Dr. John Holmes:

It also loads an extra cost onto moderate drinkers who are buying slightly more expensive alcohol and paying the extra cost involved to subsidise cheap alcohol for heavier drinkers.

A few members asked about other policies that might work and how they might fit in a wider strategy. As I said, a broad strategic approach is needed which touches a wide range of bases. International evidence suggests pricing is one of the most effective ways of tackling the issue of the hard caused by alcohol. The way it is implemented is clear. The effects are consistent in that it tackles both consumption and harm, but that is not to say pricing is the only option the committee could consider.

A few members mentioned education. Education is important, but the evidence suggests that on its own it will not reduce problem drinking because there are too many other influences on the reasons people drink. There is too much advertising which shapes alcohol as a desirable product and appeals to young people in certain ways, while there is too much cheap alcohol available. Therefore, the level of availability is too high to say education will solve the problem. However, we do need to teach young people about the dangers of alcohol, but that education might be more effective if the system in which alcohol was retailed and promoted was got right first. It is, therefore, about having a comprehensive strategy.

There are proposals before members on the labelling of products. There is not a great amount of evidence that it will reduce consumption, but there is evidence that it will increase consumers' understanding of the risks associated with drinking, It should knowledge of what is contained in the alcohol and specific risks such as drinking during pregnancy. This is more likely to affect behaviour if the influence on behaviour of cheap alcohol and advertising was reduced. There is also a point to be made about consumer rights in that people have a right to know what they are drinking.

With regard to the industry and disinformation, we have experienced a good deal of this. Members raised questions about the way the industry had responded to this policy, which is supported in Canada. I am not sure if it supported it when it was brought forward several decades ago, but it generally support it because it makes it money, as we have discussed. However, in the United Kingdom the off-trade retailers who will be most affected are strongly opposed to it because they do not want alcohol sales to be regulated. We suspect that they know this policy will have an impact and it will impact most on the heaviest drinkers. The top 10% of drinkers in the United Kingdom consume 30% of the alcohol drunk, while the top 30% consume 80%. When we talk about the industry selling responsibly, it makes a huge chunk of its profits from those who drink alcohol above what is deemed to be the responsible level. It is, therefore, in its interests to ensure policies which regulate drinking or seek to reduce heavy drinking are not implemented.