2024-11-04 13:51:00
The text aimed to limit the amount of sugar in soft drinks. On Monday 4 November, deputies rejected the Social Security budget at first reading, a reform of the “soda tax”despite government support.
An amendment by the socialist MP Jérôme Guedj, sub-amended by the general rapporteur Yannick Neuder (LR), envisaged reforming the tax on carbonated drinks by creating three tax brackets, instead of sixteen, inspired by the British model. British tax «it made it possible to reduce the percentage of drinks above the first threshold (5 grams per milliliter) by 40% and the total reduction in sugar intake would be estimated at 30 grams per family per week, an effect four times greater than the French tax »develops the rationale for the change.
But Guedj’s proposal was rejected with 57 votes in favor and 46 against. The environmentalist, socialist, communist, MoDem and Horizons deputies voted in favour, while the RN, the majority of LR and the Ensemble pour la République voted against. Insoumise France abstained. The Minister of Health, Geneviève Darrieussecq (MoDem), had supported the amendment as did her predecessor, Frédéric Valletoux (Horizons).
The “rebels” want to go “further”
Former Consumer Affairs Minister and EPR MP Olivia Grégoire opposed it, highlighting a possible transfer of the tax to the price paid by the consumer. On behalf of the “rebels”, Hadrien Clouet explained what his group wanted “a slightly firmer policy” et “That instead of being satisfied with taxes, part of which actually burdens the consumer (…) we are finally getting to regulate the authorized levels in the diet, the levels of salt, the levels of sugars, the levels of saturated fatty acids”.
At the end of the vote, Mr. Guedj expressed his opinion “frustration” and his ” anger “and Mrs. Darrieussecq said to herself “disturbed and perplexed”. The Budget Minister, Laurent Saint-Martin, said he was in favor of presenting Guedj’s amendment “by deliberation” in the continuation of the parliamentary shuttle.
The deputies, however, adopted an amendment by ecologist Sabrina Sebaihi, which aims to introduce a tax on added sugars in processed food products, this time with the support of the “rebels” and against the government’s advice.
Interview between Time.news Editor and Nutrition Expert
Time.news Editor: Welcome, Dr. Simone Mallet, a leading expert in nutrition and public health. Thank you for joining us today to discuss the recent developments regarding the proposed soda tax reform in France.
Dr. Mallet: Thank you for having me. It’s a pleasure to discuss such a pressing issue.
Time.news Editor: The amendment proposed by MP Jérôme Guedj, which aimed to simplify the soda tax into three brackets instead of sixteen, has sparked quite a debate. What are your thoughts on the effectiveness of such a reform?
Dr. Mallet: Reforming the tax structure could potentially streamline the process and make it easier for consumers to understand. The British model that inspired this proposal shows promising results, having reduced the prevalence of high-sugar drinks significantly. A reduction of 40% in drinks above the first threshold is impressive, and it reflects a more effective approach than the current complex system in France.
Time.news Editor: It’s interesting that the proposal was rejected despite support from various parties, including environmentalists and socialists. What do you think is behind this lack of consensus?
Dr. Mallet: Politics often complicates public health initiatives. Economic concerns, such as the fear that taxes will lead to higher prices for consumers, play a significant role. Those opposing the tax reform are likely worried about the immediate impacts on consumers, overshadowing the long-term health benefits that could be won from reducing sugar consumption.
Time.news Editor: Olivia Grégoire’s opposition highlighted how the tax could burden consumers. Does this concern hold weight when considering public health policies?
Dr. Mallet: It’s a valid concern, but we must weigh short-term economic impacts against long-term health outcomes. Studies indicate that reducing sugar intake could decrease chronic disease prevalence, which over time would save healthcare costs and improve quality of life. Implementing effective taxation policies tends to shift buying habits, which is ultimately beneficial for public health.
Time.news Editor: The “rebels” in the assembly argue for more stringent regulations on sugar, salt, and fats in products. How do these regulations fit into the broader picture of dietary management?
Dr. Mallet: A comprehensive approach that includes regulation of various dietary components is key. It’s not just about managing sugar; we need to consider overall dietary quality. If we can manage the levels of salt, sugars, and saturated fats systematically, we can significantly impact public health, especially in a nation with rising obesity rates.
Time.news Editor: With the current rejection of the amendment, what steps do you think supporters of the soda tax should take next?
Dr. Mallet: Advocacy is crucial. They should focus on educating the public about the health risks associated with high sugar consumption and the benefits of such taxes. Additionally, building cross-party support and encouraging public discourse on the advantages seen in other countries can help align more political stakeholders with public health goals.
Time.news Editor: Dr. Mallet, your insights are invaluable as we navigate this complex issue. Thank you for joining us today and shedding light on the important implications of these proposed reforms.
Dr. Mallet: Thank you for having me. It’s essential we continue this conversation for better health outcomes for everyone.