The Scottish government has announced that it will introduce Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP) of alcohol in May 2018. This has been a few years in the making; the policy was passed by the Scottish government in 2012, but was then challenged by the Scottish Whiskey Association and taken to the Supreme Court. This month the Supreme Court ruled that the introduction of Minimum Unit Pricing of alcohol did not breach EU law.

 

What will this mean for Scottish drinkers?

It depends on what they drink. The idea is to set a minimum price per unit of alcohol – the current suggestion is 50p per unit, although some say this should be increased. So, it will only raise the price of the cheapest drinks and is unlikely to affect bars and clubs. It is targeting the sale of cheap alcohol from supermarkets and off licences.

Here are some examples of how it would work: a bottle of wine at 14% and containing 9.4 units would cost at least £4.70; a 700ml bottle of whiskey at 40% containing 28 units would cost at least £14.00; and a 500ml can of lager at 4% containing 2 units would cost a minimum of £1.00. (To work out the units, multiply the volume in litres by the percentage of alcohol). The extra revenue produced will stay with the retailers. Therefore, it is not a ‘tax’ as the government doesn’t gain financially from it.

 

What is the point of all this?

The overconsumption of alcohol is one of the biggest risk factors for ill health in the UK. It is not surprising that Scotland is attempting to reduce this impact, as it has highest rates of alcohol-specific death in the UK – by some margin. According to the Office for National Statistics, 30.9 per 100,000 males in Scotland, compared to 14.5 in England, 17.4 in Wales and 22.2 in Northern Ireland, die from alcohol-specific causes. The idea of MUP is that it will reduce consumption of the most harmful drinkers, as it has been shown that those who drink the most buy the cheapest and strongest drinks. It is hoped that these drinkers will buy less alcohol and come to less harm.

 

But does it work?

Scotland will be the first country to introduce this particular policy, and so there isn’t a lot of evidence on this scale. Canada introduced a similar policy. However, it takes the form of a tax where the extra revenue goes to the government. There are some positive results from Canada. Academic research has found that a 10% increase in average minimum prices in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan is associated with an 8% decrease in the per capita alcohol consumption; in British Columbia, it is associated with a 9% decrease in rates of hospitalisation for alcohol-related diseases.

Therefore, Scotland has a lot to gain from such a policy.

 

What about the rest of the UK?

In Wales the devolved Labour government has unveiled plans to introduce MUP by the summer of 2018.

David Cameron had plans to legislate for MUP in England in 2012 but backed down under pressure from the drinks industry. It is likely that fresh calls will be made when Scotland and Wales introduce the law.

In just the last week Northern Ireland’s Chief Medical Officer urged the introduction of minimum pricing. Such a move had previously been on the Executive’s agenda, but with no functioning government it is highly unlikely that it will be introduced as quickly as Scotland and Wales. Perhaps, if we move towards some form of direct rule, it could be introduced in line with England.

 

Ireland is more ambitious, but currently in limbo

In 2015 the then Health Minister, Leo Varadkar, introduced a Public Health Bill that included MUP, alongside the increased regulation of alcohol sale, supply, marketing, and sponsorship. This has been delayed by political issues in Ireland and the alcohol lobby. The current Irish Health, Minister Simon Harris, has stated that he intends to introduce MUP but will not do so until Northern Ireland has a functioning government to prevent people crossing the border for cheaper alcohol.

 

Who needs a government? We do!

Yet again, the lack of a functioning government in Northern Ireland is having a real impact on the health of individuals here, but this time it is having a knock-on effect by delaying the introduction of MUP south of the border too. Hopefully it will only be a delay of months – not much compared to Scotland, where the policy experienced a lengthy legal challenge. But at this point, that might seem optimistic.