There was a short debate in the House of Commons on Tuesday about alcohol treatment. It illustrates beautifully the current state of play for alcohol treatment in England and what the government is and is not doing about it.
The MP for Plymouth Devonport, Alison Seabeck set out the issues for Plymouth and covered the:
- rise in alcohol-related liver disease
- burden on A&E
- antisocial behaviour
- lost productivity
- family breakdown and domestic violence
- effectiveness of alcohol treatment
- disparity between spend on treatment for drugs and for alcohol
- lack of targets for alcohol treatment and therefore lack of investment
- threats to existing levels of funding for alcohol treatment
- need for education, especially of parents
In response, Caroline Flint (Public Health Minister) acknowledged these issues and rattled off the elements of the Programme of Improvements (see previous posts). She distinguished between chronic dependent drinkers and binge/hazardous drinkers (which is in keeping with the guidance on implementing a local programme of improvements - only dependent drinkers, apparently, need specialist alcohol treatment).
She talked about prevention:
We are working closely with the Home Office on a joint campaign to promote responsible drinking among young people through clearer and better targeted information. That is planned for later this year. We are also working with the alcoholic drinks industry and non-industry stakeholders such as the British Liver Trust on promoting more responsible drinking and preventing alcohol misuse.
I have asked a group of industry representatives to work with Department officials to consider sensible drinking messages. The position is not the same as that on cigarettes but it might be helpful to explore sensible drinking messages and clearer unit information on the products and at the point of sale.
On the disparity between funding for drugs and alcohol treatment, Flint said:
The balance of funding between drugs and alcohol is difficult to achieve. Separate funding in the NHS is given only to drug expenditure because it was believed to be a poor relation in NHS priorities. That expenditure is supported by Home Office investment. That is not to say that we have not been able, more recently, to take stock of what is happening with alcohol and ascertain where we can achieve better connectivity between the different forms of substance misuse and the different levels and perceptions of misuse. We need to pay attention to that.
Surely alcohol is now the poor relation in terms of NHS priorities, and what does 'better connectivity' mean? Are we going to see pooled treatment budgets freed up for alcohol services? Perhaps the Home Office really is considering compulsory treatment for alcohol-related offending (see this), and will start investing in treatment as it does for drugs.
More info
Full debate from Hansard (column 233)
Plymouth Drug and Alcohol Action Team alcohol info
Alison Seabeck info
Department of Health alcohol info
Comments