Barnaby Joyce offered some straight-talking advice this week to a nation struggling to control its expanding waistline: "Stop eating so much and do a bit of exercise." Broadly, we agree with his message of personal responsibility. In the first instance, consumers are responsible for their own choices and when it comes to weight gain, the individual must do all he or she can to look after their own health.
But given the frightening level of obesity in this country – one in four adults – it is unwise for the Deputy Prime Minister to dismiss the Grattan Institute's proposal for a tax on sugary drinks as simply "bonkers mad", although no doubt his stance gave some comfort to people in sugar-producing regions who fear the disruption it could cause.
An area-by-area tracker of chronic disease and its risk factors in Australia released this week tells us that if we are serious about tackling inequality in this country, we need to recognise that our approach to combating obesity has failed our most disadvantaged. A stark example is the concentration of obesity and overweight in pockets of Sydney's west and south-west. So far, the wealthy have responded to soft government interventions and messages about individual responsibility, but the less advantaged have not. We need to do something more.
Fiscal interventions such as taxes that nudge consumer behaviour may not be the answer but it is foolish to categorically rule out a tax on sugary drinks here when we are yet to see the effect of sugar taxes planned for Britain and Ireland.
Grattan Institute Health Program Director Stephen Duckett.Credit: Wayne Taylor
Certainly such market interventions should not be introduced without careful consideration of the consequences. Denmark is a reminder of how they can go wrong. After just 15 months, Denmark scrapped its so-called "fat tax" on products containing saturated fat. It was a bureaucratic nightmare for producers and retailers, put jobs at risk and its health impacts were undermined because consumers bought products across the border.
This week, the Australian Association of Convenience Stores warned the introduction of a tax on sweetened drinks could hurt small business by encouraging consumers to buy in bulk from supermarkets to avoid price rises; just one example of the flow-on effects the government would have to factor in before contemplating a sugar tax here.
And of course sugary drinks are only one factor in our nation's rise in obesity. A government introducing a tax on them which wanted to make a substantial difference would implement it along with a package of complementary policies and programs.
But it is also worth considering the Grattan Institute's broader argument for introducing a tax on sugary drinks, which it acknowledges is not a silver bullet for tackling obesity. Obesity costs taxpayers about $5.3 billion a year in lost income tax, medical care and welfare. The sugary drinks tax would raise $500 million a year which would go some way to offsetting this. The $500 million could be used to pay off government debt or it could be used to significantly boost the $60 million a year the federal government already spends on anti-obesity programs and to target programs towards the disadvantaged.
It is premature to introduce a sugar tax in Australia but it is also premature to write it off.