Lobbying in Alcohol Industry Essay Example for Free

Lobbying in inebriant Industry try on1. inebriant industry in EUThe economic role of the inebriantic beverageic intoxications industry is considerable in m whatever European countries. inebriant excise duties in the EU15 countries amounted to 25 billion in 2001, excluding sales taxes and sepa localise taxes paid within the supply chain although 1.5 billion is given back to the supply chain through with(predicate) with(predicate) the Common Agricultural Policy. Due to the relative inelasticity of the demand for intoxicant, the reasonable tax rates are a much better predictor of a g overnments tax revenue than the level of using up in a country. 1.1 Alcohol and the economy of EuropeEurope plays a important role in the global intoxicant market, acting as the source of a quarter of the worlds alcoholic beverageic drinkic beverageic beverage and over half of the worlds fuddle production. Trade is even more than centred on Europe, with70% of alcohol exports and just under half of the worlds imports involving the European Union (EU). Although the majority of this trade is surrounded by EU countries, the trade in alcohol contributes around 9billion to the fairs account balance for the EU as a whole.Price differences play more of a role in the level of certain cross-border shopping, where individuals levelheadedly vex back alcohol with them from cheaper countries. At least 1 in 6 tourists returns from trips abroad with intoxicating discombobulates, carrying an average of over 2 litres of pure alcohol per person in several countries. The economic role of the alcoholic drinks industry is considerable in many European countries.Alcohol is withal associated with a number of stemmas, including over three-quarters of a million in drinks production (mainly wine). Further jobs are overly related to alcohol elsewhere in the supply chain, e.g. in pubs or shops. However, the size of the industry is not necessarily a good guide to the economic impac t of alcohol policies for example, trends in alcohol consumption show no in the raw correlation with trends in the number of jobs in associated areas such(prenominal) as hotels, restaurants, and bars, suggesting that the effect of changes in consumption may be relatively weak. A reduction in spending on alcohol would also be expected to free consumer funds to be spent on otherwise areas, with the economic impact depending on the exact nature of the new expenditure.While further research needs to be d matchless on this issue, current evidence from alcohol and other sectors suggests that declining consumption may not necessarily lead to job losses in the economy as a whole. Based on a review of be studies, the total tangible cost of alcohol to EU society in 2003 was estimated to be 125bn (79bn-220bn), equivalent to 1.3% GDP, which is well-nigh the same value as that found recently for tobacco.The intangible costs show the value sight place on pain, suffering and lost deportment that occurs due(p) to the criminal, social and health harms caused by alcohol. In 2003 these were estimated to be 270bn, with other ways of valuing the same harms producing estimates between 150bn and 760bn. While these estimates consider a number of several(predicate) areas of human life where alcohol has an impact, there are several further areas where no estimate has been do as it was impossible to obtain data. Similarly, while the estimates take into account the benefits of alcohol to health systems and loss of life (valued intangibly), there is no research that would enable the other social benefits to be evaluated.1.1 The use of alcohol in EuropeThe EU is the heaviest insobriety region of the world, although the 11 litres of pure alcohol drunk per adult distributively year is still a substantial fall from a recent peak of 15 litres in the mid-1970s. The last 40 age has also seen a harmonization in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Ita ly, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.Most Europeans drink alcohol, but 55 million adults (15%) abstain taking this and unrecorded consumption into account, the consumption per drinker reaches 15 litres per year. Just under half of this alcohol is consumed in the form of beer (44%), with the rest divided between wine (34%) and animate (23%). Within the EU15, northern and central parts drink mainly beer, while those in Confederate Europe drink mainly wine (although Spain may be an exception).This is a relatively new phenomenon, with a harmonization evident over the past 40 years in the EU15. Around 40% of potable occasions in around of the EU15 involve consuming alcohol with the afternoon/evening meal, although those in gray Europe are much more likely to drink with lunch than elsewhere. While the level of routine deglutition also shows a northsouth gradient, non-daily frequent consumption (i.e. drinking several time a week but not eve ry day) seems to be more common in central Europe, and there is evidence for a recent harmonization within the EU15.While 266 million adults drink alcohol up to 20g (women) or 40g (men) per day, over 58 million adults (15%) consume above this level, with 20 million of these (6%) drinking at over 40g (women) or 60g per day(men). Looking at addiction rather than drinking levels, we can also estimate that 23 million Europeans (5% of men, 1% of women) are dependent on alcohol in any one year. In every culture ever studied, men are more likely than women to drink at all and to drink more when they do, with the gap greater for riskier behaviour.Although many women give up alcohol when pregnant, a significant number (25%-50%) continue to drink, and or so continue to drink to harmful levels. Patterns in drinking behaviour can also be seen for socio-economic status(SES), where those with low SES are less likely to drink alcohol at all. Despite a complex picture for some aspects of drinking (with some measures showing glacial trends for men and women), getting drunk and becoming dependent on alcohol are both more likely among drinkers of humble SES.Every country in the European Union (EU) has a number of laws and other policies that set alcohol apart from other goods traded in its territory, often for reasons of public health. Despite the ubiquity of alcohol policies, just under half the EU countries still do not experience an action designing or coordinating body for alcohol. Even so, most countries have programmes for one aspect of alcohol insurance, of which school-based development programmes are the most common throughout Europe. All countries also have some form of drink-driving restrictions, with everywhere except the UK, Ireland and Luxembourg having a uttermost blood alcohol limit for drivers at the level recommended by the European fit out (0.5g/L).However, many European drivers believe that there is only a slim go on of being detected a third over all believe they will never be breathalyses, although this is lower in countries with random breath testing. Sales of alcohol are generally subject to restrictions in most EU countries, in a few cases through retail monopolies but more often through licences, while the places that alcohol can be sold are frequently restricted. Over one-third of countries (and some regions) also limit the hours of sale, while restrictions on the days of sale or the density of off-premise retailers exist in a small number of countries. All countries prohibit the sale of alcohol to young people on a lower floor a certain age in bars and pubs, although four countries have no polity on the sale of alcohol to children in shops. The cut-off point for allowing sales to young people also varies across Europe, guardianship to be 18 years in northern Europe and 16 years in southern Europe.Alcohol marketing is controlled to different degrees depending on the type of marketing activity. Television beer advert s are subject to legal restrictions (beyond content restrictions) in over half of Europe, including complete bans in five countries this rises to 14 countries for bans on spirits adverts. Billboards and print media are subject to less regulation though, with one in three countries (mainly in the EU10) having no controls. Sports sponsorship is subject to the weakest restrictions, with only seven countries having any legal restrictions at all. The taxation of alcoholic beverages is another conformable feature of European countries, although the rates themselves vary considerably between countries.This can be seen clearly for wine, where close half the countries have no tax at all, but one in five countries has a tax rate above 1,000, adjusted for purchasing power. In general, the average effective tax rate is highest in northern Europe, and weakest in southern and parts of central and eastern Europe. Four countries have also introduced a targeted tax on alcopops since 2004, which ap pears to have reduced alcopops consumption since. When the different policy areas are unite into a single scale, the overall strictness of alcohol policy ranges from 5.5 (Greece) to 17.7 (Norway) out of a possible maximum of 20, with an average of 10.8.The least strict policies are in southern and parts of central and eastern Europe, and the highest in northern Europe but the scores do not all decrease from north to south, as seen in the high score in France. This picture of alcohol policy is very different from the one visible fifty years ago, with the overall levels of policy now much closer together, largely due to the increased level of policy in many countries, particular in the area of drink-driving where all countries have a legal limit. Marketing controls, minimum ages to buy alcohol, and public policy structures to deliver alcohol policy are also much more common in 2005 than in 1950.Main interest groups in the industry and their leader in lobbying activitiesEurocare Who w e are and what we doEurocare, is an alliance of around 50 voluntary and non-governmental organizations across Europe created in 1990, working on the bar and reduction of alcohol-related harm2 . One of the main goals is to promote the prevention of alcohol-related harm in European Union decision-making this is achieved by monitoring all EU level policy initiatives, and carrying out advocacy campaigns directed at the European Commission (EC) and the European Parliament (EP) to ensure that alcohol issues are included in relevant policy discussions.The catalyst of our work in recent years (and the concrete result of fifteen years of lobbying) has been the EU Strategy to Support Member States in minify Alcohol Related Harm, published by the Directorate General for wellness and Consumer Protection (DG Sanco) of the European Commission in October 20063. A cornerstone of this strategy is the recently launched Alcohol and health meeting place, a multistakeholder curriculum bringing tog ether the industry and well as NGOs4 pledging to commit to concrete actions to reduction alcohol-related harm.The cross-sectoral nature of alcohol policy includes the Television Without Frontiers Directive (concerned with young peoples exposure to alcohol advertising), Minimum discover Duties (a report from the EP proposed to scrap these in order to avoid cross border trade and smuggling), and Labeling (the EC is to impart a draft Directive on labeling at the end of the year).For Eurocare, lobbying on alcohol presents several difficulties starting signal the EU has limited vience to legislate in the domain of public health5. DG Sancos Alcohol Strategy is thus useful for advocacy in Member States at EU level, it has allowed alcohol to posit a place on the political agenda, despite being weakened by the work on of the Commissions more powerful big brothers (DG Trade, DG Market, DG Agriculture, etc.) (Ulstein 2006).Second, at European level, the aim of reducing alcohol-related h arm is competing against other strong public health discourses for example in the field of tobacco, nutrition and strong-arm activity, the latter exemplified in the EU Platform for Diet, Physical Activity and Health on which the Alcohol and Health Forum is modeled. Roizen and Fillmore (2000) articulate this from the researchers perspective, but it is also true for advocates that our consumerist or dangerous-commodity orientation to alcohol () obliges us to compete in a public-health-information-offering market place already crowded with health warnings of many kinds.The specificities of alcohol mete out to further complicate the picture parallels with tobacco or junk food are obvious certain public health burdens links with social inequalities, and of course, powerful industries. What sets alcohol apart though, is the highly problematic, misunderstood and use evidence on the benefits of alcohol consumption like it or not, the ambiguous molecule alcohol forms an full part of most cultures across Europe, causing deaths while saving lives, inflicting pain while producing pleasureThe alcohol industry no ordinary stakeholderThe alcohol industry is undeniably a rival voice in the political process of weighing up the evidence a strong economic asset, with increasingly visible corporate social responsibility policies, the industry represents a valid stakeholder. Alcohol producers unite underlegitimate fronts through social aspects (SA) organisations6, such as the International Centre for Alcohol Policies (ICAP) or the European Forum For Responsible Drinking (EFRD), both of which are participating in the Commissions Alcohol and Health Forum. Under these banners, research, policy analysis and of course, lobbying are carried out in fact, it has not been uncommon to find such groups walking the same corridors of power as ourselves.To the layperson, the research and policy analysis (e.g. ICAP Blue Book) carried out by these organisations may appear methodologically sou nd, and conclusive, and the (simplistic) models as comprehensive and logical. For example, that patterns of drinking are the exceed way to visit the place of alcohol in society that targeted interventions are most sensitive to cultural differences, and that partnerships offer the best opportunities to develop policies.Funnily enough Drinking in Context Patterns, Interventions and Partnerships, an ICAP collaborative publication (Stimson et al. 2006) was recently publicised at a lunch meeting held in the European Parliament, hosted by German MEP Renate Sommer. Staff from the Eurocare secretariat attended this lunch the event was reminiscent of the spirit of the film Thank You For Smoking8 a sequel named Thank You For Drinking should be considered, and would be highly entertaining. This example highlights the tensions involved in the political process, and how apparently sound and legitimate evidence can be put forward by the industry, in order to counter what is regarded by the pub lic health community as legitimate evidence.When the Institute of Alcohol Studies published the Alcohol in Europe report, the British Beer and Pub Association (also participating in the Alcohol and Health Forum) attempted to undermine its scientific objectivity by denouncing vested interests, namely, links to temperance they likened this to vegetarians writing a report about the benefits of eating meat. The EFRDs view (in Baumberg Anderson 2007) was that those advocating a stronger EU alcohol strategy had a biased view of the evidence base.It is precisely through the use of evidence and their affair in research, policy analysis and lobbying (activities mirroring our own work) that the industry tries to secure a place at the policy table, which may be potentially difficult for the public health community to fight off. The WHO (2007) stresses the importance of the companionship of civil society organisations without the conflict of interests in alcohol policy development, as a coun ter influence to the vested trade interests, which might otherwise dominate political decision making.