Apr 2, 2014

Voters oppose junk food taxes as public health and industry square off

Voters oppose "soda taxes" but have mixed views on other forms of food and drink regulation, while a key public health figure hits back at complaints from industry.

Bernard Keane — Politics editor

Bernard Keane

Politics editor

Australians have mixed views on how food and beverages with health impacts should be regulated, but they're opposed to using increased taxes to deter consumption. That's the outcome from work by Essential Media on voter views about food and drink regulation as some public health groups push for Australia to copy Unite States "soda taxes" in the wake of concerns about the health impacts of sugar and soft drink.

Free Trial

You've hit members-only content.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions


Leave a comment

5 thoughts on “Voters oppose junk food taxes as public health and industry square off

  1. AR

    BK – still no offer from IPA?

  2. rhwombat

    Forget it, AR, it’s Commerce Town.

  3. Jonathon

    Had enough of BK’s pseudo intellectual libertarianism and pro market nonsense. The only starting point for crikey should be conflicts of interest.

  4. Louise Sylvan

    I’m guessing that being attacked from both sides must mean we’re doing something right?! Bernard Keane says the Australian National Preventive Health Agency has failed to have an industry representative on its Expert Committee on Alcohol. A little bit of digging would have shown that John Pollaers (former Managing Director of CUB and Fosters) was on the committee until quite recently, when he resigned due to work pressures in December 2013. Public health groups, on the other hand, have been very critical of industry representation on ANPHA’s expert committees. As to the criticism – from an unnamed “alcohol industry executive” – that the Agency ignores detailed industry submissions to its consultation processes, what utter nonsense; there has been no instance of industry’s views not being carefully scrutinised and considered. If industry groups are concerned about not necessarily having their preferred view become our advice to government, then they can pick up the phone and talk to me about it. Louise Sylvan CEO ANPHA

  5. Guy Francis

    ‘labelling’ is an way to continue to tax tobacco,the govt just said it a few months ago ‘lets put up smokes,we need money’it’s now become a simple and immoral reason why they don’t ban cigs,it’s a money earner

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details