Showing posts with label takeaways. Show all posts
Showing posts with label takeaways. Show all posts

Thursday, 13 August 2015

Bradford Council's anti-business planning policy in action - health fascism edition


****

Last year Bradford Council introduced - despite being told by their own Director of Public Health that it was pointless - a draconian planning policy banning new fast food outlets near schools and other places where children gather (churches, mosques, parks, play groups and so forth). The intention of the policy is to reduce levels of childhood obesity.

Yesterday the Deputy Leader of Bradford Council was crowing about the "success" of the policy:

"It is good to see that this new policy is working in blocking takeaways in these areas, as the purpose of this policy is to protect the health of young people in the district.

"When we consulted on the policy, comments were positive, especially from health professionals who recognise the obesity issue in Bradford."

In simple terms the policy bans new takeaways within 400m of schools (and all those other places) - which, if you know Bradford, means every single high street across the district. Except the City Centre because the politicians excluded it from the ban.

The article lists six proposals for new businesses that have fallen foul of the policy. That's six fewer businesses in Bradford each of which might have generated two or three jobs in a city with very high rates of unemployment. All to deliver an unquantifiable objective - there is absolutely no way for Bradford Council to know whether or not stopping these businesses from operating is reducing levels of childhood obesity.

The only quantifiable outcome of the policy is fewer businesses and fewer jobs. So when Cllr Slater says it's not "anti-business" she is lying.
....

Monday, 17 June 2013

Portion control is not the business of local councils...

About the right portion size don't you think?
Let's boss takeaways about then - it'll get us a headline or two and we can claim to be 'doing something' about obesity.

But first about that obesity. They (the Council that is) start with a fib:

Health bosses estimate that about 225,000 adults in the Bradford district are overweight or obese...

Bradford's electorate - as good a proxy for adult population as you can get - is 340,000. Now while there are quite a few overweight people in the Bradford district, I don't believe for a second that two-thirds of the population are overweight. Yet that is what "health bosses estimate". Indeed the actual statistics (from five years ago) had levels at just over 20% for men and 23% for women. But let's make the statistics up - so much simpler than actually using the real figures.

It really is none of the Council's business. While we fretting about keeping old people's homes open, providing children's centres and much else of real value, we really shouldn't be spending scare resources nannying the population about its chubbiness and takeaways about their portion sizes.

I'm with Abbas Ahmed on this:

At Royal’s Balti Restaurant and Fast Food in Great Horton Road, kebabs are sold in large sizes only in all but one flavour.

When asked whether their portions were too large, takeaway worker Abbas Ahmed said: “It’s the right size.”

He said people could have smaller portions if they asked for them. 

Absolutely Abbas - more power to your elbow!

....

Monday, 19 November 2012

The attack on takeaway food is about snobbery not health

****

With a cry I turned off the radio. I could take no more of the Labour leader from Waltham Forest Council celebrating preventing new businesses, new jobs and more choice for the residents of his borough. And all in the cause of health.

Maybe I'm over-reacting but this 'demonising' of the takeaway - blaming it for fat kids, poor schools and litter - is getting too much. For sure, there are places where converting shops to takeaways isn't right - where there's no parking, or adjacent properties that will be adversely affect by smells for example - but this campaign isn't about those issues, it's about judging the choices of others.

Now the London Food Board in partnership with the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health has issued a set of rules that planning authorities can use to stop all new hot food takeways. This is what the Councillor from Waltham Forest was crowing about - the prevention of business and job creation on the wholly unevidenced and spurious basis that takeaways make kids fat and unhealthy.

Here's the justification from the fussbuckets who authored the "Takeaways Toolkit" - after they'd admitted that takeaways employ local people and provide a valuable economic and community function:

However, as the modern world begins to wake up to the threat of a growing obesity epidemic more and more people have been turning their attention to the impact this food has on the health of the population.

Firstly, let's say it again - there is no "growing obesity epidemic" - rates of childhood obesity have stabilised and, on some measures, are falling. So we're building a scary straw man to beat up rather than addressing a real problem.

And secondly there is precisely zero evidence that fast food contributes to childhood obesity. Indeed there is evidence that suggests the very opposite is true:

When the researchers weighed these children they found something rather interesting. Here are the average body mass index (BMI) figures for each group by frequency of visits to fast food outlets. Bear in mind that a 'healthy weight is 18.5 to 25:


Weekly visits        BMI

Every day:            17.8

4-6 times:              18.3

2-3 times:              19.6

Once:                    20.3

Less than once:     21.4

Now is that clear enough for you? Essentially these findings show that the less often you visit a fast food outlet, the more like you are to be overweight.

And this isn't an isolated discovery either:

...there was no significant association between increasing takeaway and fast food consumption and obesity as measured by BMI corrected for age and gender. This is not a new finding. For example, French and colleagues found no significant relationship between frequent consumption of fast food and being overweight in their analysis of a cohort of 11-18-year-old boys and girls. Similarly, Simmons et al found no correlation between increasing takeaway consumption and obesity measured by either BMI or waist circumference.

Put simply, fast food is not the cause of that "obesity epidemic" (if there is one which there isn't). It's just that it's down-market finger food that's eaten by spotty kids in baseball caps - the Guardian and Daily Mail reading classes don't like fast food because it the sort of thing that "common" people eat.

This attack on the takeaway is about snobbery not health - us foodies peering down our noses at those working class people who don't know about "proper" food.

....

Wednesday, 9 November 2011

All retail is equal but some is less equal that others...

****

Planners, urged on by local councillors, are keen to control the use of retail premises. It clearly isn't sufficient for these people that they require shop premises to be used for retail purposes - now, it seems we're to make judgments about the specific retail uses. Moral judgements.

Burger bars in Birmingham...

According to the council, in larger shopping areas at least 55 per cent of buildings in the area would be required to retain a retail use, down to 50 per cent in smaller shopping areas, while no more than 10 per cent of units in any area should be takeaways.

The council said that the rules and limits would apply to all new planning applications in the 73 specified areas, but would not be retrospectively applied to existing businesses.

And betting shops...

Giving evidence to the culture, sport and media select committee’s review of the 2005 Gambling Act, the LGA warned that large numbers of bookmakers – as well as other prolific uses such as takeaway shops, strip clubs and late-night bars – are having a negative impact on high streets.

The LGA claimed that local authorities have raised concerns that betting shops in particular are increasing poverty in communities, citing the comparatively disadvantaged London Borough of Hackney, where there are eight betting shops on one street alone.

Doubtless the planners will be looking at pound shops, pawnbrokers, second-hand shops and other undesirable retail uses.

The result will be empty, boarded-up shops not the shiny shopping areas that these planners expect - the reason the betting shops and pizza parlours are springing up is because other retailers aren't remotely interested in these locations.

Perhaps Councils, planners and the LGA should consider why secondary retail locations have declined rather than seek to ban the only uses that can (just about) make a living from these locations.

I live in hope. But this is planning...

....