Alcopops in Norway

Anders Ulstein

Until recently, alcopops were sold in Norway at the state alcohol monopoly and beer in licensed grocery stores. From January this year, it was permissible for alcopops with a strength of less than 4.75 per cent alcohol to be sold in grocery stores. This followed the ruling from the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) that policy measures have to be applied equally to products with the same alcohol content (that is, less then 4.75 per cent alcohol). A campaign lead by Alkokutt has tried to limit the damage by appealing to retailers to show restraint or to refrain from offering alcopops at all. The campaign is still on, but there is evidence that the sale of alcopops is surging, the age limit (eighteen years old) is being flouted, and as the picture shows, some retailers promote and display the new products aggressively.

Internal Market Rules
In a judgment of March last year, the EFTA Court ruled that Norway had failed to comply with the European Economic Association (EEA) Agreement by maintaining two forms of retail sale in that beer with an alcohol content of between 2.5 per cent and 4.75 per cent alcohol could be sold outside the alcohol monopoly, Vinmonopolet, while alcopops with the same alcohol content could only be sold through that monopoly. The EEA Agreement provides Norway with full access to the Internal Market whilst committing the country to the EC rules of competition and trade. The EFTA court corresponds with the EC court of justice in Luxembourg.

The EFTA Court noted that Norway may continue to maintain a strict alcohol policy. However, it must be implemented so as not to conflict with the rules of free movement of goods and of non-discrimination. The Court found that Norway had not been able to show that separating the sales of beer and alcopops was justified on the grounds of public health. "The different treatment of beer and other alcoholic beverages with the same alcohol content is neither suitable nor proportionate in relation to the health objectives pursued", the court stated in a press release.

"A Competitive Relationship"
The Court also noted that measures necessary for the protection of public health may be adopted, as long as those measures apply equally to beer and other beverages with the same alcohol content. The government contended that there is no competitive relationship between beer and alcopops, arguing that young people consume alcopops in addition to beer. Additionally, as its second line of defence, the government argued that the separation of beer and alcopops was justified on grounds of public health.

The court was of the opinion that beer and alcopops are "to some extent bought and consumed for the same purpose" and "may meet the same needs", concluding that "medium-strength beer and other beverages with the same alcohol content are, at least partially and potentially, in a competitive relationship". The second objection from the court was the fact that beer, which is predominantly produced domestically, was given a preferential treatment. Alcopops were at the time principally imported from other EEA States.

In short, as far as the EFTA court is concerned, beer and alcopops are two competing products and restricting the sale of alcopops to the Vinmonopolet is to the advantage of beer. The fact that a predominantly domestic product is given a preferential treatment over imported goods is a serious offence in the Internal Market.

Finally, the court also found that the public health argument did not apply. The court claimed that the government had not been able to prove that the contested rules are "necessary" and "proportionate" to that objective. The Court accepted that alcopops has a young appeal, but indicated that enforcement of age limits is more appropriate and a less restrictive measure.

In the few months after January 2003 sales have been high, as predicted. More than half a million bottles were sold following the court ruling, making alcopops second only to Coca Cola and beer. According to an independent account, the sale of beer has remained unchanged. However, in mid February the brewers' association insisted that they had recorded a 5.5 per cent drop in beer sales.

A campaign testing the enforcement of age limits showed that young people under eighteen could buy alcopops in ten out of twelve shops in Norway's second largest city, Bergen, this January.

At the moment there is a wait-and-see situation. Both in parliament and in the Ministry of Social Affairs there is a will to solve the problem, but no specific proposal is on the table. Presently the sales figures of alcopops and beer need to be independently monitored in order to challenge one of the main premises in the court ruling, namely that alcopops is basically replacing beer. Secondly, alcopops' significant appeal to young people needs to be highlighted and what role is played by the consumption of alcopops in the already disturbing drinking patterns of adolescents. Thirdly, there is no longer a clear case of discrimination against foreign goods. Several of the most popular alcopops brands in Norway are now produced and owned domestically. Lastly, the most important strategic goal is to reclaim the nation state's prerogative to make stricter judgments on matters of public health than the EC lawmakers and courts allow.

Anders Ulstein works with Actis, the Norwegian Policy Network on Alcohol and Drugs, at its Brussels Office.