Given the estimated near US$9-billion fallout from Hurricane Melissa, the Government’s new tax package won’t have surprised most Jamaicans. Also, in our view, the tax on sugary drinks — from which the Government expects to reap approximately $10 billion — shouldn’t have surprised anyone.

As we are reminded in the February 13 edition of this newspaper, the idea of a tax on sweetened beverages with an eye to combating obesity, diabetes, and other non-communicable ailments has been floated for years. We are reminded that in 2018 the Government was reportedly contemplating such a tax.

It never happened.

We suspect that the reality of elections two to three years down the road probably concentrated minds at the time. In the current context, the Dr Andrew Holness-led Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) Government is less than six months into its third term.

The hope and expectation will surely be that by the time the next general parliamentary election comes around, effects of the current tax package will be fast receding in the rear-view mirror. So that apart from the compulsion brought on by Melissa and, regardless of the pros and cons of a sugar beverage levy, or any other for that matter, if ever there was a right time to raise taxes this is it.

Wisynco Group Chairman Mr William Mahfood, unsurprisingly concerned at the impact the manufacturing sector will take from increased taxes on its output, correctly asserts that the most impoverished among the general public will feel it most. But Health and Wellness Minister Dr Christopher Tufton is also dead right in arguing that overconsumption of sugar not only undermines health, it kills.

Says he: “[O]besity, diabetes, hypertension are the main drivers of our sick profile, which leads to about 18,000 to 20,000 deaths every year in our country.”

That apart, treatment of such ailments are said to be costing the country billions of dollars annually. Experts say added sugars, such as manufactured white and brown varieties, molasses, syrup, etc, provide energy, but possess no nutritional value on their own. That’s unlike natural sugars in fruits, vegetables, milk and so forth. As we understand it, that’s why added sugar was described by Dr Tufton as an “empty calorie”, as reported in Wednesday’s edition.

We believe we are correct in saying that in decades past sweeteners did far less harm because the bulk of the population was far more physically active, thereby ‘burning’ excess sugar. Children, for example, often walked and ran miles to and from school in both urban and rural areas.

Nowadays, it’s not unusual to see children — even in rural Jamaica — awaiting public transportation to attend school just a few hundred metres away. That urgent need to proactively restore physical activity as a way of life among Jamaicans, twinned to improved diet, inspired Dr Tufton’s popular ‘Jamaica Moves’ initiative of some years back. Unfortunately, controversies of various sorts undermined that programme.

It’s obvious that in order to maximise any health benefits from the tax on sugary drinks there needs to be renewed, innovative public education. There must also be will/commitment by the manufacturing sector, appropriately supported by Government, to provide healthy substitutes for much of the harmful sugar products now on the market.

And, as we have long argued, there must be a powerful restoration of emphasis on physical activity for all ages to protect public health.

Crucially, outdoor sports and recreation should be prioritised in all schools. That’s especially important in today’s world with many children slavishly glued to digital devices.