Boris Johnson has set himself on a likely collision course with the authors of a new national food strategy by effectively ruling out its key recommendation for a £3bn sugar and salt tax to tackle the dominance of junk food. Some members of the expert panel who helped the restaurateur Henry Dimbleby draw up the government-commissioned report are understood to be disappointed at the immediate dismissal of an idea they see as strongly supported by evidence. Asked about the proposal after a speech in Coventry, Johnson said: “I’m not, I must say, attracted to the idea of extra taxes on hardworking people. Let me just signal that. I shall study the report with interest.” He was noncommittal on the report more generally, saying: “It’s an independent report. I think there are doubtless some good ideas in it. As I said earlier on, we believe in tackling obesity, trying to help people to lose weight, promoting exercise and tackling junk food advertising and so on.” While the report makes a series of recommendations, the most notable is the idea of imposing a levy of £3 a kilo on sugar and £6 a kilo on salt sold wholesale for use in processed food, restaurants and catering, with the money raised used to expand free school meals and wider work on the country’s food culture. A similar levy on soft drinks introduced in 2018 saw a number of products reformulated to reduce sugar levels, meaning prices for consumers did not rise. Speaking after Johnson’s comments, Dimbleby said the proposed tax “is not about pushing up costs for hardworking people”. He said: “It is designed to force manufacturers to reduce the amount of sugar and salt in their products, which are causing enormous harm to the people of this country and putting intolerable strain on the NHS.” However, some people connected with the report think that while some foodstuffs would be reformulated, some prices could also rise, which would also be a disincentive for consumers. No panel members have spoken out about Johnson’s comments, but several are understood to be concerned about his position, viewing the proposed levy as a key element in a wider policy framework aimed at trying to shift the national food culture. Johnson’s apparent decision to dismiss the plan came despite his pledge to launch a so-called war on obesity, sparked in part by the prime minister’s belief that his very serious bout of coronavirus last year was exacerbated by his own weight. During his speech on Thursday, Johnson cited the need for “tackling the problems of junk food and rewarding exercise” to address obesity, part of his proposals to “level up” unequal opportunities around the country, but gave no details of new policies. One interventionist proposal announced by Downing Street last month would involve a ban on junk food advertising online and before 9pm on TV from 2023. Speaking before Johnson’s speech, Dimbleby said there had been “a sort of arms race for sugar and our tolerance for sugar – we’ve needed more and more – and we’re just trying to take that down and get the sugar out of the system”. He told BBC Breakfast: “There are two parts to the strategy: one is about changing our long-term culture, making us eat more fresh, nutritious food, and the other is about reducing the harm of that processed food and reducing the addictive nature of it.”