that means for society and what that means for our health care system is certainly concerning.

From an American perspective, Canadian rates are very much on par with the U.S., so we're certainly not alone on this issue. Globally, rates of obesity have increased five times over the past decade. As I'm sure you're more versed in than I after hearing from so many experts, the health crisis we're facing is very real and very concerning. I think for me, as a mother of two small children, perhaps the most sobering statement was this, in terms of how much it personalizes the issue: "We are the first generation whose children's life expectancy may not be as long as their parents'." I think that puts as fine a point on this as we can.

Once we started to educate ourselves about the issue as an industry, which for us began about five years ago, we wanted to really understand the issue and then from there try and determine how we could contribute on the solution side. We started by trying to get our heads around what the basic cause of obesity is, which as we all know is energy in versus energy out — which at first blush is very simple. The challenge becomes, then, when you look at the factors that influence it. When we understood it from a child's perspective, there were three key factors: physical activity, healthy eating and media literacy.

Media has a huge role to play in terms of a displacer of physical activity, through the sedentary lifestyles of children today and also as an influencer of healthy eating. So we felt that as an industry, if we really wanted to make a difference and meaningful contributions forward, we needed to look at physical activity and healthy eating as the two core drivers, but include in that the media component of both of those. From there we then started to look at how we put it into practice. I think this is the part that has given everyone who's working in this issue such pause to be overwhelmed at times, but also to realize the magnitude of the issue we're facing.

The Institute of Medicine recently published this chart which really speaks to how, if we're going to serve children, part of serving children is speaking to all populations and speaking to children in all the environments that they live in. We need to look at marketing. We need to look at culture and values, economic factors, school, family, home, community. There is no sector of society that is exempt from playing a role on this issue.

Certainly, we recognize that while no single sector created this issue and no single sector is going to fix this issue, every sector has a role to play, and each of us needs to look within to determine exactly what that role is.

We know there's an issue. We're all concerned. We recognize the magnitude and the importance. For all of us, what's at stake is our children. How can we help? Obviously, it's an important question for industry to ask ourselves and for us to consult with many issue experts on about how we can move forward.

There are three key reports that have come forward in the last six months that perhaps you're familiar with and that are really providing some very concrete and informing direction around what can be done. The Institute of Medicine published a report in January 2006 called Food Marketing to Children and Youth. The FTC, the Federal Trade Commission, also published a report, and the World Health Organization also published their framework.

We have gone to those three sources to try and understand where they feel that industry can make a positive and contributing contribution on this issue and really looked to some of their direction and counsel. All three reports are the result of extensive hearings and collaborative processes with all sectors and, I think, have some very informing ideas in them.

In terms of the Institute of Medicine, they talk about industry needing to transform leadership roles and to harness the creativity of our industry to help children have healthy diets; the need to really promote healthy foods and beverages in social marketing; the need to have cross-sector partnerships and to work in partnership with government against multisector — and I think the key word is "sustainable" — social marketing and education campaigns that can really make a difference; and to make sure that, for all of us, we have the highest standards of marketing possible, and that that is the hallmark.

The WHO framework comes across with similar recommendations using different words: the importance of dissemination of diet and physical activity information from the private sector, the critical role of education and the importance of self-regulatory codes to be sure that we have standards and practices that we can all feel proud of.

The FTC report again reinforces the role of education of consumers about nutrition and fitness, the need for broad participation against all stakeholder groups and the really important role of effective self-regulation. I think effective self-regulation is a key part of that.

Within the context of the issue and what we're hearing from issue experts both inside and outside of Canada, what does the Canadian system look like today, and what are we doing today to try and support this issue going forward? The Canadian system has four pillars, and when you look at the recommendations that we're seeing on a worldwide and international basis, the Canadian system is often pointed to as a system of great regard and a great standard.

The first pillar is called the broadcast code for advertising to children. Because, to date, television has been the primary medium for communication to children, the industry put in place many years ago a code that would ensure that every commercial that's directed to children in Canada adheres to a set of standards. I've given you all a copy of the actual code in your packages so you can look at the details.

The code's content is very specific, and it's mandatory. It's not a nice-to-do; it's a must-do. It's a condition of licence by the CRTC. The code says things like: "No well-known characters can touch, consume or in any way endorse a product." The code says: "There can be no direct urges to children." The code has safety issues. It has social values. It is very specific in going through what is allowed to be said in responsible communications to children in Canada and what isn't.

While the code is very strong and covers a lot of the core issues that many other countries are still struggling with, I think part of what gives it real teeth is that it is a preclearance mechanism. Every commercial has to adhere to this code before it goes on air. So it's not a complaint-based system where we catch it after it's out the door. If it doesn't adhere to the standards up front, it doesn't run.

The code is administered by Advertising Standards Canada, which has a committee that includes parents, educators, regulators and industry. Every other Monday morning the committee meets. The commercial comes to the committee. The committee reviews the commercial. If it adheres to the standards, it runs; if it doesn't adhere to the standards, it doesn't run.

I think the other key component of the code is that while it governs television and radio, it is also a living document. As issues of social value and concern have changed over the years, the code has interpretation guidelines and additional elements to keep it current. Whether we're talking about bullying, media violence or, today, healthy eating and physical activity, the code tries to keep pace with those issues through the interpretation guidelines that keep it current and relevant.

While the code is the first level, if you will, of industry taking the first line of responsibility by trying to make sure that nothing goes out there that's not appropriate, the second level of responsibility rests in the Canadian code of advertising standards. That code governs all media and is complaint-based. Because we don't have the same mechanisms in place for other media that we currently have for the broadcast medium, what this means is that any individual or any parent can register a complaint about an ad in any medium, inclusive of television, exclusive of television.

It only takes one complaint to trigger a review of that ad against the Canadian code. The Canadian code is a 14-clause code that is very specific and mandatory. Again, a copy of it is with you at your table. It, too, includes interpretation guidelines that work very hard at staying current and relevant to the issues of the day.

What is interesting is that Advertising Standards Canada gets about 1,200 complaints a year in terms of all advertising and all media. Of those, for the last five years running there have been zero complaints against advertising to children. I think that is certainly a positive indicator of a system that is effective and working.

The third level of the Canadian system is that once we have the preclearance codes and standards, then we provide a responsive complaint system beyond that. The third piece really speaks to one of our biggest challenges, which is that children today are not watching just children's programming, and they're not even watching just Canadian programming. They're often watching foreign signals, foreign programming. They're watching later into the evening. They're watching what older siblings or neighbours may be watching. The result is that it is difficult to have the same measures in place against non-children's programming as children's programming.

We went back to the media experts and the issue experts again to try and guide us around how we educate, protect and inform children against the reality of a broader media world that they now live in. Media literacy education came forward through both the CRTC and leading issue experts across Canada as being a critical component. Media is now considered the fifth language in many schools. It's a core part of the curriculum and of curricula across Canada. It's really about teaching kids how to interpret, cope with and understand the media.

Because kids are so comfortable with the media, we often confuse that with being informed about the media, and there is a big difference. We need to teach kids how to construct and deconstruct the media, how to be informed, how to ask questions, how to understand that an ad's intention is to sell and the news's intention is to bring forward a point of view and just to be sure that they are those critical thinkers so that, as they grow and mature, they have the ability to be media-literate and to make healthy choices.

Once we identified that as a platform, industry secured a million-dollar funding grant from Corus Entertainment along with tremendous support from a balance of industry. We've spent the last ten years with Linda Millar, an educator from the Ottawa-Carleton school board, travelling the country year-round and providing free workshops to parents, educators and community leaders around media literacy education.

We have curriculum that's designed for kids in grades K to eight that is part of the western protocol and is a recommended resource in the provinces across the country. It has become a critical part of industry, making sure that while we recognize that we need to be the most responsible we can be upfront, there is also a really important education role that has to happen to give children the skills and the tools to be informed.

Finally, the social messaging component, and I talked a bit about that earlier. Our messages all end with a black exclamation mark, and it's important to know that everything we do is non-branded. None of the programs or commercials that we do has any of the company names or brands on them. Everything is 100 percent about the issue and for the issue. While we've evolved through a number of issues over the years, the issue that we're here to talk about today, of course, is the issue of healthy, active living and how we can advance that and teach children to eat smart, move more and be media wise.

Given the magnitude and depth of this issue — both the solution and the problem — we really felt that

we needed a concerted, focused effort against just this, really unlike anything we had ever done before.

The first thing we did was bring together 16 of our companies to fund specific initiatives directed to healthy eating, physical activity and media literacy. With those funds and their support in place, we have then partnered with over 14 leading health organizations and issue experts across Canada, because the big thing that CCA really feels passionate about is not wanting to be the issue experts where we're not. We have a responsibility, and we have the ability and resources to contribute to an issue, but we want the content of what we do and how we do it to be guided by those who are informed and by those who are the experts on the issue.

From the Canadian Teachers Federation to the Dietitians of Canada, Active Healthy Kids, Canadian Diabetes Association, Health Canada — the list goes on. All of these organizations came together under the umbrella of Long Live Kids, a program committed to healthy, active living, with the funding provided by industry, so that together we could use the best resources of both groups to mobilize an effort, educate children and create a societal sea change that will see children moving in a stronger direction.

Long Live Kids was launched two years ago and continues to have great success in connecting with children across Canada. If I can take 60 seconds, I thought I would just quickly show you the commercial so that you have an opportunity to see what we're talking about. Then I will close out after that. This commercial runs on all….

Hopefully, that gives you a sample. We have over 35 commercials that have been produced against broad social issues. This is the first against healthy, active living, and we're in development on the second. We will continue to provide new commercials into the pool going forward so that we can continue our role of being responsible and contributing in both our business practices as well as on the social marketing side.

I will close my presentation by just giving you a couple of key points of consideration that, hopefully, will be constructive to your dialogue. When we talk about food advertising and children in Canada, I think it's very important that we recognize that we do have a very strong system currently in place and that each broadcast ad does currently go through a double review, both through the Food and Drugs Act and through the broadcast code.

You'll also probably be interested to find out, as I was, that less than 10 percent of broadcast ads directed to children in Canada are food-related. When we first started looking into this issue, we went to Advertising Standards Canada. Because they have to clear each commercial before it goes on air in children's programming, they know how many commercials are created each year. From that they were able to tell us what percentage was food-related, what percentage was toy-related, movie-related. The number one category was movies and entertainment, the number two category was toys, and the number three category was food, consistently over the last five years.

Over the last five years anywhere between about 140 and 180 commercials specific to food have been created directed to children. Having said that, that is an absolute number. What that doesn't take into account, which is important, is the frequency with which those ads may run. Out of respect for that, what we've tried to do, from an industry perspective, is that…. While the broadcast code deals specifically with what you can and cannot say, the code also limits and restricts how much advertising is allowed to children in Canada.

In adult programming you can have 12 minutes of advertising per hour. In children's programming we've reduced it by 40 percent to eight minutes of advertising per hour. Even within that, no commercial can run more than once per half-hour. Even if it's a different commercial but for the same product, it cannot run more than once per half-hour.

We've also structured the system such that there are entire day parts where no advertising to children is allowed — in the morning school hours — so that, again, there are times when there is no advertising. Of course, we also have Treehouse, CBC and TVO and lots of commercial-free networks that provide an additional opportunity.

What that doesn't take into account is children's viewing beyond children's programming. Again, that brings us back to the importance of media literacy and making sure, in children's programming, that we have the key components in place and that we're also giving them the tools for when they watch beyond that.

Another important consideration is to look at Quebec. As I'm sure you're aware, there's a ban on advertising to children in Quebec. That ban has been in place since 1980. As we were looking for solutions and strategies, we obviously wanted to look to Quebec to see where there may be some learnings and how those might play out for us. We did, and we were surprised to see that in 1981 Quebec obesity and overweight levels were 11.5 percent, increasing to 27.6 percent in '96 and subsequently now settling at 22 or 23 percent.

When we looked at it, we saw that the rates were on par when you look at '81 to '96. When you include 2004, Quebec rates are certainly three points below the Canadian average. But by the same token, it is still a double increase. I think our key takeaway was that this ban has been in place for this entire period, and it certainly has not insulated or protected them from the realities and the sad challenges of this issue.

We also looked at what children's viewing of Quebec television was because we thought that maybe part of the reason the ban has not proven effective is because of the influence, say, of the media outside of Quebec. When we looked at children's viewing, we saw that for English- and French-speaking children, 78 percent of their viewing is of French conventional television. When you go to all French-speaking children, it goes up to 88 percent.

What that said to us was that children of Quebec are watching Quebec programming. Their external viewing to the U.S. is just below 3 percent, and their viewing beyond Quebec borders is below 10 percent. It really spoke to us about how there is a ban in place there. They are watching Quebec programming, and there's still a problem.

We also went to Europe. Sweden is a country that's well known for having a very restrictive advertising environment. What we found there was that in Sweden, where advertising is lower at three ads per hour, and the Netherlands, where it's higher at five to six ads per hour, Sweden actually had higher levels of childhood obesity than the Netherlands at 14 percent. Again, from what we can see, the actual experience does not necessarily suggest a correlation.

We also looked to the U.S. What we found there was that children exposed to equal amounts of advertising had vastly different childhood obesity rates — from 31 percent to 15 percent.

Through all of that, what we concluded as an industry was that when we go back to what the issue experts are telling us and to what we're seeing, self-regulatory advertising codes are critical. We have to make sure that we continue to have the highest and best standards and mechanisms to control what we say, how we say it and when we say it when we're speaking to children.

We need to ensure we've got media literacy education so that we're teaching children how to be critical thinkers and how to function in a media-rich world. We also need to make sure that industry is playing a centrepiece role on public health campaigns, either individually and/or collectively and in partnership with issue experts in government.

From a Canadian perspective, we feel very proud of the fact that we are doing all of those things. We have industry codes and preclearance. They are living documents, so they're constantly in a process of strengthening. As we all learn and know more about this issue, there will be strengthening of those codes as there is with every issue. We have a responsive complaint system. Media literacy has been a foundational pillar of what we do, and social messaging is critical to helping give the kids the tools to make good choices.

Where do we go from here? From our perspective, we feel very strongly that we need to continue doing just what we're doing today: discussions, dialoguing and creating solutions. None of us have figured out how to fix this issue or else it would be fixed.

I think what Canada has the great privilege of is a very strong system with very strong pillars and infrastructure in place and that the opportunity before us now, as we know more about this issue, is to look to make each of those pillars work as hard as they possibly can against this issue.

One of the key things that we're currently doing, in partnership with FCPC, is meeting with external issue experts from across Canada — be it the Heart and Stroke Foundation; Kim Raine; leading academics, researchers and NGOs — to really understand from them where they think we could or should do more about this issue from an industry perspective and use that to best inform us, to keep us on a continuum of contributing and making a very viable and important difference on this issue.

I think the challenge in all of this is that we'd all love to find that simple solution. Unfortunately, as I think this academic says so well, for every complex problem there is a simple solution, and it's always wrong. The claim that food advertising is a major contributor to children's food choices and the rising tide of obesity has certain appeal, but as an argument it does not stand up to scrutiny.

We feel very strongly that we as an industry recognize the importance and the magnitude of the issue. We have a role to play. We're playing that role. We look forward to continuing to play that role, and we look forward to continuing our dialogue and discussion so that together we can create the societal changes that need to happen on this issue.

J. Nuraney: A couple of questions, Cathy. A very good presentation, by the way. The first one. I saw a slide there that showed the growth of obesity in different provinces.

C. Loblaw: I know. I think that if we knew the reason for it, we'd all be in a great position today to make a difference. I don't know the reason for it.

This is from the geographic and demographic variational report on overweight Canadian children that was done by Katzmarzyk and Tremblay in May of 2003. They show, as you noted, that B.C. went from a 5.1-percent rate of childhood obesity in 1981 to 26.6 percent — a fivefold increase. I don't know why.

I think the same question could be asked of every province. Perhaps your levels were so low that they had farther to climb to catch up with the rest. Certainly, in terms of 1996, you definitely, consistently, see higher numbers in the Maritimes and lower numbers in Quebec and Alberta, but I don't know the reason why. I wish I did.

J. Nuraney: Okay. My second question: in your conclusion, did I hear it right — you saying that the advertisement directed towards children has got no bearing on obesity?

C. Loblaw: No. I don't think there's anything in society today that has no bearing. I think that every sector of society has a bearing and has an influence. We absolutely respect that. What I did say was that to suggest that advertising to children was the single-minded cause or the single-minded solution is, unfortunately, not the case, in my opinion and that of many of the issue experts.

The Institute of Medicine, when they came out with their report after extensive collaboration, said that they really couldn't determine at the end whether it was necessary or whether it was to the…of advertising and marketing to children. My intention is by no means to leave you with the message that we don't have a role to play. My intention is to leave you with the message that we all have a role to play, and we absolutely are playing that role in terms of making sure that how and what we say is regulated, controlled and managed in an age-appropriate way.

We'll continue to advance that as we go forward. It's just the single-mindedness of it that I think is not an accurate assessment of the issue.

M. Sather: Thank you, Cathy. Your association. What you talked about sounded like your focus is on TV, radio and print advertising. Is that…?

C. Loblaw: No. Certainly, the system that's in place to regulate and manage and ensure a responsible landscape for children to date has its roots and its history in television and the traditional media. However, that system is intended to keep pace with the new media.

I think one of the challenges we face on this issue and part of what we're trying to work through on an internal basis and with the expert counsel of issue experts is: how do we apply the same vigour that we have in the broadcast and traditional mediums to many of these new and emerging mediums, be it the Internet, text messaging? The list goes on about what's new and emerging. That's what we're trying to determine: how we do that. We haven't figured that out yet. We do have in place a complaint system against those mediums.

The system that is in place is responsive to all forms of advertising, but the preclearance component — the component that has the most teeth, if you will, and that really controls most tightly what you say, how you say it and when you say it — is specifically against the broadcast medium.

M. Sather: The reason I ask is that my wife and I recently made a trip to our local video store, and we were really struck — these were recent changes in this store too — that, for example, where the videos were against the wall, which is pretty standard, all kinds of foods that I think quite accurately can be described as junk foods, were stapled all along the wall right next to the videos.

Also, it used to be a straight…. You'd go up to the counter and pay for your video. Now there's a long, kind of convoluted aisle that you have to go through, which is completely lined with candy. It's low, where kids can reach it and see it, and they were. They were grabbing it. Just watch it. It's a candy store, and the kids are in there. That issue, for example — is that something your association is addressing? If so, how do you address it?

C. Loblaw: What you're talking about is in-store promotions and how products are provided for sale at point-of-purchase. Certainly, the Canadian code for advertising governs all forms of advertising, and I believe it would include aspects of that, but in terms of what we're specifically doing against that, our focus is traditional advertising within its broadest context.

We're not specifically…. I certainly hear what you're saying, and I'm not sure if perhaps FCPC may be able to speak to that, or some of the other industry associations. I can appreciate and hear your comment and concern.

D. Cubberley (Deputy Chair): A comment first. I did find one statement that you made, at least as I interpret it, hard to accept on the face of it, which is that the advertising provided by these folks on television doesn't influence children's behaviour or their product choices. It strains credulity to think that these guys would bother with children's advertising if it didn't move children toward product choices.

C. Loblaw: Yeah, for sure. I don't disagree at all. My intention is not to say that advertising doesn't influence and doesn't have a role. I think that if it didn't, we wouldn't be here.

What I hope I'm trying to communicate is that we as an industry respect the inherent vulnerabilities of children. We have to be sure that our codes stay current with how, what, where and when we speak to children.

D. Cubberley (Deputy Chair): Well, that's an interesting segue, because what I wanted to ask about…. You appear to be talking mostly about self-regulation and media literacy as the main ways to address emerging social problems. You even mention that the code keeps pace with these issues and has shown that it can.

To get a little more specific on that, I'm wondering how…. Is that a solution for something like the overconsumption of pop? Has the code evolved to take account of the fact that sugared beverages are being overconsumed by children? Is that something your association has an internal discussion about? Are there particular products that members of your association

C. Loblaw: I think that when we talk about specific products, their actual consumption and how they're made…. Unfortunately, I'm not a dietitian, and I'm not a nutritionist, so I can't speak to the individual companies. What I can speak to is the code and how much the code — through both the Food and Drugs Act, which is not a self-regulatory mechanism but a federally regulated mechanism, and the broadcast code — addresses specific aspects of how we present things.

For example, the code speaks to the fact that a product, if it's a snack, must be presented as a snack. It can't be presented as a meal. If it's a meal, it needs to be presented as such, so that the depiction of what is presented to children is real and accurate.

D. Cubberley (Deputy Chair): So how would that work for pop? Pop is pop, so how would you frame it to kids?

C. Loblaw: Currently in Canada pop is not advertised directly to children, so if you look at Advertising Standards Canada — and they're current — and the commercials that come in, the broadcast code addresses children 12 and under. They do not currently submit advertising directed to children in the 12-and-under category. But that gets to one of my earlier comments, which is the "beyond children's programming" piece that children are often exposed to now. So how do we manage that piece?

D. Cubberley (Deputy Chair): I'm just thinking of a McDonald's set piece — you know, with the Big Mac, the fries and the Coke. It's the product leader for the chain. I got one this morning in the mail, just before leaving, with it on the cover, bringing a cluster of products together into the….

C. Loblaw: That speaks again to one of the challenges that we've talked about and why we're out in our own stakeholder conversations talking to the issue experts. How do we, as I said earlier, take the broadcast code, which has these pieces, and apply it to the non-broadcast environment, because non-traditional media is blossoming and growing in terms of the various touchpoints? That's exactly the kind of thing we're trying to work through in terms of how we make sure these same standards apply across the board and not just to certain sectors.

We don't have the answers yet. The stakeholder audit is in process, and our intention is that we will get these findings so that in the weeks and months ahead we'll be in a position to again be able — just as whether it was media violence or whether it was bullying — to go back and say: "Okay, we've learned from the issue experts that the critical concerns the system is not currently addressing are X, Y and Z. Therefore, how do we try and move forward in addressing that?"

That's the exact process we're in right now, because we absolutely recognize and hear the concerns that are coming forward. We all see the same papers, and we certainly all are raising children in this environment. We're all working to get to the best solutions possible. I think we just have to continually…. As we know more, we can do more. And as we can do more, we can make a difference.

K. Whittred: Mine is sort of a segue out of what my colleague just asked, and that is really about the advertising that is not aimed directly at children. I can only imagine that if I were on your committee, that would frustrate me all to death.

I can hear what you're saying about what you can do within the confines of your specific mandate. However, in a realistic sense — I think of Coke ads or Pepsi ads or whatever ads — they are marketed directly at all ages. I think most advertising is around a ten- or a 12-year-old age. I would submit that Kokanee beer is targeting my 11-year-old grandson. They're looking at him as a potential client. Definitely, it's not meant for people my age.

I guess my question to you is: how does your committee…? Do you have any jurisdiction? What kind of discussion might you have? What kind of recommendations do you have about that whole advertising that goes on outside the perimeters of what you're mandated with?

C. Loblaw: I think that this is exactly what the Institute of Medicine report and the FTC report brought forward, and even the WHO to some extent. What are we doing to address the new and emerging media and the broadness — the fact that children aren't watching kid's programming anymore? They're watching older programming. How do we address it?

This is what we're talking through right now as an industry and also trying to garner counsel and insight from the issue experts so that we can try and come back with some solutions and strategies that can try and address that. It's absolutely an issue that we're aware of, and it's absolutely something that we want to have measures in place against.

Certainly, the Canadian code of advertising standards and the complaints system is a measure, and it does reach out there against all advertising and all age groups, and it's a complaint-based system. As I said, it just takes one complaint to trigger a review. As an industry, we do have a mechanism in place, which has been in place since 1963, against all media in its broadest context.

I think the question that we're all asking ourselves is: against the magnitude of this issue, what more can or could we be doing in addition to that? My hope and belief is that every day, as we know more, we will get closer to coming up with some solutions in addition to

the ones that are there, which are media literacy education and the complaint system.

We certainly respect and understand the question. We're trying to get to a good solution. I think we will, you know.

I think what we can feel really proud of, from a Canadian perspective, is that we do have these mechanisms in place. In many countries they're trying to get these mechanisms in place. They're trying to get forums for discussion and for consensus. They're trying to build relationships with the issue experts. That is an established model in Canada. It's a model that has worked against other issues, and we would project that it will work against this issue too. It's just that we're all learning and gaining information at the same rate. We're in process. That is the "perhaps not satisfying, but honest" answer to where we're at on it. We see it.

R. Sultan (Chair): One final question, Cathy. Your slide up here before us at the moment talks about the Quebec ban on advertising, and you pointed out that there doesn't seem to be much compelling evidence that it's changed the rate of childhood obesity in Quebec. What is the Quebec ban on advertising? Can you just give us a two- or three-sentence synopsis?

C. Loblaw: You know what? I can actually leave a copy with Jonathan so you have it.

C. Loblaw: April 1980. The Quebec government legislated under the Consumer Protection Act that it would be unlawful to direct commercial advertising to children under 13. They would determine whether or not an advertisement was directed at children, taking into account the nature and intent of the product, the manner of presenting it, and the place. It continues to exist today. The consumer protection office is not offering consultation and review anymore of what constitutes, but the law does still exist and is in practice in the province of Quebec.

M. Sather: Cathy, we've had discussions in our committee about the similarity between the damage that smoking has done to people's health and the damage that high-sugar content foods are doing to people's health, particularly children. Now, there have been prescriptive measures taken vis-à-vis smoking that have been, I think, recognized as fairly influential. Why do you think that similar-type measures with regard to these deleterious substances, these food substances, wouldn't also be beneficial to society?

C. Loblaw: I think to equate food to tobacco is just wrong. I mean, food is a substance that we need to sustain life. Like anything taken in moderation, in balance, in variety and according to Canada's Food Guide, it is a part of living a healthy life. When you talk about tobacco, there is at no point that it is a healthy part of a child's life or that it has a role to play in the short or the long term. So I find that it's comparing two entirely different things.

I think what's important for children is that…. We have to give them the tools and the skills and an environment that will support and enable healthy eating choices and physical activity and teach them how to balance both their energy in and their energy out. We have to make sure that we've got that kind of information out there.

I think from that perspective there have been some great educational–social marketing programs that are child-directed that we can learn a lot from in terms of the tobacco movement. But I think to equate the two is just not right.

R. Sultan (Chair): Cathy, on that rather pregnant topic for future consideration, perhaps, I regret to say that we've run out of time. I'd like to thank you for coming to present before the committee on an extremely important public health issue. Thank you.

C. Loblaw: Well, thank you. We hope that we can continue the dialogue and continue to ask each other and ourselves the tough questions so that we can get to the right solutions.

R. Sultan (Chair): We will take a two-minute recess while we prepare for our next witness.

R. Sultan (Chair): Ladies and gentlemen, while we are collecting ourselves, I would like to remind the committee of their invitation — at committee expense, I might add, having consulted with the tight-fisted Clerk's office. Your all-expense-paid visit to the Childhood and Adolescent Obesity 2006 conference in the wonderful downtown Coast Plaza Hotel in Vancouver has been endorsed and enthusiastically promoted. This conference will take place October 5-7, Thursday through Saturday, and I would hope that as many committee members as possible may take advantage of this opportunity to gain even further insights into the selfsame issues that the committee has been exploring.

We are delighted to have as our next witness Phyllis Tanaka, who is director of food and nutrition policy with Food and Consumer Products of Canada.

Welcome, Phyllis. We would ask you, as is our habit, to explain who you are, a little bit about your background and what you do.

P. Tanaka: Okay, I will do that. I'll start off by saying thanks to the committee for this opportunity to speak to you as part of your information-gathering process in support of seeking effective strategies to combat childhood obesity. On a personal note I grew up in British Columbia. As a child I lived in the West Kootenays and as a teen in Vancouver. I just came back last night from visiting my parents in Maple Ridge. It's always nice to come back home to B.C. I am a dietitian, and I work for Food and Consumer Products of Canada in the function of director of food and nutrition policy.

I'm pleased to be able to share information with you on the Canadian food and beverage industry's initiatives on diet, physical activity and health, but first I will step back and let you know a little bit about what Food and Consumer Products of Canada is about.

FCPC is the voice of companies that make and market the majority of the prepared foods and household commodities that Canadians use every day. Over 70 percent of the food and beverages on grocery shelves in British Columbia are manufactured by our members. FCPC member companies employ about 2,000 British Columbians in 26 corporate offices and plants throughout the province. We are keen to see British Columbians enjoy a healthy lifestyle predicated on moderation, balance and physical activity. Our industry does support your efforts to find effective ways to combat childhood obesity. These are the logos that represent FCPC member companies.

As a backdrop I just want to say that our industry does have an understanding of the issue and the magnitude of the problem. I know from your Chair that you have definitely heard more than once what the magnitude of the problem is and understand it. The statistics that were released by Statistics Canada just this past August confirm that it continues to be a troubling trend with 26 percent of children and adolescents in Canada overweight or obese — up 15 percent from '78-79 — and the prevalence of overweight and obesity doubling.

While the good news in B.C., as you know, is that the adults have the lowest overweight-obesity rate in Canada, childhood obesity is on a par with the rest of Canada. So we do commend your work. Given the statistics, it is well-timed and right on target.

Everyone here today, I believe, is familiar with the World Health Organization's global strategy on diet, physical activity and health. It clearly states that all segments of society have a role to play in combating obesity. It gives clear direction on the important and constructive role that industry can play.

I'll just walk through those key elements: promote healthy diets and physical activity in line with global standards; limit the level of saturated fats, trans fatty acids, free sugars and salts in existing products; continue to develop affordable, healthy and nutritious choices as well as new products with enhanced nutritional value; empower consumers with product and nutrition information; practise responsible promotion of foods high in saturated fats, trans fatty acids, free sugars or salt, especially to children; issue clear and consistent food labels and evidence-based health claims that will help consumers make informed choices; provide information on food composition to national authorities; and finally, assist in developing and implementing physical activity programs.

The food and beverage industry is carrying out these recommendations by focusing its efforts on five main areas: offering new, "healthier for you" products and choices, disseminating consumer information, improving advertising and marketing, promoting healthy lifestyles and advancing workplace wellness.

For the balance of my formal presentation to you I would like to take you through examples that bring industry's commitment to life. These examples are, for the most part, based out of a survey we conducted with our members. They reflect questions asked specific to their plans and activities in the year 2004.

The primary way FCP member companies can help Canadians lead more healthy and active lives is through the product choices they offer. Our companies are leaders in food science and are using that knowledge to advance consumer health. Canadian food and beverage companies have invested significantly in new product development to enhance the nutrition profile and increase choices available to consumers, especially in what they call the "healthier for you" category.

Speaking to the "healthier for you" category, the types of formulation changes that have been put into place are to find ways to reduce the fat — bring the fat down to zero — and that speaks to both saturated fats and trans fats; to produce products with less sugar; and on the positive side, the addition of nutrients like omega 3, calcium, fibre and vitamins; and finally, reducing sodium content. I want to bring to life some of these statements by speaking to some of the products we have displayed on PowerPoint.

Wonder Plus is a white bread with the nutritional goodness of whole wheat and the taste and texture of traditional white bread. It's a first of its kind in Canada. It provides four grams of fibre per serving, along with 11 essential nutrients and added calcium.

Lactantia Healthy Attitude omega-3 margarine helps Canadians to get omega 3s into the diet on a daily basis. This margarine is non-hydrogenated. It's a source of omega-3 fatty acids. It's trans fat–free, it's cholesterol-free, and it's low in saturated fats. It meets the criteria for the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada's health check logo.

Oasis Health Break is a functional juice, again with omega 3s. It won a prestigious award in 2004 called the Canadian Grand Prix New Product Award for healthy innovations. Another example up there, although not as easy to see, is Yves Veggie Cuisine veggie sausages. They're made with soy protein. They contain 85 percent less fat than the regular sausage meat. They're cholesterol-free, trans fat–free and low in saturated fats and a good source of protein and an excellent source of iron, thiamine, B12 and zinc.

Along with providing "healthier for you" products, size is another issue that matters. Portion control is something that's been on the plate as well. Recent packaging changes have been put in place to address that concern. Based on our survey, 42 percent of companies are introducing smaller portion sizes in many product lines. To speak to that as an example, you can see that in 2005 Cadbury Adams introduced Cadbury Thins. It's a chocolate bar that contains only a hundred calories.

Nordica has developed a single-serve cottage cheese. These single servings of cottage cheese with fruit are high in protein. They're reduced in sodium, low in fat and a good source of calcium. Portion size is controlled at 113 grams and 130 calories.

Industry is also tackling the trans fatty acid issue. In 2004 the industry enhanced the health value of products through the elimination and reduction of trans fats. Almost half of FCPC companies reformulated products to reduce trans fatty acids, and most are moving to virtual elimination of trans fatty acids. An example that I have provided here on the overhead is High Liner Foods. They reformulated all their fish products to eliminate trans fats, lower the saturated fat contents and remove added hydrogenated oils.

Sugar is another issue that has been on the table. Over one in five of the companies that we interviewed have introduced products with less sugar. New products are on the way with no sugar at all. That's an increasing marketplace initiative. As an example to speak to that: Danone Silhouette yogurt was reformulated to provide Canadians with tastier, healthier product that contains no added sugar, has 25 percent more fruit than their original recipe and has the lowest amount of calories in any of the yogurt products on the market right now, coming in at 40 calories per portion.

There are other examples that I could speak to. For instance, General Mills cereals are all now formulated with whole grains. These are but examples of how industry is bringing healthier food products to Canadians.

The second area of focus is on providing customers with useful information. The industry has focused on empowering consumers to make "healthier for you" choices in a number of ways, through labelling, health claims, call-in centres. As you all know, in December 2005 mandatory nutrition labelling came into place. On all processed packages, there is a listing of calories plus an expanded list of 13 core nutrients: fat, saturated fat, trans fat, cholesterol, sodium, carbohydrates, fibre, sugars, vitamins A and C, calcium and iron. Food manufacturers can also advise Canadians through claims they can make on the labels of their products. For instance, if a food is high in fibre, they can make that claim on the product.

"Lite" is also a claim that can be listed on a product, if a food is reduced in fat or reduced in calories. These claims are all regulated through Health Canada, so you have to meet criteria to make these claims.

In Canada food companies can also make five regulated health claims, specific to health conditions. There's the sodium-potassium and hypertension link health claim; calcium, vitamin D and osteoporosis; saturated trans fatty acids and coronary heart disease; fruits, vegetables and cancer; sugar alcohols and dental carries. Most companies have websites and 1-800 lines where they provide information not just on their product line but on healthy eating, physical activity and basic health and nutrition information.

Here is an example — a great example, I think — of how the food and beverage industry is helping consumers to learn how to make informed decisions. Healthy Eating is in Store for You is an education program that was developed by the Dietitians of Canada and the Canadian Diabetes Association. It provides a virtual grocery store tour for anybody who goes on the website to walk through. Ultimately, the goal is to help the consumer understand how to use the nutrition label towards the end of making healthy food choices. It has a website where anybody can go and check it out.

Another example is specific to one company's initiative, and that's Nestlé Canada. Nestlé Canada supports Dietitians of Canada's initiative called EATracker. EATracker is a tool, again, that consumers can log on to and assess their own eating habits. They can track their daily food record, their activity choices. It's checked against what the current guidelines are with respect to healthy eating and activity according to Health Canada. I think that Bill Gates got into the spelling of this one. I think it's dietitians with two t's.

Another great example is Kraft Canada's sensible solutions program that's specific to their product lines. Kraft applies this program to Kraft products that meet specific criteria: namely, they must provide beneficial nutrients such as protein, calcium or fibre or deliver a functional benefit, such as related to heart health, that stays within specific limits on calories, fat, sugar and sodium, or offer reduced levels of calories, fat, sugar or sodium.

The sensible solutions program was developed by Kraft's nutrition experts. The nutrition criteria are based on Health Canada's nutrition recommendations — another public health authority.

There are many examples, and I will stick to reviewing just the next four and then get on with the next section.

Jean's Family Foods has a Healthy Meal Solutions information program. Part of that is the family fun planner. Here consumers can get information on trans fat–free and low in saturated fat food products. It also features healthy recipes that consumers can use.

Smuckers Foods of Canada is another example of a partnership here with the Canadian Diabetes Association to develop an educational brochure and a 1-800 line, again to the benefit of the Canadian consumer in finding ways to get information to make informed choices on healthy eating.

Campbell's has an in-store promotion called Get Your Veggies to help people to understand the importance of veggies in the diet. In the February 2005 Heart Month Becel offered consumers a 28-day challenge. They provided a CD-ROM and 28 days of recipes, tips and challenges to get consumers inspired to eat well and increase physical activity.

Now, the third area that FCPC member companies are committed to is with respect to advertising and marketing, as you've just heard from Cathy Loblaw. I don't think I'll spend any time on this area, because you've already had a good presentation and a healthy discussion, but that is an area where FCPC members are committed.

The fourth area that FCPC members take an active role in is the promotion of healthy lifestyles. Collectively and individually they have developed a wide range of initiatives to promote healthy lifestyles, and they've financially supported research, education or initiatives specific to healthy, active living with budgets ranging from $100,000 to $500,000. Routinely they sponsor physical activity programs for children.

Under promotion of healthy lifestyles — again, you've heard about this — FCPC did partner with Concerned Children's Advertisers in developing their Long Live Kids program. It was a partnership that included Health Canada, FCPC and Concerned Children's Advertisers. Again, Cathy did spend some time speaking of this to you, so I'll move on. I just want to leave the message that FCPC is a big supporter of Concerned Children's Advertisers.

These are some company-specific examples of how food companies are supporting the promotion of healthy lifestyles, and I'll just speak to these three as examples.

Coca-Cola has a program called Live It. It's an unbranded program that's designed to engage and educate grade six students on the importance of regular physical activity and healthy eating. It has a "fit it in" section that emphasizes nutritious alternatives, such as fruits and vegetables, for students and teaches the importance of the four food groups. It has a "step with it" section that stresses the health benefits of being active through any form of physical activity. The program is supported with educational and interactive materials for both students and teachers, and they have a website called liveitprogram.com, where there's more information on it.

Kellogg has supported, through Active Healthy Kids Canada, Canada's report card on physical activity for children and youth. This report card was designed to help Canada move away from an awareness of the issue to action and to provide children with physical activity programs. Again, more information is available on this program through the Active Healthy Kids website.

Finally, as an example, McCain Foods Canada launched a series of non-branded, public service–style announcements encouraging Canadians to eat healthy, snack nutritiously and exercise. These segments featured Rose Reisman, a well-known cookbook author and accomplished chef.

The fifth and last area I'll speak to where the food industry is involved in healthy, active living is with respect to workplace wellness. Companies are augmenting their community outreach by helping their own employees to improve their health. It's being done in a variety of ways, including flextime for fitness participation; financial support for health club memberships; third-party insurance for nutrition counselling; on-site fitness programs; on-site weight-loss programs; on-site cafeterias that have food selections in line with Canada's Food Guide. An example here that speaks to this would be Cavendish Farms. They have an employee wellness program where they encourage their employees to walk and count their steps towards a walk to the moon. That will keep you busy for a while.

They have healthy cafeterias. They have an assessment program that helps individual employees to choose healthier lifestyles. Another example: Pepsi-QTG Canada has a HealthRoads program. It's a web-based program offering all employees and their families access to information on healthy eating and physical activity.

Effem Inc. is an organization that has an on-site fitness facility, along with some resources to augment the fitness facilities to help employees make choices toward healthy, active living.

In line with what the World Health Organization report has suggested as a role for the food industry, the Canadian food and beverage industry is and will remain committed to providing a wide selection of products; providing consumer education and initiatives; being responsible with respect to marketing and advertising practices; promoting healthy lifestyles; and supporting workplace and community healthy, active living initiatives.

Since 2004 industry has continued — and in many cases, intensified — efforts to promote healthy diets and physical activity. At this point I'd like to say that we welcome an opportunity to work with the government of British Columbia to ensure that the committee's mandate is successful, and we look forward to receiving the committee's report and recommendations.

R. Sultan (Chair): Thank you, Phyllis Tanaka. I'm sure our committee members have many questions they'd like to address to you.

J. Nuraney: Thank you, Phyllis. Once again, a great presentation, very thought-provoking. Particularly for me, it was interesting to see that the industry is taking steps to reformulate, as you say, their products to make them a little healthier — particularly minus the trans fats. Great, great news.

My question is…. You talk about global strategies and global standards. Can you throw some light on what the global standards are?

P. Tanaka: I would say that the World Health Organization would be an example of where you'd look for global standards on product formulation. As they stated in that report, these are the key areas or nutrients we need to be concerned about. Let's look for ways to reduce saturated fat content, trans-fatty acid content; reduce the amount of sugar; reduce sodium in products. These were the ones that were identified through that report that needed to be looked at overall — relative not just to the obesity issue, but chronic disease issue.

I would say that with respect to product reform products, those are the global standards that exist. The World Health Organization, I'd say, is recognized as a global standard bearer.

M. Sather: Ms. Tanaka, I appreciate that the industry is making some steps to enhance and improve healthy eating, but the fact is it's clearly demonstrated that we have an epidemic of childhood obesity on our hands. It's a time for action. We need to do something about this. One of the things I feel the industry could do, in the spirit of self-regulation, is to make a commitment not to sell in our schools those high-caloric foods and beverages that have sugar added to them.

P. Tanaka: FCPC is the trade association that represents individual food companies. We work on initiatives that are collaborative in nature, but I can't — or FCPC in itself can't — speak to what individual food companies would commit to. It just isn't our role.

I would say, though, that with respect to your concern, we have a very active committee in place at FCPC that brings member companies to the table. It's called our healthy active living committee. It's a committee that's sitting down and looking at the issue of childhood obesity and all the ramifications and looking for ways they can come together in a common way to address the childhood obesity issue.

I think when your next presenter comes to the table from Refreshments Canada she can even speak further to some guidelines they have been working on specific to the school situation. So there is some action there.

K. Whittred: Well, I'll ask a question. Like the others, I do appreciate that there's been a lot of progress in the food industry. I personally read labels all the time. I'm pretty knowledgable, I think, about what goes into products.

Anyway, having said that, I just have a couple of concerns despite the progress. If you look at the picture on page 10 of your booklet, it kind of illustrates this. You have all the cereals, and it says: "All General Mills cereals are now made of whole grains." I think that if we look back in time, most cereals have always been whole-grain.

However, if you look at what's there, I see Reese's Puffs, Cocoa Puffs, Cinnamon Toast Crunch, Nesquick, Honey Nut Cheerios, Lucky Charms, etc., etc. So, other than Fibre One at the end, I would say that every single other one of those cereals that you've pictured there is sugar-coated. I mean, they are swimming in sugar. They may, in fact, be whole-grain.

I guess that is one of the principal concerns I have about the food-labelling industry. I just feel as a consumer, as a parent, as a grandparent that sometimes this is a little bit deceiving. I mean, whole-grain is good. Whole-grain that is swimming in sugar is not good. Obviously, the food industry advertises to promote its best face, so they're advertising the whole-grain. They're not saying about the sugar.

I'm just wondering: how do you as a dietitian…? I mean, I could give you lots more examples. I think to some extent the whole advertising around "light," if you like…. You know, a label will say "one-third less fat," so whoever is looking at that says: "Gee, it's got less fat. I can eat three times as much." Well that, of course, is silly, and it's not right. I think that in itself becomes a contributing factor to poor nutrition.

However, I'm just asking: what do you feel as a nutritionist, and how do you advise when you're at the table around these sorts of…? I guess they're not really deceptions. They're just in the labelling.

R. Sultan (Chair): Phyllis, before you answer that question, let me add to MLA Whittred's point.

R. Sultan (Chair): You perhaps read the Globe and Mail this morning — page A2, fairly prominent positioning in the media.

R. Sultan (Chair): The story headline: "It's 7 a.m. Do you know what your kids are eating?" The story goes on to say that the Globe and Mail, in research commissioned by it and CTV, concluded that a bowl of Post Sugar Crisp contains as much sugar as a Mr. Big chocolate bar. A typical serving of Cocoa Puffs is the equivalent of downing a 50-gram bag of Hershey's Kisses. Starting the day with a serving of Corn Pops, Honey Comb or Lucky Charms — which Katherine referred to a moment ago — is about the same as gobbling a Kit Kat. And reduced-sugar versions of morning favourites like Frosted Flakes and Froot Loops contain as much sugar as a Reese's Peanut Butter Cup. It goes on to say that when you say your child is eating the equivalent of a Mars Bar for breakfast, that should hit home — says a dietitian.

R. Sultan (Chair): I suppose this is just adding some journalistic drama to MLA Whittred's question.

P. Tanaka: I'll answer it on two fronts. I'll start by talking to the labelling, specifically. I think one of the things you've pointed out is that one of the reasons

there are programs like Healthy Eating is in Store for You is a realization that while the mandatory nutrition facts table is up there, not everybody understands how to use it. Education is a component of making nutrition labelling work.

Having a nutrition facts table there was designed to be a powerful tool for the consumer to make product selection comparisons so that they could look at the list of nutrients that are in product A and compare it to product B. If they wanted to have a product that was lower in sugar or lower in saturated fat, they had a means to look at the mandatory nutrition labelling, which is regulated to be factual as a tool for them to use. It does require a consumer to be informed on how to use it for it to be most effective.

I think one of the things that health professionals realize — whether they're in academia, whether they're a dietitian practising with consumers or whether they're in government — is that there was some folly in the consumer's mind around the power of low whatever. Some people did not understand or didn't correlate that because it was low didn't mean that it was something you could eat in large consumptions.

Portion control was still part of eating healthily. Some consumers did use it as a licence to over-consume. Again, from my perspective as a dietitian, the way to address that is through education. That's why, from my perspective, I'm really happy that our industry supports programs like HESY, Healthy Eating is in Store for You, that Dietitians of Canada have up, and as well, the one that Nestlé Canada supports on EATracker. These are the types of tools that will help consumers to understand the relationship between what they eat, the quantity they eat and what they need in the way of balance. That's speaking to the labelling perspective.

With respect to the Globe and Mail article, I did read it. It was on page A-2. It was pretty hard to miss it this morning when I got up. I guess, on that one, too, while I can't speak to individual food companies' decisions on products — that's their business, and it isn't my role to speak to them in any way, shape or form — I would say that I support what Leslie Beck did say in the newspaper article with respect to the fact that there are many choices out there. The mandatory nutrition labelling becomes that tool to help parents decide which food products they want to have on their breakfast table for their child.

D. Cubberley (Deputy Chair): I just say, as somebody who buys food for a younger person, that the amount of reading that would be required to penetrate these materials in order to use information to make healthier choices is enormous, because the majority of foods that you show here — for example, in this display of cereals — are sugar-laced. So you'd be looking for the needle in the haystack with all your reading.

D. Cubberley (Deputy Chair): What I would like to see is many products that have no sugar and one or two that have sugar.

My question, really, is: what is it about sugar that all these companies have given themselves permission to lace products with sugar? What is it about sugar? What is sugar doing? Is sugar addictive? Is that why they're using as much sugar as they're using?

P. Tanaka: I worked in research for a number of years before I was at FCPC. I worked at the University of Toronto in the nutritional sciences department. I know of no literature that shows sugar as addictive. I know that's one of the myths you hear come up once in a while, but no, there's no literature to support sugar as addictive.

What I do know and remember from the days I did some infant nutrition research is that of all the tastes when we are newborns, universally we respond positively to the taste of sweet. History believes that it relates back to the fact that it was a tool we used to protect ourselves from taking in foods that were poisonous. So there is a universal like for sugar. There isn't an addictive relationship to sugar.

D. Cubberley (Deputy Chair): Well, it would be interesting to know if it's psychologically addictive.

D. Cubberley (Deputy Chair): What you're telling me is that it's not physiologically.

D. Cubberley (Deputy Chair): To explain the presence of it…. I had occasion to make instant oatmeal over the holidays to facilitate a fishing trip. I don't eat instant products, but I made it because my son wanted to go out on a trip and it was early. I tasted it before I served it. I don't have a sugar-oriented tongue, and I try to avoid it. It was repellently sweet. It was also laced with so much flavouring that there was a competition in my mouth of repellent things which occurred all at once. It was with some trepidation that I allowed him to eat it, but he was ready to go, and he scarfed it down.

I just wonder at what point we're going to recognize that there's a link between obesity and sugar consumption. We're consuming it as liquid in the pops and the

sugar drinks. It's going in as coatings on all of these things. It's running right throughout the fast-food industry. It's in the milk shakes. They put it in various product coatings.

They put sugar in product coatings that go onto things. We're like the Mayans. We're in the corn sugar culture here. At what point does industry recognize that sugar is part of the problem?

P. Tanaka: I think industry is recognizing that. One of the areas that the World Health Organization identified, as I mentioned, was a need to look for ways to reduce added sugars in food products. While industry has not reduced added sugars in all food products, some of the examples I provided to you today speak to the industry acting on that agenda and bringing no-sugar-added and reduced-sugar-added products to the table.

Yes, there are still products with added sugar in them out in the marketplace. I would say, with respect to the oatmeal and the flavours, that I think that's a personal like or dislike. I personally like plain oatmeal. My husband likes it flavoured. But at the end of the day you're getting the nutrients in oatmeal. You're getting some good value there.

R. Sultan (Chair): Well, Phyllis, we could go on and get into our personal taste buds at some length, but unfortunately the clock has told me that we should thank you for coming all this way, for giving a credible, understated and very comprehensive review of what the food industry is doing to address this public health problem. We thank you for that.

R. Sultan (Chair): I will call the meeting back to order. Welcome to the Health Committee Calla Farn, who is the director of public affairs for Refreshments Canada. I, having some background in the beverage industry myself many, many years ago, looked up Refreshments Canada on the website this morning before I got out of my pyjamas. I learned all sorts of interesting things about the broad array of liquids that Refreshments Canada is representing. So, Calla Farn, maybe you could first of all explain who you are and a little bit about your background. What is Refreshments Canada?

C. Farn: Okay. Let's start with Refreshments Canada. It's an industry association that represents more than 40 brands of juices, water, soft drinks, sports drinks and so on. They're the common brands that Canadians drink every day.

On a personal note, I live in Halifax, after spending 35 years in Toronto. I live in a little log house on a lake, which would be totally unaffordable anywhere else in the country, I suspect. It's wonderful, and I have a five-year-old daughter, who's just entering grade one this year.

I talked a little bit about Refreshments Canada as a trade industry association. We represent the industry in regulatory, public-policy, trade and commercial issues with all levels of government in Canada. We're also the link to community stakeholders and the media on all issues relating to refreshment beverages.

Our key objectives include promoting beverages as an important part of a healthy, balanced lifestyle; promoting product innovation to meet consumer demand; and developing industry initiatives to support healthy, active lifestyles, particularly among children and youth. Just to give you a quick overview of the industry itself, our member companies alone represent a $5-billion-a-year industry in Canada. They have 12,000 direct jobs and 20,000 indirect jobs. We have over a hundred facilities, located in virtually every region of the country, and an annual payroll of about half a billion dollars. So as you can see, the beverage industry is a significant contributor to the Canadian economy.

We're here today to talk about what we are doing to help address an important and growing issue in Canada. Childhood obesity has become the focus of a dynamic discussion amongst many stakeholders for several reasons. The available science about the causes is often contradictory and inconclusive, and it continues to fuel media interest in the issue. Also, pressure is mounting on schools and school boards to create a healthier school environment, and many stakeholders, including parents and governments, are asking industry to help play a role in developing meaningful solutions.

We all know that obesity is a serious and complex problem. No single food or ingredient is the cause, and unfortunately, there is no easy solution. Demonizing foods, pointing the finger and bans simply won't help. We agree with many of the experts who say that teaching children there are good foods and bad foods is not helpful. In fact, banning foods can have a negative impact. They say it often makes the food more attractive or more desirable and will actually lead to an increased likelihood of overconsuming certain foods.

We believe that if we really want to have an impact on this issue, we have to develop a comprehensive approach that includes nutrition education and physical activity along with healthy eating choices. We must teach children the importance of moderation and balance and the need for regular physical activity. Children and adults also have to know the role that beverages play in a healthy, balanced diet. They provide hydration, energy, nutrition and refreshment. It's also important to recognize that while different beverages provide different benefits, all of them can contribute to hydration, which is especially important for children.

In a document entitled Step Right Up to Healthy Eating: Fueling the Young Athlete, Dietitians of Canada notes that children have a poor sense of thirst and need to be reminded to drink during sports. While water is a good thirst quencher, many children will drink more of a flavoured beverage. As I said, all beverages can be part of a healthy, active lifestyle. The key, as in everything we eat and drink, is moderation and balance. The beverage industry not only offers a wide variety of products but also offers a wide range of packaging to meet all consumer needs.

In the end, of course, this issue is all about balance: the balance between energy in and energy out. Obesity occurs when we consume more calories than we expend through physical activity and normal bodily functions. The excessive calories from any source can lead to weight gain if they're not properly balanced with increased physical activity.

Our industry has demonstrated our commitment to healthy children in healthy communities in a number of ways. As Cathy Loblaw noted earlier, we supported the Concerned Children's Advertisers' Long Live Kids program. Our member companies support local children's sports teams and youth organizations across the country. We work with a number of dietitians to create a beverage nutrition chart, which is in the package that I distributed to you earlier. We're currently working on developing a guidance document for beverages to provide information on the benefits and attributes of different beverages along with your daily fluid requirements. A part of that document will be focused specifically on children.

I'm here today to tell you about one of our major initiatives undertaken this year: voluntary guidelines for the sale of beverages in schools. We recognize that schools are a unique environment. In fact, we introduced our voluntary guidelines for elementary schools in 2004. Since then we've expanded them to include middle schools and high schools.

Our guidelines address both the product mix — in other words, what beverages are offered for sale in schools — as well as packaging sizes. They're designed to be age-appropriate, recognizing that the students' ages, maturity levels, nutrition needs, physical activity levels and even school environments are very different for elementary children than they are for high school students. So a one-size-fits-all approach didn't seem to make sense to us. What we are doing for all grade levels is encouraging a shift toward more nutritious and lower-calorie beverage options. By doing this, we hope we can help children develop dietary habits that will benefit them for the rest of their lives.

Here's how the guidelines work. In elementary and middle schools there are three product offerings: bottled water, 100-percent unsweetened juices and low-fat and no-fat, flavoured and regular milk. There is no restriction on the size of the containers of water, because water has no calories. However, for the juices and milk the sizes will be capped at 250 millilitres in elementary schools, 300 millilitres in middle schools and 355 millilitres for high schools. A number of dietitians have told us that they support the graduated packaging sizes aimed at the increasing ages of children.

In high schools we offer a wider variety of beverages, but we still maintain a focus on nutritious and low-calorie beverages. In addition to the water, unsweetened juices and milk, high school students will also have access to no-calorie and low-calorie beverages such as diet beverages, as well as juice drinks and sports drinks, as long as the calories are less than 100 calories per container. Again, these containers will be capped at 355 millilitres. In addition, at least 50 percent of the beverage choices in high schools will be water and the no-calorie and low-calorie options. We believe that offering students a variety of beverages, while encouraging the shift toward nutritious and low-calorie options, will help them develop positive attitudes toward healthy eating.

Dietitians we consulted supported the expanded choices in the high schools, saying that high school students need the opportunity to use more sophisticated critical-thinking skills. They also told us that high school students need to develop an awareness of how their food and other health choices may impact health later in life. They supported both the beverage choices and the package size the industry offers.

These guidelines are effective immediately for all new school contracts and contracts that come up for renewal. Our goal is to have them fully implemented by the 2009-2010 school year. The time line is required for a number of reasons. First, it recognizes that we have contractual obligations that are already in place. However, if any school or school board wants to transition to the new guidelines sooner, our member companies will work with them to do that. The additional time is also required so that member companies can develop innovative, new products; redesign existing packaging; and enhance vending capabilities in order to meet the spirit and letter of the school guidelines.

Earlier I mentioned that obesity is a complex issue and that the science on what causes it is inconclusive at best. For example, I've reviewed many of the transcripts of previous presentations made to this committee, and many of them cited studies that identified certain beverages as a key culprit in this issue. However, a study published in Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise found no relationship between consumption of sweetened beverages and fat mass in healthy males and females between the ages of eight and 19.

Another study in Nutrition Reviews concluded that even though some evidence supported a relationship between sweetened beverages and obesity, other studies supported no such relationship, and a few indicated a negative relationship.

A study published last year in an obesity review involving 137,000 girls and boys aged ten to 16 concluded that overweight status was not associated with

the intake of fruits, vegetables and soft drinks and that obesity strategies should instead focus on increased physical activity and less time spent watching TV.

In 2004 a study in International Journal of Obesity found that snack foods were not an important, independent determinant of weight gain among children in adolescence. A study in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association showed no linear relationship between sweetened beverage consumption, BMI and total energy intake in more than 1,500 ten-year-olds.

It's difficult for anyone to say that one study is more valid than the other. What I'm trying to say is that we agree with many experts who believe that any solutions should consider all the available science and should take into consideration the perspectives of all stakeholders on this issue.

While the science on causes of obesity remains inconclusive, we do have some relevant data on soft drinks. Statistics Canada shows that the amount of soft drinks available for consumption has been dropping steadily over the last several years. In fact, between 1998 and 2005, availability dropped 9 percent, while we know that obesity rates continued to increase over that time. Our own industry data confirms that downward trend.

There are some things that virtually all stakeholders do agree on. First, we have to determine the root causes of obesity. Why are people eating more if, in fact, they are? According to the recent Statistics Canada Canadian community health survey, caloric intake for both boys and girls aged five to 19 has actually decreased between 1972 and 2004. So if they're not eating more, why are physical activity levels dropping? Many reasons are often cited for that. Many of them you've heard in previous presentations, and they include things like more time spent in front of the TV and computers.

There's also widespread agreement that solutions should be evidence-based and that we need a comprehensive approach in which education must be a key component, along with increased opportunities for physical activity. Schools are a unique environment and offer an opportunity for us to help children develop healthy, active lifestyles. The beverage industry has taken a key role with our school guidelines, and we hope others will join us in our efforts to make schools places where kids can begin to develop healthy, active lifestyles.

Now committee members have a chance to ask questions. Let's start with John Nuraney.

J. Nuraney: Thank you, Calla. I think it was very refreshing to hear that the industry itself wants to be regulated to make sure they provide the right kind of beverages to different age groups. It is, I believe, emanating from the fact that they do accept that the present delivery of the beverages to schools does not promote healthy lifestyles. Hopefully, the new guidelines that you mentioned will provide the kind of beverages that this committee would like to have recommended.

When you say "guidelines," is this a voluntary thing in terms of the industry, or are you going to make them mandatory?

C. Farn: They are voluntary, but our industry members include Coke and Pepsi, which typically do much of the business in the school channel. Having said that, not all schools and school boards have beverage contracts with our member companies. Some of them use independent third-party operators, some of them might stock their own beverage machines, and some of them may not even have beverage machines, so there's a mixture out there. But these were developed with our major member companies, and they're fully supported.

Later this month we will undertake a major communications initiative with all schools and all school boards urging them to adopt our guidelines regardless of where they source their beverages. When we introduced the elementary school guidelines in 2004, we got widespread support across the country. We have no indication that this would be any different this time around with the elementary, middle and high schools.

J. Nuraney: So the committee can use them as our own guidelines in terms of providing recommendations in our report?

J. Nuraney: That these would be the guidelines that the school districts must follow in order to make contracts with beverage companies?

M. Sather: Well, I have to say that I find your presentation and the last one quite disturbing. It seems to me that the message that's being given to us is that it's not about the product that you're selling. It's about people exercising more and about being more media-

savvy about what they eat. In fact, I hear almost putting the emphasis on the consumer to be knowledgable enough not to eat too much or drink too much of the product that your members are promoting and trying to get people to consume.

Then we hear about so-called, apparent, conflicting information. The evidence isn't there. That's ever so reminiscent, I have to say, of the tobacco industry, which told us for years and trotted out studies for years that said tobacco is not related to cancer.

In virtually every other presentation we had, no one said that these foods were healthy, that excessively caloric foods were healthy, that foods with all this added sugar were healthy. They said quite unequivocally that they were related to obesity, so we're hearing a message from your industry which is at complete odds with that. I have to say I just see a lack of responsibility by the industry here to face this issue, this crisis, head on.

The fact of the matter is if the industry doesn't do it voluntarily, governments will have to do it if for no other reason, as has been said earlier, than the costs. We can't sustain the cost to the health care system. So I really would encourage you in the industry to take far, far more responsibility for the product that you're selling, particularly where it's being sold in areas where children are there and are the consumers, like schools, but not just schools.

C. Farn: I think our school guidelines show clearly that we are playing a role and that we are accepting responsibility. I'm not here to say that healthy eating is not part of the equation. Absolutely, it's a key component of the equation. What I'm saying is it's not the only part. It has to be three-pronged. We have to focus on healthy eating, absolutely, but we also have to focus on physical activity and nutrition education.

I think all of the industry experts you heard today have said: "We all have a role to play." Individual companies and industry sectors are taking their responsibility quite seriously. Our industry has been a responsible school and business partner for decades. We take that very seriously. That's one of the reasons we introduced our guidelines. We recognize schools are a unique environment. You know, we've changed the product mix and packaging sizes.

Again the comparison to the tobacco industry, I think, is totally unfortunate You've got an industry stepping forward, saying: "We want to be part of the solution. How can we help? How can we work with you to solve this crisis?"

You said something about the actual availability of pop. I think you said that carbonated beverages had actually reduced since a certain time. I'm assuming you meant just in schools.

C. Farn: No. I meant across Canada. The term availability is a term that Statistics Canada uses. They're not taking into consideration, for example, wastage and spoilage and things like that. They're saying that out of all the soft drinks that are available for consumption in Canada, it's been steadily dropping since 1998. It continues to do so.

Obesity has continued to rise. It's not unusual for a mature industry, anyway. There are so many new and innovative products on the market today, wider choice than ever before, and Canadians are clearly taking advantage of those choices. They're trying the new beverages that are available. In fact, juices and waters are the fastest-growing beverage category today. Waters are growing in double-digit ranges every year as people become more concerned and focused on their health.

R. Sultan (Chair): I wonder if I could ask a question which might be, perhaps, bordering on the commercial confidentiality area. If so, I would not press it.

I had a long chat with one of your member sponsor organizations, and they explained, of course, that you were their spokesperson — and a very effective one, I should say. We're glad to have you here today. In passing, it was mentioned that this particular organization had had meetings with our Ministry of Education. To paraphrase, I guess they didn't go very well.

Now, I didn't pry as to what was on the agenda and what didn't go very well, but I presume it had something to do with further restricting the availability of soft drink vending machines in the schools. I'm speculating, however.

Could you shed any light on what, perhaps, currently has been going on between our own Ministry of Education, on which we have no special insight on this committee, and at least one of your member companies — speaking very generically?

C. Farn: Actually, Refreshments Canada has had a number of conversations with the government of B.C., particularly on this schools issue. We've been welcomed, we've had a fair hearing, and they've taken our information. In the end, they developed their own school guidelines. We would have much preferred they adopted ours and made them provincewide, but they adopted their own.

There are some areas of commonality between the two, and there are some differences. The reason for most of the differences, I think, is because the B.C. school guidelines apply to all school levels. They don't recognize any difference between the elementary school environment and the younger children and smaller body sizes and so on and the older high school students.

In some areas our guidelines are more restrictive. For example, the B.C. guidelines will allow some diet beverages in elementary schools — diet soft drinks. We don't. They're just not being sold. It's juices, waters and milk.

In other areas they're more restrictive. For example, because they apply to all school levels, diet colas are not allowed in high schools because of the small amounts of caffeine that they include. So where we would allow a range of diet beverages in high school but no diet soft drinks in elementary school, there's a bit of a difference between the two sets of guidelines there.

There may be a difference in sports drinks, depending on the sodium content of them. You know, sports drinks might not be the best choice for elementary school students, but a lot of high school teams are using them for rehydration and replacing of electrolytes.

I guess when a member company reported they didn't go well, they didn't go well in that our guidelines weren't adopted 100 percent. But I think there are a lot of areas of commonality between the two guidelines. We would have preferred that they recognized the difference between elementary and high school. That was one area that we really pushed on, because we thought it was important. A lot of dietitians supported us on that.

R. Sultan (Chair): So, Calla, are you saying that at the present time there are no cola beverages sold through vending machines in B.C. schools?

C. Farn: No. I'm saying that as companies enter into new contract arrangements or as existing ones come up for renewal, these guidelines will take effect. They take effect immediately for any new contracts, and if schools that have existing contracts want to adopt them immediately, we'll certainly work with them to do that. That's one of the reasons we needed the time frame to go as far 2009-2010 so that we could honour existing contractual obligations.

J. Nuraney: Just one more question, if I may, pertaining to the same thought. Why not put a sunset date rather than expiration of contracts?

C. Farn: There are, I guess, legal and other ramifications. Both parties have entered into contracts. If both parties agree to terminate them early that's one thing, but I don't think either party can…. I don't think our member companies can demand changes.

R. Sultan (Chair): The Clerk has pointed out to me that the industry guidelines do apply where beverages are being sold as part of fundraising activities. Am I reading this correctly?

R. Sultan (Chair): Do not apply — excuse me. The industry guidelines do not apply where beverages are being sold as part of fundraising activities by schools. We frequently hear, of course, that the schools are in these programs to raise money for sports teams, etc. Do you have any comment on that?

C. Farn: Well, our goal was to increase the availability of nutrition beverages and lower-calorie beverages to students during the school day. Yes, many schools rely on fundraising activities for all sorts of things — extracurricular activities, sports equipment and things that they couldn't otherwise afford to provide.

C. Farn: Special events. And normally they would be events that also attract parents and other adults, not just regular after-school activities. They do apply to extracurricular activities as well.

J. Nuraney: Yeah, I think the misunderstanding is that revenues that are generated from those vending machines are used towards funding some of the school projects. That is not constituted as a fundraiser.

C. Farn: No. There will still be revenue generated from the sale of other beverages in vending machines. We're talking about special fundraising events.

R. Sultan (Chair): Calla, I guess we should concede, if that's the proper term, that our own special event coming in 2010 depends very heavily on one particular prominent member of your trade association. I'm sure that VANOC is very grateful for that, so we thank you.

Well, hearing no further questions, I think we will thank Calla Farn and Refreshments Canada for coming a long way, from Halifax, to testify, and we'll allow you to get back to your daughter and your log cabin. Thank you for coming.

R. Sultan (Chair): I will call the meeting to order. This is, as we have said at the outset, a continuation of the Select Standing Committee on Health hearings into the issue mandated by the Legislature of British Columbia — childhood obesity, a public health issue of growing magnitude and urgency.

We have before us as our final hitters in the lineup, you might say, three very distinguished representatives of the food and distribution industry, including some old friends. We will have a presentation by the Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices Association, Mark von Schellwitz, vice-president for western Canada, assisted by John Bishop, a director of the association. Coming along is a person representing a classic Vancouver institution, the White Spot restaurant chain, where I frequently have lunch — and you folks do a great job — Warren Erhart, director and president.

Welcome to the Health Committee, and perhaps you could each lead off just by introducing yourselves. It's always interesting to the committee to get a little one or two sentences about your own personal bio. You know, are you here from Halifax like one of our previous witnesses was, or where are you from, etc.? Then proceed to your presentation.

As the chairman mentioned, Mark von Schellwitz with the Canadian Restaurant Association. By way of background, I was in the hospitality industry for a good part of my life. Our family had a resort on Vancouver Island until the mid-90s, and then I took over this job. So I'm quite familiar with the industry on a lot of different levels and really enjoy what I'm doing with the association, which is mostly government affairs work.

J. Bishop: I'm John Bishop, and I'm fortunate to have had a restaurant on 4th Avenue for over 20 years. I came to Canada in 1973 expecting to stay just 12 months and fell in love with Vancouver and also, fortunately, met a wonderful woman from Saskatchewan, a farmer's daughter, who I've been married to ever since. We have two children.

I'm very involved with cultivating — cultivating is actually the accurate word — and promoting and trying to encourage all of us, not only in the industry but home cooks and restaurateurs, to support local agriculture, helping to make sure that we have farmers to supply food for our own kids.

So issues like that — not really political, although my hat that I wear for the CRFA…. Sometimes we do get involved in the politics of the industry, so I also feel fortunate to be involved with the CRFA as well.

W. Erhart: I'm Warren Erhart. I'm president of the White Spot Restaurants. I've been the president since 1994. I joined White Spot in 1990, and prior to that, I spent 15 years with Keg Restaurants, both in British Columbia and in Ontario.

Likewise, like John, very fortunate that White Spot is a wonderful, beloved brand within British Columbia, and I've got the responsibility of continuing to move the business forward and trying to keep on trend with all the unique things that we're doing in the marketplace.

I joined the restaurant association about five years ago — the Canadian restaurant association with Mark and John — and I'm one of the B.C. representatives, both from a chain operations point of view but also the west coast as well. I live in Ladner, where I guess one of your cohorts, Val Roddick, is our local person there.

M. von Schellwitz: First, Mr. Chairman, what I'd like to do is just outline a little bit about the Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices Association and our industry and how it relates to the issue of nutrition and fitness. I'll then inform you of some of the initiatives that we've been involved with over the last few years on this issue, and I'll go through some of the stuff on our website. There are some copies here as well in case we have a technical problem. I'll do that, and then I'm going to hand it over to John to mention a few things about the issue from a fine dining operator's perspective and then over to Warren to talk about the issue from a casual chain operator's perspective.

Without further ado, I'm just going to tell you a little bit about us. We're the largest hospitality industry association in Canada. Since 1944 we've grown to more than 31,000 members, including over 3,000 B.C.-based members.

Our members include quick-service restaurants, fine dining establishments, hotels, caterers, pubs, educators and food service suppliers. Approximately 68 percent of our members are independents, and the other 32 percent are regional and national chains.

We're funded by membership dues from member services and trade shows, and our mission statement expresses our function — that we will create a favourable business environment and tangible value to our members in all sectors of Canada's food service industry. Of course, creating a favourable business environment includes working to influence government policy in a fashion that allows our industry to grow and employ more Canadians and British Columbians.

The food service industry in British Columbia is a $7.9 billion industry. We employ 167,000 people, and of those, 42 percent, or 70,700, are under the age of 25. That's roughly 21 percent of all young people employed in the province.

Just to put the food service industry in perspective to the overall food industry, the average Canadian sources just 10 percent of his or her meals and snacks from a restaurant. Eight percent of meals are skipped, and 83 percent are prepared and eaten at home, carried from home or eaten in somebody else's home. That's according to the NPD Group, Eating Patterns in Canada.

On average in B.C. 25 percent of our food dollar is actually spent in restaurants, whereas 75 percent is spent with food retailers. We're actually the highest in Canada, which is something we're quite proud about.

There are more British Columbians eating out in restaurants per capita than anywhere else. We're spending more money on it, anyway.

The food service industry makes up only a small portion of the food industry, but we recognize that we've got an important role to play in encouraging British Columbians and Canadians to live healthier lives, which is why CRFA is a proud steering committee member of the ActNow–Agri-food Partners in Healthy Eating initiative and also member companies such as Warren's are part of the healthy dining pilot project, which is also under ActNow.

In fact, we've been involved in a number of initiatives over the last few years to help make the healthy choice the easy choice for restaurant customers. Our board of directors decided to become actively involved in nutrition and fitness roughly four years ago. As a result, they put together something called a nutrition and fitness round table, which started in January 2003. This brings together some of Canada's leading food service companies to explore opportunities on how the industry can work with government and other stakeholders to educate consumers about the importance of a balanced diet and physical activity.

Throughout the round table the industry…. As a result of the round table we introduced a nutrition information program, which I'm going to go into in a little bit more detail. We became involved in the Pan-Canadian Healthy Living Strategy. We presented indoor seminars to help smaller food service operators respond to growing customer concern about nutrition and fitness. We participated in a Health Canada task force aimed at reducing trans fats in foods to the lowest level possible, and we've supported that task force's recent recommendations.

When the nutrition and fitness round table first met in 2003, they recognized that the restaurant customers had a growing interest in obtaining nutrition information about the food and beverages they served. However, given the made-to-order nature of our industry — supplier substitutions, daily and seasonal specials — it can be a challenge for restaurants to provide nutrition information in an accurate, thorough and legible manner.

The round table recognized that there was a need to standardize the manner in which this information was provided so that consumers would know how to find information on a consistent basis. As a result, we developed voluntary guidelines for providing nutrition information to consumers, which resulted in a February 2005 launch of the nutrition information program, which, coincidentally, coincided almost exactly with the launch of ActNow.

This voluntary program provides consumers with the calorie, fat, cholesterol, sodium, carbohydrate and protein content of standard menu items. Restaurant operators are also encouraged to identify ingredients that are common causes of food allergies or intolerances, such as nuts, milks, eggs and fish.

By the end of 2005 participating restaurants across Canada provided nutrition information in brochures at each of their locations and placed a notice on menu boards or in menus to let consumers know that information was available on the premises. In some cases nutrition and allergen information have also been posted on a number of restaurant websites.

Since the launch of the nutrition information program in February 2005, 26 restaurant chains have signed on to the program and are now at various stages of complying with the voluntary guidelines. More and more restaurants are making detailed nutrition information known in a variety of formats. Many have found innovative ways to provide information. I'll get into that in a while, too, with on-line nutrition calculators, in-store brochures, posters and tray liners.

Also, given the current high level of interest in nutrition and fitness amongst Canadians — according to Angus Reid last year 83 percent of British Columbians wanted to eat more healthfully — our restaurants are introducing a wide range of lighter, leaner menu options that are growing in popularity.

More items are being added all the time, and restaurant patrons are responding. The following menu items, which are considered generally as healthier choices, grew in popularity from the year 2000 to 2004, by the percentages listed. This information is from the NPD food service information group, which monitors consumer eating and restaurant behaviour.

Vegetarian burgers went up 121 percent. Bottled water: 55 percent. Fruit: 55 percent. Juices, excluding orange juice — don't ask me why: 38 percent. Main-dish salads: up 32 percent. Wraps and pitas: up 29 percent. Bagels: up 22 percent. Submarine sandwiches: up 19 percent. Fish: up 16 percent. Water: 15 percent. Orange juice: 8 percent.

Closer to home in B.C., just even more recent data for British Columbia from NPD shows that volume increases of menu items ordered in British Columbia…. An average increase overall of 4 percent. In that 4 percent sushi was up 95 percent. Main-dish green salads were up 75 percent; that's with protein. A main-dish salad without protein went up by 54 percent. Orange juice: 61 percent. Other juice: 14 percent. Diet soft drinks did go up, however, too, by 30 percent. Bottled water: 26 percent. Water: 11 percent. Hot tea: 15 percent. Soup: 12 percent. Bagels: 36 percent.

Part of the reason for the growth of these healthy menu items can be attributed to most restaurants now offering healthy substitutions for various menu items, where salad, for example, can replace fries, and where milk can replace a soft drink like a Coke or something like that. This healthy substitution trend is happening more and more as consumers become increasingly interested in healthy eating and living.

Many fine dining restaurateurs like John Bishop are also becoming increasingly strong advocates of thinking globally but acting locally by supporting local farmers where possible so that they can provide their customers with more fresh, tasty ingredients which also happen to be more nutritious.

Finally, restaurant operators realize that eating better is only half the solution to living more healthy lives, which is why they are major sponsors and promoters of physical activities both nationally and in every community throughout B.C. Today many restaurant companies are leading the way, offering consumers nutritious menu choices and encouraging physical activity.

Just so you know, we take this very, very seriously on our website. This is one of the main portals of our website, what we call our food and fitness facts. We go through some of the messages we mentioned earlier today about fats. Food and fitness fact number one: with the current high level of nutrition and fitness among Canadians, restaurants are introducing a wide range of lighter, leaner menu options that are growing in popularity. I went through some of these examples, but you can go through this more at your leisure. Also, more and more of them are making detailed nutrition information available.

The food service industry is certainly doing its part to help improve health and fitness of Canadians through some of the things that I mentioned, and many restaurant companies are leading the way in offering nutritious menu choices and encouraging physical activity.

We've got some links here to all the various participating restaurant chains. You'll see most of them — for example, let's just pop up on Wendy's here — have some great information on their websites as well. If we go down here, I'll show you just one example of what Wendy's has got, for example, under "nutrition."

M. von Schellwitz: Oh, I didn't choose the A&W site, but it's very good too.

Anyway, under the Wendy's site, there's a portal as well to talk about food nutrition facts. You'll see all the different things that they've got on nutrition on their website here as well.

I'm just going to conclude my remarks by saying that CRFA and the food service industry believe the most effective way to combat obesity is through education on the importance of healthy food choices and physical activity. Interestingly, StatsCan's 2004 Canadian community health survey, an overview of Canadians' eating habits just released this last July, states there's no evidence the average daily caloric intake increased from 1972 to 2004. Therefore, the problem is not in total calories but in the poor food choices that people are making and an increasingly sedentary lifestyle.

We all have a role to play in educating people to make the healthy choice the easy choice. I think that as far as our industry is concerned, we're well on the way to being there.

Just as far as those handouts are concerned, I could have taken you through the website in more detail. There are all the details there as far as what's in the nutrition information program, and how-to guidelines. There's also an article there about applying Canada's Food Guide to restaurant menu choices. There are on-line caloric calculators. There's all sorts of information through our website on this issue, and more and more over the last couple of years we've had members accessing that site and that information.

That's just a rough example of what we've been doing as an association. I'd now like to turn it over to John and to Warren to just talk about this issue a little bit from their perspectives.

J. Bishop: I can tell you from my experience of 40 years of cooking in this industry and more recently, as I said, being involved with the agricultural side of it — getting to know local farmers, etc. — that fine dining has certainly never been healthier as far as I know.

Thirty years ago it was not uncommon for small kitchens to be using additives to soups and things like that — powdered soups, etc. — even in fine dining circles.

None of that happens today. More and more chefs across the country, and in my involvement with the CRFA I'm fortunate to see it firsthand, are looking at the jobs they do, the work and the food they produce for their customers as being a craft, a truly passionate skill to have.

Whereas we used to go and just sit in an armchair and get on the telephone and order our food, now more and more we are going out and sourcing the food and trying to craft this locally grown, locally purchased menu style.

The conditions in the business have improved too. The health side of how we perform, the equipment that we use has all come up so much in the past 20 years at least. A lot of my colleagues…. I get out to their places, so I know this, really, firsthand.

The dining public, especially the fine dining public that I am involved with — especially here in this part of the world — are getting a fantastic product. As I say, in many cases it's a locally grown product.

Health isn't something that we as chefs purposely…. It's not on the top of the agenda for us. But certainly, like it is for your family…. That's how I view my restaurant, as an extension of my family, really. I'm being careful about what I put on those plates for my family and my guests at the restaurant.

As far as the other segments of the industry that I am involved with through the CRFA, I know there isn't anyone that sits around the CRFA table at meetings that isn't more than aware of the issues swirling around things like obesity and the food that they are offering to their clientele, albeit they're a different clientele than I am.

The establishment of the round table — not that I'm a part of that, but just the fact that it's there and they meet regularly…. I see, as I say, some of the results of that through the expression of concerns from all of

those members — whether it's McDonald's, White Spot or fine dining — so I am not quite as discouraged about the situation.

I agree with Mark. I think if I would be carrying a placard on behalf of my compatriots in the fast food thing, it would probably read: "education, not legislation." We probably, like anyone, need to be nudged to be diligent in that matter, but the industry as a whole, I do believe, is moving in a healthier way.

My involvement with Warren…. I'm encouraged by the work they're doing in looking for healthier alternatives, looking for new ways to present their food, because it's in their best interests. It's better to be proactive across the board than face the other alternative.

Even diners…. When I mention possibly what we're faced with when you come to the restaurant — even our restaurant — it would be a whole bunch of stuff. It's sort of like junk mail. Not junk mail, but you know when you get mail that you don't really want? You try to get away from it. You go to a fine dining restaurant, and there you are: it's got all the stuff on there warning you. You can't have that, or even if you have just a gram of it, it's not, you know….

We as an industry are trying to be proactive. As I say, health — capital "H" — is not right up there, but it is in our minds all the time because it equates to quality. We're looking for quality ingredients. The cooking styles, too, have changed so much. We use way less butter, way less cream. There's much more of a Mediterranean influence coming into the food. I notice at home we're picking up olive oil, maybe half-and-half with vegetable oil or butter — so healthier cooking styles across the board.

That said, going back to education…. in the little time I had this morning I noticed an article in one of our publications here — I haven't even really read it; I don't know whether you've had a chance to see it either — relating to: do you know what your kids are eating for breakfast? Tomorrow, or at least when I get home, I'm going to be looking in my pantry because, quite honestly, I know they have cereal. I suspect they choose their own cereal, so I'm going to be looking in my pantry tonight.

The education thing. I think very often parents just…. We take our children shopping for their school lunches. We cut back on that, too, because I knew there were a few nasty things creeping into the pantry. The way I addressed it with them with trans fats was there was a wonderful article in the New York Times that just created this perfect picture, even for kids. It said that eating trans fats is as damaging as throwing sand into the works of a fine clock.

I said that to my kids a couple of times and tried to clear the pantry out. I think they've got the message now. Try to eat good things, but good things don't have to taste lousy at all. They taste very good with a little bit of preparation.

So that's my pleading of the case. As I said, as an industry member I'm open and realize our responsibilities in this regard. I just wish we could get decent hospital food for people that need it. I wish we could get universities, as we are getting, more choices instead of just the pop and all that stuff — water and fruit and yogurts. At least give them the choices — even for students, I think.

W. Erhart: I think at White Spot we've always had a commitment to our guests with providing choices for people. I know that over the years when the Heart and Stroke Foundation had a HeartSmart program — I think this goes back 15 years ago — that was one of the initiatives we got involved with in the early days. Then there was, I think, a problem with policing — in fact, on the menu you say this, but what's going to happen in the restaurants? — and that too often….

After that we spent some time with the chef from the Pritikin Center down in Santa Monica. He came up here and talked about spa cuisine, and we have Pritikin dressings because they are low fat. That was, for it's time, quite unique as well. Now, as Mark mentioned before, we are going to be involved with the health check program that's being put out by the Heart and Stroke Foundation as well.

So we've always had some initiatives. It's funny within our industry as well. I don't have to tell John these numbers here. About 16 million people last year in British Columbia came to a White Spot restaurant. We're really proud of those numbers. As far as full-service restaurants, we had more full-service restaurant meals than anybody else out there.

Ten percent of those guests are kids eating pirate packs. A big initiative on our part is how you provide that — John, don't do the math on that, okay? — in providing initiatives for kids as well. I know how over the years our offerings, whether they be salads versus french fries and pirate packs that we have…. One of our biggest sellers, of course, is macaroni and cheese or fish and chips or grilled cheese sandwiches. We just most recently opened up a chicken salad that's available for kids now as well. It's really changed along the way for our kids' offerings.

Spring of 2005…. I always kibitz John because it was at one of our CRFA meetings that we had about: "Hey, would you ever want to do a commercial with us?" This whole campaign for us of fresh thinking, fresh cooking. It was both what was happening within our restaurants, but what was really happening with our menus as well, making sure that our menus were far more contemporary.

I think we've made a lot of evolution, especially over the last three or four years, with some of the programs and initiatives we've had within our menu offerings — things like big bowl salad promotions or lifestyle choices. We've consistently had items on our menus to give people that choice.

I think a lot of us that are in our industry, though, viewed it as veto power, as the fact that we should always have something on our menu if a person doesn't want to come in for a Triple O burger. I don't want to go to White Spot but at least I could have something

healthy on the menu. That part of our menu grows and grows and grows and, in fact, burgers shrink as time has gone on.

Mark will tell you the CRFA stats. As far as the top ten food items in Canada, hamburgers were number one and french fries were number two, but they're dropping. In fact, they've dropped significantly in the last couple of years, so you sort of see that within our trends. We sell more chicken burgers and more veggie burgers today than we ever have before. In fact, our little Triple O's — you might have seen them on B.C. Ferries and some of the Chevron stations…. Chicken burgers were our number-one sellers over beef in this area as well.

So there have been shifts. I think it's just prudent as an operator to make sure you've got a pulse on what's going on, both from what our guests want but also what's good for business.

We switched in October of last year to non-hydrogenated oil with all of our deep frying as well. It came, as John talked about, as far as looking for trans fat–free frying that's not only better for you but, we believe, a better flavour profile as well. We are one of the restaurant chains to mark comments as far as nutritional information. You come to our restaurants and ask for that information. Our servers will give you all the information on what's in your products that you're eating today. It's all available for you that way as well.

Substitution's never been a problem within our group. Our job is to treat customers as guests in our home, and so if you want a salad or Caesar salad versus french fries, absolutely no problems at all. The additions as well. Some of this is market trends. Bottled water sales continue to grow and grow at the expense of pop and soft drinks. There's no question. Fruit offerings, salads and fish within our menus are getting to be a bigger and bigger part of our mix.

We are using people like John. It isn't just a mutual admiration. It's the fact that we try to find the best chefs out there with the best recipes that have the appeal for consumers. That's the way things are trending for us.

Within the health check program…. I just want to touch upon that. In October of this year we're going to be rolling out, as a partnership with the health check people, some lifestyle choices within our menu that have all gone through the Heart and Stroke Foundation, which probably have some of the most rigid menu standards in Canada as far as menu offerings that way for fat, protein, sodium, etc., etc. So they will be launched with that familiar heart check logo on our menu. We're collecting surveys within all of our restaurants in September, both pre- and post- the launch of this program.

The pirate packs is the next area. We're looking at an upgrade to our whole kids' menu within our offerings from a variety and quality point of view. When you do attack, it's on two fronts, not just the menu recipe parts that John talked about but also the ingredient parts as well.

It's sort of a two-pronged approach. As John says, you can advertise and promote all you want, but they still come to our place for a burger and a cheesecake and sort of…. It's attitude and behaviour. I guess when I'm at home, maybe I'll eat healthy, but sometimes I'll go out and indulge. When I got out to a restaurant, that sometimes happens. We're doing a bunch of things that way as well.

Mark touched upon this. I think we've probably, at last count, sponsored about 112 sports teams in the province. We continually do things out there as well to keep active and fitness that way. Of course, our relationship with the Vancouver Giants and other things from a minor sport point of view: those are some of the things that we've been up to.

I'd love to answer any questions you may have about what we're doing in the industry.

K. Whittred: I don't have a question so much as I have a comment. I just wanted to congratulate all of you in your industry. From my own limited viewpoint, I think that of all the different groups, your industry has really been right in the forefront in terms of promoting healthy eating.

I am really pleased to be able to go to White Spot and order the chicken breast and salad and know that it's been grilled and not deep-fried. I come away knowing what I'm getting. Just as a matter of information, one of things in restaurant eating that I do like to know is how it's cooked. Sometimes it says it's healthy, and then you find out it's been breaded and deep-fried, and it wasn't exactly what you had in mind.

I really do congratulate you on your leadership there — not only yourself but other Vancouver chefs. I'm very proud of the work that Karen Barnaby's doing, her writing in the Vancouver Sun, and Rob Feenie and his innovative cooking. This is a whole new style, and it's healthy and local. I just think it's really good, and I wish it could reach more people.

A couple of comments on things. I might pass some information on to you around portion size. I was travelling recently and was in a restaurant where they actually offered seniors portions, and so I ordered the seniors steak, which was a five-ounce steak. That's just about the size that I like. I don't want to go into a restaurant anymore and get the six- or the eight- or the 12-ounce piece of meat. A five-ounce piece of steak is just fine. I think that the industry could be a bit more responsive on the portion size — not only for seniors, probably for all people.

In addition to the information that you give on the calories and fat — and I think White Spot is really good about this — I would like to see the fibre information added to that nutritional information.

There's not much else I can say. I sound like a mutual admiration society, but I really do think your industry has done a good job. I think some of the fast food…. I think they've still got a way to go in terms of meeting the challenge, but I find that I can go out to dinner very comfortably now and have a whole range of choices from fine dining, like John Bishop's establishment, to the White Spot, which is where I go very frequently because it's right near my home. I find I've got a range of choices, and I know that I can get a good healthy meal.

I really liked your comment. I think it was John. You said that good things taste good. I think that's a really good message: good, healthy food tastes good. That's a really simple message, I think, for this committee, so thank you for that.

J. Bishop: I've been fooling my kids for years. I make the best french fries and the best macaroni and cheese — in their eyes, I should say.

M. von Schellwitz: One thing I should mention on Katherine's remarks is that we did invite a QSR person to come with us. Unfortunately, we didn't have a lot of time. They would have loved to have come here. I think some of the quick-service chains — A&W, McDonald's — have actually done quite a bit, as well, for quick-service establishments.

What they can do with their marketing arms, some of these big, national chains in the QSR side, is put forward that active living, healthy living message. A lot of them have got advertising campaigns specifically geared towards healthy living. I think you can't underestimate how important that is to actually helping the trend which is already taking place towards healthier lifestyles, healthy eating choices and more activity.

I know there were some people who would sometimes comment on some of these QSR chains: "Oh, well, they're still the bad guys." In actual fact, they're doing a lot. If they were here, they could tell you some of the initiatives they're involved with and some of the huge shifts in their menus, as well, as far as the burger-and-fries element going down and how they're getting more of the wives that didn't come in coming into the restaurant because they have more of the salad-type of things.

I think, as well, even an icon like a Ronald McDonald going into the high schools can actually have a very positive influence on getting these teens more active.

That's my personal thing, having two teenage kids, who I keep really, really busy. I think the biggest problem here with the friends of theirs who do have a weight problem…. It's nothing to do with their diet. I think they're having balanced diets, but they're very, very sedentary. They're sitting in front of their computer screens and TVs all the time, and I think it's incumbent on parents to get their kids more active. I think that would go a long way towards solving this problem.

K. Whittred: If I could just make one more comment, again, in a complementary way. Every presenter today has talked about education. I think one of the most influential means of education has been the food channel in terms of the general public. It is a widely watched resource. It's watched by a lot of parents. Not only the food channel but some of the other channels carry the food shows, and I think that has been an incredible resource for the whole idea that good things taste good, as well as the newspaper, the Wednesday paper and so on.

M. Sather: Mr. Bishop, I certainly want to commend you and your establishment for combining fine dining with support for local agriculture. I think that's really commendable.

M. Sather: You're an industry leader in that respect and well acknowledged, so that's just great.

I just had a question, again, for Mark. This is a point that's been made before. This has to do with total calories not having gone up. I wanted to ask over what time period that is the case and if you have any age-related breakdown for your statistic.

M. von Schellwitz: I think so. It's all in that report. The time frame, I believe, was 1972 to 2004. We've got that study, and I can get you the details from it as far as breakouts and everything like that — for sure. No problem.

R. Sultan (Chair): Could I ask a question related to that? I got the impression that total calories haven't gone up, but then I seem to recall you saying that it's the type of calories or bad calories or something. Is that what you were implying?

M. von Schellwitz: Back in '72…. I guess that's what I was implying as far as energy-dense foods as opposed to more of a balanced-meal approach. It's too easy, I think, to sit in front of your TV having — gee, I don't want to point anybody out — a type of food that's not very good for you. Maybe 30 years ago there was still more of a focus on a balanced diet.

I think that a really important consideration on the whole thing is having that balanced diet — making sure that the parents and the education system and everyone is going towards saying, "You know what? You can have a little snack like an apple instead of potato chips. It's going to do your body a lot of good, and you'll feel better," as opposed to the natural tendency of a child to go for the taste right away.

R. Sultan (Chair): But Mark, in my simple-minded engineering fashion, a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. Am I wrong?

M. von Schellwitz: A calorie is a calorie is a calorie, which is why I said before that I think the real solution

here has to be at the other end. I think we have to get our kids — and the overall population has to get — a lot more active. We're quite spoiled here in British Columbia compared to other parts of Canada in that we have a large part of the year that you can get outside — enjoy the outdoors, go for a walk, go for a run — which is probably why we're better off than the rest of the country when it comes to this obesity issue.

Certainly, more can be done. I'm a great advocate…. For example, the federal government's now thinking of reintroducing the Participaction program, which I think would be a positive step in this whole debate. I think that anything we can do as a food industry or as a government to promote more physical activity…. That is probably the bigger part of the problem.

As mentioned, through the advertising that's going on already on the nutrition side, that shift is already taking place. We're already in it, and it's in our industry's best interest to make sure that we do offer these nutritional choices, because consumers are demanding it already.

I guess the other thing I should mention as part of that statement, as well, is that what won't work are red-tape-intensive regulatory measures or trying to tax one food over another. It's just so difficult with the complexity and the diversity of our industry to take these sorts of one-size-fits-all solutions and try and fit it into it. For example, how would you do a tax credit or tax this type of your menu item but not that part of it? Some of the complexities involved would just be enormous. We want to be part of the solution, but we think education is the solution.

R. Sultan (Chair): Let me turn to John Nuraney and invite him as, in a sense, an industry expert himself, perhaps, to add his point of view.

J. Nuraney: It's really humbling, Mr. Chair, to be in front of the real great icons of our industry. John Bishop, Warren and Mark have made a great contribution to the food industry in the last years.

What I would like to say is that, more importantly, I think it is public education that has really acted here in our industry. It's all customer-driven. It's not unusual to see a person coming up to the counter ordering a Papa Burger and then taking the top bun off. He's not eating the top bun. He's simply eating the meat and the bottom bun. This is customer-driven, I would think. We used to salt our fries at one time. We don't anymore, because the customers do not want salt on their fries. I think it's more customer-driven because the education is out there.

I certainly want to compliment the leaders of our industry in terms of being aware, being socially responsible, not only in making sure that the business dollars don't suffer but also in offering a choice that the customers are now asking for. I think Warren's restaurants have been a real leader in our industry in terms of offering those choices.

I want to compliment Warren and John for his great, recent going public, so to speak. Everybody knew John behind the kitchen, but now we know John in front of the counter and talking about these issues.

It's a great thing, John, for you to come on board and make that contribution to British Columbians. Thank you.

R. Sultan (Chair): I have another question. When I go into some of the fast-food chains, I see the…. I saw, for example, the introduction of salads into McDonald's. I got the impression that the salads tended to sit there until they curled a little bit. The demand was not there.

Has it been a case where the industry, generally, has had to prime the market — through availability and through the point-of-purchase promotions — to re-educate the menu choices of people? Or has this indeed been largely a customer-driven phenomenon, as John points out?

W. Erhart: I think that maybe at first it was. I think a lot of people would probably go to a quick-service restaurant and not expect to see a salad in there. So I think the initial was the fact…. "Can they do a good job on this product anyway? Because I don't expect that if you come to their place, they're going to have a good quality of product."

Our Triple O's locations we opened up with just burgers and fries. It didn't take long before Caesar salads were there and those kinds of things. In the sales mix, by the way, all these products are growing. There's no question that more and more people are ordering salads all the time, which gets our staff good at producing the product. It's a really positive thing. What happens is that once your staff get comfortable and good at it, they produce more. It gets comfortable and good versus….

The problem we had for awhile there, Ralph…. Probably, a lot of product got thrown out because basically we made the product, it never sold, and it was in the garbage. I'm sure a lot of operators were wondering if this was a good move or not. What I think is that as time goes on, the menu mix begins to shift, and the quality is there….

I think that at first, there was an investment spending that had to go on by the quick-service operators to get the acceptance of the product. But then, today we've got a lot of people who come in and never mind the burger or chicken strips. They come for the salads, as well, even in quick-service restaurants. That's just speaking for our Triple O's locations, which are a quick-service option.

What came first? I really believe that there was a demand for it. I go back to this veto power of this garden burger and veggie burger and things where people were ordering, saying: "I don't want a beef. I want something other than beef."

Funny, I sit around with a lot of our employees, and we talk about menu items and say: "What aren't you proud of serving on our menu?" I'm talking to a lot of usually young, female staff. You start talking to them, and they say: "Well, I don't eat beef. I don't want to eat beef." "Have you tried the beef dip?" "Well, I don't eat beef." "Oh, okay." So you have a whole audience of people who don't eat the product how it is to start with.

At first, it took awhile for acceptance. I think now it's got legs on its own. It's really working on its own that way as well. For instance, if you look at Wendy's example, when they opened up with basically salad bars at one time and then basic salads. The different types of offerings and the different types of salads are now growing within quick service as well. It's not just green leaf lettuce. They're actually offering more options like that and types of dressings.

R. Sultan (Chair): Finally, let me add to Mark's point about John's emphasis on locally grown produce. Val Roddick — a member of our committee, former Chair of the Health Committee — jumps up in the Legislature talking about healthy, fresh, locally grown veggies or whatever with great enthusiasm and has convinced us all. I'm sure that if Val were here, she would second what Mark said in terms of how wonderful it is that our own homegrown produce is being emphasized.

W. Erhart: It's interesting. I know that at White Spot one of the first things we took off the menu was a thing called Chicken Pickin's or Chicken in the Straw. It was a breaded, deep-fried bone-in chicken. We took it off the menu. I don't know how many phone calls…. "Are you the guy that took that thing off the menu?" I felt like saying: "Well, did you ever talk to your doctor about what you're eating there?" We sort of went back and forth as well.

It was a big seller for us, actually. But as years went on, it sort of started progressing to a lower and lower mix, so we offset that for boneless and charbroiled versus deep-fried, and different ways of doing the onions as well. I think that the restaurant's gone with tapas and a lot of menu offerings that way — non-fried appetizers. A lot of those things are growing, as well, in popularity.

R. Sultan (Chair): I would like to thank Warren Erhart, John Bishop and Mark von Schellwitz for an interesting, mouth-watering presentation.

Hansard Services publishes transcripts both in print and on the Internet.
Chamber debates are broadcast on television and webcast on the Internet.
Question Period podcasts are available on the Internet.



CONTENTS

		Page

Presentations		169
C. Loblaw P. Tanaka C. Farn M. von Schellwitz J. Bishop W. Erhart

Committee Staff:	Jonathan Fershau (Committee Research Analyst) Carla Shore (Committee Consultant)

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS (Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
(Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON
HEALTH