Niki Bezzant: Sugar tax a start to tackling obesity

Perhaps we need lots of healthy drinks choices - and a tiny corner of the shelf where the expensive and unpopular sugary drinks live. Photo / Natalie Slade
Perhaps we need lots of healthy drinks choices - and a tiny corner of the shelf where the expensive and unpopular sugary drinks live. Photo / Natalie Slade

Can you imagine a world without sugary drinks? That's the goal for one motivated group of people.

Last week I attended the Fizz symposium. Fizz is a group of health professionals dedicated to a sugary drinks-free Aotearoa.

The attendees were a diverse group including doctors, researchers, dentists, nutritionists. There were also, encouragingly, representatives of the beverage industry.

I think everyone in the room agreed there is a great need for engagement from everyone, including industry, in addressing the problems of obesity, diabetes and dental decay.

I think we also all agreed there is no one solution.

Although much of the day's discussion focused on a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) - including my own presentation on the ongoing SSB tax petition - we all know this is not a silver bullet solution.

A tax on its own won't cure obesity.

That doesn't mean, though, that it is not worth doing. I'm more convinced than ever that a tax has to be part of the solution.

Expert after expert came at the topic from different angles.

Economist Geoff Simmons neatly dismantled the arguments put forward by opponents of a tax, including the one that it is regressive - it hurts the poorest people in society - by pointing out that obesity and diabetes are highly regressive, too, disproportionately affecting the most deprived.

He also made the excellent point that raising money via a tax is just the start. We need to spend that money wisely and it can be spent for good.

In the petition we are calling for the money raised from a tax to be spent on healthy eating education, a key part of the obesity puzzle.

Coming at it from a legal angle, Professor Michael Littlewood from Auckland University took a pragmatic approach.

He admitted knowing nothing about health.

But, he said, if the goal is to reduce consumption of sugary drinks, a tax - specifically imposed on a per unit basis, say $1 per litre - will achieve that.

He addressed the "nanny state" cry by looking at the criteria for nanny state legislation: how harmful is the product to the person using it and what is the burden on other taxpayers?

The harm of sugary drinks is well-established.

And the burden is huge. It costs more than $20 million a year just to remove decayed teeth from young children. The cost from obesity and diabetes is over a billion dollars and climbing.

Those who are opposed to nanny state, said Littlewood, should consider that we tend not to mind nanny-state laws in many other circumstances. He listed some: motorcycle helmets; seatbelts; dangerous drugs; liquor and tobacco.

I'm not sure New Zealand will ever be SSB-free. They've done it in Tokelau, but that is a highly controlled environment: small islands with one boat in and out for people and soft drinks alike.

Perhaps an achievable vision for us is an Aotearoa with lots of healthy drinks choices - and also a tiny corner of the shelf where the expensive and unpopular SSBs live.

• To sign the petition for a tax on sugary drinks, go to and search "sugar"

- Herald on Sunday

Get the news delivered straight to your inbox

Receive the day’s news, sport and entertainment in our daily email newsletter


Have your say

1200 characters left

By and large our readers' comments are respectful and courteous. We're sure you'll fit in well.
View commenting guidelines.

Sort by
  • Oldest

© Copyright 2017, NZME. Publishing Limited

Assembled by: (static) on production bpcf02 at 28 Apr 2017 07:23:19 Processing Time: 695ms