We need a sugar tax on soft drinks. And that’s just the start

Jamie Oliver wants the UK Government to slap a sugar tax on soft drinks. And IQuitSugar.com’s Sarah Wilson says Australia needs to do the same. But she wants more than just soft drinks taxed.

I tell you, for anyone who’s ever brought an unpalatable idea to the proverbial dinner table, having Jamie Oliver pop in halfway through dessert with his pucker fervour is a digestive boon.

Six years after I started bleating about the dangers of sugar, Jamie has joined the fight. He’s arrived with slogans and hashtags, a compelling documentary — Sugar Rush, which screened on Channel Ten Sunday night — and a sugar tax campaign for us all to rally around.

He published a “sugar manifesto” last month urging the UK Government to slap a 20 pence per litre tax (around 43 cents) on soft drinks. I’ve been chatting with Jamie and his team for a while and they’re keen to agitate for the same here.

Sarah Wilson and Jamie Oliver. (Pic: Instagram)

Invariably I’m asked what I reckon about this. Will it work? Is it the right tack?

Yeah. And no. And yeah again.

The Cancer Council Australia, Diabetes Australia and the National Heart Foundation of Australia have supported a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages (including soft drinks, sweetened fruit juices and flavoured milk) since 2013. Great stuff.

Various studies show a 20 per cent hike in soft drink prices could slash consumption by up to 24 per cent, and case studies in France, Hungary and Mexico show such taxes do impact sales, albeit modestly.

So what’s to argue?

Soft drinks are the “low hanging fruit” in the sugar debate. Few dispute that they are crappy contributions to life and can afford to be targeted.

But it’s argued by some that focusing on soft drink alone means we don’t strike the real culprit — total added sugar consumption, which currently exceeds World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines by up to 400 per cent in some cohorts.

After all, it’s not the bubbles or the water that makes Coke bad; it’s the sugar (10 teaspoons in a single-serve can). This being so obviously the case, why aren’t we extending the tax to the sugar in yoghurt (up to 6 teaspoons a serve) and the sugar in breakfast cereal (up to 9.5 teaspoons a serve)?

Others also ark up with this: A tax on soft drink is a tax on the poor (who tend to drink more of the stuff). To which I would suggest this solution — use the tax to subsidise fresh fruit and veg (something the WHO also advise).

What about the fact a tax on sugary drinks would drive folk to drink the artificially sweetened alternatives? Yeah, this concerns me. The latest science, which many are not aware of, shows artificial sweeteners can cause glucose-intolerance — the precursor of type 2 diabetes — raise insulin levels and even can impair brain function.

Jamie, if I may, can I suggest you extend your campaign to include ALL soft drink, including the so-called sugar free stuff? Just an idea.

Readers on the iquitsugar.com website and social media forums on Sunday as we live tweeted Sugar Rush also raised concerns that a tax doesn’t educate people.

“Educating parents is where it starts,” said one Instagram user.

I have to say this is not a concern for me. I think the very fact the sugar tax debate is getting more of us talking about sugar says it all. The fact I’ve being given column inches by the kind folk at RendezView to rant as I have just now says a lot, too.

Picking at the low-hanging fruit gets us digging up the whole toxic orchard.

In many ways, Australians are ahead of the curve in understanding the extraordinary facts that Jamie exposed in his documentary last night — that over-consumption of sugar can cause tooth decay and type-2 diabetes.

Indeed, 85 per cent of Australians support the idea of a soft drink tax.

It’s funny (in the sad sense). Having campaigned on the topic heavily for the past few years both here and in the UK and the US, where my books were bestsellers, it doesn’t surprise me that Australian consumers are particularly fired up about a tax that could make a real difference to our health.

But what does surprise me is the resistance from both the Australian media and government to the idea.

In the UK, while consumers are only just discovering kale chips and coconut water, the Conservative Government announced it will consider debating the issue. The British media, in my experience, is also very much behind the general push against sugar.

And here? Well, many journalists can’t get past the idea that sugar is not a food group.

But perhaps the arrival of Jamie — and his legions of social media followers — at the table will make a difference. And perhaps the recent change in Liberal leadership will too.

Sarah Wilson is director of IQuitSugar.com