8. Childhood Obesity—Sugary Drink TaxJULIE ANNE GENTER (Green) to the Minister of HealthChildhood Obesity—Sugary Drink Tax8. JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green) to the Minister of Health: Will he now investigate a sugary drink tax given the World Health Organization is citing evidence that increasing taxes on such drinks will contribute to reducing obesity and improving nutritional health?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): Contrary to what the member asserts there is neither clear nor new evidence on the effect of such a tax on obesity and the jury is still out on this issue. A sugar tax is not something we are actively considering but as I have said before we will continue to keep a watching brief on the emerging evidence and two major global studies are due to report at the end of next year. I think that it is important to note that there is no single solution that will fix obesity. That is why we have implemented a Childhood Obesity Plan with a range of interventions across Government schools families and the private sector.Julie Anne Genter: So is he saying that the World Health Organization and the Prime Minister's own Chief Science Advisor are wrong given that the Prime Minister's Chief Science Advisor chaired an international commission on ending childhood obesity that recommended sugary drinks be taxed?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I have talked to the Chief Science Advisor extensively about this and he admitted there was no clear evidence on the subject but he said that on balance he was in favour of a tax. But the debate we had was well what really is the price elasticity in this case and how much would you have to put a can of Coke up to to stop people buying it? The bottom line is there is no evidence that a sugary drinks tax will decrease obesity. So I know you love taxes—I know the member loves taxes and inquiries and sackings but we are about evidence in this case.Julie Anne Genter: Why is the Government happy to go ahead with the Childhood Obesity Plan but not a sugary drink tax when 70—seven zero—public health experts in New Zealand have said there is more evidence supporting a sugary drinks tax than any of the soft strategies in his plan?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: No. The member is completely wrong. There is no evidence that such a tax would decrease obesity and if you look at what happened in Mexico when they put a tax on 2 years ago in actual fact 2 years later they are now finding that sales of Coca Cola are growing. So until there is clear evidence we will not be considering it and there is not that evidence.Julie Anne Genter: Which evidence does he think is more reliable: that from independent public health experts in New Zealand the World Health Organization the Prime Minister's own Chief Science Advisor or research funded by the industry that sells sugary drinks and would like to continue selling as many sugary drinks as possible?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Well certainly I have not read any evidence in the latter category but in terms of the first category I do not think the member should confuse a passion for more tax with hard evidence and there is no evidence. If the member has the evidence please drop it off at my office and I will have a look at it. But I can tell you it does not exist.Julie Anne Genter: I would like to table a letter from 70 public health experts to the Minister of Health saying that there is more evidence for a sugary drinks tax than any—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The date of the letter please?Julie Anne Genter: I do not have the date here but I do have the letter. It is—Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Mr SPEAKER: No I need to put the leave for this first and then I will hear from the Minister. Leave is sought to table that particular letter. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Julie Anne Genter: I seek leave to table the journal article from the British Medical Journal published in 2016—in January this year. It is behind a paywall. The title of the article is Beverage purchases from stores in Mexico under the excise tax on sugar sweetened beverages: observational—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The document has now been well and truly described.Julie Anne Genter: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Mr SPEAKER: No. I need to put the leave for you first. Leave is sought to table that particular article in the medical journal. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Julie Anne Genter: I seek leave to table the academic article from the Obesity Reviews published in 2013. The title of the article is "Assessing the Potential Effectiveness of Food and Beverage Taxes and Subsidies for Improving Public Health: A Systematic Review—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That description will do. I will put the leave. It is an academic article dated 2013 on the issue of obesity. Is there any objection to it being tabled? There is none.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Julie Anne Genter: I seek leave to table a journal article from the American Journal of Public Health published in 2015: "Higher Retail Prices of Sugar-Sweetened Beverages 3 Months After Implementation of an Excise Tax—Mr SPEAKER: Order! And again a brief description is quite satisfactory. Now before I put the leave does the member have any other documents she wishes to leave seek to table?Julie Anne Genter: I have a few more. Mr SPEAKER: Well the member had better be careful about using up the patience of the House.Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Mr SPEAKER: No I am dealing with this one. Let us have a list of them all. I will put the leave and see whether members are happy for them to be tabled.Julie Anne Genter: There is an article called "Taxing Caloric Sweetened Beverages: Potential Effects on Beverage Consumption Calorie Intake and Obesity"—Mr SPEAKER: Well that is well-enough described. Julie Anne Genter: —from the US Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table all of those.Julie Anne Genter: Sorry there is one more: "A Typology of Beverage Taxation: Multiple Approaches for Obesity Prevention and Obesity-Prevention-Related Revenue Generation" from the Journal of Public Health Policy 2013.Mr SPEAKER: Order! A significant number of documents have now been described. It is now over to the House. I will put the leave for the House to decide. Is there any objection to those documents being tabled?Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House.Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Look you know there was a long list there. The first letter that the member is tabling was actually published in the New Zealand Herald a few months ago—so I can table a whole lot of newspaper articles to counter that sort of rubbish.Mr SPEAKER: Order! The process is quite simple. I need a description to decide whether it is relevant. If in doubt I will put the leave. Then it is over to any member to exercise his or her right at the time to object to it being tabled. Once it has been tabled there is no point in then raising the objection as the Minister just has.Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I seek leave to table advice to me from the Ministry of Health saying that there is no conclusive evidence that a sugar tax will decrease obesity rates—Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that particular advice to the Minister from the Ministry of Health. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I seek leave to table an article from the Wall Street Journal from May of this year that shows that Coca-Cola sales have actually increased—Mr SPEAKER: Order! It has been described. Now again is the Minister also going to attempt to table a large number of documents? Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: No. I am just making a point.Mr SPEAKER: No but if it is the Wall Street Journal then that surely is available to all members competent to use—[Interruption] Order!Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: My point is—Mr SPEAKER: Order! No. The point made by the member was that a lot of her medical journals were difficult to find. [Interruption] Order! If the honourable Minister wishes to stay for the balance of question time then do not interrupt me when I am on my feet. There was one document that was taken as behind a paywall. On that basis I put the leave. I am not prepared to put the leave for something that is in the Wall Street Journal. I hope that is clear to the Minister.James Shaw: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I mean the Minister did ask for evidence and he surely cannot object when it is then—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I want the point of order. There is not one. Further points of order?Tracey Martin: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Kia ora. This is actually a point of order Mr Speaker. My understanding—and I am sure you have made it clear on several occasions—is that points of order are supposed to be heard in silence. It has become more and more common that the National Party backbench particularly when members of the Green Party and particularly when women are standing—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The point has been made and I think there is some value in it. I do not accept that the interjections come from one corner only. I will attempt to keep more silence but points of order should be—in fact must be—heard in silence. We move now finally to question No. 9."