AT last the Scottish Government can boast that it is leading the world in addressing Scotland’s chronic alcohol misuse problem, by the use of unit pricing on this drug. But is that a false hope?
I use the word drug purposely, because alcohol is a very powerful a drug, which like tobacco for hundreds of years has been tolerated as a legal substance for public consumption. It has also provided countless billions of revenue to our tax collectors.
The nature of the drug alcohol is that it disinhibits us, so allowing us to relax and enjoy ourselves, which can be a harmless state of mind. However, if too much alcohol is consumed and the user is in low spirits or depressed, then instead of improving that mood it makes it worse. The disinhibition fuels our sadness, our depression, or our suicidal feelings, and sadly for some it will give them the courage to take their own lives. Alcohol is the drug most associated with our ever growing suicide rate.
So clearly it is a good thing for governments to try to reduce consumption of alcohol in the belief that this will reduce the harm. I accept that it is only one of many measures the Scottish Government has taken to address this serious public health issue.
However, having worked in the field for five decades, I do not believe it will work. Firstly because the very powerful drinks industry will in no time at all find another way to get cheap booze to the problem drinkers. Secondly, the PR driving unit prices highlights young and poor people as the problem drinkers, when in fact our whole population is affected. The well-off middle classes over the age of 60 are now known to be one of the most hazardous consumers of alcohol. The 50p unit price will not curb their drinking. Wine is at a minimum price of under £5 is not going to affect that group.
The danger I see for the less well-off drinkers is that they will, in far larger numbers, switch from alcohol to the vast range of cheaper, illegal drugs available on every street corner. Chronic drinkers, like the thousands who are addicted to illicit drugs, drink for many reasons and research has shown for decades that underlying their drinking are undiagnosed and untreated mental health problems, which no unit pricing policy will ever address.
The public have missed one vital point about unit pricing that politicians have hidden from them. That is the scandal that every extra penny spent on alcohol because of unit pricing goes straight to those producing and selling alcohol. It is estimated that at the 50p unit price, the drinks industry in Scotland alone will get an additional £120 million of income, eg profit. It is not a tax. None of it goes to the Chancellor, who could have ring-fenced it to provide alcohol education and vastly increase the treatment services for those affected by alcohol.
Politicians could have tried other things that would made more of a difference and could have drawn in the horns of the profit-chasing drinks industry. For instance, over the last 15 years the size of spirit measures and wine glasses in pubs and restaurants have increased from 25mls to 35mls for spirits, and from 125mls to 250mls & 350mls for wine. They also missed the chance to really address drinks aimed at the young and young women, by failing to curb the massive development of alcopops, cocktails and drinks with high caffeine contents like Buckfast.
To crown all of that, the government have changed their advice on consumption of alcohol so often that the public no longer believe any of it. In the 1950s we were told 50-60 units of alcohol a week was safe. Then in the 1980s it was 21 units for men and 14 units for women. Now we are told that men and women should not drink more than 14 units of alcohol a week. It is starting to sound like alcohol is such a dangerous drug that it should no longer be available to the public.
So I would appeal to the government to revisit what they are doing about alcohol misuse and find ways to pull in the £120m extra profit going to the drink sellers to fund efforts to really educate the public about alcohol and to provide better mental health and addiction services. Then they could really boast that they are leading the world in addressing alcohol misuse.
Max Cruickshank
Glasgow
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel