Mr. Chris Macey:

Yes, that point was made in my statement. Food Safety Authority research about 12 years ago showed the difference between an unhealthy and a healthy calorie. It is a huge concern. Today's children who are going to die prematurely are overwhelmingly in those disadvantaged areas. The disparities in primary school children are growing, not getting narrower, so we have to make this work. Three times more people from disadvantaged areas die than do people from advantaged areas and for heart disease, the differences are similar.

We have to take this on and the tax is a weapon to do it. We have to design it well and ensure it will work, in the same way as the sugar food and drink tax. That was modelled beforehand and the modelling has borne out. It is actually more successful than the modelling suggested it would be. The purpose of the tax is to reduce high fat, sugar and salt intake, especially among children in the most disadvantaged communities, and this is going to do that. The Department of Finance will not talk about hypothecation, although it makes use of it in other areas such as in agriculture and tourism, with the plastic bag levy and so on. If we were to spend the money from the tax we collected on addressing those issues, we could make sure there would be no additional burden on the people who can afford it least. We would be putting the proceeds of the tax back into schemes and programmes for people who need a healthier diet and do not have access to one at the moment.