Councils to take lead on sugary drinks

Councils will be urged to reduce sugary drinks in public facilities and at council-run events through their own voluntary policies.

Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) voted in favour of a remit, designed to take steps to dial back consumption of sugary drinks, at an annual meeting in Auckland yesterday.

Other remits were around lobbying the Government to: adopt national legislation to manage cats, allow a portion of GST to come back to the region where it was generated, and amend legislation around litter infringements. All of them passed.

The sugary drinks policy, proposed by the Hastings District Council, stated all councils should model good behaviour in their communities, provide an example to other organisations and reduce sugar consumption among those who use council facilities.

In the lead-up to the vote, the Hastings council was asked to begin to develop a policy on sugary drinks and develop a ‘‘sugar-free drink haven’’ within council facilities and council-run events.

Although the policies would be voluntary, New Zealand Dental Association spokesman Rob Beaglehole said the move would provide a useful inventory of councils which had adopted policies.

‘‘What the remit was doing was getting LGNZ to come up with some policy statements and templates so the councils that wanted to develop these sugary drinks policies would be able to easily.

‘‘It’s another example of organisations showing leadership and understanding sugary drinks are a major health issue.’’

Beaglehole successfully lobbied the Nelson Marlborough District Health Board to become the first DHB to limit sugary drinks, and other DHBs soon followed suit.

A remit on a controversial cat control policy to regulate cat ownership snuck through with 51 per cent in favour.

It meant LGNZ would lobby the Government on the importance of implementing the final version of the National Cat Management strategy which recognises both the importance of companion cats and indigenous wildlife to many New Zealanders.

Possible measures would include microchipping, making cats wear bells, desexing and curfews.

The remit came from the Dunedin City Council, and stated existing law allowed councils to impose controls on cats only to protect people from nuisance, health and safety risks.

There were no powers to pass bylaws to restrict cat numbers and impose conditions on owners to protect wildlife.