An anticipated end to the long drawn out legal battle over Scotland's Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP) bid is being played out in the UK's Supreme Court this week - live stream here. The final ruling is expected nearly five years after Scotland legislated for MUP, but has been subject to a long drawn out legal challenge from sections of the alcohol industry.
Public health groups have continued to highlight the expected benefits - and lives lost in the period the policy has been delayed. A new report, the 'Financial case for action on liver disease' [PDF], predicts 63,000 alcohol-related deaths over the next five years, attracting significant media attention. As well as MUP, the report also calls for a range of policy measures including taxation, restrictions on trading hours and marketing.
The MUP legal ruling has significant implications not only for Scotland but also for Wales and Ireland whose Governments also wish to implement it. In England, Government Ministers have been sketchy on the issue following the infamous 2012 U-turn, but have largely insisted they have not ruled out the policy. Ministers have also suggested they have been taking action to address some of the cheapest drinks, firstly via the below-cost ban and more recent consultation on white cider duty. Health groups though have been unsatisfied, not least because of the negligible effect - if any - of the below cost ban, but particularly due to the ending of the alcohol duty escalator in 2014 and subsequent budget duty decisions.
The issue has shown the extent to which alcohol policy issues can be hard fought. Alcohol groups have accused the industry of "delaying tactics" in order to protect profits, whilst former Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill described the Scotch Whisky Association's (SWA) actions as "disgraceful". The SWA have spearheaded the legal challenge, but represent a wider consortium of industry groups. Last year Eric Carlin of SHAAP said the legal challenge was "never about Scotch Whisky; so-called ‘quality’ whisky brands are unaffected by MUP" and that thousands of lives had been lost due to the delay in implementation.
The SWA have however maintained that MUP contravenes EU law by imposing a form of trade barrier. In a blog post, it claims the measure would damage the Scotch whisky industry and that the SWA are "committed to tackling alcohol misuse". The SWA also claim that its legal legal view was endorsed by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in 2015, though health groups disagreed and highlighted that the ECJ said it was for Scottish Inner House of the Court of Session to rule on MUP.
The legal battle has inevitably revolved around the complexities of EU law, and ultimately, whether the 'proportionality' of MUP can be justified under health grounds. The challenge suggests taxation measures, which can obviously be adopted in a wide variety of ways, are more suitable, but Sheffield researchers have long highlighted the limitations of taxation policy alone when compared to MUP.
The date of the Supreme Court's ruling is not yet known. Many involved in the field will be hoping that the verdict proves final.
Comments