Experts raise practicality, hygiene concerns for eateries
PETALING JAYA: Calls to mandate free drinking water at eateries to reduce sugary drink intake have raised questions, with health experts citing concerns over implementation costs, practicality and long-term effectiveness.
Universiti Malaya Occupational Health and Public Health Medicine specialist Prof Dr Victor Hoe said tap water in the country is generally safe at the point it leaves treatment plants.
However, he noted that its quality can be compromised by building plumbing systems, storage tanks or poorly maintained internal piping before reaching consumers.
“As a result, many food premises rely on filtration or additional treatment systems before serving drinking water, which carries extra costs for purchasing equipment, maintenance and water charges,” he said.
He said the practice is feasible, in view of the fact that some restaurants already provide complimentary drinking water.
However, he stressed that if such a policy were to be mandated, a transparent consultation process involving stakeholders and experts would be necessary.
“Any public health policy should ultimately seek a balance between commercial interests and the health and wellbeing of the population,” he said.
Prof Hoe was commenting on proposals by the Galen Centre for Health and Social Policy, whose chief executive officer Azrul Mohd Khalib has suggested that mandatory free drinking water at eateries could help reduce consumers’ intake of sugary drinks.
Holistic health expert Datuk Dr M. Rajen said the proposal is a good idea in principle, but questioned its long-term sustainability and practicality.
He said, unlike the sugar tax, the proposal does not present a clear win-win outcome for both businesses and consumers, as restaurants would bear additional costs while losing a potential source of income.
“There is no clear win-win situation for businesses and customers. Restaurants will bear the cost and lose a source of income,” he said.
He also raised concerns about hygiene standards and enforcement, noting that consumers may question whether the water is boiled, filtered or distilled, and whether unlimited refills would be allowed.
“Will health officers have to inspect restaurants all the time? These are the things that need to be thought through before implementation,” he said.
Dr Rajen argued that providing free drinking water alone would not significantly reduce sugar consumption if consumers continue choosing sugary foods and beverages.
“Someone may choose free water but still order a roti tissue loaded with sugar. That won’t solve the problem,” he said.
He said broader behavioural change is needed, including public education and the availability of low-sugar or no-sugar options to help consumers make healthier choices while still allowing businesses to remain profitable.
“Implementation should also be incentivised for both parties. If restaurants offer lower-sugar options, customers are more likely to choose them if they are cheaper than sugary drinks,” he said.
Dr Rajen added that awareness efforts should be strengthened.
He said restaurants could play a role by displaying educational materials and supporting health campaigns.
