Alcohol firms would lose £13bn if drinkers in England stuck to limits

Academics say study shows why industry resists measures to tackle harmful consumption

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/

Haroon Siddique

22 Aug 2018

Revenue from alcohol sales in England would plummet by £13bn if customers complied with the recommended drinking guidelines, according to a study that condemns the industry’s role in regulation.

Academics from the Institute of Alcohol Studies (IAS) and the University of Sheffield’s Alcohol Research Group say their analysis shows the scale of the conflict of interest afflicting producers and retailers and that they should not be allowed to influence government policy on risky drinking.

The researchers found that if everyone stuck to the recommended limit of 14 units a week, alcohol sales revenue would decline by 38%. To claw that back they would face increasing the average price of a pint of beer in a pub by £2.64 and the average price of a bottle of spirits in supermarkets by £12.25.

The researchers say such significant prices rises, which would take the cost of an average pint to £6.15 and the cost of an average bottle of spirits to £26.68, are unrealistic, meaning revenues and profits would be hit.

Aveek Bhattacharya, a policy analyst at the institute and lead author, said: “Alcohol causes 24,000 deaths and over 1.1m hospital admissions each year in England, at a cost of £3.5bn to the NHS. Yet policies to address this harm, like minimum unit pricing and raising alcohol duty, have been resisted at every turn by the alcohol industry. Our analysis suggests this may be because many drinks companies realise that a significant reduction in harmful drinking would be financially ruinous.

“The government should recognise just how much the industry has to lose from effective alcohol policies, and be more wary of its attempts to derail meaningful action through lobbying and offers of voluntary partnership.”

The extent to which heavy drinkers (consuming more than 14 units a week) fuel the industry was also illustrated by the researchers’ finding that they provide 68% of industry revenue, despite making up 25% of the population.

Furthermore, the 4% drinking at harmful levels (more than 35 units a week for women and more than 50 units a week for men), account for 23% of sales revenue, according to the study.

The alcohol industry has often been at odds with health campaigners, the medical profession and charities in the drive to reduce excessive drinking, with producers and retailers championing self-regulation.

Part of this has involved the industry setting up its own “responsible drinking” organisations, the Portman Group and Drinkaware, which have been criticised for allegedly placing the interests of the industry above public health considerations.

Meanwhile, the government has faced accusations of marching to the industry’s drum, on everything from the coalition government’s Public Health Responsibility Deal, which brought alcohol businesses on board to make voluntary commitments, to the U-turn on minimum unit pricing.

In 2012, David Cameron announced plans to introduce a minimum price for alcohol in England and Wales but the plan was shelved the following year, despite support from doctors, children’s charities, the police and even the government’s own health advisers.

The change of heart came after fierce lobbying from the alcohol industry, which has also resisted calls for mandatory, graphic cigarette-style health warnings on bottles and cans of alcohol.

Responding to the research, published in Addiction on Thursday, the Alcohol Health Alliance (AHA) UK, whose 50 members include medical royal colleges, charities, patient representatives and alcohol health campaigners, said the government must stand up to those with vested interests.

Sir Ian Gilmore, the chair of the AHA, said: “For years the alcohol industry has presented itself as part of the solution, not the problem, when it comes to harmful drinking. This research shows that their business model is fundamentally reliant on encouraging millions of people to risk their health by drinking above government’s own recommended limits.”

Minimum unit alcohol pricing was introduced in Scotland in May and is expected to be implemented in Wales next year.

Industry representatives hit back at the researchers’ criticism, claiming that major gains had been made over recent years with its help.

Drink-drive casualties in UK at four-year high

John Timothy, the chief executive of the Portman Group, said: “In the last decade or so binge drinking has fallen by nearly a quarter and alcohol-related violence, drink-driving casualties and acceptance of drinking among children have also fallen significantly. Drinks producers have contributed to this decline through their commitment to encouraging moderation through the development of a wide range of low and no alcohol products and the removal of over one billion units of alcohol from the market.”

A spokesman for industry body, the Alcohol Information Partnership, said consumption was declining and that targeted action was the right way to address concerns.

“We firmly believe that a one size fits all approach is unhelpful and punishes the vast majority of people who enjoy a drink, but are not problem drinkers,” he said.

A government-commissioned review, published in 2016, found that alcohol was the biggest killer of people aged between 15 and 49 in England, accounted for 167,000 years of lost productivity each year and was a factor in more than 200 illnesses.

The IOS and University of Sheffield researchers calculated alcohol sales revenue using data from the UK Office for National Statistics’ Living Costs and Food Survey and NHS Digital’s Health Survey for England and extrapolating the results.

A government spokeswoman said: “This country already has some of the highest taxes on spirits compared with other European countries, and the UK chief medical officer’s guidelines are available to help adults to make informed choices about their drinking.

“We have been very clear to industry that we expect them to reflect this guidance on alcohol labels and continue to engage with them on this.”