Time to bring sugar into the 'sin tax' net

NOBODY disagrees that we should tax harmful substances like tobacco and alcohol to discourage their consumption. But there is one substance - which can also be addictive - that seems to have got away lightly when it comes to taxation, and that is sugar.

Sugar is already present in a natural form in many foods. But food and beverage makers add extra sugar to what they produce, to make it tastier. Supermarket shelves are laden with products that contain added sugar, including soft drinks and juices, canned foods, soups, sauces, syrups, spreads, dairy products, breakfast cereals, cakes, breads, biscuits, confectionery and more.

For the longest time, added sugar was considered relatively harmless; it was simply calories, we were told. For decades, the sugar lobbies - food and beverage associations, for instance - suppressed or debunked research which exposed the harmful effects of sugar. An eye-opening account of the dirty politics of the sugar business can be found in Prof John Yudkin's 1972 book Pure, White and Deadly. Persecuted for his findings at the time, he has now been vindicated.