Fewer sweets at Swiss checkouts? Geneva MP calls for federal intervention

Chocolate bars and gummy sweets are often the last products shoppers encounter before paying in Swiss supermarkets. Now Geneva Social Democratic MP Laurence Fehlmann Rielle wants that to change. In a parliamentary motion, she is asking the Federal Council, Switzerland’s government, to reduce children’s exposure to unhealthy products at checkouts in large shops and give healthier alternatives more space. The proposal faces opposition from major retailers and the Centre Party.

For families, the scene is familiar: the shopping is almost finished, but a wait beside the conveyor belt brings another request for something sweet. Fehlmann Rielle sees this not simply as a parenting issue, but as a question of sales promotion. Her proposal targets where products are displayed; it does not call for a general ban on selling sweets.

Why a recommendation is no longer enough

Fehlmann Rielle first raised the issue in parliament in 2021. At the time, the Federal Council favoured recommending that major retailers make their checkout areas healthier. The Social Democrat says that approach has achieved nothing. In her view, there has been no progress and the situation has deteriorated further.

She points to research by the consumer association for French-speaking Switzerland, which examined more than 2,200 products in 30 shops. It found sweets at 98 per cent of staffed checkouts in Geneva. The picture was no better elsewhere in the French-speaking area examined. The findings describe a widespread retail practice, but do not constitute a nationwide survey covering every type of checkout.

Fehlmann Rielle links her demand to the wider debate about excess weight. Her motion states that 43 per cent of Switzerland’s population is overweight or obese, and that children and adolescents are also affected. That figure is not a specific measure of the proportion of children affected. Rather, she uses it to support closer scrutiny of the shopping environment.

Specifically, she wants measures to ensure that “children at checkouts in large shops are no longer heavily exposed to unhealthy products”. She is seeking an end to what she describes as harmful marketing aimed at children and young people.

Centre Party MP puts responsibility on parents

Thomas Rechsteiner, a Centre Party MP from Appenzell Innerrhoden, believes this is the wrong approach. He recognises the importance of protecting young people, but draws the line at state rules governing checkout displays. “Well-intentioned does not always mean well-designed,” is his verdict.

For Rechsteiner, learning to handle temptation is part of becoming independent. “We need responsible citizens, not shopping trolleys supervised by the state.” Customers should decide what to buy, he argues, while parents are responsible for bringing up their children.

Within existing laws, shops should remain free to choose their product ranges. In his view, that freedom should apply equally to major retailers, bakeries, butchers and small shops.

He also questions the potential health benefits. “A different checkout display is no substitute for a balanced diet or a walk,” he says. Anyone who wants to reduce their sugar consumption can already do so. His argument places greater weight on personal responsibility than on reshaping the retail environment, as Fehlmann Rielle proposes.

Retailers question whether changes would work

IG Detailhandel, the organisation representing the interests of Coop, Migros and Denner, is also critical of the motion. Spokesman Manuel Toma regards it as a substantial intervention in product selection and shop layout. He says it is also “highly questionable whether this measure would have a noticeable effect on children’s diets”.

The organisation points to choices already available. Its members’ checkouts often offer savoury snacks or dried fruit as well. Many branches also have self-service checkouts without sweets. The existence of those alternatives does not, however, settle the question of what criteria would define a healthier checkout area under any future rules.

Retailers do not regard fresh fruit and vegetables as a straightforward replacement. Toma says they require considerable care, which is another reason they are unsuitable for checkout areas. He also rejects the idea that snacks are deliberately positioned within children’s reach: the determining factor, he says, is the reach of adults waiting to pay.

As with Rechsteiner, his argument ultimately returns to parental choice. Parents decide which products they buy for their children.

The Federal Council must now respond

The dispute touches on a broader question for Swiss health policy: how far should the state shape the surroundings in which people make everyday purchasing decisions? Fehlmann Rielle wants to reduce exposure to unhealthy products. Her opponents question both whether such intervention is justified and whether it would work.

The checkout research establishes what is on display. By itself, it does not demonstrate how much changing those displays would alter diets. That distinction remains important when weighing the proposed intervention against the objections raised by retailers and political opponents.

For Swiss shops and their customers, the motion changes nothing immediately. First, the Federal Council must respond. The National Council, parliament’s lower house, will then consider the proposal. If it approves, the motion goes to the Council of States, the upper house representing the cantons.

Only if both chambers adopt the motion will the Federal Council receive a binding instruction to implement it. What specific requirements might follow therefore remains open, as does the eventual shape of any changes shoppers would see at the till.