18th Mar 2016
Jamie Oliver urges Australia to adopt a sugar tax

With the UK announcing that it will introduce a sugar tax on soft drinks, outspoken celebrity chef Jamie Oliver is calling on Australia to “pull its finger out” and do the same.

Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne announced that, in two years’ time, Britain will place a levy on drinks that contain five grams of sugar per 100 millilitres. The sugar tax is being introduced in an attempt to reduce the rapidly rising rate of childhood obesity in the UK.

"We all know one of the biggest contributors to childhood obesity is sugary drinks," said Chancellor Osborne. "I am not prepared to look back at my time here in this parliament, doing this job and say to my children's generation, 'I'm sorry. We knew there was a problem with sugary drinks. We knew it caused disease but we ducked the difficult decisions'."

Jamie Oliver, a tireless activist for healthy eating, was both surprised and rapt by the announcement, quickly taking to social media to urge other countries to do the same.

"It's about time your governments got on this," he said. "Australia, pull your finger out."

The UK’s sugar tax is expected to raise £UK520 million ($967 million) per year. With our own Government looking for ways to raise revenue, and especially considering that Australia is the world’s third-largest consumer of raw sugar, a sugar tax doesn’t seem such a bad idea. In fact, it could be a win-win for the economy and for the health of our nation.

Here’s a look at just how much sugar per 100ml is contained in many popular soft drinks:

  • Solo: 12.1g
  • Fanta: 11.2g
  • Red Bull: 11g
  • Bundaberg Ginger Beer: 10.8g
  • Coca Cola: 10.6g
  • Sprite: 10.1g
  • Vitamin Water: 5.49g
  • Lipton Ice Tea: 5.3g

The introduction of the tax is being delayed to allow soft drink manufacturers the time to change their product mix.

Whilst the Australian sugar industry is concerned that a tax such as this would be passed on to producers, it doesn’t seem too worried about a sugar tax being implemented in the near future.

"We are quite confident that there isn't the political climate in Australia to have this tax introduced at this point in time," said Canegrowers Queensland Chairman Paul Schembri.

Do you think a sugar tax is a good idea? Would you be prepared to pay more for your favourite soft drink?

Read more at www.abc.net.au

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    roy
    18th Mar 2016
    10:01am
    The kids are not obese because they eat too much, they are just big boned!
    Put a tax on big bones.
    ranga
    18th Mar 2016
    10:43am
    It is a serious issue.
    JAID
    18th Mar 2016
    1:09pm
    Evil idea.

    Most here can probably count on one hand the number of these drinks we have had in the last few decades. That doesn't give us any natural right to adjudicate on what others can have. We would be better to let those who drink the rubbish decide.

    We would be better again explaining the dangers without the moralistic tone and then leaving people to drink what they please.

    Sugar is only one thing that contributes to obesity. Some may never eat anything with added sugar but eat carbohydrates excessively which turn to sugar. Will we tax bread next?

    Another thing is lack of exercise and that is certainly at fault here, too little exercise for the quantity of energy being taken in.

    Lets start an abstinence society. Shoot the sugar bootleggers. Teetotlers unite...no, better not risk that tanin intake. Another tax another wealth of wasted lives policing our zealously held righteousness.
    Pablo
    18th Mar 2016
    3:29pm
    Yes Mick, this definitely discrimination against big boned people!
    Rosret
    18th Mar 2016
    10:04am
    Yes, we should. However I would start with soft drinks and make it enough to actually sting. It should be on diet drinks too as they cause as much havoc to the body as sugar sodas. They need to include fruit drinks and over sugared milk drinks as well. The money earned could go towards the subsidising price of buying real fresh fruit.
    These drinks are addictive.
    Old Man
    18th Mar 2016
    1:04pm
    Ah Rosret, I see where you are going with this. By claiming something is addictive, you immediately raise a government department to supervise the addictive products and arrange for addicts to get their daily fix in a government approved tasting room. That will leave more money available for the addicts to buy fresh fruit.
    Gra
    18th Mar 2016
    2:23pm
    Tax this, tax that, tax everything. Next some idiot will be suggesting the government tax the air we breathe.
    How about people forget about taxing everything and just encourage parents to get their kids outside and involved in some healthy activity rather than them sitting around playing computer games all the time? That is where the obesity stems from, that and too much take away food. Think back to the days when we were kids. We were rarely inside if the sun was shining, we were out doing stuff, building billycarts or making kites, kicking a football around or doing something with our friends. How many obese kids can you remember? Some kids might have been overweight but that was usually due to a medical condition, not because they were lazy and housebound.
    Old Man
    18th Mar 2016
    3:17pm
    Gra, Labor was taxing the air we breathe, not inhaling but exhaling. They called it a carbon tax.
    nena
    18th Mar 2016
    10:27am
    Yes, yes, tax on sugar and on SALT as well...I consume very little of
    those and I´m healthier than ever. There is enough sugar and salt
    already in fresh fruits and vegetables and any other food which is
    resourced from plants...Go vegan...good for every sentient beings and
    the Planet Earth which is an astronomic object not very well
    appreciated by humans...did I say humans?
    Bonny
    18th Mar 2016
    10:43am
    Sugar is the problem salt is not.
    roy
    18th Mar 2016
    2:31pm
    What about big boned people?
    Anonymous
    18th Mar 2016
    2:56pm
    They should get a tax rebate.
    musicveg
    28th Mar 2016
    8:37pm
    Salt can be a problem too if you consume too much, we need very little salt in the diet.
    Rae
    18th Mar 2016
    10:28am
    If they do put a tax on it should be on all sugar and artificial sweeteners.

    Sauces have a huge amount of sugar in them as have breakfast cereals, fruit and cereal health bars, fruit juices, wines etc.

    All need the tax not just soft drinks.
    Bonny
    18th Mar 2016
    10:45am
    Artificial sweeteners are a lot worse than sugar on the bodies metabolism. You get rid of sugar in a few hours but artificial sweeteners can take days and sometimes weeks to get rid of.
    Star Trekker
    18th Mar 2016
    10:50am
    Also add it to low fat options. They use sugar as a substitute.
    Rae
    18th Mar 2016
    3:48pm
    I don't ever use artificial sweeteners or fat free foods.

    In fact it was when fat free foods started appearing that obesity really took off.
    Janran
    18th Mar 2016
    3:59pm
    Spot on Star Trekker and Rae.

    "Low fat" = more sugar, plus transfats that don't require labelling. It's a rort and an unhealthy one at that. Whole foods, with there natural fat content, are the much healthier option.

    Low fat foods started as a result of the lie that eating fats causes heart disease. We need (good) fats!
    Hasbeen
    18th Mar 2016
    4:17pm
    Yes Ray, they pushed us at WHOLE GRAINS, carbohydrate was the healthy way to eat. Now they are finding WHOLE Grains are producing diabetes. 15 years time they will be banning bread & pushing sugar.

    I am totally sick of half baked experts, sticking their noses into our lives, & others making a big quid from scare campaigns. Remember all the adds about cholesterol free. Now we find the cholesterol we eat is harmless, it's the stuff we produce that may be a problem.

    For god's sake, eat what you like, & enjoy today, tomorrow you may walk under a bus.
    Aussiefrog
    18th Mar 2016
    10:32am
    Why not ban sugar, and salt, and bacon, and alcohol, and coffee, and whatever else! The only thing that are really detrimental to our health are fat cat politicians!
    buby
    19th Mar 2016
    11:36am
    I"ll second that Aussiefrog.
    Why are they making ppl suffer, when its the large companies that put so much sugar in everything.
    I was buying lactose free milk there for a while. but it kept going off.
    it didn't dawn on me for a while. but see NOT enough sugar in it to keep it for its self live, or perhaps it wasn't being stored properly in the first place??
    Sugar to a degree stops everything from going off. Too bad they just can't contain themselves, and only put in the required amount like they used to in the old days. but NO, because there is so much sugar in abundance, they are now overloading us.
    Hey but don't forget, they are now also selling us Genetically Modified goods. Perhaps that is also a bit of a culprit. OH no they don't want to go there. their excuse would be, but how do we feed the world if we don't go that way......$$$$$its just really about the bucks....shakes head NOT health
    wally
    19th Mar 2016
    2:02pm
    We already have taxes on tobacco, alcohol and petrol to keep us all safer and healthier, so the precedent for a sugar tax already exists. Taken to the most extreme example, government could tax almost all food products and have us all living on bread and water.
    The pensioner debit cards issued to the welfare recipients in Ceduna South Australia that limit the amount of spending a card holder can use to purchase cigarettes and alcohol is another example of "Creeping Big Brotherism".

    I wonder where it will all end.
    chief
    18th Mar 2016
    10:40am
    no tax just label all items with the number of spoons of sugar they contain
    Bonny
    18th Mar 2016
    10:46am
    A picture with amount of sugar would be a better idea.
    Sen.Cit.89
    18th Mar 2016
    11:50am
    Yes chief,
    Make the label large to see at a glance.
    I wonder of it would affect my alcohol buying if it was introduced into the 'less sugar campaign'.
    NO TO MORE TAX.
    wally
    19th Mar 2016
    2:15pm
    Getting consumers to look at the labels on packaging is the tricky bit. People still buy cigarettes, in spite of the lurid pictures and health warnings on the packs. The hide and seek game of concealing the cigarette packs in cupboards, in my view, eliminates much of the impact of the health warnings might have on the buyers. Now the buyer asks for their preferred brand, pays for it and takes it away without looking at the message.

    Labels would only work on canned or bottled drinks. How would labelling work where soft drinks are sold as post mixes in pubs, clubs and certain fast food outlets where glasses and disposable containers may be used to hold drinks with different amounts of sugar in them?
    Dot
    18th Mar 2016
    10:47am
    No more bl--dy taxes. We are being taxed to the hilt as is.
    Happy cyclist
    18th Mar 2016
    11:01am
    Sorry, Dot, we are one of the lowest taxed countries in the world! Its just the politicians wwho like to make us feel over-taxed to keep people angry at the other party -- both parties play the game. Whichever is in government they carry on about making tax cuts to keep people on-side but by and large over time we still pay the same tax and we should. We want so much done by government, the money has to come from somewhwere.
    marls
    19th Mar 2016
    8:03am
    Harry sorry the figures were released recently and we are the second highest taxed country in the world highest being uk
    And the ones that are even high like Denmark provide numerous free services to the ppl like education Childcare medical etc.
    Bazza
    18th Mar 2016
    10:53am
    they already tax every thing thats not nailed down then god knows where it goes into consolidated funds where they can hire helicopters and other waste of money they should hire a married couple to run the country they would do a better job
    Star Trekker
    18th Mar 2016
    10:58am
    Don't tax sugar. Blame parents for not buying healthier options. Schools no longer have soft drinks in canteens.

    I shouldn't be taxed on something I rarely use.
    ozimarco
    18th Mar 2016
    1:26pm
    Sugar won't be taxed, only sugary drinks with more than 5g of sugar per 100ml .
    Rae
    18th Mar 2016
    3:53pm
    If you rarely use it you won't pay the tax will you. Just like not paying tax on tobacco if you don't smoke or gambling if you don't gamble.

    I would have thought GST was already paid on soft drinks.
    Star Trekker
    18th Mar 2016
    4:25pm
    It is Rae and on everything else that contains sugar.
    red 1
    18th Mar 2016
    11:18am
    NO!!! We have enough bloody taxes now. Educate your kids about sugar. Don,t buy em Rubbish loaded with sugar.
    bebby
    18th Mar 2016
    11:44am
    red 1, it's the parents who need the education, not the kids.
    Obese children should come under Child Cruelty laws.
    roy
    18th Mar 2016
    2:43pm
    What about big boned kids?
    Anonymous
    18th Mar 2016
    3:17pm
    What about people with fat heads?
    JayUK
    18th Mar 2016
    5:06pm
    Eddie I knew you'd lighten the load !
    buby
    19th Mar 2016
    12:11pm
    what about the big greedy Companies that load the drink with sugar. TAX them!!!
    PlanB
    18th Mar 2016
    11:27am
    Hello again NANA state NO let people take responsibility for them selves.

    I never drink soft drinks but this would be a thin end of the wedge -- there is more sugar in other things as well as soft drinks. I like Jamie BUT on this occasion, I say go to hell Jamie
    Allenmack
    18th Mar 2016
    11:42am
    How can this happen?
    The Australian Government is already committed to providing financial support to the sugar industry. $335 MILLION since 2004 !!!!
    http://www.agriculture.gov.au/ag-farm-food/crops/sugar#sugar-industry-assistance-and-reform
    Roy
    18th Mar 2016
    11:56am
    You can google it and find out what would the consequences be 'If Sugar was discovered today...' Its quite revealing, it would either be banned outright, or used as a controlled substance. The GOVT was only going to provide financial support to assist development in creating alternative fuel sources, fair enough... lets take it out of our diets (slowly) and reap the benefits of better health!
    Rae
    18th Mar 2016
    3:57pm
    So that is the real issue. Using the sugar for fuel.

    Funny how the very elderly WW11 generation never suffered from too much sugar considering the cakes, biscuits and desserts that were in the diet.

    Suddenly we have a huge increase in disease. Perhaps something else is also going on.
    Boomah52
    18th Mar 2016
    11:44am
    Surely a BMI yearly test with scaled Medicare levy on the result. No test and you pay the max. The child abuse we can see with our own eyes and seemingly ignored is a disgrace.
    roy
    18th Mar 2016
    2:30pm
    What about the bog boned kids?
    Anonymous
    18th Mar 2016
    2:57pm
    If they have bOg bones they are a worry.
    KSS
    18th Mar 2016
    9:30pm
    Boomah BMI has been discredited for years. If you were to test elite athletes they would all be considered overweight or obese! And BMI was never to be used on kids in the first place.

    And Mick, stop with the ridiculous "what about the big boned kids?". Most people who say their kids (or they) are big boned are quite simply overweight and in denial.
    musicveg
    28th Mar 2016
    8:39pm
    BMI tests are not accurate, they don't take into consideration weight of bones and muscles.
    kentucky
    18th Mar 2016
    11:45am
    Why not try buying 12 large bottles of cool drinks at Xmas as a treat and no sugary drinks for the rest of the year.(worked for us) The tax will just be another way of revenue raising as stated in Leon's column,(The UK’s sugar tax is expected to raise £UK520 million ($967 million) per year). due to Governments having free spending dip stick politicians with their hands in our pockets every time they want a holiday,sorry (junket),If we all ran our own household budget the same way our Governments run the Public Purse we would be looking at ways of making ends meet. More than likely having several jobs so we can put more tax money in to useless politicians pockets. A vicious circle.All politicians should go back to school and do a course on the word BUDGET.(an estimate of income and expenditure for a set period of time)work within it.
    Roy
    18th Mar 2016
    11:46am
    No, we do not need to be taxed for sugar use, because guess what this ingredient is used in so many food items that it would increase the price of the majority of your grocery goods and then everyone has to pay the increase - that's simply not fair or equitable... It works out as 20c extra for a can of Coke, do you honestly think that will deter a soft-drink addict? Lets tax wheat & flour products as well, that might help overweight people, but it won't do much for our budgets... think about it!
    KSS
    18th Mar 2016
    9:31pm
    Roy the very fact that sugar is added to most things is the real problem.
    Evil child
    18th Mar 2016
    11:50am
    People have to take responsibility for their own actions. The government of the day should not be legislating where groups decide that a product is bad for us. They've increased taxes on fuel alcohol and cigarettes. Does it stop people using them. No. No matter how high the taxes go on goods people will continue to by the products and forego other essential things they may need. This should be more about educating people than taxing

    18th Mar 2016
    11:53am
    Only drink beer and water and you won"t have a problem.

    Just make sure you don"t drink to much water it has a bad effect on your bladder, the other stuff is all right.
    PlanB
    18th Mar 2016
    11:59am
    Beer is full of sugar too so that would have a bigger tax as well
    Anonymous
    18th Mar 2016
    2:16pm
    You are right PlanB but it has a lot of good stuff water,hops, yeast and is already taxed to the hilt.
    roy
    18th Mar 2016
    2:34pm
    I'm with you there robbo, I'm lucky that I'm not big boned.
    Foxy
    18th Mar 2016
    5:52pm
    ...you "whimpy" Mick?? :-)
    niemakawa
    18th Mar 2016
    5:56pm
    Recommended: 6 pints of beer a day will do the trick for a healthy life.
    KSS
    18th Mar 2016
    9:34pm
    And a lot of the sugar in beer is eaten by the yeast during fermentation.
    kev888
    18th Mar 2016
    12:03pm
    I vote Yes Tax sugar. Take the message further vote to change the labeling laws. Bigger print, clearly able the contents of an item....Legislate to sue companies that step beyond the boundaries of associated laws
    PlanB
    18th Mar 2016
    12:21pm
    The Labeling laws will be in in July this year -- not b4 time either darn disgrace they are now
    Janran
    18th Mar 2016
    3:05pm
    How about putting photos of putrid, gangrenous toes of diabetics on the packaging of highly sugared food, like cigarette packaging?
    Rae
    18th Mar 2016
    4:01pm
    Be careful Janran if they had to put pictures of what fluoride can do to you on the sides of taps with the poison label then no-one would ever drink water again.
    Janran
    18th Mar 2016
    4:22pm
    You're right again, Rae. Imagine a huge big sign: S6 POISON, written in red? It is against the law to force "medication" on patients, yet the Govt and its Health Depts are illegal drug pushers when it comes to fluoride in the water supply.

    And then it's added to the run-off and sewerage treatment to all end up in our waterways!

    I recently installed a big rainwater tank to avoid forced medication. Not a cheap exercise.
    jam
    18th Mar 2016
    12:23pm
    If it would help, it might be good. I doubt however that it makes a scrap of difference to those buying it. They are often young with plenty of money for junk food or they are addicted where taxing will not change the habit.
    Education education is better than tax tax tax.
    ozimarco
    18th Mar 2016
    1:29pm
    In the case of smoking, it was a combination of high taxes and education that did the trick for the majority of the population. I don't see why the same approach wouldn't work for the majority in this case. There will always be a minority that will never change their ways no matter what.
    Gra
    18th Mar 2016
    2:31pm
    How many people gave up smoking when the tax on cigarettes was increased? Taxing soft drinks would only result in the government raking in more money for them to waste. Education is the way to help people, making them pay more only means they have less money for the important things.
    Old Man
    18th Mar 2016
    12:58pm
    Here we go again, 95% of the population paying a tax because 5% of the population has a problem. I can only agree if those who are not overweight are allowed to claim an exemption and the certificate is to be issued by a medical doctor with all associated costs to be paid for out of the sugar tax.

    I'm still angry about Labor imposing an additional excise (they promised no new taxes but this is not a tax, it's an excise) on my favourite treat, Bundy and Cola RTD. This additional excise was designed to stop binge drinking by young people who were 4.9% of the drinking population and increased the cost from $39/carton to $72/carton. The young ones bought the bottle of spirits and cans of mixers, got the ratio wrong and became a bigger problem. BTW, Labor assured us it was a health matter not a revenue raising exercise and politicians don't lie.
    Polly Esther
    18th Mar 2016
    1:01pm
    Tax sugar, tax the air we breathe, tax every bloody thing. Any how why does Jamie Oliver think he is entitled to issue us orders? He should stick to stirring his own pot and stop dribbling into what he is cooking, ooh that's nasty isn't it? Anyway I agree with him about sugar,and summing it up my opinion is yes, people do eat too much sugar and too much of it isn't healthy, and no, putting a tax on it isn't going to make it good for you, and if you did tax it why would it convert the 'sweet toothes' anyway? People should practise restraint, not be taxed more.
    PlanB
    18th Mar 2016
    1:07pm
    Re the tax on the air Polly -- just wait a little longer I am SURE it will come
    maelcolium
    18th Mar 2016
    1:27pm
    Meh! More social engineering.

    What about the crap fast foods like McDonalds and Kentucky Fried et al. It's the only food the poor know how to cook due to poor nutritional education so of course they and their children and their children's children will be fat. Schools don't have sports anymore because it's too competitive apparently so what hope is there.

    Canned food and sauces from the supermarkets are loaded with sugar, so why single out soft drinks? While we're at it what about the social damage caused by alcohol. Jamie is a publicity seeking twerp. Why listen to this claptrap?

    Of course governments love taxes and this is just another excuse to raise one. If they guaranteed that the money would be diverted to food education and training it might get traction from me, but I guarantee that won't happen.
    Rae
    18th Mar 2016
    4:10pm
    The Personal Development, Health and Physical Education Syllabus from K inder to Year 12 is full of education about healthy choices, bullying, drugs, physical needs etc.

    People are still acting like gluttons and eating far too much food and drinking far too much as well.

    It isn't a lack of education but a lack of will power.
    Janran
    18th Mar 2016
    1:55pm
    There's nothing like hitting the hip pocket to persuade and educate.
    I say all junk and processed foods with added sugar, transfats or excessive preservatives should incur a big tax (we're talking GST) of 30% or 50%. People will vote with their pockets for healthier, real food options.
    No need to ban anything and no condescending preaching either. The huge savings to the health system, plus the extra tax collected, will improve people's lives, young and old, no end.
    Janran
    18th Mar 2016
    2:06pm
    Obesity isn't the only problem caused by sugar - it's all those chemicals, like artificial sweeteners and transfats, wrecking peoples' guts and other internal organs. Sugar (and excess carbs) cause candida which puts the whole immune system constantly under stress. If you let that go on for too long you create chronic diseases such as cancer.
    Heart disease and unhealthy arteries aren't only suffered by obese people, far from it.
    So just because you're not fat doesn't mean excess sugar isn't making you sick.
    Biddy
    18th Mar 2016
    2:30pm
    Is this the real problem or are they just looking at another way to tax something else,before worrying about sugar just stop and think once upon a time they use to sell sugary things at tuck shops and then they stopped this,results children leave school and go to shops for lollies drinks etc because their sugar levels are low and the energy level way down is this not telling all these smart people something and is not sugar a preservative that makes shelf life longer for products,children are denied sugar which is a energy food at homes and then pig out when these things become available,I also believe that if children were made to get off their butts away from computers and televise and be more active and parents guided all their intakes and excercise there would not be so much obesity,and the complete myth that Dibetes comes from to much sugar is rubbish,it is your diet, and some inherit Diabetes from family members enzymes from a vital organ also creates Diabetes,but the reason behind this tax is Jamie Oliver is pushing for it,because it makes him look important and keeps him in the headlines,take a look at all the preservatives in food and cereals and cut back on it would be my advice,some other reason children are obese is gland ,and baby fat,which they can loose as they get older ,I think taxing sugar is totally unecessary
    niemakawa
    18th Mar 2016
    6:00pm
    It's all about the money, it's all about the money. Another tax that will be wasted and not used for the intended purpose.
    jackie
    18th Mar 2016
    2:31pm
    Sugar is addictive as well as bad for teeth and health. Tooth decay is expensive and diabetes is a killer. Yes bring it on and tax sugar
    Biddy
    18th Mar 2016
    2:44pm
    Once upon there was no Macdonalds,no Kentucky fried,chicken no red rooster,no Pizza no hungry Jacks ,no take always but the Parents do not bother making dinners anymore,it is easier to order take away and there are lots of Pasta and noodles that children are fed when we were growing up it as always cooked meals and lots of salads we ate ,I feel this is missing in a lot of homes which plays a big part in children being obese,sugar is a preservative and gives food longer shelf life,take it away and things would not last for any length of time,obese can also be baby fat,and those whom have gland problems can also be obese not always sugar ,so I think this tax in sugar is something they can blame because a cooking chef has decided it's the right thing to do and keeps his name on the top ,sugar is energy take it completely out of the diet it will create a lot more problems what next I ask
    Dreamer
    18th Mar 2016
    3:06pm
    Tax all refined sugar products, I say. Pocket money can still be used to buy sweet treats, but fewer of them. UK is pledging the £500M raised to equipping schools with sports equipment. And in my moments of weakness I'll probably buy and enjoy a small single chocolate instead of a whole box full!
    Patriot
    18th Mar 2016
    4:09pm
    Sugar is highly addictive and becomes the equivalent of a drug!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

    I would reluctantly agree to put taxes on the items mentioned by Biddy & Dreamer if we were to be assured that those TAXES raised were to support our AILING Sickness Care system OVER & ABOVE the current commitments of Fed & State govts.

    This should then:
    A Resolve the current issue with our Sickness Care system
    b Hopefully allow a natural "Build-Up" towards the calamity "Sugar & Junk Food Addictions" are causing to the "Foundation of Health" wrought onto the current generations who are - via deceitful & misleading advertising - enticed to eat de-nurtured CRAP rather than "Wholesome Food".
    All for the sake of the GREED of the BIG CORPORATIONS who pay little or no taxes and - additionally - are not punished for the crimes they commit against these gullible generations.

    However, to keep the B****rd Politicians honest and ensure that - when the kitty is big enough - these funds/assets will NOT be converted into consolidated revenue is the "Real Problem".

    Look at the Age Pensions & Road Taxes as an examples!!!
    Pablo
    18th Mar 2016
    3:28pm
    Tell Jaime Oliver to mind his own stupid lowlife pommie business and buy out of what happens in Australia! It's not bad enough that we have to put up with his lowlife Pommie cooking, now he opens his stupid mouth. This is the responsibility of Australian parents, not politicians and certainly NOT Jaime Oliver!
    KSS
    18th Mar 2016
    9:46pm
    Wow Pablo. Could you be any ruder?

    Jamie Oliver has done a great deal of good in improving the diets of kids in the UK (and in the USA). They get far better school dinners now than before he got involved. He employs underprivileged kids in his restaurants, he has taught millions how to cook healthy meals cheaply instead of relying on packaged foods and takeaway. And yes he makes money with his books, tv shows and merchandise. He has invested in similar activities in Australia and like anyone else, he has a right to his opinions.

    I agree it is the responsibility of parents to feed their kids properly, but when you have reports as we did earlier this week of kids as young as 5 with tooth decay so bad they need surgery in hospital to extract their teeth, something has to be done and someone has to say something. If that is Jamie Oliver, then so be it!
    jeff
    18th Mar 2016
    3:32pm
    I can't believe the sheep that thing another Tax is a good idea. You must being making to much. Instead of trying to increase the cost of living why don't you just donate you excess money to the government. Do you really think sugar is only in soft drinks, it's in every thing we buy including fruit juice (Nearly the same as Coca Cola). The pensioners will the the worst hit, again.
    bebby
    18th Mar 2016
    3:51pm
    I don't see very many obese old people out my way jeff. I imagine with those who are genuinely struggling, water is their only drink of choice.
    jeff
    18th Mar 2016
    5:51pm
    The point is, Sugar is almost in every thing we buy. So they will need a tax on that to. Most canned food (Beetroot 9.1g, Pineapple 13.3g, ect Coca Cola 10.6g of sugar per 100g. There is even sugar in chips.
    patchy
    18th Mar 2016
    3:33pm
    will they put sugar tax on wine & beer ? they already tax the alcohol content ?
    alanem
    18th Mar 2016
    3:56pm
    Do we really need a cocky pom to come to Australia telling us what we should or should not be doing? I bet he doesn't hold back on the sugar etc when he cooks! not everyone is obese by choice!
    Patriot
    18th Mar 2016
    4:11pm
    alanem
    Does not matter if he is a "Cocky Pom" or not.
    Who raises the idea is of little importance.

    Is the idea correct for Australia is more the issue I believe!
    roy
    18th Mar 2016
    10:13pm
    How racist of you, you wouldn't say that if he was muslim.

    99'9% of obese people are obese by choice how else can one get fat except by eating too much? Have you never seen the awful films of the poor people who came out of concentration camps after World War 2?
    niemakawa
    18th Mar 2016
    4:21pm
    In short. NO. Any tax raised will end up in General Revenue, not one cent spent on its intended purpose. It would just be another case of "Sweet" talking.
    Patriot
    18th Mar 2016
    4:24pm
    SAD Enough - that's correct in my opinion!
    Anonymous
    18th Mar 2016
    4:34pm
    ANY tax is a sweetener for the government, and General Revenue is where most of the taxes go to be spent on foolish works projects or "initiatives" which an untrained monkey could perform and are only done to show that the government is doing "something". NO MORE TAXES - this article is a load of crap!
    Troubadour
    18th Mar 2016
    4:24pm
    That is such a silly comment Mickl!! Our kids need to be helped to keep healthier,'and doi consume too many soft drinks.
    jeff
    18th Mar 2016
    5:56pm
    It's called responsible parenting. We don't need a new Tax. Not government responsibly to interfere into our life choices.
    roy
    18th Mar 2016
    8:51pm
    jeff, absolutely right, I saw a woman in Coles only today and her trolley was almost full of Pepsi and other junk drink bottles, responsible parenting my backside.
    roy
    18th Mar 2016
    8:53pm
    I also saw another female, probably very early 20s and her backside was so big that the cheeks of her bottom had different post codes.
    KSS
    18th Mar 2016
    9:47pm
    But Mick wasn't she just 'big boned'?
    Brissiegirl
    18th Mar 2016
    5:13pm
    Yes tax sugar. Tax fatty foods, tax salt. Tax sedentary behaviour. Tax everything that is naughty but nice. Didn't our grandparents eat bread and fat? Didn't our parents cook sugary puddings, cakes and biscuits, delivered with great love and affection? Then they stopped playground cart-wheels, monkey bars, climbing trees, walking home from school due to predators, they told us to keep out of the sun so now we have a large population deficient in vitamin D. On the other hand, I think the social engineers should educate and advise, then just bugger off.
    niemakawa
    18th Mar 2016
    5:33pm
    I tend to agree with you. What the Government should be doing is telling the producers that a upper limit of "X" amount of sugar is allowed and if that is breached then the product is taken from circulation and the producer fined and/or licence revoked. Maybe that is too easy a solution as the Government would miss out on an additional "Tax" which is their real motive, nothing to do with the perceived "obesity" problem.
    Brissiegirl
    18th Mar 2016
    5:15pm
    Tax unhealthy fruit. It is full of sugar.
    RSS
    18th Mar 2016
    5:19pm
    About time. Too many soft drinks loaded with sugar around & are a great temptation for children. However this does not just apply to soft drinks....most of the "health" drinks are loaded too. What a laugh ! Parents though have a responsibility to educate their children in theses areas. Having one or two off and on is quite OK. so I think a tax is good. Will help-prevent dental caries as well.
    niemakawa
    18th Mar 2016
    5:35pm
    Still to come, salt tax, fat tax, it will never end.
    Foxy
    18th Mar 2016
    5:55pm
    .....where's "particolour" ? I seriously miss his humor???
    niemakawa
    18th Mar 2016
    5:57pm
    Probably can't get his head out of the sugar bowl.
    Foxy
    18th Mar 2016
    6:26pm
    lol - yeah maybe? :-)
    RSS
    18th Mar 2016
    6:31pm
    Jamie Oliver is only trying to do what is best for the whole world. There are too many knockers out there. Yes sugar is in everything, but what do you see most people drinking.....COKE!!People have choices & Jamie is only trying to help have a healthier world & to educate people. I say Good on him for having a say....about time someone did !! You don't have to have a lot of money to buy healthy stuff & to make simple nutritious food & drink.
    Rae
    19th Mar 2016
    2:48pm
    Coca cola uses corn syrup. In fact most sweet things are made with corn syrup these days as real cane sugar is much more expensive.
    Oars
    18th Mar 2016
    6:56pm
    I love sugar, yet I am not obese. To challenge the rising obesity scare, I drink wine, have XXX frequently, sometimes with a partner, and feed well. I also chase my dogs around the block. They are a bit chubby, but not this kid. This scare about sugar sounds like the bleaters who banned smoking- and runed that pleasure. Next they will make us all go to WORK- yes that dreadfull disease that most of us have to suffer for 40 or more years, and then hear from some scrawny academic that we are all too fat. Eat a balanced diet( no big woop what that is) and run, jog, cycle every day of your life, and you can have a wine, eat a bit of cake, and be HAPPY- unlike the scrawny bats that started this scare campaign. Good eaten'. !
    roy
    18th Mar 2016
    7:55pm
    Are you big boned? How tall are you and what do you weigh?
    Oars
    20th Mar 2016
    8:25am
    Mick. What the hell have my bones got to do with sugar ?. I was trying to say that diet is only one item of being healthy. The others ( note plural) are: 1. regular exercise -not including an elbow bending at the pub, 2. have a happy outlook- laughing is prescribed for troopps after they have been under battle stress- remember the vietnam war vets ? 3. have a balnace on all three. Oh, I forgot to mention: Get involved with life and other people, not just be selfish and navel watching. I hope that cleared things up. And I quite tall but stand taller than most as I don't cower to hasty scare campaign. !
    JAID
    23rd Mar 2016
    8:26am
    With you all the way Oars. Bet Mick is too...even if a little handicapped by his big bone.
    Lizsan
    18th Mar 2016
    7:47pm
    Make healthy fruit and foods more affordable and more people would be able to feed their kids properly. This combined with education will work much better in the long run
    niemakawa
    18th Mar 2016
    7:53pm
    People must start learning to make the right choices instead of relying on Governments to keep holding their hands. I have no sympathy for obese people that has been caused by over eating.
    roy
    18th Mar 2016
    8:48pm
    99.9% of obesity is caused by over eating unless you happen to be big boned, ha ha ha.
    roy
    19th Mar 2016
    10:52am
    Clive Palmer can afford to eat properly at look at the size of him!
    Pamiea
    18th Mar 2016
    7:58pm
    A sugar tax on drinks eh! Would it work? The more they tax smokers the more they smoke so would this just be another revenue raiser for the government?? Me thinks so and like cigarettes where does it end?
    niemakawa
    18th Mar 2016
    8:10pm
    That is all it is. The Government cares not about people.
    marls
    19th Mar 2016
    8:08am
    When something is bad for ones health it should never be allowed to be sold to the public in the first place the gvt has a responsilility to the well being of its ppl you don't see legal heroin or cocaine sold everywhere
    retroy
    19th Mar 2016
    1:44pm
    Yes put a sugar tax on every thing which uses sugar in its manufacture.
    You only have to look at the weekly catalogue fro woolies and coles to see what they are promoting most, soft drinks, chocolate, and lollies followed by cakes etc.
    The government would make a fortune, and not have to bother about old peoples pensions and savings.
    RSS
    19th Mar 2016
    6:07pm
    SOmeone mentioned Corn Syrup....well that is just as bad if not worse. That is what the Americans use, & that is why there are many obese people there. Corn is fed to live stock that are then killed for the beef. And humans eat the beef, and what are they getting in the beef ? sugar from the corn! Sugar has its place in our diet, onloy a certain no of grams per day, if you stick to that, it's fine. People can't be bothered these days, too lazy. CHildren that are obese don't necessarily have big bones it just looks like that. Lots of complications arise from being unhealthy.
    Janran
    20th Mar 2016
    12:06pm
    Except for certified organic foods, about 99% of the corn syrup (sugar) used in USA stock feed lots and most processed foods, is Genetically Modified.

    That's why there's been a huge argument in the USA of late, led and paid for by Monsanto (GM seed central), and the Grocery Association, to stop individual States from making food labels reflect their GM ingredients, as will be enacted in Vermont on 1/7/16.

    If the legislation can be upheld, 99% of processed foods that have sugar (corn syrup) in them, will have to be labelled GM.The big Grocery chains are up in arms because they know people don't want GM foods, especially once they know corn syrup is at the heart of the health and obesity epidemic.

    Unfortunately, Monsanto and the Grocery Association, unashamedly pay off (I mean, politically donate), Senators directly. Worse still, they have so much money, they'll probably win. We call this "democracy in action", via capitalism.

    How can we encourage people away from buying processed food full of unhealthy ingredients?
    If you don't want to tax the culprits, can we subsidize our food farmers, so unadulterated (I mean GM-free) fresh food is cheaper than processed foods?
    Food farmers, excluding cotton and biofuel producers, could certainly do with a helping hand in this area.
    Franky
    21st Mar 2016
    9:54am
    Sugar tax, yes please! It's about time we started to realize the damage excessive sugar does to our bodies and the miseries it causes.
    MD
    21st Mar 2016
    1:52pm
    'How sweet it is,'oh definitely apply a tax to sugar. Just think of the massive increase to government coffers once the tax has been applied to every sugar inclusive food item; ice-cream, biscuits, most canned/jar/bottle foods, chocolate & sweets, soft drinks, juices, 'sports' drinks, frozen/prepared (packet)foods, cakes, pastry products, almost anything that is ingested and certainly not confined to this means, although --- if we think about it, then maybe the extra $ in the coffers will prompt another generous increase to the age pension ? So, what's your poison ?
    Gee Whiz
    22nd Mar 2016
    7:52am
    I really can't understand why substitute sweeteners such as Stevia ( not a chemical like aspartame that carries different product names such as Sweet & Low etc ) can't be used in confectionary and soft drinks.

    Stevia is a natural extract from the Stevia plant and just as sweet as sugar. It only requires a fraction to be as sweet as sugar thus reducing calorie intake.

    And the government should have the guts to ban those so called Power Drinks. The next time you see them on the supermarket shelf read the liable to see what's them. You will find they contain more chemicals than weed killers.
    Janran
    22nd Mar 2016
    9:21am
    Yes, Gee Whiz, stevia is great, though expensive. I buy the Natvia brand 700g Baking pack, in a pink striped box, for about $16 on special at Coles. This brand uses organic stevia, yet is the cheapest brand when bought in bulk on special.
    The green box with 40x or 80x 2g sticks are handy for drinking coffee when out, though I've seen them available in cafes alongside other sweeteners, in groovy places around Byron Bay, Bangalow, Lennox Head and Ballina.
    Beware the tablets in little pop-up tins - they've managed to include some nasty chemicals in these.
    Radish
    23rd Mar 2016
    1:57pm
    A tax may force makers of the products to decrease the sugar content to an acceptable level
    Radish
    23rd Mar 2016
    2:01pm
    I have one Nativa Stevia tablet in my one and only coffee I have each morning.

    There are "no" chemicals or nasties in them.

    " MADE WITH CERTIFIED ORGANIC STEVIA*

    Nirvana Stevia® tablets have been developed and formulated with extensive research to ensure the purest, highest quality and superior tasting Stevia product, which is also easy to use.

    Only the most natural, highest quality, non-GMO materials have been selected, to provide a healthy, caloric-safe and great tasting product for everyone to enjoy. Most people love the taste of a good quality Stevia product. High quality Stevia extract does not have the grassy or slightly bitter after-taste that has been reported with the use of some Stevia. Each tablet is approximately equivalent to the sweetness of (7g), or 1 heaped teaspoon of sugar.

    Nirvana Stevia® has no calories, no sugar, no artificial sweeteners, no fat, no wheat, no yeast, no soy, no milk derivatives, no added flavours, no artificial colourings and no toxic chemicals. ENJOY!

    http://www.nirvanahealthproducts.com/products/nirvana-organics-stevia/stevia-100-tablets.html
    Janran
    23rd Mar 2016
    2:38pm
    Thanks, Radish - always good to learn about quality goods.
    Gee Whiz
    23rd Mar 2016
    6:35pm
    Yep, already know that about Stevia. .

    In my post I was referring to the so called Sports drinks which are loaded with chemical's.
    maxchugg
    23rd Mar 2016
    6:56pm
    The following site contains a list of the 33 worst foods, and the top 6 are not listed because of their sugar content, but because of trans-fat:
    http://bembu.com/most-unhealthy-foods
    So, if a tax is to be imposed on food/drinks with high sugar content, then a tax on the following should also be levied:
    Fast food
    Packaged Cookies
    Cake frosting
    Pancakes
    Microwave popcorn
    Frozen meals.
    A tax on the above items would probably do more for the revenue than a tax on sugar.
    Also, a tax on soft drinks with high sugar content will simply cause the sugar to be replaced with artificial sweeteners, such as aspartamine. Increased consumption of artificial sweeteners could well cause even greater problems than sugar.
    musicveg
    28th Mar 2016
    8:47pm
    Who will get the benefits of a sugar tax? How about they just ban advertisement of sugary drinks? What about more education? A tax on alcohol and cigarettes has not stopped many people. I think a sugar tax is a good idea in theory but not sure if it is going to help. Just don't buy the stuff full of sugar, more honest and bigger labels on food will help but then food producers always find a way to push their poison.


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

    • Receive our daily enewsletter
    • Enter competitions
    • Comment on articles