Australia’s new national food policy sounds promising, but health experts warn it could make the nation’s diet even worse. With heavy influence from profit-driven food industries, the policy may prioritize cheap, unhealthy foods over better nutritional standards. So, is this the solution we need, or a missed opportunity?
The Power Behind the Policy
Earlier this month, the Australian government unveiled the new National Food Council, an advisory body tasked with guiding the country’s food security strategy. Sounds good, right? The goal is to ensure food is affordable, accessible, and resilient in the face of climate-related disruptions. However, the council’s composition has raised some eyebrows. Out of the 11 council members, nine are affiliated with agribusinesses or food production companies, many of which have ties to ultra-processed foods—those cheap, convenient, and often unhealthy options that have come to dominate the average Australian’s diet.
Dr. Kim Anastasiou, from the University of Sydney, points out to The guardian that many of the industries represented on the council are major contributors to environmental harm and diet-related health issues. These include large-scale food manufacturers and industrial farming sectors that rely heavily on producing ultra-processed products. And while it’s great that the council’s focus includes things like food security and resilience, it’s missing a critical component: a focus on nutrition. With processed foods making up about half of the Australian diet, it seems like a glaring oversight.
The Industry’s Role in Shaping Public Health
One of the biggest concerns is that this policy might prioritize profits over public health. Dr. Matt Fisher, from the University of Adelaide, argues that industry involvement in food policy often turns food into a commodity, with little regard for the health outcomes it creates. With the current influence of agribusiness, there’s a real risk that the policy will continue to encourage the growth of cheap, unhealthy food rather than addressing the root causes of poor diet and nutrition.
Take, for example, the vast availability of ultra-processed foods. A recent global report published in The Lancet highlighted that Australia has one of the highest consumption rates of ultra-processed foods globally, which directly correlates to worsening health outcomes. If this pattern continues, the nation’s food system may continue down a path of prioritizing convenience and cost over health, with long-term consequences for public wellbeing.
A Missed Opportunity?
The issue here isn’t just about what’s on the shelves—it’s about ensuring that all Australians, no matter their income, have access to healthy, nutritious food. Dr. Mark Lawrence from Deakin University calls the council’s makeup a “narrow analysis” of food insecurity. He points out that the council might succeed in securing food supply chains, but it’s overlooking the bigger issues of food and nutrition security. After all, a secure food supply doesn’t mean much if people can’t afford or access the food that promotes long-term health.
This could have been an opportunity to reassess Australia’s approach to food policy, focusing on reducing the prevalence of processed foods, lowering fresh food prices, and increasing diversity in food production. But instead, we’re left with a policy that seems to be more about keeping the status quo than tackling the bigger health and environmental issues.
