Sugar tax won't combat obesity crisis

Obesity crisis reaches breaking point in the UK (Image: The Independent)

We always have an urge to combat a battle of some kind. Not all of them involve bombing one another, thankfully. Putting international frictions aside, world leaders are largely united in facing certain challenges surrounding nature, global poverty, corruption and wildlife. By being part of organisations and treaties where they can discuss ways to handle these contentious issues, it shows the true value of approaching them with relative ease.

However, there are certain crises we have to face alone, due to its nature. While many countries in the Western world have a problem with obesity, there is no global treaty where those in power can collectively create laws and regulations to combat the rising levels of people gaining fat together. In the UK, it is feared half of the population will be obese by 2030.

Those who led the British government over the past 12-15 years, have tried to tackle obesity in their own way. In 2006, Tony Blair said individuals should feel empowered, not be commanded, to take their health seriously. He warned fast food chains about their advertising and how it could influence young people in visiting one regularly. Gordon Brown's government compared the obesity crisis to the challenges with climate change and pledged to draw up long-term plans to tackle it.

Conservative governments under David Cameron and Theresa May have taken strides to tackle obesity. Fast forward to 2015, Cameron allowed a petition, launched by TV chef Jamie Oliver and pressure group, Sustain, to be debated in government and MPs voted in favour of what is commonly known as a 'sugar tax'. This charge has finally been implemented this week, nearly two-and-a-half-years after Parliament supported it.

Jamie Oliver (Image: I Quit Sugar)

The 'sugar tax' specifically targets fizzy drinks with high levels of sugar, usually above the daily limits that children could have under government guidelines. A tax is imposed on a drink if it has more than 5g of sugar per 100ml, and a higher levy on those with more than 8g per 100ml. The government said they will use what's raised through this - which The Sun approximates around £520 million - to go to investing in sports at school.

This regulation has been backed across the board. Diabetes UK highlights its potential to prevent 140,000 more children and adults being obese every year, as well as 19,000 new cases of type two diabetes per year. They can see it's reportedly worked in Hungary and Mexico, for instance, where sugary products in these countries were dramatically reduced. In the UK, we've already seen the likes of Irn Bru stepping away from tradition by drastically dropping the sugar intake in their drinks.

Will the tax make a genuinely difference? Firstly, I am happy politicians are taking our health seriously. They recognise the pressures the NHS face when it comes to handling people's overweight issue. In 2016, NHS England reported they spent £16 billion per year on direct medical costs as a result of obesity. This is hugely alarming.

That said, I'm not utterly convinced by political intervention in its current state. With the sugar tax alone, I don't believe making fizzy drinks more expensive is the answer. In fact, I don't see how that would work in our current economic and societal climate at all.

When it comes to our health, for many of us, our decision is based on how much money we have. We don't want to starve ourselves, and yet we don't want to spend too much on what goes in our mouths because we have to prioritise where our cash goes in other directions. If you look at our average supermarket, you can see the prices for yourselves. The cost of fruit has dramatically gone up and you'll have to dedicate time in the aisle to find cheap fresh vegetables too. Due to the falling value of the British pound, prices of food and non-alcoholic beverages are naturally going to increase. We've seen annual rises of around four percent between 2016 and 2017.

Typical sport sponsorship (Image: Visa Middle East

)

Unfortunately, these price increases aren't necessarily in line with how much we get per annum through wages and other means. Many may notice they're going to be slightly better off with the minimum and living wages increasing by around 4.7%. Yet, housing bills continue to rise with the energy bill price cap increasing by £57 per year. When you catapult these together, in addition to the rising levels of fast food places on our High Street, the government should expect the obesity crisis to fuel.

Increasing the price of fizzy drinks isn't going to change people's attitudes towards them. We subconsciously buy them, and this will only allow Pepsi and the like to thrive on healthy profits. Ironically, it's these companies that promote healthy lifestyles through multi-million pound sponsorship deals with sporting organisations and competitions. Coca Cola and McDonald's pledge to support world football governing body FIFA during this summer's World Cup.

Rather than focus on burning holes in people's pockets, the current government should be looking at the societal impact of obesity rather than focusing on economics. While they have positive healthy eating guidelines in terms of encouraging us to eat five portions of fruit and vegetables a day, there is little done in empowering people to achieving this. They can't rely on millions spending £2 on asparagus when they can have a fulfilling meal at Chicken Cottage for £1.99. They also can't rely on chefs like Jamie Oliver and so-called fitness gurus such as Joe Wicks to teach us how to eat well.

In my view, the government shouldn't be telling us what to eat. If they want to take the obesity crisis genuinely seriously, they'd put levies on fast food parlours and encourage supermarkets and farmers to come together and decrease prices of things that are designed to get us in good shape. Not enough is being done to encourage supermarkets to sell British grown produce, as foreign exports result in hiking prices. While they're at it, ditch the old BMI measurement system which currently gives the public an increasingly inaccurate picture of the crisis' true scale.

Fizzy drinks are the least of the government's problem, when it comes to combatting obesity. Imposing this sugar tax is a petty step which would affect more people who aren't obese than those who are. I'd love to be proven wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me if the levy would still mean more people opting for KFC than roast dinners and fewer children participating in competitive sport.