Sugar tax debate misses real causes of poor diet

Condescending sugar tax debate misses real causes of poor diet

Iain Dalton

Taxing sugar has hit the headlines. Celebrity chef Jamie Oliver backs calls for a 10 to 20% duty on high-sugar products.

After weeks of criticism, Tory health minister Jeremy Hunt released the report ‘Sugar reduction: the evidence for action’ on 22 October.

Poor diets are resulting in the growing prevalence of obesity and type-2 diabetes. But a sugar tax was just one of eight proposals in government agency Public Health England’s report. Others include curbing advertising and supermarket promotions.

Some health experts suggest another of the proposals – ‘reformulation’ (changing recipes) – holds the key to tackling the crisis.

Some food companies have already reduced levels of sugar in their products. But this often means simply swapping sugar for another – sometimes controversial – sweetening additive. This doesn’t address the underlying problem of over-producing food with little nutritional value because it’s more profitable.

Moreover, only targeting high-sugar products misses out just how much sugar is used in other processed foods. This includes savoury products such as soups, ready meals, gravy – and even bread!

Many working class people will resent the paternalistic approach of taxation. The reality of our lives is often zero-hour contracts, low pay, long working hours and commutes. We frequently don’t have the time or money to eat as we would wish.

Union

A shorter working week with no loss of pay was a historic demand of the trade union movement. Today, it would mean workers have time to prepare healthy meals.

Affordable workplace canteens serving nutritious food would lead to less reliance on fast food or packed lunches containing easy snacks.

The only way to fully control what we eat is to own it. The Socialist Party says: take big food production and distribution companies – alongside supermarkets – into public ownership, under democratic control.