Scotland out of step with European European levels of alcohol-related harm

Jack Law, Chief Executive, Alcohol Focus Scotland, reports

Alcohol misuse costs Scotland a staggering £2.25 billion per year. Someone dies every 4 hours from an alcoholrelated disease - equivalent to 33 full double decker buses a year.

Scotland has the highest rates of liver disease deaths in western Europe. Alcohol-related death rates in Scotland are around double the rates for the UK as a whole. At a local level, Glasgow City had the highest alcohol-related death rate among both men and women in 1998-2004. Alcohol is involved in 70% of assaults. It’s conservatively estimated that around 65,000 children are living in families where there are alcohol problems. “Changing Scotland’s Relationship with Alcohol: A Framework for Action” shows that the Scottish Government is taking seriously the need to address our drinking culture with bold action to reverse unprecedented levels of alcohol-related health and social harm. It focuses on proposals to reduce consumption through regulating price and availability, as well as actions to support families, improve support and treatment, and promote positive attitudes and choices.

We particularly welcome the long overdue commitment to end irresponsible alcohol promotions in shops and supermarkets. Instead of buying the four cans of beer we actually want, we leave with a case because it was so deeply discounted, so heavily promoted and displayed at the entrance to the store that it’s difficult to resist.

While it is clear there is no magic bullet to tackling alcohol problems, the evidence is clear that price is closely linked to consumption and consumption to harm. Introducing a minimum price per unit of alcohol will reduce consumption and therefore reduce health and social harm.

What is minimum pricing?

Minimum pricing is the lowest price at which any alcohol product can be sold. The price is set based on the alcohol content (number of units) of the product. So, the higher the number of units in a bottle, the higher the minimum price will be. Cheaper alcohol tends to be bought more by harmful drinkers than moderate drinkers, and is shown to be attractive to young people and those under the legal age. So a minimum price policy is beneficial in that it targets the drinkers causing the most harm to both themselves and society whilst having little effect on the spending of adult moderate drinkers.

Research by the University of Sheffield research for England and Wales shows that there would be a £12.93bn value of harm reduction in terms of employment, criminal justice, and health costs if minimum pricing was set at 50p per unit.

Why do we need it?

Over the past 50 years the real price of alcohol has fallen. With the introduction of more liberal licensing legislation; this has led to alcohol being sold in more places and for longer periods of time. This has increased competition between retailers who have responded by cutting prices and offering deep discounts and promotions. The result is that alcohol is available at pocket money prices.

SCOTLAND OUT OF STEP

So how will minimum pricing reduce harm?

If we want to reduce the level of alcohol-related harm in Scotland we need to reduce overall consumption of alcohol. There is a growing body of evidence which shows that price increases can have a substantial impact on reducing consumption, and consequently harm. Based on estimates by the Academy of Medical Sciences, a 10% rise in alcohol price would save the lives of 479 men and 265 women in Scotland every year.

Do other countries have minimum pricing for alcohol?

A number of countries in Europe, including Belgium, France, Greece, Portugal and Spain, have legislation banning below-cost selling. However, minimum pricing schemes for alcohol in which minimum prices are fixed by public authorities are less common. Canada is one country that has a well established minimum pricing scheme for alcohol.

What do we stand to gain if minimum pricing for alcohol is introduced?

The University of Sheffield study into pricing policies concluded that:

• Pricing policies can be effective in reducing health, crime and employment harm.

• Pricing policies can be targeted, so that those who drink within recommended limits are hardly affected and so that very heavy drinkers, who cause by far the most alcohol-related harm, are most affected.

• Minimum unit pricing and discount bans could save hundreds of millions of pounds every year in NHS, crime and employment costs.

If policy makers wish to see the greatest impact in terms of crime and accident prevention, through reducing the consumption of 18-24 year old binge drinkers, they need to consider policies that increase the prices of cheaper drinks available in pubs and clubs as well as supermarkets. Dispelling the myths which have been put forward by some drinks producers and retailers who are in opposition to minimum pricing:

Moderate drinkers are not being ‘penalised’. If you drink within the sensible drinking guidelines, you will barely notice any difference in cost. Price increases will affect the heaviest drinkers the most.

Scotland’s alcohol problems are not restricted to underage and chronic drinkers. 1 in 2 men and 1 in 3 women are exceeding the recommended guidelines. People in all age groups and backgrounds are drinking in a way that is harming themselves and others. We are all affected so we all need to be part of the solution.

People on low incomes will not be ‘penalised’ - moderate consumers, irrespective of income levels, will notice very little difference in terms of cost. What will be noticeable is a significant health improvement and reduction in alcohol-related deaths amongst the most deprived members of society who account for 64% of alcohol related deaths, and are six times more likely to be admitted to hospital with an alcohol-related diagnosis than those from the most affluent areas.

This is not a tax. The extra money will go to retailers, not the government. Using taxation as a price lever has not been successful in the past as some retailers have not passed on the increase to their customers.

It does not contravene competition law.

There is no evidence that people will cross the border to buy alcohol in England. This would be costly and time consuming, and only certain drinks would be increasing in price.

We have reached the point where prices must increase for Scotland’s damaging relationship with alcohol to be re-balanced. Change won’t happen overnight. But the combined efforts of Government, health and police services, the alcohol industry, licensed trade and the voluntary sector should ensure significantly fewer Scots’ lives are blighted by alcohol misuse.