Anti-sugar campaigners attacked as ‘stupid . . . elitist . . . wowsers’
Taxing soft drinks simply doesn’t work, according to a UK expert flown in by NZ Food & Grocery Council. reports.
THE NZ
Dirty in sounds rather suspicious, it shows that they’re probably a bit worried,’’ he said.
Blakely’s research in the New Zealand Medical Journal suggested a 20 per cent tax on soft drinks could prevent 67 deaths each year by curbing obesity-related diseases.
The tax would raise about $ 40 million per year, which could go into health promotion campaigns.
But in order to get to that point there needed to be clearer proof of the benefits of a tax, Blakely said.
‘‘The onus is on us to get better evidence on how much effect it’s going to have. We’ve got a lot more work to do as health scientists to actually make that information robust. The sensible starting point would be the sugary beverage tax. We should do that and assess where we’re at a year or so after doing that.’’
Heart Foundation strategic adviser Sally Hughes said a tax on sugary drinks was the top priority.
‘‘People are never hugely welcoming of taxes of any sort. But doing nothing is not an option,’’ she said.
‘‘The industry is trying to protect their position. What we’re trying to protect is the health of New Zealand.’’
Snowdon said the debate was being driven by public health ‘‘wowsers’’ who failed to recognise the failures of the schemes overseas, or the unintended poor people.
‘‘A very large part of the public health lobby exhibits contempt toward people, assumes that they’re stupid. It’s a very elitist movement I think.’’
Businesses were worried about their bottom line, while public health campaigners were equally self-interested, Snowdon said.
‘‘They say it’s a benefit that the government are going to get money to be spent on obesity prevention. Well what does that really mean? Is it by any chance going to the people that are coming up with the computer modelling and doing the campaigning? It’s a snout in troughs situation.’’
Discussions on sugar taxes were increasingly polarised and likely to heat up even more if it progresses to Parliament, Massey University professor Dr Andrew Dickson said.
He said health campaigners were wrong to ‘‘whip up a fervour around obesity’’ to justify calls for a tax, while opponents were wrong to dismiss any positive outcomes reducing diabetes and other diseases.
‘‘It is clear we can reduce the consumption of sugary drinks by taxation,’’ he said.
‘‘But it’s a complicated area. If it was up to me I would probably rather they just dropped GST on non-processed foods.’’
consequences
on