A SUGAR tax on the makers of soft drinks to tackle childhood obesity was broadly welcomed in Scotland where 30 per cent of children are overweight.
Chancellor George Osborne is forecasting the new tax, to be introduced in 2018, will raise £530 million a year which will be spent on boosting sports in primary schools.
Manufacturers of soft drinks will be taxed in two bands – one for sugar content above 5gms per 100mls and a second, higher band for drinks with a sugar content of more than 8gms per 100mls. Pure fruit juice and milk-based drinks are excluded and the smallest producers will also have an exemption from the scheme.
Irn-Bru has 10.3g of sugar per 100ml so will be in higher band for Osborne’s sugar levy and will add 8p to a 330ml can and 12p to a 500ml bottle. Shares in the Irn-Bru maker AG Barr dropped five per cent and Britvic fell by 3.5 per cent after the announcement.
AG Barr bosses described the move as “extremely disappointing”.
Chief executive Roger White said: “It is extremely disappointing that soft drinks have been singled out given it is the only food and drink category to have made any real progress in reducing sugar intake in recent years, down 13.6 per cent since 2012.”
In the top bracket for tax will be Coca-Cola, Red Bull and Ribena, and drinks like Fanta, Sprite and Dr Pepper will be on the lower band.
Celebrity TV chef and sugar tax campaigner Jamie Oliver was quick to rejoice in his victory, tweeting: “We did it guys !!we did it !!! A sugar levy on sugary sweetened drinks ... A profound move.”
Scottish Food Commission chairwoman Shirley Spears, co-owner of the Michelin-star Three Chimneys restaurant on Skye, was disappointed the tax won’t be introduced for another two years.
She added: “The Food Commission isn’t there to give out dietary advice but we welcome any measure that will assist the Scottish population in making healthier choices but this is just one of a huge number of dietary-related issues we have to face up to.”
A report on the effects of a sugar tax, published by Cancer Research UK and the UK Health Forum last month, showed that it could prevent 3.7 million cases of obesity over the next decade.
Sir Harpal Kumar, Cancer Research UK’s chief executive, said: “The Chancellor’s announcement of a levy on high sugar drinks is great news for the health of our children.”
Amanda McLean, director of World Cancer Research Fund, said the levy was a welcome step but was “only one part of a wider obesity strategy that is needed if our government is serious about tackling the biggest public health crisis”.
The British Dental Association (BDA) has been leading calls for action on sugar as tooth decay has become the number one reason for hospital admissions among young children. Mick Armstrong, chair of the BDA, said: “Many were expecting half-measures from Government on sugar, so today’s announcement looks like progress.”
Prof Derek Bell, Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh (RCPE) president, added: “The RCPE welcomes the introduction of a sugary drinks tax as one tool in the fight against obesity. It must be looked at alongside a range of other preventative measures.”
The Federation of Small Businesses in Scotland policy convenor Andy Willox said the news was “encouraging” because of the exemption.
However, the People Against Sugar Tax campaign were furious, tweeting: “It is ridiculous, unfair, regressive.”
Swinney: Budget will slash cash for essential services
Budget 2016: Help for the oil and gas industry – but not enough
The National View: With Osborne in line to be PM, a second indyref cannot come soon enough
Budget reaction: ‘Next generation will be the poorest for decades’
Budget 2016: Only one Scottish charity to benefit from 'tampon tax' fund
Budget 2016: V&A museum bosses welcome £5m extra funding
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here