Landmark ruling on booze cost
Trade warning as court backs SNP bid to hike cost of alcohol
THE UK’s highest court yesterday rejected a challenge by the Scotch whisky industry against plans to introduce a minimum price for alcohol. Seven Supreme Court justices in London dismissed an appeal by the Scotch Whisky Association.
The judges unanimously ruled that there was no breach of EU law and that minimum pricing ‘is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim’.
The Scottish Government i s expected to bring in legislation within months which will see a minimum price of 50p for each unit of alcohol sold in shops.
SCOTLAND will become the first country in the world to introduce minimum pricing for alcohol after SNP plans were backed by the highest court in the land.
Ministers now plan to i mplement controversial legislation which will introduce within months a minimum price of 50p for each unit of alcohol sold in shops.
The minimum price for a bottle of wine will rise to £4.60, while a bottle of whisky will be no cheaper than £14.
It is the latest in a series of measures taken by the SNP aimed at ‘improving’ the lives of Scots, including proposals to cut promotions on unhealthy foods.
However, critics fear minimum pricing could have a damaging effect on the country’s lucrative whisky industry and would have little impact on improving health.
Yesterday’s landmark Supreme Court ruling allowing the Scottish Government to proceed with the Bill follows a five-year legal battle with the Scotch Whisky Association ( SWA), and comes after European judges ruled that the plans would breach trade laws.
The court unanimously ruled that the Alcohol ( Minimum Pricing) (Scotland) Act 2012 was compatible with EU l aw and said the plan was appropriately targeted, lawful and proportionate. Judges said minimum pricing ‘ is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim’.
However, they said that a ‘significant factor’ in allowing the proposals to be implemented was the inclusion of a ‘sunset’ clause and review of the ‘ experimental’ system.
The news was welcomed by the Scottish Government – which plans to have legislation in place in the first six months of next year – and medical campaigners.
Speaking after the ruling yesterday, Health Secretary Shona Robison said: ‘This is a historic and farreaching judgment and a landmark moment in our ambition to turn around Scotland’s troubled relationship with alcohol.
‘In a ruling of global significance, the UK Supreme Court has unanimously backed our pioneering and life-saving alcohol-pricing policy.
‘Given the clear and proven link between consumption and harm, minimum pricing is the most effective and efficient way to tackle the cheap, high- strength alcohol that causes so much damage to so many families.
‘So we will proceed with plans to introduce minimum unit pricing as quickly as possible.’
There are still a number of questions over issues such as Scots ordering alcohol f rom suppliers and shops south of the Border, which the Scottish Government has yet to answer.
It has also been disclosed that following the lengthy court battles, the Scottish Government will pursue the Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) to pay its legal fees.
The SWA had pursued legal challenges against ministers over fears for Scotland’s whisky industry and the country’s economy which, it believes, will be hit when minimum pricing is introduced.
But last night chief executive Karen Betts said: ‘We accept the Supreme Court’s r uli ng on minimum unit pricing of alcohol in Scotland.
‘ Looking ahead, the Scotch whisky industry will continue to work in partnership with the Government and the voluntary sector to promote responsible drinking and to tackle alcoholrelated harm.’
Miss Betts added: ‘We will now look to the Scottish and UK Governments to support the industry against the negative effects of trade barriers being raised in overseas markets that discriminate against Scotch whisky as a consequence of minimum pricing.
‘This is vital in order that the jobs and investment the industry provides i n Scotland are not damaged.’
Many health campaigners have hailed the court’s ruling, with Alcohol Focus Scotland insisting the decision was a ‘ massive victory for Scotland’s health’.
Chief executive Alison Douglas said the legislation would ‘save the lives of hundreds of Scots and improve the lives of thousands more’.
But reformed alcoholic Alister MacKinnon said he was not convinced.
Mr MacKinnon said: ‘When you come to the point of bingedrinking and you are needing alcohol and if alcohol has really got into your system, the price is no problem. If you haven’t got the money, you will get the money. Alcohol is a huge, huge killer and this pricing will do absolutely nothing at all.’
Fears have also been raised that moderate drinkers will be penalised and f orced to pay more money to simply enjoy a relaxing drink.
Kenny Alexander, spokesman for alcohol consumer body Drinkers’ Voice, said: ‘The poor, the young and the moderate majority are
‘Investment must not be damaged’ ‘Attack on our heritage’
being made to pay the price for the excessive drinking habits of a few middle- aged and middle- class drinkers.
‘It won’t be the ideologically driven Rioja-drinking medics and academics who have campaigned for this measure who will feel the pinch, but the average men and women who enjoy the simple pleasure of a drink at a price they can afford.
’As a Scotsman, I feel that this decision, which will inevitably drive up the cost of whisky, is an attack on our culture and our heritage.’
Chris Snowdon, head of lifestyle economics at the Institute of Economic Affairs, said: ‘The Supreme Court’s decision today is disappointing but we should be thankful the legal action has delayed the implementation of this pernicious policy by five years, saving Scottish drinkers hundreds of millions of pounds.’
Comment and John MacLeod– Page 16