Consultation on Restricting Alcohol Advertising and Promotion: Analysis of responses

Summary of main views

5. Almost all respondents to the consultation acknowledged that harmful drinking is a serious issue in Scotland and needs to be addressed. They also agreed that children and young people should not be unduly exposed to the marketing of age-restricted products such as alcohol. However, in the main, respondents thought that the proposals as set out would not achieve the intended outcomes of reducing alcohol consumption and alcohol harm, and / or were disproportionate to the scale of the problem.

6. Respondents fell into two main groups:

• The first group comprised a large majority of individuals (around 3 in 4) and most organisational respondents (i.e. advertising and media organisations; alcohol producers; music, culture, events and sporting organisations; retail and hospitality organisations; business and private sector organisations; and organisations involved in setting advertising standards or developing self-regulatory codes). Respondents in this group were content with the status quo and opposed further restrictions of any kind. However, some respondents in this group did agree that additional (limited) restrictions – especially those which would help to protect children and young people – could be beneficial.
• The second group comprised public health and third sector organisations, academic organisations, some local authorities and public bodies, and a fairly small proportion of individuals. In the main, these respondents called for a 'blanket ban' on alcohol marketing with no (or minimal) exceptions. This group argued that a comprehensive approach was required to (i) fully protect vulnerable groups – children and young people, and those in recovery were most often mentioned in this regard, (ii) reduce the harms caused by alcohol across the population as a whole, and (iii) move away from the current culture in Scotland where alcohol consumption is routine, commonplace and 'normalised'.

Summary of views on specific proposals

7. Overall, there were high levels of opposition to the specific measures proposed, and both individuals and organisations expressed similar levels of opposition. Opposition was highest in relation to banning the sale of alcohol-branded merchandise (82% of respondents opposed this) and banning alcohol sponsorship of music and cultural events (81% opposed this). However, 70% or more of respondents opposed nearly all the other specific proposals set out in the consultation, and more than three-quarters (77%) said they opposed the introduction of a comprehensive package of restrictions across all forms of alcohol marketing.

8. Although none of the proposed measures received majority support, there were two proposals for which respondents were more divided in their views. These related to (i) alcohol advertising in cinemas (37% supported and 58% opposed restrictions in this area), and (ii) the introduction of a watershed for alcohol advertising on TV and radio (40% supported and 53% opposed this). However, in general, respondents thought that restrictions to protect children and young people were already in place in cinemas, and that these were adequate – and so additional restrictions were unnecessary. They also thought that the introduction of a watershed for alcohol advertising on TV and radio was unlikely to have any effect given the widespread use of streaming services.

Arguments against further restrictions

9. Those who opposed (further) restrictions on alcohol marketing (or only supported further restrictions in very limited circumstances) argued that:

• Alcohol marketing is not a root cause of alcohol harm. Rather, alcohol harm is a consequence of complex social, economic and environmental factors.
• The evidence presented in the consultation paper was drawn from a narrow, and highly selective range of sources and was not an accurate reflection of the current evidence base. In particular, there is no robust evidence presented to demonstrate that (i) the marketing of alcohol causes harm and (ii) introducing restrictions (as has been done in a variety of other countries at different points in history, dating back to the 1930s) reduces alcohol-related harm. In addition, the evidence from Scotland clearly shows that, while expenditure on alcohol marketing has risen in recent years, alcohol consumption (at population level, and among young people) in Scotland has been falling.
• The current regulatory arrangements implemented via the licensing system and co- regulatory and self-regulatory codes are adequate, effective and operate at no cost to the public purse.^[1] Indeed, many companies go further than the codes require in ensuring a responsible approach which minimises harm.
• Alcohol marketing aims to promote (specific, branded) drinks rather than alcohol consumption per se. In other words, alcohol marketing is not about encouraging increased consumption overall, but about encouraging brand switching. In particular, advertising is vital when bringing new products onto the market. Moreover, alcohol marketing is concentrated on promoting high-cost / premium products – rather than promoting the low-cost products most associated with harmful drinking.
• There has been no formal review undertaken of the success (or otherwise) of current measures to limit alcohol harm. In addition, the consultation paper contains no impact assessment(s) and no analysis of the (social, economic, and community) costs or benefits of introducing the restrictions. Respondents also said the proposals do not align with the Scottish Government's own 'Better Regulation' principles.
• The alcohol industry – and the whisky industry in particular – is important to Scotland's economy and to its global recognition and reputation. Restrictions on alcohol marketing would have a significant negative impact on Scotland's economy, its exports and its tax revenues. The negative effects would be disproportionately felt by small local businesses and those living in rural and remote communities, and would be particularly damaging to small independent alcohol producers who would find it very difficult to establish products and grow their business in a market dominated by well-known multi-national drinks companies. Scotland's tourism, hospitality, arts and culture, and food and drink sectors would also be badly affected. The proposals are at odds with the direction of travel set out in other Scottish Government policy documents relating to these sectors, and with the National Strategy for Economic Transformation.
• The measures suggested are disproportionate. Alcohol is legal, is not inherently harmful, and should not be 'demonised'. The majority of the population are moderate drinkers whose freedom of choice will be limited by the proposed measures. Respondents asked, 'if alcohol marketing is banned – what will be next?'
• The power of the Scottish Government to act in this area is not clear. Any introduction of separate regulation or legislation for Scotland in relation to the proposals set out in the consultation paper would not necessarily gain approval from the UK Government, would undermine the benefits of the current (UK-wide) approach, and would likely entail increased costs for enforcement. Marketing jobs and businesses could be lost to the Scottish economy as organisations seek to relocate to a more 'business friendly' environment.

Arguments in favour of further restrictions

10. Those who were in favour of further restrictions (and usually a comprehensive ban) on alcohol advertising and promotion argued that:

• There is evidence of a causal link between the marketing and promotion of alcohol and positive attitudes towards – and consumption of – alcohol. This has been particularly highlighted in research with children and young people.
• There is evidence that restrictions on alcohol marketing can be effective in changing behaviour relating to purchase and consumption. This has been demonstrated by international research in countries where restrictions of various kinds have been introduced. (Note that respondents often referred to evidence on the links between marketing and behaviour change within other policy areas, e.g. smoking and consumption of unhealthy food. These respondents thought that this evidence would also apply in relation to reducing alcohol consumption.)
• There is evidence to suggest that the general public, those in recovery, vulnerable groups, and – importantly – children and young people are in favour of further restrictions.
• The World Health Organization has identified 'prevention of the alcohol industry's influence on social norms' as a key purpose of comprehensive restrictions.
• The current regulatory arrangements – which are implemented via the licensing system and co-regulatory or self-regulatory codes – are not adequate or effective. They are not rigorously applied, and the sanctions are weak (or absent).
• Any restrictions would have to be comprehensive to be effective in reducing exposure to alcohol marketing. A comprehensive ban would provide clarity to the alcohol industry and be easier to implement and enforce. Any exceptions (or exemptions) would be exploited by the industry which would simply adapt their business and marketing strategies to avoid restrictions.
• Any economic costs in terms of job losses due to increased restrictions on alcohol marketing would be offset by decreases in health care costs, and a healthier and more productive workforce.

11. These respondents often went on to say that the proposals were not sufficient in themselves. Rather, they should form part of a wider approach to tackling alcohol harm which should include (i) education about the risks of alcohol consumption, (ii) health warnings on all alcohol products, (iii) more and better information, support and services for those affected by alcohol harm, and (iv) the replacement of alcohol marketing by public health messages delivered across a range of media channels.

Alternative approaches

12. In discussing their views, respondents who opposed the introduction of (further) restrictions often suggested that there are alternative – better, more cost-effective – ways of reducing alcohol harms in Scotland.

13. Respondents of all types called for the Scottish Government to work in collaboration with the alcohol industry to improve and strengthen the current approach to encouraging and promoting responsible drinking. This could include (i) reviewing the effectiveness of current approaches before any new measures are introduced, (ii) strengthening the regulatory codes currently in use, (iii) giving consideration to placing (some of) the codes onto a statutory basis and (iv) increasing the use of public health messaging and warnings on alcohol products.