I suppose one I can see coming up is the introduction of a ‘sugar tax’. There seems to be a belief in government that to curb human behaviour, add a tax and it will change it.
The success of a sugar tax in other countries is questionable and have been doing a little research lately to see if it would be an effective method to reduce sugar consumption. Appears a sugar tax may not the a panacea some interest groups think it may be.
If the government was serious about dietary sugar intake, they possibly would regulate the maximum concentration/calorie component of added sugar in processed foods. For example, regulating that maximum % added (or total) sugar in soft drinks/processed foods being 3%.
I expect that some items like lollies and raw sugar would need exemptions, but these could have clear labelling of the percentage of sugar contained in the products. Blind Freddy also knows that these are already high in sugar, where as may have a mistaken belief that a pre-made meal is low in sugar.
Often new policies of government are a reactionary response to an issue, without much forethought on what would be the best long term solution. Sometimes doing a quick fix irrespective of the outcomes is what they want to achieve…as this is seen to be doing something even if it is not overly successful. The other problem with a small tax like a sugar tax is is they often cost more to administer than the revenue generated, meaning general revenue which should be spent on other things are used to prop up the tax system. The other problem with a tax is a cost to the economy as a whole…just like the diseases it is trying to reduce.
