Social Responsibility

Marketing any alcoholic drink places great responsibilities on those engaged in it and, since 1990, the NACM has had in operation its own Code of Practice for responsible marketing - the first produced by anyone in the drinks industry.

This initiative has been built upon in recent years with the launch of the Portman Group Code www.portmangroup.org.uk. The NACM is a signatory to this Code.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SAFE. SENSIBLE. SOCIAL. SELLING ALCOHOL RESPONSIBLY: A CONSULTATION ON THE NEW CODE OF PRACTICE FOR ALCOHOL RETAILERS. NACM RESPONSE - 7th AUGUST 2009 - 

National Association of Cider makers

The National Association of Cider Makers (NACM), which represents producers of cider and perry in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, welcomes the opportunity to respond to the Consultation on the New Code of Practice for Alcohol Retailers.

The Industry

The cider industry is characterised by its wide range of scale of production with two major producers, a handful of medium scale producers and a very long tail of very small scale with some perry and cider makers producing less than 70Hl per annum.

The principal raw material for making perry and cider is pears for perry and apples (both cider apples and dessert apples) for cider. The source of the pears and apples for making perry and cider is from a wide variety of orchards, varying in scale from 2-3 trees to large orchards in England and Wales.

Cider and perry is sold throughout the United Kingdom in a wide range of outlets from major national and regional pub chains, major multiple retailers to farm shops and local pubs and local supermarkets.

The share which cider and perry have of the total UK alcoholic drinks market is only very small at about 9%, compared to beer (40%), wine (25%), spirits (25%) and RTDs (alcopops) (1%). Of cider’s 9% share of the alcoholic drinks market less than that 10% is strong white ciders >7.5% ABV, accounting for less than 1% of the total alcohol market. Furthermore this product is declining in sales volume and is increasingly representing a reducing share of the alcoholic drinks’ market.

Alcohol Misuse Policy Overview

NACM appreciates and shares the Government’s ambition to tackle alcohol harm, disorder and misuse and believes that Government should take appropriate measure s to address this issue and introduce policies that will contribute to the significant reduction in the harm which arises from misuse. NACM, together with others in the alcoholic drinks industry, is determined to work in partnership with Government to tackle these problems.

A review of published reports in the public domain produced by the UK Government and other bodies, quite clearly demonstrates that no one alcoholic drink is responsible for alcohol misuse – misuse is caused by certain drinkers who clearly misuse alcohol and by some under 18s who are clearly breaking the law. This therefore is not a problem about problem drinks but about problem drinkers.

Cultural change

For the Government to succeed in bringing about a cultural change in how alcohol is consumed by the irresponsible minority then, as an urgent priority, it needs to identify and deal with the real causes of alcohol misuse (and indeed substance abuse in general). It is misplaced to focus on the availability and affordability (price and promotion) of alcohol as the sole and root cause of misuse. The real drivers behind harmful drinking, binge drinking behavior and under 18’s alcohol misuse tend to get overlooked as a consequence. This means adopting or calling for a combination of long-term measures such as improving education, awareness campaigns, etc and short-term measures which can also be effective such as enforcing the legislation that already exists.

NACM acknowledges that Government has committed resources to initiatives in this area as indeed has industry. NACM is a supporter of the Portman Group, Drinkaware Trust and of “Project 10” Campaign for Smarter Drinking, a £100m (over 5 years) industry education initiative. 

Specific response to Consultation on the New Code of Practice for Alcohol Retailers.

General comments

The NACM represents the producers of cider and appreciates that the main thrust of the code of practice is directed at the retail sale of alcoholic beverages in the 'on' and 'off' trades. Nevertheless some of the measures have consequences for producers and indeed many medium and small scale cider makers operate farm shops through which their products are sold and some have ‘visitor’ centers with restaurants. The provisions of the draft code have a direct impact on them. In addition some the cider makers sell their products on-line.

Whilst not under-estimating the scale and seriousness of alcohol misuse, NACM’s members believe that any strategy must recognise that the vast majority of the population drink responsibly and that the majority of businesses behave in a responsible manner. What is needed are targeted policies designed to tackle the minority with alcohol problems, those responsible for disorder and the minority of rogue businesses in the industry that do not comply with the law.

NACM shares the view, expressed by others in the alcoholic drinks industry, that the proposals for the Code that deal with licensing conditions, both mandatory and discretionary, do not give any powers that were not already available through the Licensing Act. Rather than bringing in new measures more focus should be given to enforcing existing legislation.

NACM is not convinced that the measures proposed in the Code will have a significant impact in tackling alcohol misuse and share the view of others in the alcoholic drinks industry, that the Government has not presented convincing evidence that these measures will have the required impact.

The real effect of the proposed Code will do more to increase bureaucracy and cost for industry and enforcement agencies and do little to tackle binge drinking or crime and disorder. 

Underage drinking

In seeking to tackle the issue of underage purchases and drinking the Government needs to take heed of evidence which shows that most of the alcohol obtained by underage people is not from licensed premises and the current proposals do nothing to recognise this. Of the 11-15-year-olds who drank 14 or more units in the previous week 48 per cent claim to have been given alcohol directly by their parents.

On-line and age verification

The Code proposes a requirement for on-line and mail order purchasing to be subject to a robust form of age verification where the sale of alcohol is involved. NACM totally supports the need to ensure that young people do not access alcohol through the internet or mail-order in accordance with the existing laws. However, as others have demonstrated, there is limited evidence that young people are in fact using online retail as a source of alcohol. The delayed nature of online sales and the fact that the majority of sites only sell by the case for practical reasons means that they are unlikely to be a large contributor to alcohol related disorder. There is far more evidence that young people are getting access to alcohol through older friends, relatives or strangers.

A mandatory condition requiring a robust form of age verification would duplicate existing legislation and create a situation where failing to have a sufficiently visible and robust system for avoiding breaking the law would incur a harsher punishment than the offence itself. The majority of on-line suppliers already have processes and systems in place depending on their style of business to ensure they do not sell to under-18s.

If this proposal is introduced then it needs to be simple and provide flexibility for different types of business. 

In-Premise Signage

NACM notes the requirement for premises selling alcohol to display signs communicating sensible drinking messaging. As with others in the industry NACM questions or seeks clarification of the evidence base for this proposal, what the aim of it is, and whether or not the Government has researched how best to communicate these messages to consumers. Product in the off-trade is already subject of a voluntary agreement on labelling.

Research developed by the WSTA, Drinkaware and in the development of the Campaign for Smarter Drinking, suggests that consumers are not receptive to this type of “Government” style health message in retail environments and furthermore, they quickly become ‘wallpaper’. Before proceeding with this proposal, as the WSTA has recommended, the Government needs to work with the industry based on the foundation of the Campaign for Smarter Drinking to understand best how to communicate these messages in these different environments. In the event that some form of information is required following the outcome of this consultation, NACM believes that the Government should simply produce a standard sensible drinking unit information poster for display in all licensed premises.

Banning Sales at prices Lower than Duty + VAT

The Sheffield University study commissioned by the Department of Health confirms that only a small proportion of product is sold below Duty + VAT and that restricting sales of product below this level would have no material impact on alcohol misuse in the UK. Before proceeding with such a measure more research is needed to determine its impact and efficacy on dealing with alcohol disorder, misuse and harm.

NACM has long argued that using taxation and price control is not an effective means to deal with alcohol disorder, misuse and harm and that more targeted measures are called for.

Promotions

NACM does not believe that any restriction on price promotions on multi-packs of alcohol is warranted. The Government has not presented any direct evidence that multi-pack/bulk volume related promotions contribute to alcohol disorder, misuse and harm and to demonstrate that multi-pack/bulk volume related promotions contribute to “pre-loading” before people go out for the evening’s entertainment. In its submission the WSTA has included data from Nielsen which shows that the majority don’t drink before they go out and that the majority of those who do, don’t have any more than 1 - 2 drinks.

There seems to be a misunderstanding of who actually purchases bulk promotions of alcoholic beverages. Again evidence submitted by the WSTA shows that the consumer groups most likely to purchase these promotions are ABC1 Consumers over 45 years old as part of their weekly shop and those least likely to purchase are C2DE Consumers under 28 years of age. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE GOVERNMENT AND ALCOHOL MISUSE

The Government has just issued its consultation document on its proposed mandatory guidelines. All those involved in the production and resale of alcohol and other stakeholders will have 12 weeks to respond.

NACM, along with other producer organisations will be examining the content of the proposed code with a view to responding when it is released.

The code when it is adopted will only apply to England. Scotland has its own initiatives to tackle alcohol misuse.

The Government’s objective is to achieve the long term reduction in alcohol related illness and crime...whilst ensuring that people are able to enjoy alcohol safely and responsibly.

It set out the following desired outcome:

1. Reductions in alcohol related crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour,
2. Reduction in chronic and acute ill health caused by alcohol,
3. Increase own awareness of risks associated with  excessive consumption,
4. Increase the number of people drinking with in the sensible drinking guidelines,
5. Reduction in number of under-18s drinking and the amount they consume.
6. Improve awareness of the calorific value of alcoholic drink.

It accepted that some changes would take time to register.

The means by which it aims to secure its objectives is by:

• Sharpened criminal justice for drunken behaviour – Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006
• Toughened enforcement of under age sales (test purchase schemes).
• Application of Licensing Act 2003 powers:

1. Police powers to close disorderly and noisy licensed premises
2. Increased penalty for breaches
3. License reviews (fast track)

• Tackling under 18s drinking – Confiscation/ Parental contract
• Local initiatives (Crime & Disorder Reduction Partnerships):

1. Glass v polycarbonates
2. Alcohol Disorder Zones – ADZs-(premises pay for policing)
3. Dispersal Zones
4. Concept of high risk (premises v areas)
5. Support for those who want to drink less

• Public information campaigns to promote a new sensible drinking culture:

1. Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships are being awarded a £3 million cash injection to target enforcement activities on specific alcohol-related problems in 190 areas across all police forces.
2. In addition, £1.5 million will be given to a number of priority areas to:

• strengthen their ability to tackle underage sales,
• confiscate alcohol from under 18s
• run communications campaigns to tell people what action is being taken to successfully reduce alcohol related crime and disorder in their local area:

1. “Know your limits campaign” 2006
2. Industry funded “Drinkaware Trust”, operational 2007
3. Promise of “multi-millions” campaign to support sensible drinking message

• Industry focussed initiatives:

1. Project 10

• Providing on-label information for unit information and sensible drinking messaging
• Policing and Crime Bill to enable the Mandatory Code of Practice

Over the past 12 months NACM has been active with drinks producers to respond to the various government initiatives that have been consulted on. In each case the NACM has made the point that:

1. Only evidence based measures should be considered,
2. Price should not be used as an instrument of social policy,
3. No new laws,
4. Ensure that existing measures are used widely and effectively,
5. Introduce targeted practical measure to deal with issues rather than whole population measures.

The NACM’s position both in England and Scotland has been to:

• Add its support to industry responses by making joint industry submissions in addition to its own separate submissions.
• Work with Government to find practical targeted solutions to the identified problems – mainly Department of Health and the Home office.
• Working with others to get its message across such as other Government departments e.g. BERR, DCMS & DEFRA, Alcohol concern and opposition shadow spokespeople and labour MPs that have expressed a particular interest in cider.

Other activities NACM is following very closely are: 

Sensible Drinking and Health Messaging

The Department of Health has just embarked on the second stage monitoring of compliance with the voluntary labelling agreement re: sensible drinking and health messaging. The majority of the issues raised by the alcoholic drinks industry following the first stage monitoring exercise have been resolved satisfactorily.

The issue for NACM is to see a greater proportion of member’s products incorporating the messaging.

It is expected that the Department of Health will publish its survey results in June but after discussing them first with industry.

Commons Health Committee enquiry

An inquiry into “Alcohol” by the House of Commons Health Committee has been announced with the following terms of reference:

• The scale of ill-health related to alcohol misuse;
• The consequences for the NHS;
• Central government policy;
• The role of the NHS and other bodies including local government, the voluntary sector, police, the alcohol industry, and those responsible for the advertising and promotion of alcohol; and
• Solutions, including whether the drinking culture in England should change, and if so, how.  

NACM made a submission to the select committee. The Committee has just published the evidence submitted to it and is now taking evidence from witnesses in session.

Further research on alcohol pricing and promotions

The Department of Health is undertaking more research, in April and May, on top of that already done by Sheffield University, to assess the impact of various price controls/restrictions on promotions on various sectors of society and on the industry as producers and retailers.

During the course of discussions on the Government’s proposals for tackling alcohol misuse there have been calls from stakeholders for the sale of alcoholic drink to be subject to a minimum price. This proposal initially emanated from the Scottish Government’s consideration of proposals for an alcohol strategy, “Changing Scotland’s Relationship with Alcohol: A discussion paper on our specific approach”.

The UK Government is not in favour of setting a minimum price for alcohol, although the Department of Health is known champion of the idea. The concept is supported by some MPs, elements of the medical profession, Alcohol concern, small retailers, elements in the on-trade and some drinks producers. It is seductively appealing but once set there is only one direction it will go, and that is upwards. Already the starting level has risen to 50p per unit of alcohol when discussion initially about the minimum price was of 35p. The Annual Report of the Chief Medical Officer, “On the State of Public Health 2008” has a chart with the effects of a minimum price of 70p per unit of alcohol – showing a significant drop in alcoholic drink sales at that level.

The department of health and the Scottish Government make no secret of their desire to see alcohol consumption at significant lower levels than now despite the significant fall already experienced.

The pricing of alcohol becomes institutionally set going down this particular route. Any introduction of a minimum price for alcohol in England and Scotland is likely to meet a legal challenge under EU Competition regulations.

Scotland

The situation in Scotland is far more draconian for on- and off-trade and producers in. Following on from its “Strategic Approach” discussion paper, after reviewing all the consultations made, the Scottish Government  produced its, “Changing Scotland’s Relationship with Alcohol: A Framework for Alcohol” document.  The document contained the following proposals:

• Bring forward regulations to end irresponsible promotions and below-cost selling of alcoholic drinks in licensed premises.
• Pursue the establishment of a minimum price per unit of alcohol through regulation.
• Place a duty on Licensing Boards to consider raising the age for off-sales purchases to 21 in part or all of their Board area and provide powers for Chief Constables and Licensing Forum to request a review of their local Board’s policy.
• Establish a legislative power to apply a social responsibility fee on some alcohol retailers.
• Bring forward regulations to restrict the use of marketing material or activity on licensed premises.
• The Scottish Government do not intend to pursue separate supermarket checkouts for alcohol sales, or raise the age for those staffing such checkouts, at the present time.

Initially these proposals would have been introduced in September 2009 through a combination of secondary legislation and regulations within the existing Criminal Justice and Licensing Bill. However, these measures will receive the full rigour of debate with the Scottish Parliament as they will be introduced through the proposed Health Bill early in 2010.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HEALTH MINISTER LAUNCHES ALCOHOL PILOT IN FIFE

- Unique partnership set to tackle alcohol misuse-

A unique collaboration between the Scottish Government, the drinks industry, Fife Drug and Alcohol Action Team and the local community aims to tackle alcohol-related harm in Fife with the launch of a groundbreaking pilot backed by Health and Sport Minister, Shona Robison in Dunfermline today (Tuesday 5 May 2009).

The Fife Alcohol Partnership Project, set up to co-ordinate and manage a multi-component and targeted approach to reduce alcohol misuse in Fife, brings together a number of local and national stakeholders including the Scottish Government, DAAT - which includes representatives from the voluntary sector, NHS Fife, Fife Council &  Fife Constabulary - and the Scottish Government & Alcohol Industry Partnership.

As a result of an extensive scoping study, the Partnership has identified three areas in West Fife for the first phase of its pilot work. Fife was chosen for the pilot as it has a wide mix of rural and urban areas and recent experience of major pilot activity such as test purchasing as well as industry partnership working in projects like DAPL (Drug & Alcohol Project Levenmouth). The region also has a good educational mix of schools, colleges and a university which is important as it allows the partnership to communicate widely with young people.

The main objectives of the pilot, which it is hoped can be rolled out across Scotland longer-term, will focus on reducing harmful drinking, underage drinking, anti-social behavior and alcohol-related crime as well as increasing awareness of responsible drinking and associated alcohol misuse issues.

A series of initiatives will be undertaken in Rosyth, Touch Housing Estate and Dunfermline Town Centre. These three areas all face different issues with alcohol misuse and different approaches will be required to tackle them rather than a blanket approach.

Initiatives currently being explored include a Community Alcohol Partnership in Rosyth, working with police and local retailers to tackle underage drinking; the introduction of a ‘Strengthening Families Programme’, focusing on reducing family-related risk factors in young people and their parents, a potential partnership with Barnardo’s Scotland on an early intervention programme to raise awareness of healthy drinking, diet and lifestyles for new parents and a unique Social Norms project tailored to a community setting.

The social norms approach promotes reinforcement of positive behaviour by dispelling the myths of perceived normal behaviour. Changing misconceptions about the incidence of excessive drinking has been shown to play an important role in tackling alcohol misuse.  This approach has been tried many times in an educational or college setting in various parts of the world but never, as far as we know, been carried out with a community.

Shona Robison, Minister for Public Health, said: “I welcome this community-based approach to tackling alcohol related harm in Fife and believe it sits very well alongside our national framework.

“I am also encouraged that the Fife Alcohol Partnership will be working closely with other initiatives in Scotland to share ideas and knowledge on what works and - just as importantly - what doesn’t.

“With alcohol misuse costing Scotland £2.25billion per year in extra services and lost productivity, it’s absolutely vital that we all work together to get to grips with this major social problem.”

Mark Baird, programme director for the Scottish Government & Alcohol Partnership, added: “The launch of the Fife Alcohol Partnership Project marks an exciting time for Fife and indeed all of us who have worked hard to get to this stage.  The project is unique in that we’re bringing together the industry with national and local government, the commu nity and local services.

“Whilst the majority of Scots do drink in moderation, there are still too many who drink irresponsibly causing harm to themselves and others. We believe that alcohol-related-harm and misuse is a shared responsibility and there is credible evidence to show that this multi-component and collaborative approach may have a greater chance of success in addressing the problems caused by this. We will work closely together to promote responsible drinking in Fife and evaluate the effectiveness of planned initiatives sharing our insights and learnings with other agencies and communities across Scotland.” 

Yvonne Crombie, project manager for the Fife Alcohol Partnership Project, said: “I’m confident that by working closely with the partnership members that we will make a real difference to families and communities at a grass roots level.  We have already received interest from a number of local organisations, projects and community members who have not only expressed an interest but shown enthusiasm in getting involved in this unique project.

“I have no doubt that with such commitment at a local level combined with this multi-component approach that the Partnership will deliver positive results enhancing many people lives in the area.”

This is the first community pilot to be formed under the Scottish Government Alcohol Industry Partnership (SGAIP), which was established in 2007.

For more information, call Yvonne Crombie, project manager, Fife Alcohol Partnership Project at Fife Council on 08451 555 555, extension 446947 or 07816 769 804 or email .

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHANGING SCOTLAND'S RELATIONSHIP WITH ALCOHOL: A DISCUSSION PAPER ON OUR STRATEGIC APPROACH 

National Association of Cider makers

The National Association of Cider Makers (NACM), which represents producers of cider and perry in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, welcomes the opportunity to comment on the consultation paper, “Changing Scotland’s relationship with alcohol: a discussion paper on our strategic approach”.

The cider industry is characterised by its wide range of scale of production with two major producers, a handful of medium scale producers and a very long tail of very small scale with some perry and cider makers produce less than 70Hl per annum.

The principal raw material for making perry and cider is pears for perry and apples (both cider apples and dessert apples) for cider. The source of the pears and apples for making perry and cider is from a wide variety of orchards, varying in scale from 2-3 trees to large orchards in England and Wales.

Cider and perry is sold throughout the United Kingdom in a wide range of outlets from major national and regional pub chains, major multiple retailers to farm shops and local pubs and local supermarkets.

Alcohol Misuse

NACM appreciates the Scottish Government’s desire to tackle alcohol misuse and is an active member of the Scottish Government Alcohol Industry Partnership to develop effective, practical and targeted measures to address the misuse of alcohol by the few.

The share which cider and perry have of the total UK alcoholic drinks market is only a very small 6%, compared to beer (42%), wine (25%), spirits (25%) and RTDs (alcopops) (2%). Of that 10%, strong white ciders >7.5% ABV, accounting for only 0.6% of the total alcohol market and is a declining share of the market. The market share or cider and perry in Scotland is similar to the average market share in the UK.

As the figures clearly show, due to its small market share, cider and perry cannot be singled out as being responsible for alcohol misuse in Scotland, as some would suggest. A review of published reports in the public domain produced by the Scottish Executive, UK Government and other bodies, quite clearly demonstrates that no one alcoholic drink is responsible for alcohol misuse – misuse is caused by certain drinkers who clearly misuse alcohol and by some under 18s who are clearly breaking the law. This therefore is not a problem about problem drinks but about problem drinkers.

Policy considerations

NACM firmly believes that any policy considerations, by the Scottish Government, to address the specific misuse of alcohol by problem drinkers, should be;

0. Based on robust evidence that is relevant to equivalent environments, as opposed to deploying convenient data to fit an argument;
0. Given that the majority of the public drink sensibly and that alcohol is misused by a minority of drinkers, general population measures such as increasing taxes or other means of raising prices (curbing promotions, introducing minimum pricing etc.) are not the appropriate means for tackling misuse – it penalises the majority of sensible drinkers without necessarily dealing with alcohol misuse . People’s lives are already being negatively impacted by problem drinkers and it seems ironic that this negative impact should be doubly visited upon them by having to endure restrictions, inconvenience, and ultimately higher prices, as set out in the consultation document, to deal with the problem drinkers.
0. Dealt with, in the many instances of misuse, by better/more effective enforcement. No new legislation is required. NACM believes that the Scottish Government should focus on maximising the effective use of existing legislation to target problem drinkers and that it should avoid using one-size-fits-all measures that just punish everyone.
0. There is a need to ensure that measures proposed do not in fact work against changing Scotland’s relationship with alcohol. (This point is elaborated further below.)
    

Specific comments on the proposals within the Strategy consultation

Set out below are specific comments on the proposals set out in “Changing Scotland’s relationship with alcohol: a discussion paper on our strategic approach”.

Cultural change

For the Scottish Government to succeed in changing Scotland’s relationship with alcohol, then as an urgent priority, it needs to identify and deal with the real causes of alcohol misuse (and indeed substance abuse in general). It is misplaced to focus on the availability and affordability of alcohol as the sole and root cause of misuse. The real drivers behind harmful drinking, binge drinking behavior and under 18’s alcohol misuse tend to get overlooked as a consequence. This means adopting or calling for a combination of long-term measures such as improving education, awareness campaigns, etc and short-term measures which can also be effective such as enforcing the legislation that already exists.

Consequently NACM is fully supportive of the Government’s commitment:

• Of funding alcohol services;
• To early and evidence based interventions;
• To support for families and communities;
• And to the improvement of delivery of substance misuse education. 

Promotions, loss-leading, further restrictions of promotional material in licensed premises.

The UK Government is currently conducting a review into what evidence there might be between promotion and pricing and harm. We believe that the outcome of that review should be studied carefully before further policy announcements are made. If cogent evidence is found which links the price or promotion of alcohol to harms, it will then be especially important to have a thorough economic understanding of how market distortion might actually impact on those harms.  We believe that it is extremely hard to target harmful drinkers simply through price measures and measures that impede the convenience of legally purchasing alcohol by imposing separate checkouts for alcohol sales. (To overcome this, one simply buys more alcohol on a shopping trip – buying by the case rather than the bottle or can.)

Promotional activity is a direct and more effective way to introduce consumers to new products and product variants. Restricting promotions will inhibit new product introductions into Scotland.

The average strength of cider in Scotland and the rest of the UK has reduced. There are also plans to introduce into the UK market significantly lower strength cider but before the product is put on sale more widely it is being trialed/promoted in a limited number of retail outlets. However, without the ability to promote such new products, producers will not be able to introduce them to the public at large. It will be observable and measurable that the uptake of successful new product launches will be in those areas where the restrictions do not apply.

Inevitably the market will stagnate and will become characterized by lower quality and cheaper products.

Advertising Restrictions

Advertising is already strictly regulated. NACM does not believe that any further restrictions on advertising will address any particular misuse issues. The consequences of further restrictions will be to shut down a further, and last remaining avenue for bringing to market newer and better quality products.

The advertising of cider on TV is focused not on its strength but on its refreshing qualities and its provenance and is clearly targeted at an adult audience. The claim that cider advertising significantly increased between 2002 and 2006 (see paragraph 151 and circumstantially associating that with increased cider consumption completely misses the point. The advertising spend was a result of a new entrant into the UK market (and is unlikely to be repeated at those levels) and the subsequent increase in consumption was at the expense of other drinks (at similar or higher ABVs).

Alcohol Product labelling

NACM is fully supportive of improved alcohol product labeling. The leading NACM members include on their labels:

• Unit information
• Sensible drinking messaging
• Promote “Drinkaware”
• And by the year end one will start to see bottles and cans carrying the “pregnancy advice information/logo”
• Company websites include the sensible drinking message and age restrictions to entry. 

Conclusion

Penalising the general population does not seem to be the appropriate way forward in either seeking to bring about cultural change in Scotland’s relationship with alcohol or dealing with alcohol misuse (the problem drinkers). Indeed certain proposals in the area of promotions and advertising will undermine efforts to promote a cultural change if new products are not provided a route to market. To restate, there are no problem drinks, only problem drinkers and therefore measures need to be targeted at these misusers. Furthermore NACM believes that the panoply of powers available to the police and local authorities should be used much more effectively both against individuals who misuse alcohol and those who willfully seek to break the law in obtaining alcohol underage, as well as against those retailers who sell alcohol irresponsibly.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SAFE, SENSIBLE, SOCIAL - CONSULTATION ON FURTHER ACTION: NACM RESPONSE

National Association of Cider makers

The National Association of Cider Makers (NACM), which represents producers of cider and perry in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, welcomes the opportunity to comment on the consultation paper, “Safe, Sensible, Social – Consultation on further action”.

The Industry

The cider industry is characterised by its wide range of scale of production with two major producers, a handful of medium scale producers and a very long tail of very small scale with some perry and cider makers produce less than 70Hl per annum.

The principal raw material for making perry and cider is pears for perry and apples (both cider apples and dessert apples) for cider. The source of the pears and apples for making perry and cider is from a wide variety of orchards, varying in scale from 2-3 trees to large orchards in England and Wales.

Cider and perry is sold throughout the United Kingdom in a wide range of outlets from major national and regional pub chains, major multiple retailers to farm shops and local pubs and local supermarkets.

The share which cider and perry have of the total UK alcoholic drinks market is only very small at about 6%, compared to beer (42%), wine (25%), spirits (25%) and RTDs (alcopops) (2%). Of that 10%, strong white ciders >7.5% ABV, accounting for only 0.6% of the total alcohol market and is a declining share of the market.

As a producer organization the NACM is confining its comments to those areas of the consultation where questions have been raised, assertions and comments made that impact cider makers.

Alcohol Misuse Policy Overview

NACM appreciates the Government’s desire to tackle alcohol misuse and believes that Government should take appropriate measures to address this issue and introduce policies that will contribute to the significant reduction in the harm which arises from misuse.

A review of published reports in the public domain produced by the UK Government and other bodies, quite clearly demonstrates that no one alcoholic drink is responsible for alcohol misuse – misuse is caused by certain drinkers who clearly misuse alcohol and by some under 18s who are clearly breaking the law. This therefore is not a problem about problem drinks but about problem drinkers.

Cultural change

For the Government to succeed in bringing about a cultural change in how alcohol is consumed by the irresponsible minority then as an urgent priority, it needs to identify and deal with the real causes of alcohol misuse (and indeed substance abuse in general). It is misplaced to focus on the availability and affordability (price and promotion) of alcohol as the sole and root cause of misuse. The real drivers behind harmful drinking, binge drinking behavior and under 18’s alcohol misuse tend to get overlooked as a consequence. This means adopting or calling for a combination of long-term measures such as improving education, awareness campaigns, etc and short-term measures which can also be effective such as enforcing the legislation that already exists.

NACM acknowledges that Government has committed resources to initiatives in this area as indeed has industry. NACM is a supporter of the Drinkaware Trust and of “Project 10” a £100m (over 5 years) industry education initiative.

Policy considerations

The Minister of State for Public Health, stated in the Ministerial Foreword to the consultation,

“ ... retailers and consumers of alcohol act responsibly and it is the irresponsible minority on which our efforts should be focused. It is right to consider ways to tackle irresponsible practices but we must ensure that any measures do not unduly penalise those consumers who benefit from legitimate promotions responsibly.”

NACM fully endorses the position stated by the Minister. It is important to bear in mind that the distinction must be made and maintained to ensure that whatever means are introduced they are targeted at preventing harmful drinking without punishing the majority of people who drink responsibly. The industry is concerned that the introduction of measures that have a broader impact and go beyond targeting problem drinkers will bring with it unintended consequences.

To this end industry has a legitimate role to play in working with Government in reaching solutions.

NACM firmly believes that any policy considerations, by the Government, to address the specific misuse of alcohol by problem drinkers, should be;

0. Based on robust evidence (ensuring that studies are peer reviewed) that is relevant to equivalent environments, as opposed to deploying convenient data to fit an argument;
0. Given that the majority of the public drink sensibly and that alcohol is misused by a minority of drinkers, general population measures such as increasing taxes or other means of raising prices (curbing promotions, introducing minimum pricing etc.) are not the appropriate means for tackling misuse – it penalises the majority of sensible drinkers without necessarily dealing with alcohol misuse . People’s lives are already being negatively impacted by problem drinkers and it seems ironic that this negative impact should be doubly visited upon them by having to endure restrictions, inconvenience, and ultimately higher prices, as set out in the consultation document, to deal with the problem drinkers.
0. Dealt with, in the many instances of misuse, by better/more effective enforcement. No new legislation is required. NACM believes that the Government should focus on maximising the effective use of existing legislation to target problem drinkers and that it should avoid using one-size-fits-all measures that just punish everyone.
0. There is a need to ensure that measures proposed do not in fact work against the Government’s overarching objective of reducing alcohol related harm. (This point is elaborated further below but deals particularly with the area of advertising and promotions.)
    

Specific comments on the policy measures and questions contained within “consultation for further action”.

Set out below are specific comments on the proposals set out in “Safe, Sensible, Social – Consultation on further action”.

Independent review of the effects of alcohol pricing and Promotions.

Paragraph 2.21 Next Steps states that,

 “Government will examine the findings of both phases of the ScHARR review  and consider if any further action on alcohol and price might be both proportionate and necessary in order to have a significant impact on alcohol related harm.”

Promotions

A key point lost in the School of Health and Related Research at Sheffield University (ScHARR) Study on “Price, Promotion and Harm” is that promotional activity is a direct and more effective way to introduce consumers to new products and product variants. Restricting promotions will inhibit new product introductions.

The average strength of cider in the UK has reduced. There are also plans to introduce into the UK market significantly lower strength cider but before the product is put on sale more widely it is being trialed/promoted in a limited number of retail outlets. However, without the ability to promote such new products, producers will not be able to introduce them to the public at large. Of concern is that inevitably the market will stagnate and will become characterized by lower quality and cheaper products.

Advertising

Advertising is already strictly regulated. NACM does not believe that any further restrictions on advertising will address any particular misuse issues. The consequences of further restrictions will be to shut down a further avenue for bringing to market newer and better quality products.

The Sheffield University review failed to provide compelling evidence that would warrant the Government to introduce controls on promotions and advertising. The review cited publications and references making causal links but some of these documents have not been peer reviewed. NACM reiterates its position that evidence should be robust.

Consequently NACM would endorse the proposition set out in paragraph 2.21 that if new evidence emerges that alcohol advertising increased the risk of harm to consumers or fails to protect the vulnerable, the matter would be for remitted for consideration by the appropriate regulators i.e. OFCOM, and the Advertising Standards Authority.

Reviewing self-regulatory commitments by the alcohol industry.

NACM is fully supportive of improved alcohol product labeling. The leading members of NACM, accounting for a significant volume of cider on the market, include on their cans and bottles:

• Unit information
• Sensible drinking messaging
• Promote “Drinkaware”
• And by the year end one will start to see bottles and cans carrying the “pregnancy advice information/logo”
• Company websites include the sensible drinking message and age restrictions to entry. 

Monitoring the industry’s voluntary labelling agreement

Paragraphs 2.28 to 2.33 address the uptake of the voluntary labelling agreement and disappointment is expressed in paragraph 2.31 that only 57% of products contained alcohol unit information and only 3% contained the labelling scheme information “in its entirety”.

It is greatly appreciated that the Department of Health, Campden and Chorleywood Food RA are working together with the industry to develop a robust and reliable set of data on this issue, compared to the misleading numbers reported. Although not part of the 1998 agreement to incorporate alcohol unit information on cans and bottles, over 80% of cider by volume is declaring its unit strength. This was in response to the commitment set out in the Social Responsibility Standards, published in November 2005, to which the NACM was a signatory.

As mentioned above members of the NACM are introducing the labelling scheme information on bottles and cans. However, this can only be done with planned label changes over a period of time to avoid writing off (and additionally creating its own waste issues) £ms of packaging materials.

It also has to be recognised that that not all cans and bottles are the same size and with the smaller containers there is a practical limitation to including all five components of the labelling scheme. It is the NACM’s understanding from the various versions of the Memorandum of Understanding, that have been in circulation that it was acceptable for these smaller containers to only include three components of the labelling scheme. This needs to be formally recognised in any follow up “uptake audit” that will be commissioned.

NACM is aware that the Government is holding legislation in reserve to secure a greater uptake of the labelling scheme information (suggested in paragraph 2.33). If this approach were to be actively pursued it would halt, in its tracks, any further voluntary introduction of the key components of the labelling scheme because it would introduce uncertainty as to what would be specifically required to be included on cans and bottles re exact wording, use or non use of the pregnancy logo, dimensions of characters, positioning of statements etc. The industry would not want to write off two sets of packaging. Furthermore legislation would recognise the industry’s legitimate request for a period of 12 to 18 months for transition period to permit existing non complying packaging to be sold through.

KPMG review of Social Responsibility Standards

NACM was one of the first signatories to the Social Responsibility Standards in 2005 and has commended their adoption to all of its members. NACM fully cooperated with KPMG in its review of the effectiveness of the Standards.

It needs to be emphasised that only part of the Standards, examined by KPMG, was applicable to alcoholic drinks producers i.e. the Portman Group’s “Code of Practice on the Naming, Packaging and Promotion of Alcoholic Drinks” which predates the Standards and to which producers have been adhering since its introduction in 1996.

Paragraph 2.40 Next steps,

“... seeks views on whether existing voluntary codes should be made mandatory.”

Before addressing that specific point there is merit in reviewing some of the commentary contained in the KPMG Report “Review of the Social Standards for the production and sale of Alcoholic Drinks – Volume 1”.

Despite the negative introduction of paragraph 5.1.2, there was a positive a positive statement that,

“There was more respect for the Portman code, which was acknowledged to have had some effect on the advertising and marketing of alcoholic drinks”,

Further positive statements about the Portman Group code and producer’s adherence to it can be found in paragraphs 6.7, 6.9 and 6.10.

In “Safe, Sensible, Social etc”, KPMG appears to have an issue with the point, expressed in paragraph 2.38, that the

“Positive examples of good practice could not be linked to the impact of the Standards”.

Whilst seeking to condemn the Standards as not being “fit for purpose”, the Portman Group Code has clearly demonstrated that it is.

The negative point about the code, made further in paragraph 5.1.2, in the Standards review, Volume 1, misses a serious legal point:

“ ... the code as doing little to mitigate against the perceived evil of cheap, strong alcohol available too freely  at off-trade outlets”.

It has to be recognised that since the repeal of the Resale Price Maintenance Act in 1964, it is illegal for producers to have any influence over the supply of products and price at which retailers sell any products. This is reinforced by the Restrictive Trades Practices Act 1968, but subsequently repealed and replaced by more stringent powers to prevent price fixing by the Competition Act 2002 and the Enterprise Act 2002.

The idea that a single standard could apply across the entire alcoholic drinks supply chain is intellectually flawed because of legal considerations and the disparate nature of the different parts of the supply chain and the independent relationships that must be maintained. The Standards were not appropriate for the needs of neither government nor industry, particularly where better self regulatory instruments existed, such as the Portman Group code.

NACM has had the opportunity to review the structure of the proposed Mandatory code to replace the Standards and sees no compelling intellectual argument presented that concludes that a single code to cover all aspect of the sale, marketing, labelling, packaging etc of alcoholic beverages, throughout the supply chain will achieve the Government’s aim of reducing alcohol harm.

The work of the Portman Group and the effectiveness of its Code has been recognised not only by KPMG but also by the Better Regulation Taskforce and the International Harm Reduction Association (IHRA).

The Better Regulation Taskforce described The Portman Group Code as a good example of a Code that works well, demonstrating how effective self-regulation can be.

The International Harm Reduction Association included the latest edition of the Code in its “50 Best Collection on Alcohol Harm Reduction”, published in May 2008 (ref IHRA.) The Collection contains project reports, documents and research papers from around the world, chosen by an international panel of experts for their evidence-base, reasoning, justification and contribution to alcohol harm reduction.

NACM firmly believes that the Portman Group Code of Practice is fulfilling, effectively, a valuable self regulatory role with regard to the way producers package, name and market their products and as should be fully supported by Government agencies. This support should include promoting greater awareness amongst TSOs and Licensing Officers of their role with the code in ensuring compliance at local level when non-complying products are included in the Retailer Alert.

[NACM has noted that the government is currently consulting on the possible structure of a proposed mandatory code and that should a code or codes be progressed, after considering the responses to the consultation on “Safe, Sensible, Social – Consultation on further action” there will be further opportunities to comment on its content. As currently written the content does raise a number of serious concerns.]

Conclusion

Penalising the industry and the general population is not an appropriate way forward in either seeking to bring about the desired changes in reducing alcohol harm or dealing with alcohol misuse (the problem drinkers). Indeed certain proposals in the area of promotions and advertising will undermine efforts to promote a cultural change if new products are not provided a route to market.

To restate, there are no problem drinks, only problem drinkers and therefore measures need to be targeted at these misusers. Furthermore NACM believes that the panoply of powers available to the police and local authorities should be used much more effectively both against individuals who misuse alcohol and those who willfully seek to break the law in obtaining alcohol underage, as well as against those retailers who sell alcohol irresponsibly.

print version