UPDATE:  Nigel Griffiths failed.  Ed Vaizey made some very sensible comments — here.

On Friday the Nigel Griffiths legislation on Junk Food advertising: the Food Products (Marketing to Children) Bill will get its second reading in Parliament. Based on my discussions with people that know U.K. politics, the bill is unlikely to go anywhere. It doesn’t have either Tory or government support, and people doubt 100 MPs will even show-up on Friday.

Let’s face it — it’s a poorly-framed, blunderbuss solution to a complex problem.

The entire junk food advertising debate — lamented by Ofcom CEO Ed Richards in an interesting Times op-ed in November 2006 — has been characterised by the marriage of two powerful political forces: (i) a media panic and (ii) gesture politics.

When they join forces: stand back…

So where does that leave Ofcom? The regulator is now way out on a limb, having made a tough policy choice in a situation where the government should have otherwise taken the lead. Now Ofcom will review its actions in July 2008, and presumably aim for the narrowest possible definition of success: Are children watching fewer junk food adverts provided for in the scope of the HFSS restrictions?

Can you blame Ofcom for avoiding the larger — and more relevant — question of childhood obesity? The evidence gathered by Ofcom in 2004 showed that television advertising had only a modest effect on children’s food choices and no evidence showed that an advertising ban had ever worked to improve children’s health. None.

Ofcom is in a bit of a trap because its advertising restrictions, adopted in February 2007, were predicated on bringing about real health benefits to society. Just read Ofcom’s impact assessment accompanying the regulations — it’s written there in black and white. But the HFSS advertising restrictions have severe type I / II errors and Ofcom imposed them without any real regard for the industry’s voluntary movement towards more responsible advertising practices.

If the Griffiths bill fails, will health campaigners then turn their attention to Ofcom’s July 2008 review? Probably; these groups will no doubt pressure Ofcom to assess whether the restrictions are delivering health benefits. Ofcom will have a difficult time facing down these campaigners a second time if it is proved they have not.

Either way — those kids will probably continue to eat junk food…