But a spokesman for David Cameron confirmed yesterday that the Prime Minister had vetoed the idea of a “sugar tax” without having even read the PHE report his government had commissioned.
Advertisement
Television chef and food campaigner Jamie Oliver gave evidence to the committee earlier this week, and has said he is “ready for a fight” with the Government on the issue.
However a spokesman for Mr Cameron said on Thursday: “The Prime Minister thinks there are more effective ways of tackling this issue than putting a tax on sugar”.
He said: “Dr Tedstone was clear at the health select committee that there is no silver bullet solution to nation’s excessive sugar consumption”.
The Government’s multi-pronged anti-obesity strategy seems well considered and evidence-based though it was always going to be criticised for what’s not on the table – a sin tax.
Asked whether soft drink companies could be entitled to cry foul if their businesses were disproportionately affected by a tax on just one sector of unhealthy foods, he says any such sense of injustice might well be justified.
The 10% to 20% levy on high-sugar products such as soft drinks is one of the key actions recommended by Public Health England. Following the publication of the report, Herbert was quoted by The Guardian as saying, “I don’t want to see higher taxes overall, but it’s not a bad principle to tax discretionary items that are bad for us”.
However, details of the review have since been revealed to MPs by Public Health England’s (PHE) director of diet and obesity, Dr Alison Tedstone.
It comes after Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt was embroiled in a row over whether the PHE review, which was due to be published in July, had been suppressed, which the Department of Health (DoH) has denied.
Do we need a sugar tax?
She said: “Broadly, the evidence shows the higher the tax increase, the greater the effect”.
“PHE does see there is a role for a fiscal approach in reducing sugary drink consumption” pointing out that a fizzy drink tax in Mexico had led to a 6% fall in consumption, with the biggest impact on the fattest poorest people.
But Ian Wright, director general of the Food and Drink Federation, said benefits of a tax were not supported by global evidence.
Sugary foods and drinks cause tooth decay and can contribute to people becoming overweight, which increases risk of heart disease and type 2 diabetes, says the NHS.
“At its most troublesome level, the obesity epidemic is centred on a minority of people who struggle to make healthy lifestyle choices”. Cola drinks, lemonade and even fruit juice are also major contributors to the obesity epidemic, experts have said, and a particular problem for children who consume more of them than adults.
How can sugar content be reduced?
Advertisement
But he added: “The Prime Minister’s view remains the same, that he does not see the need for a tax on sugar, but that it’s important to remember that that is not the only part of this debate, that there are a large number of different elements to it…”
