Something needs to be done to address Canada’s rising rate of obesity, but I’m not sure if another tax is the answer.
A Quebec coalition recently called for the federal government to create a tax on soda and energy drinks.
The Quebec Coalition on Weight-Related Problems would like to see a one-cent tax per litre on soda and energy drinks and have the generated revenue funnelled into health promotion programs. In a press release, the coalition said such a tax could generate about $36 million.
It is also calling for stricter product packaging, a ban on the sale of soda and energy drinks in federal buildings and regulating marketing directed at children.
Other groups, such as the Canadian Diabetes Association, have also been calling for taxes on other unhealthy food choices.
More health advocates are asking for a tax on junk food to relieve pressure on a health-care system under strain from unhealthy eating and lifestyle habits.
I agree something must be done. I found a conversation I had last week with Janice Krall, area manager for the Heart and Stroke Foundation for B.C. and Yukon Vancouver Island, a little shocking.
“This is the first generation that may not outlive their parents,” she said. “The obesity rate in children has tripled in the past 25 years.”
My first thought is not another tax. Is it really going to curb unhealthy eating or will it just be another tax grab by the government? Alcohol and cigarettes are items already taxed, although neither are food items. Soda drinks, I would argue, are also not food items, with no real nutritional value; however, I wonder if introducing a tax could have a domino effect on other unhealthy foods.
Where will the sin taxes stop?
With the introduction of the gas tax, the HST and other taxes, Canadians are bogged down with more taxes than their income levels can take.
Instead of more taxes, I would like to see changes within the food industry. I would like to see a push from the government for companies to offer lower sugar, lower salt and calorie foods at a reasonable price. I would like to be able to get a soda that had half the sugar – not that aspartame-loaded diet soda option that is being pushed as an alternative.
Many foods have become too sugar-loaded in the last few years. Products that often claim they have no fat or are good for you have excessive amounts of sugar. That sugar just converts to fat in the body anyway if the person isn’t active enough to burn off the calories. There should be better regulations governing these alternatives and product packaging.
The other day when I went to purchase my packaged oatmeal, I had to search for the reduced-sugar option. The regular packages have more than 20 grams of sugar in them, while the reduced have about five grams or less. The regular oatmeal is so sickly sweet I can’t stomach it. Yet the reduced-sugar is often the more expensive of the two.
A co-worker pointed out she often tries to buy soups with reduced salt and has to pay twice the price for the healthier alternative. Her experience is often what I see when I travel down the grocery aisles. The unhealthy food is cheap and anything marketed as healthy will mean the consumer pays more.
These kind of price differences impact the country’s lowest wage earners and poorer Canadians the most. Often the rate of diabetes is higher among poorer Canadians who don’t have the money to purchase healthy foods.
I think if the Canadian government wants to stop the rising rate of obesity it needs to take a look at the entire picture instead of one item that could be the culprit. By taxing only one junk-food item the government is only filling its coffers, not addressing the real problem.
reporter3@nanaimobulletin.com
