Alcohol Policy UK

No announcement on England's minimum pricing decision as Scotland gets legal go ahead

Rumours that the Queen's speech would confirm whether Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP) had been scrapped were proven false this week. However when later asked in the House of Commons, the Prime Minister David Cameron promised to deliver a 'package of measures' to deal with cheap alcohol:

"On minimum pricing for alcohol, it is important that we take action to deal with deeply discounted alcohol, with cans of lager sometimes selling for as little as 25p in supermarkets. We will be bringing forward a package of measures, and it is important that we get this right."

Recently Home Office minister Jeremy Brown had said the Government was yet to confirm its decision on MUP and were listening to "powerfull arguments on both sides" following the consultation.

The Government has yet to publish its response to consultation, but it has been widely touted that a decision to u-turn on MUP has been made as a result of Cabinet pressure. A Guardian article by the IAS's Katherine Brown suggests "Intense lobbying from alcohol producers would appear to have killed-off this ground-breaking policy". Opponents largely argue MUP as a measure unfair to responsible drinkers, summarised on the WTSA sponsored anti-MUP site.

However advocates of MUP saw a victory as a legal challenge to Scotland's MUP plans was recently dismissed. The Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) had spearheaded a campaign claiming that MUP was in breach of EU competition law. A number options to appeal the decision are expected to be pursued by the SWA, suggesting Scotland's 50 pence MUP plans are still some way off.

As for England, should the Government's committment to introducing MUP be replaced by other measures to 'tackle cheap alcohol', health groups are unlikely to be convinced that they will replace the need for MUP. Increased taxation, an approach called for by the IFS, certainly has some recognition amongst health groups, but a number of issues are highlighted.

In particular, taxation rises can be absorbed by producers or retailers, for instance through 'loss-leading'. It is claimed some tax increases would have to be dramatic to achieve the same impact of a 45 pence MUP. Indeed the alcohol duty escalator has  been delivering alcohol tax rises already, but the beer trade successfully argued that hikes in beer tax were having a negative impact on the hospitality sector, halting the beer duty rise in this year's budget.

Dr Petra Meier, who conducted the University of Sheffield modelling on pricing impacts has previously said both taxes and minimum pricing should be used, so it should not be an 'either or' argument. Initially the Coalition had committed to a "below cost ban", however difficulty over definitions of 'cost' and implementation challenges seemed to leave few convinced, including the Home Office. No further word on plans set out in the Strategy to ban the sale of multi-buy discount deals.

'Independent' alcohol strategy released by coalition of health bodies

An "independent" alcohol strategy has been released by a coalition of over 70 health organisations from across the UK, led by the University of Stirling. 

Health First: An evidence-based alcohol strategy for the UK calls for a 50 pence Minimum Unit Price (MUP) and a series of other measures including a ban on alcohol advertising and a third of label space to be taken up by health warnings.

Last year a Government alcohol strategy was released, which announced plans for MUP and measures to "re-balance" licensing laws. A Home Office led consultation recently closed which had proposed a 45 pence MUP, despite Scotland seeking to implement MUP at a 50 pence level.

Sir Ian Gilmore, Chair of the Alcohol Health Alliance, said: “Governments across the UK have begun to take action to reduce the harm that alcohol can cause. This action is very welcome but needs to go further. In developing this strategy, we considered the best available evidence about appropriate policies and interventions that are needed both to reduce drinking levels in individuals and reduce the damage to families and communities that alcohol can cause. The report provides a blueprint for action, now and in the future.”

However Henry Ashworth, chief executive of the alcohol industry-led Portman Group, said the vast majority of people drink within recommended guidelines and highlighted progress made through the controversial responsibility deal. Ashworth said "we must focus on finding local solutions to tackle specific alcohol-related problems, not penalising those who are drinking sensibly."

See the independent strategy's press release, a BBC and Guardian report.

Last chance for minimum pricing consultation as arguments over evidence escalate

As the Government's consultation on Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP) and other measures draws to a close next week (6th February), various industry and health groups are making their cases for and against. See here for the online response form.

Leading the pro-MUP arguments, Alcohol Concern and the Alcohol Health Alliance
have challenged anti-MUP messages from sections of the alcohol industry. Alcohol Concern have stated "parts of the alcohol industry are currently trying to discredit the research on minimum unit pricing and are attempting to sway the public by putting out misleading information", and encouraging people to respond to the consultation. See Alcohol Concern's consultation response.

The AHA have said the drinks industry is now using tactics of Big Tobacco against minimum unit pricing. Dr Nick Sheron said the industry is "trying to undermine evidence-based alcohol policy measures which would save lives" and that MUP is "a targeted policy that will impact heavy drinkers whilst leaving the majority of moderate drinkers unaffected, and the international evidence (from Canada) shows that it works." See here for the full AHA response.

Sections of the industry and other bodies have been re-iterating various arguments against MUP, largely questioning the evidence base, predicted impacts, EU legal issues or suggesting it as an unfair measure that will 'penalise poorer drinkers' or a 'responsible majority'. The Adam Smith Institute (ASI) ,a free-market think tank, released a report refuting MUP and in particular the statistical modelling done by the University of Sheffield as "entirely speculative and do not deserve the exalted status they have been afforded". Sheffield have published a response to the claims here.

Bodies such as the IFS suggest using tax should be the preferred lever, though may have a less direct effect on prices on the floor. Other groups within the alcohol or retail industry also support MUP such as Greene King who see cheap alcohol as behind the decline in the pub trade.

A recent BBC report looked at the battle over minimum pricing. Other analysis includes an Information Daily feature and a selection of other recent MUP news and updates we recently featured. See here for a previous recent round up of MUP news and developments or the intial responses to MUP and the Government Alcohol Strategy released last year.

Both for and agiainst MUP websites are availabe:

• The pro-MUP www.minimumpricing.info website is supported by various alcohol organisations including Drinkwise Noth West
• The anti-MUP www.whyshouldwepaymore.co.uk is spear-headed by WTSA  

The consultation closes on 6 February 2013. See here for the online response form or download the consultation pdf.

Minimum pricing: consultation deadline approaches; Scottish legal challenge; Newcastle try 'MUP' on bars; news and views

There are less than 3 weeks left to respond to the Government's consultation on Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP) and other measures set out in the strategy. See here for the online response form. A selection of MUP reaction and news is highlighted below.

Alcohol Research UK have said they support the Government MUP proposals but warn of cross-border purchasing if a 45 pence MUP is adopted in England and a 50 pence MUP in Scotland. Alcohol Concern are calling for a 50 pence MUP, though only a 45 pence option is proposed in the consultation.

In Scotland a legal challenge against the SNP's minimum pricing is underway, headed by the Scotch Whisky Association (SWA). The SWA says MUP would be “in breach of the UK’s European Union Treaty obligations as it would restrain trade”. However there is much uncertainty over the legal position, with the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) previously stating that in its view "UK competition law does not prevent legislation to set a statutory minimum price for alcohol".

The Information Daily recently published a feature 'Minimum pricing is not what it seems' which seeks to dispel public mis-conceptions about how MUP would be expected to work. It followed an earlier anti-MUP piece by the Wine and Trade Spirit Association claiming it would hit 'responsible consumers'.

David Cameron last month claimed that responsible families are “actually subsidising the binge drinker” because supermarkets increase the price of food to fund loss-leading on wine, beer and cider. Supermarkets have previously been accused of such strategies but the British Retail Consortium said the remarks were “nonsense”.

MUP plans were reportedly under threat due to opposition from a number of Cabinet members, the Telegraph also reported last month. It claims an alliance of senior Ministers, including the current Home Secretary who is responsible for the strategy, are opposed to MUP.

The boss of the pub and brewer giant Greene King has backed minimum pricing citing home drinking as a driver for binge drinking. However in a Telegraph report Carlsberg chief executive Jorgen Buhl Rasmussen said he is strongly against MUP.

Meanwhile Newcastle City Council have applied a novel but controversial local 'minimum pricing' approach to two bars in the city centre. A press release states the £1.25 minimum price has been "agreed as a license condition in order to maintain standards and to keep the street as the city’s premier street". A Morning Advertiser piece suggest the move is legally "questionable".

See below for other key MUP reports and research:

• University of Sheffield modelling on pricing impacts for England and Scotland
• Home Office report on The likely impacts of increasing alcohol price: a summary review of the evidence base [pdf]
• Could minimum pricing "backfire" as claimed?
• A SABMiller commissioned report by the CEBR outlining arguments against minimum pricing
• An Alcohol Insight into 'The Cost of Alcohol: The Advocacy for a Minimum Price per Unit in the UK'
• SNP pages on minimum pricing and the Scottish Alcohol Bill.
• An interim report on Manchester's proposed local minimum pricing
• BMJ report urging a VAT reduction for the on-trade 
• Aberdeen University research arguing minum pricing does not target lower income groups

Latest Findings alcohol bulletins: Canadian experience supports minimum pricing evidence; Scotland exceeds brief intervention target

Recent bulletins from the drug and alcohol bank:

Real-world Canadian evidence supports minimum alcohol pricing
Mathematical models for Britain predict that high minimum per unit alcohol pricing would substantially reduce consumption, but are consumers and markets that predictable? From British Columbia in Canada, real-world support for this first step in the chain expected to lead to improved public health and productivity and reduced crime.

Minimum price for alcohol has reduced consumption
Further and arguably stronger Canadian evidence from Saskatchewan of the real-world impact of something close to minimum per unit alcohol pricing applied more consistently to more beverage types and at a higher level than in British Columbia.

Scotland exceeds national brief alcohol interventions target
In three years from 2008 Scottish national policy drove delivery of nearly 175,000 brief alcohol interventions, testament to what can be done when policy is backed by funding and infrastructure and incentive payments contingent on implementation. Leverage and acceptance were greatest in primary care, where the vast majority of the work took place.

Alcohol strategy consultation proposes 45 pence minimum unit price

The much anticipated consultation on the Government alcohol strategy has been released, proposing a 45 pence Minimum Unit Price (MUP). The consultation is seeking views on five key measures identified by the release:

• a ban on multi-buy promotions in shops and off-licences to reduce excessive alcohol consumption
• a review of the mandatory licensing conditions, to ensure that they are sufficiently targeting problems such as irresponsible promotions in pubs and clubs
• health as a new alcohol licensing objective for cumulative impacts so that licensing authorities can consider alcohol-related health harms when managing the problems relating to the number of premises in their area
• cutting red tape for responsible businesses to reduce the burden of regulation while maintaining the integrity of the licensing system
• minimum unit pricing, ensuring for the first time that alcohol can only be sold at a sensible and appropriate price

Minimum pricing has arguably been the most high profile and politically sensitive aspect of alcohol policy over recent years. Health groups almost universally support the implementation of minimum pricing based on the link between affordability and consumption and Sheffield modelling. However sections of the alcohol industry and those opposed to such Government intervention have fiercely contested the evidence base and repeatedly asserted that it would 'punish the sensible majority', or could even 'backfire' - notions equally disputed by supporters.

Earlier this year the Scottish Government passed the Alcohol Minimum Pricing Bill, meaning a 50 pence minimum unit price (MUP) could be in place north of the border by April next year. However, the Scotch Whisky Association (SWA), supported by major drinks companies, have been seeking to challenge the move in the European courts. 

The surprise announcement that the Coalition's new alcohol strategy would seek to implement minimum pricing came earlier this year - politically MUP policies are not generally considered a vote winner. Last year a YouGov survey indicated British opinion is split with 47% reportedly in favour and 44% against (full survey results here and a research insight here).

Selected coverage of the announcement includes reports from the BBC, The Guardian, The Telegraph. See here for a Morning Advertiser summary of 'the industry responds', a This is Money feature on 'an industry divided'.

The consultation runs for 10 weeks from 28 November 2012 until 6 February 2013. See here for the online response form or download the consultation pdf.

Scotland upates: minimum pricing; drink drive limit consultation; local profiles for Scotland

Scotland's Minimum Unit Pricing

Scottish Health Action on Alcohol Problems (SHAAP) has produced a minimum pricing briefing for NGOs and Public Health Networks in the European Union to try and garner support for the Scottish government’s plans to introduce Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP).

Earlier this year the Scottish Government passed the Alcohol Minimum Pricing Bill, meaning a 50 pence minimum unit price (MUP) could be in place north of the border by April next year. However, the Scotch Whisky Association (SWA), supported by major drinks companies, have submitted a petition to the Scottish Court of Session seeking a judicial review of the legislation. Alcohol Focus Scotland were recently granted the right to submit evidence as part of the appeal.

In England, the Home Office has set a target of implementing a minimum unit pricing (MUP) for alcohol by October 2014 in its Business Plan 2012-2015. See here for our recent report on whether claims minimum pricing 'could backfire' stack up.

Scottish Drink Drive limit consultation

A consultation on the lowering of the drink driving limit in Scotland from 80mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood to 50mg is now open and runs until 29 November 2012. See Alcohol Focus Scotland report.

Last year in England the Government decided to keep the 80mg legal limit despite a report advising it to be lowered in line with most of Europe.

Local alcohol profiles for Scotland

Alcohol Focus Scotland have published local profiles which provide a brief summary of the overall costs of alcohol-related harm to local authority areas in Scotland in 2010/11. 

In 2010, the Scottish Government produced The Societal Cost of Alcohol Misuse in Scotland for 2007 which estimated a central cost of £3.6bn. This national methodology has been applied to local data to provide estimates of the cost of alcohol-related harm at a local authority area level. Costs have been calculated for a range of alcohol harm indicators covering health, crime, social care, productive capacity and wider social costs.

The findings showed that alcohol is costing Glasgow city £364.8m every year. Scottish Health Secretary Alex Neil commented on the findings "These findings demonstrate the continuing extent of Scotland’s alcohol misuse problem which costs Scotland £3.6 billion per year, equating to £900 per adult in Scotland whether they drink or not.

Local Alcohol Profiles for England are produced by the North West Public Health Observatory.

Could minimum pricing "backfire" as claimed?

Earlier this year a new Government Alcohol Strategy won praise from health groups for its intention to introduce minimum pricing, now planned for 2014. However the strategy received mixed reviews overall, with concerns extensively explored in a recent Health Select Committee report. Critics said the strategy was too focused on the crime and disorder aspects of alcohol misuse, neglecting the importance of health and treatment issues. 

A month or so later, The Telegraph ran a story headlined 'Plans to outlaw cheap alcohol will backfire, says watchdog', suggesting minimum pricing will lead to supermarkets selling "more, not less" cheap alcohol. The story, based on written evidence from the Office of Fair Trading (OFT), also appeared in the Daily Mail and the Financial Times.

Does the claim the minimum pricing could "backfire" stack up? Certainly the true impact - and indeed its questioned legal status - will be unknown until it is implemented. However, whether resulting supermarket actions could actually result in more, not less cheap alcohol being sold seems a somewhat mis-leading conclusion to draw from the OFT submission. If this did happen, the public health community would surely regard its campaigning for minimum pricing as the biggest own goal in it's history.

The basis for the argument is that minimum pricing will generate increased profits to retailers which could in turn incentivise supermarkets to sell more, for example via increased promotional activity on those products. Whilst this may be feasible there are many complex factors to consider, and no evidence as yet to suggest increased promotional activity will be applied. The OFT clearly states "At worst, such an incentive [to sell more] could dull the effectiveness of the minimum price in reducing alcohol sales."

Nonetheless, the assumption that minimum pricing would increase revenue to retailers is a logical argument, and one that the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) has previously warned of. It is estimated that a 10% price rise results in an average 4.4% reduction in consumption - so although sales are reduced it is not proportionate to the price rise, leaving retailers with extra profit. It is worth noting that in the background, alcohol duty changes have been continued as part of the Treasury's role in the alcohol strategy to 'tackle problem drinking'.

There are of course multiple factors at play, and it could be argued that if raising alcohol prices were to bring such net benefits to retailers there is nothing to stop them having done so already. The perceived success of the responsibility deal - which committs to "foster a culture of responsible drinking" and take further action on marketing - has already caused contention. However we know little about strategies such as "loss leading" - heavily discounted products designed to bring people in store, but with losses reportedly made up on other items.

It may be worth considering at this point the way that minimum pricing would be expected to work. It will not suddenly stop specific individuals from problematic drinking, as much of the public seem to misunderstand it. Although minimum pricing will disproportionately effect heavier drinkers, it is a small reduction across this significant minority that would collectively result in overall benefits to crime and public health. If each heavy drinker drank one or two percent less as a result, the combined impact could be significant - as modelling has estimated.

The OFT in fact state they have less issue about the impact of minimum pricing itself, but are more concerned about the longer term implications of "legitimising intervention to control prices in a competitive market". Of course it is the OFT's role to protect and promote an open and competitive consumer market.

The legality is also commonly raised. The OFT states that although minimum pricing could inadvertently lead to retailers holding discussions that could breach competition law, their view is that "UK competition law does not prevent legislation to set a statutory minimum price for alcohol." The Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) are hoping it will prove otherwise.

Whilst no one can be sure how retailers or consumers will respond to minimum pricing, it seems unlikely to result in activity that would overall counteract the expected small reductions in consumption brought about by a raised floor price. Minimum pricing alone won't solve the UK's current culture of alcohol misuse, but amongst many academics and health bodies, it is both hoped and expected to play a significant role.

News & updates July 2012: minimum pricing by 2014; call for health warnings on alcohol labels; MPs report to call for more action

Minimum pricing by 2014

The Home Office has set a target of implementing a minimum unit pricing (MUP) for alcohol by October 2014 in its Business Plan 2012-2015. However according sections of the alcohol industry, the plans are ambitious due to the potential legal challenges, according to a Morning Advertiser report.

The government will be conducting an impact assessment of MUP and will launch a consultation on it and other measures in the strategy in the autumn.

'Health warnings' should be included on alcohol labels

"No nonsense" health warnings on alcohol products would help inform people about the risks, says the Faculty of Public Health. According to a Guardian report warnings were suggested such as "Alcohol increases risks of violence and abuse", "Alcohol causes over 15,000 deaths a year in the UK" and "Alcohol increases risks of mouth, throat and other cancers".

Currently a voluntary labelling pledge expects more alcohol products to list unit content and guidelines, but only a warning message around pregnancy risks. Professor Mark Bellis, FPH’s spokesperson on alcohol, says: "At the moment, when people think about the dangers associated with alcohol, they are more likely to think of the problems caused by binge drinking rather than breast cancer. These health warnings would help educate the public...".

Report into alcohol strategy will want more from industry

An Health Select Committee on the Government Alcohol Strategy will publish a final report this week. The Telegraph has claimed it will warn the alcohol industry it is in the 'last chance saloon' and will face tougher regulation if it does not deliver more significant actions through the controversial responsibility deal.

Doctors called for tougher action on advertising on alcohol as part of evidence given to the committee - see Alcohol Research UK report. Alcohol Concern highlighted a recent Lords debate on the successes and failures of the Responsibility Deal and developments with the Alcohol Strategy.

Other news

Membership of Drinkaware's independent review panel has been announced - see here for details. Membership includes Sir Ian Gilmore, chair of the Alcohol Health Alliance, and Chris Heffer, Deputy Director Alcohol and Drugs at the Department of Health.

Daily drinking in pregnancy 'not safe' says an NHS report after contradictory headlines based on research suggesting drinking a low or moderate level of alcohol in early pregnancy is not linked to developmental problems.

David Nutt has told MPs cannabis 'coffee shops' would cut alcohol consumption by 25% in a Guardian report. A David Nutt Science weekly podcast is also available.

Pubs will have to pay up to £4,400 per year towards the late-night levy, as confirmed by the draft regulations on the measure published by the Government, reports the Morning Advertiser.

Fake alcohol products are on the rise, reports the Grocer, who said fake alcohol accounted for almost half (45%) of the 170 cases reported to the FSA’s Food Fraud Database, against 23% of the 238 reported in the same period last year.

Charities are providing drugs and alcohol services in place of the NHS, says a Guardian report. A BMJ study found that 14% of presentations at the Bristol Royal Infirmary A&E felt their attendance was related to alcohol. A Daily Mail report used the study to estimate 'Two million trips to A&E every year blamed on alcohol-related illness and injury'.

Irish health experts intend to cut the weekly recommended guidelines of alcohol to 17 units for men and 11 units for women - reports the Herald. The current lower risk drinking levels in Ireland are 21 units per week for men and 14 units per week for women. In the UK Government announced that there will be a review of current alcohol guidelines.

Scotland passes minimum pricing bill; Irish health minister announces ban on alcohol sports sponsorship

The Scottish Government has passed the Alcohol Minimum Pricing Bill, meaning a 50 pence minimum unit price (MUP) could be in place north of the border by April next year. The Bill requires Royal Assent and still faces the threat of potential legal challenges as warned of by sections of the alcohol industry.

A 50 pence MUP would set a minimum floor price for an average strength bottle of wine at £4.69, vodka at £13.13 a bottle (70cl) and a standard four-pack of lager would need to cost at least £3.52. The Bill sets a minimum price for a unit of alcohol as a condition of licence.

However most drinks would be unaffected, especially those sold in pubs and restaurants. The minimum price would not be raised for at least two years and is reported to include a "sunset clause". The move is expected to save lives and reduce crime based on evidence linking price and consumption and modelling work by the University of Sheffield.

See reports from the BBC, Telegraph, Guardian and the Herald.

Irish health minister announces ban on alcohol sports sponsorship

Roisin Shortfall, Irish Minister of State for Health, has announced that alcohol sponsorship of sports will soon end. The announcement was prompted by calls from Fianna Fail to address alcohol issues in the wake of a worrying report on young people's mental health in Ireland.

Recent research by Headstrong/UCD found that young people who drink excessively were at risk of depression, severe anxiety and stress. The survey found that 38% of 12-25 year olds had problem or harmful drinking, and 7% showed signs of dependence. There was also a particular risk of suicide with young people who drank excessively.

Ms Shortfall said emphatically that there was "no room for ambivalence" on the issue. She said that although currently there were still contractual agreements in place, she would seek to phase out alcohol sports sponsorship as soon as possible.

The full recommendations of the National Substance Misuse Steering Group include a ban on all alcohol sponsorship of sporting activities and large outdoor events, outdoor advertising of alcohol, higher excise duties on some alcohol products and the introduction of minimum pricing.