Should Australia get on board and implement a sugar tax?

MARCH 17, 2016
News.com.au
LIBRARY Sarah Joel (left) and Jessica O’Dowd drink coke at Tuggerah shops after their school banned soft drinks at school. Children. Kids. Teenagers.
Vanessa Brown and Rebecca Sullivan news.com.au
A TAX on sugary drinks, in its current form, won’t solve our expanding waistlines, say experts as Britain moves to introduce a tax from 2018.
Celebrity chef Jamie Oliver also called on Australia to “pull your finger out” and do the same.
But nutritionist Dr Joanna McMillan, although on-board with bringing a sugar tax to Australia, says numerous other measures need to be put in place alongside a sugar tax for it to work.
“Bringing in a sugar tax is important, because the data between soft drink consumption and obesity is undeniable. But this type of tax is not going to be the solution,” Dr McMillan told news.com.au.
Some studies show sugar levies have worked in Mexico, which recently overtook the US as the most obese country in the world.
In January 2014, Mexico implemented a tax of 1 peso (7c) per litre for sugar-sweetened beverages as a way to cut down on the country’s growing obesity epidemic.
A study published in the British Medical Journal found that a year after the tax was implemented, sales of sugary beverages dropped significantly.
Researchers reported an average six per cent decline in purchases of sugar drinks, and that decline grew over time, reaching a 12 per cent drop in December 2014. Untaxed beverages experienced a four per cent average increase in 2014.
The tax in the UK will come into effect in two years time and be in two bands — one for total sugar more than five grams per 100ml and one for drinks with more eight grams per 100ml.
Pure fruit juices and milk drinks will remain exempt and it’s expected to raise more than $1 billion a year to be spent on school sports programs.
Australian Minister for Trade, Steve Ciobo, has played down the prospects of Australia following Britain’s lead and introducing a sugar tax.
“If you ask what’s my personal view, I’m not a fan of that, I think the more you get in and distort these types of things, the more government causes havoc across the system,” Mr Ciobo told ABC TV.
But Dr Christina Pollard from Curtin University said “Australia is behind in the times” and that the “UK government has the right idea [because] taxation sends a strong message to manufacturers, retailers and the general public about the health risks of certain types of food”.
HOW MUCH SHOULD WE BE TAXED?
Dr McMillan stressed that if a sugar tax is ever implemented in Australia, it can’t be a small cost increase or it will be ignored by consumers.
“It has to be high enough to make a difference. A small amount won’t change people’s consumption — it needs to be substantial,” she said.
According to Prof. Pollard, unhealthy food and drink would need to be taxed by “20 to 30 per cent for effective changes in consumption” to occur.
“We need to tax foods detrimental to health. Annual CPI for food has slowed to 1.6 per cent, but over the last 13 years, healthy foods like fruit and vegetables have risen in price at a rate above that of junk foods (3.8 compared to 3 per cent),” Prof. Pollard added.
“Healthy foods should be subsided by 20 per cent … we need to make healthy food more affordable than junk food.”
WHAT WOULD WORK BETTER THAN A SUGAR TAX?
Rather than a sugar tax, Dr McMillan thinks age restrictions, like what is seen with cigarettes and alcohol, may be a stronger solution to reducing soft drink consumption.
“I would like stronger regulations around soft drinks in place, maybe age restrictions,” she said.
“On the other hand, we should look at health warnings on packaging, and clearer information for consumers. There is still a lot of confusion about what is good, and what is bad. I’m amazed by how many people drink a litre or so of soft drink a day, and still don’t know how problematic that is.
“When I see kids that are two-years-old drinking soft drink, it greatly scares me,” she added.
But the Australian Beverages Council, which includes brands Coca-Cola Amatil, Schweppes and Red Bull, said soft drinks are “an easy target,” and if a sugar tax was debated in Australia, the move would not receive its support.
“Soft drinks are a low hanging fruit. A sugar tax wouldn’t do anything to address obesity, but only impact the industry,” CEO Geoff Parker told news.com.au
“The beverage industry supports 46,000 fulltime jobs in Australia, and a tax would effect that, especially in regional towns.”
Mr Parker said the tax is focusing on the wrong area of excess kilojoule consumption, and should instead be channelled in other areas, and on other industries.
“Soft drink consumption in Australia has been declining over 15 years, and only makes up less than two per cent of an average person’s kilojoules,” he said.
“The average Aussie child gets 43 per cent of their daily kilojoules from treats, and for adults that’s 36 per cent.
“If the government was serious about correcting the expanding waistline, they should look at that part of the diet, rather than the smaller part — being sugar drinks.”
Last year, a New York Times investigation revealed Coca-Cola donated millions of dollars to a scientific group called the Global Energy Balance Network, which argues that the obesity debate focuses too much on what people eat and drink, rather than their lack of exercise.
Coca-Cola donated $US1.5 million to establish the organisation last year and has provided almost $4 million in funding to two of the organisation’s founding members — Dr Steve Blair from the University of South Carolina and Gregory A Hand, dean of the West Virginia University School of Public Health.
“The media tends to blame the obesity epidemic on our poor eating habits — but are those french fries really the culprit?” reads the description of a video announcing the new organisation.
Just last week, Coca-Cola released a list of health groups and research institutions in Australia to which it makes donations. Most promote exercise, the ABC’s 7.30 reported.
— with Victoria Craw and wires