Ms Cliona Loughnane:

Thank you, Vice Chairman, I will be discussing measures to reduce obesity. The Irish Heart Foundation also developed a submission on tobacco with the Irish Cancer Society and fully endorses the points Ms O'Meara will make to the committee today.
Members of the committee are well aware of Ireland’s obesity rates. Three per cent of preschool children and 7% of children in first to fifth classes of primary school are obese. By adulthood, almost a quarter of Irish people are obese. The Irish Heart Foundation is proposing a package of measures to make healthy food more affordable and to stop calorific, sugary sweetened drinks, SSDs, being a normal part of many children’s diets. We are calling for a tax on SSDs to increase their price by 20%. We are seeking part of the resulting revenue for a fruit and vegetable subsidy and the establishment of a children’s future health fund.
Research for the Department of Health shows that fizzy drinks are the most consumed beverage in Ireland, at 83 litres per capitaeach year. That is three times higher than consumption of bottled water, and SSD consumption is highest among young people. Sugary drinks play a unique role in obesity. They have no nutritional value and do not provide a feeling of fullness. As a result, people usually consume SSDs in addition to the food they eat.
To achieve improvements in health, the level of the SSD tax must be high enough to cause people to cut down. A health impact assessment for the Department of Health by the Institute of Public Health and Oxford University Institute of Public Health recommended the introduction of an SSD tax. They found the effect of the tax would be among the highest consumers and also among young people. People are understandably weary of taxation in this country, yet our recent national poll showed a majority of the public are in favour of the tax. That is a clear signal that people want stronger measures to be taken on obesity. Almost 90% of those polled also agreed that sugary drinks contribute to obesity among children and that they are drinking too much of such drinks.
The industry claims that taxation will not work, but in 1992 the removal of a tax on soft drinks in Ireland drove consumption up, suggesting the products are price sensitive. The industry also claims the tax would cost jobs. However, reduced spending on sugary drinks would be redistributed in the economy to other products, and research in the Irish market has also found the employment effects of a such a tax combined with the fruit and vegetable subsidy we propose would be neutral at worst and perhaps positive, because the fruit and vegetable sector is more labour intensive. We recognise that people find it difficult to buy healthy foods. Our second recommendation therefore seeks a healthy food subsidy to reduce any regressive impact of a tax on sugary drinks. Research finds that a tax and subsidy combination would be broadly neutral with respect to poverty in Ireland. The evidence from around the world supports a multi-pronged approach for children and adolescents where we tax less healthy, energy-dense foods and subsidise healthier foods.
This is budget season and for that reason we are focusing on fiscal measures. However, we recognise that there are many other things which must be done to reduce obesity. That is why we are calling for the establishment of a children’s future health fund to provide for complementary measures to the fiscal measures outlined such as improving food education, cooking and gardening skills, as well as providing healthier meals to schoolchildren.