NEWS ANALYSIS: Position of responsibility

The issue of alcohol misuse has again risen to the top of the media agenda and the government is working with the drinks industry to review legislation. It is vital that the trade continues to be seen as a responsible partner, writes Ben Grant

Last month was the annual “silly season” in the media, as newspapers struggled to fill inches and broadcasters had to be ever more creative to saturate the airwaves and the rolling news channels. But the month that is traditionally associated with irreverent news stories was anything but a joke for the drinks trade. The senseless murder of Garry Newlove by a group of teenagers resulted in Cheshire Chief Constable Peter Fahy issuing an impassioned call for more parental and community responsibility, in addition to an increase in the price of alcohol, the drinking age to rise to 21 and drinking to be banned in public spaces. The issue of alcohol was thus catapulted back to the top of the agenda but, encouragingly, much of the media response was surprisingly measured with many newspapers disputing the effectiveness of these measures to control anti-social behaviour. At the same time, the progress of the government’s Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy (AHRS) took some significant steps forward with the industry being consulted on the two major research projects triggered by the strategy: the first on the impact of pricing, promotion and advertising on alcohol consumption and misuse; and the second, a review of the impact of the industry’s own Social Responsibility Standards.

The AHRS is a long-term government initiative that was first launched by the Home Office in 2004. In June the second instalment, “Safe. Sensible. Social. The next steps in the National Alcohol Strategy”, was released, the brainchild of public health minister Caroline Flint and policing and community safety parliamentary under-secretary Vernon Coaker. The document gives plenty of reasons for the trade to be optimistic – as Jeremy Beadles, chief executive, WSTA, confirms, “overall, there are plenty of points that we are happy with and that we fully support”.

There are, however, a number of areas of concern from an industry perspective and the agenda has moved forward at breakneck pace over the last few months as the Government begins to consult stakeholders on the terms of reference and process for managing these two reviews. The key point from an industry perspective is that both these reviews are independent and one of the first contentious issues was that the strategy set out that the Pricing, Promotion and Advertising Review should be overseen by the Alcohol Education & Research Council, a number of whose members have very publicly stated policy positions on these issues. The Government now seems to be moving away from that and has invited various stakeholders to help shape the process, including representatives of both the drinks industry and the public health lobby.

The ultimate aim of the PPA Review is to determine what role advertising, promotion and pricing plays in alcohol misuse, and thus make appropriate policy recommendations. The research team appointed at the end of the process will therefore review all existing literature on the subject, decide what additional research is required, and make policy recommendations to the government.

When the drinks business spoke with Beadles immediately after the publication of “Safe. Sensible. Social”, the lack of engagement of the industry in this process was his biggest bone of contention, so he has welcomed the engagement with the industry. But there are still areas of concern and at the time of going to press the process of the review was still unknown.

Firstly, there is the question of whether any one organisation has the expertise to carry out research into advertising, promotion and pricing – these are, after all, three very different areas of speciality and also, given the size of the task, whether this kind of review can be conducted within the timetable dictated by the government. Secondly, on the review of the Industry Social Responsibility Standards, which will review the trade’s ”compliance” with industry codes and best practice, it begs major questions about the future role of self-regulation. Beadles expresses confidence that “this will not be the end of self-regulation… I don’t believe that the government wants to regulate everything, they’d like a responsible industry to take the lead”. But the situation must still be monitored closely.

On the subject of advertising, serious questions remain about whether a ban or further restrictions will actually have any bearing on problem drinkers. Ads play a major role in brands fighting among themselves for market share, but there are serious doubts about whether they encourage vulnerable drinkers to consume more. The nature of online advertising must also be carefully considered.

With regard to pricing, there are some pretty serious questions about what role the government is permitted to play in setting prices in a free market economy. Meanwhile, if the retailers collaborated to set minimum prices, they could reasonably be accused of running a cartel. It must also be noted that UK tax on alcohol is already relatively high, so it is questionable whether a further hike would have any impact on the minority problem drinkers.

Promotions remain a sticky issue, but perhaps this is an area where the trade could benefit significantly from taking a proactive approach. If supermarkets called an end to the economically destructive and much criticised practice of selling cut-price beer as a loss leader, for example, the positives would far outweigh the negatives.

There are many issues that will be researched and discussed in great detail prior to the proposed public consultation that is likely to take place in November 2008. It seems inevitable that new legislation will ultimately be introduced. However, before rushing to pass reams of new rules, it would be prudent to take stock of all the legislation that is already on the statute books, and ensure that it is being applied effectively. In addition, Beadles expresses a hope that the dangers of irresponsible drinking will be included for the first time on the National Curriculum, and that more guidance will be given to parents, helping them to communicate with children

On the plus side, it appears that working with the government to tackle problem drinking is playing a positive role in bringing the trade together. There are, of course, certain fault lines between the various constituents of the industry on a few specific issues. But, on the whole, there is an unprecedented level of cooperation between the trade associations as the industry seeks to work together to present a unified message.

The issue of irresponsible drinking will continue to dominate the national debate. There seems to be a growing realisation that it is a cultural issue, and to bring about cultural change it will require a consistent, long-term effort – uniting all stakeholders. It is therefore excellent news that the trade has been engaged in the process. But to ensure that it keeps its seat at the decision-making table, now, more than ever, it is critical that the trade is seen to be a responsible partner.

© db September 2007

Insider opinion

Campbell Evans, chief executive, Scotch Whisky Association

“We need to ensure that there is proper enforcement of the existing legislation, rather than assuming that there is a need for new legislation. It’s also important that we focus attention on the target groups that have been identified where there is need for a change of attitude – the vast majority of the population consumes alcohol responsibly. In order to bring about a change of attitude it’s important that the government has a consistent, long-term strategy.”

Neil Williams, communications manager, BBPA
“There will be a series of consultations flowing from the strategy. The devil is in the detail, so we’ll only be able to comment on specific details when they come out. It’s right and welcome that the trade will be consulted in the future and we’ll definitely be participating where we can. We work closely with other trade associations on issues where there’s agreement, but on the subject of alcohol promotions, for example, we have major differences with the off-trade.”

Jeremy Beadles, CEO, WSTA
“It’s been a very interesting press month for the industry: first there was a lot of coverage (based on Chief Constable Fahy’s statement) calling for price increases, raising the drinking age to 21 and banning drinking in public areas. But since then there has been a lot of coverage saying these won’t tackle the problem. The government has a difficult job as the stakeholders have very polarised views. Some public health campaigners feel that we shouldn’t even be at the table, so the Dpt. of Health has a difficult balancing act.”