|
The World Health Organisations European Conference on Alcohol
and Young People took place this February in Stockholm.The tenor
of the conference was predictable, reflecting WHO Europes pro-regulatory
anti-alcohol stance, but the publicity generated, particularly
by statistics relating to alcohol-related deaths among young people
cited (55,000 deaths per annum among 15-19 year olds within the
WHO EU region it is claimed) hints at a subtle shift in the alcohol
policy agenda. Although WHOs views represent the extreme of public
health thinking on alcohol, its capacity to generate hostile media
coverage was demonstrated. Media attention focuses increasingly
on the social damage of alcohol abuse; in the UK we have been
bombarded with reports on womens ladette behaviour and Britains
yob culture for example.
Dr Gro Brundtland spoke of her fury and feeling of manipulation
over the marketing techniques that are being used to introduce
alcohol to very young people.Many would argue that it is the misuse
of alcohol and not the product itself which is the problem and
the industry, through associations such as the Portman Group and
the BLRA in the UK, does play an active role in combating abuse.
Further more the ineffectiveness of the restrictive French Loi
Envin (introduced in 1991 and recently reviewed) in reducing alcohol
consumption enhances the research that there is no convincing
evidence that advertising leads to an increase in overall consumption
or abuse.
As well as advertising, the conference highlighted the regulation/self-regulation
debate as David Byrne, European Commissioner for Health and Consumer
Protection,while endorsing the WHOs tough stance on abuse, fell
well short of advocating more legislation. He pointed out that
much could be achieved by enforcing current laws and he challenged
the industry to prove that it could regulate itself. "I have signalled
to the industry that they have an opportunity to demonstrate their
credentials by acting to enforce their codes." The conference
made clear that any self-regulatory measures will be closely scrutinised
- launching and publicising codes of practice is no longer the
prime challenge, making them work is what really counts.
Self-regulation in all areas of alcohol policy can be effective
and offers many advantages over legislation. The European Advertising
Standards Alliance (EASA) has argued that properly designed and
well administered self-regulatory systems provide a swift, flexible,
inexpensive and effective means
of enabling the responsible majority of the industry to restrain
the irresponsible minority. It can also be argued that legislation
is more cumbersome , bureau-cratic and expensive for government
than self regulation, which is respected more by those working
in the industry who abide by the spirit of the code rather than
the letter of the law as self-regulation is formed in partnership.However,
if self-regulation is only there to stave off government regulation
it is not a very good reason for it. The industry must embrace
regulatory principles genuinely and whole heartedly and has to
show that self-regulation, when fully supported and acted up,
actually does work. If it does not, legislation will become irresistible.
While WHOs figures may be questionable, no one denies that problems
such as under-age and binge-drinking are there. Arguing over exactly
how many young people die as a result of alcohol abuse is not
a politically wise move for the industry, but if through effective
and imaginative programmes and self-regulation it can point to
genuine reductions in the damage misuse does, its position is
legitimised and strengthened |
