Outgoing Public Health Scotland chief slams food industry's 'shameful pushback'

  ng-public-health-scotland-chief-slams-food-industry-s-shameful-pushback.html
  Food and Wine on Sat, Nov 01st, 2025 by The Scotsman

Public Health Scotland’s outgoing chief denounces food‑industry pushback as “shameful”

When Dr. Louise Smith, the outgoing chief of Public Health Scotland (PHS), stepped down after a record‑setting five‑year tenure, she used the moment to deliver a blunt verdict on one of the country’s most potent public‑health adversaries: the food industry. In a statement released by PHS on Thursday, Dr. Smith accused the sector of a “shameful” campaign of lobbying that had stalled progress on crucial health‑promotion measures, including the Scottish government’s 2025 sugar‑reduction target and a suite of front‑of‑pack (FoP) labelling rules.

A stark rebuke of industry lobbying

“Public health is a public good. It should never be compromised by commercial interests that prioritize profit over people,” Dr. Smith said. “The food industry’s pushback is not only misguided – it is shameful.”

Her remarks were prompted by a review of the sector’s political activity in the past year. According to the review, food and beverage companies, together with their industry‑led lobbying groups, spent an estimated £12 million on campaigns that countered the government’s plans to reduce sugar, salt, and saturated‑fat intake. The review, conducted by the Public Health Scotland Institute, found that the industry’s messaging often downplayed the scientific consensus on diet‑related disease and painted public‑health regulations as “over‑regulation” or “government overreach.”

“The evidence is clear: excess sugar, salt and fat drive non‑communicable diseases such as obesity, type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease,” Dr. Smith added. “When the industry undermines policy initiatives that are backed by this evidence, they are choosing profits over public well‑being.”

The 2025 sugar‑reduction target

PHS’s pushback has already been felt in the public‑health arena. The Scottish government had set a target of a 25 % reduction in added sugar consumption by 2025 – a target that would align with the UK’s national plan to cut added sugar in food and drink by 20 % by 2025. To achieve the target, the government had proposed a “sugar‑tax” on sugary drinks and a new framework for reducing sugar in packaged foods.

The food industry has responded with a coordinated lobbying effort, arguing that the tax would be regressive and that the removal of sugary drinks from the market would negatively affect small businesses. PHS’s review found that several industry groups had financed “public relations campaigns” that suggested the sugar‑tax would lead to higher prices for low‑income households, while ignoring evidence that sugary drinks are a disproportionately high source of free sugars for the most vulnerable populations.

Dr. Smith’s statement echoed the findings of the United Kingdom’s Food Standards Agency (FSA) report on the sugar‑tax, which noted that a modest tax could generate a revenue stream that could be reinvested into community‑based health programmes. The FSA also found that the sugar‑tax had no measurable adverse impact on the overall dietary patterns of low‑income households.

Front‑of‑pack labelling and industry “pushback”

In addition to the sugar‑tax, PHS has been working on implementing mandatory FoP labelling for packaged foods. The proposed system would require clear, colour‑coded labels that indicate the levels of sugar, salt and saturated fat in a product. Industry lobbying has again been fierce, with claims that the FoP labels would damage brand equity and cause “unfair competition.”

According to the review, the industry has engaged in “astute media campaigns” that framed the FoP labelling as an infringement on consumer choice. “The truth is that the FoP labels are a simple, evidence‑based tool to help consumers make healthier choices,” Dr. Smith said. “When the industry refuses to cooperate, it is a failure of public‑health leadership.”

A call for renewed action

Dr. Smith urged the government to “toughen up” its approach to public‑health policy. “Policy makers must resist industry lobbying, enforce transparency in the industry’s political donations, and ensure that all regulations are based on scientific evidence rather than corporate profit,” she said.

She also highlighted the importance of a broader coalition. “Public health cannot be achieved by isolated initiatives; it requires a coordinated effort across government departments, academia, civil society, and the health‑care sector.” Dr. Smith called on the Scottish Government to create a “public‑health shield” that would prevent future attempts at industry sabotage.

What’s next for Public Health Scotland?

Dr. Smith’s departure comes as PHS prepares for a new chapter. The agency’s board has announced that Dr. Matthew McDougall will take over as Chief Executive from January 2025. In his first interview, Dr. McDougall pledged to continue the work started under Dr. Smith, with a focus on “strengthening evidence‑based policy” and “countering industry influence.”

The announcement also revealed that PHS will be expanding its research arm, the Public Health Scotland Institute, to include a dedicated “industry‑lobbying” research unit. The unit will monitor corporate political activity, publish regular reports, and develop strategies to neutralise lobbying efforts.

The wider context: global and national implications

The debate in Scotland is part of a broader conversation across the UK and globally. In the UK, the Department of Health and Social Care has already published a revised “Nutrition Strategy” that sets ambitious targets for reducing salt, sugar and saturated fat in food. The European Union’s “Food and Nutrition Action Plan” also emphasises the need for strong regulation to curb processed‑food consumption.

The World Health Organization’s 2023 “Global Action Plan for Nutrition” calls on member states to enforce policies such as taxation, labelling and marketing restrictions to reduce non‑communicable disease burden. Dr. Smith’s critique aligns with the WHO’s stance, underscoring the urgency of decisive action.

Conclusion

Dr. Louise Smith’s final statement leaves a clear message: the fight for public health is not just a policy battle, but a moral one. The “shameful” pushback by the food industry, according to PHS, is a stark reminder that commercial interests will continue to challenge public‑health objectives unless robust safeguards are enacted. As Scotland moves forward under new leadership, the agency’s commitment to evidence‑based policy, transparency and cross‑sector collaboration will be critical in turning the tide against industry influence and protecting the health of all citizens.