The advertising industry and the regulator, the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland (BCI), may be on a collision course over the controversial issue of advertising aimed at children.
While parents groups and health bodies such as the World Health Organisation (WHO) have long pointed to the connection between obesity and children's advertising, restricting this form of advertising may not be so easy.
Advertising agencies and their clients are concerned that an overly restrictive regime could effectively end all children's advertising, such as has happened in Sweden.
Broadcasters, meanwhile, are also uneasy about the future regime. Television stations such as RTÉ, TV3 and TG4 will face restrictions on children's advertising but, legally, it will be impossible for the BCI to regulate stations beaming in from Britain and the North, among them Sky, UTV, E4, Sky Sports, Nickelodeon and MTV.
These channels are known as "opt out" channels because they insert Irish advertising into their normal schedules as part of an opt-out arrangement.
The BCI has been engaged in a lengthy consultation process and recently issued a "statement of outcomes" outlining the main elements of its approach. This included a restriction on personalities advertising food and drink during children's programming.
The BCI also said it would be introducing restrictions on "Christmas-themed advertising prior to November 1st each year".
These outcomes have made the advertising industry and its clients uneasy, according to a letter sent to the BCI from the Institute of Advertising Practitioners of Ireland (IAPI), which represents advertising agencies, and the Association of Advertisers in Ireland (AAI), which represents the big clients of the agencies. Kraft Foods, Erin Foods, Bord Bia and Glanbia are among AAI's members.
The groups warn that, if not done correctly, the children's code could result in advertising and broadcasting industries being "strangled by regulation".
The two groups outline a range of objections to the BCI. They are particularly unhappy with the decision that the use of celebrity endorsements should end.
"We contend that the stipulation to ban celebrity endorsement of food promotions is a barrier to trade and an unfair restriction on industry's ability to raise product awareness in its target markets," says the groups' submission to the BCI.
The submission says the argument that advertising is the root cause of childhood obesity is "in no way proven or provable".
But their argument is also partially an economic one. "This clause could also have severe repercussions for domestic broadcasters as any international campaign using celebrities will simply shift its expenditure to opt out channels".
The advertising industry is also concerned about the timing, pointing out that advertising budgets are set 12 months in advance. "As an absolute minimum, industry will require a six-month period of grace from adoption of the code," the groups state.
A BCI spokeswoman acknowledged that advertisers felt strongly about the issue. But she pointed out that British channels were also facing bans on children's advertising that promoted unhealthy food and drinks.
She said advertising agencies and their clients should have been aware of the possibility of restrictions on children's advertising since 2001, when it was mentioned in the Broadcasting Act.
She added that the restriction on celebrities fronting children's campaigns was a response to submissions from parents and teenagers in particular.
