Drinking together, thinking together

The working lives of politicians, from funerals to fund-raisers, areintimately linked with alcohol. Is their relationship with the drinksindustry too cosy to confront our society's alcohol-related problems? writes Kathy Sheridan.

Statistics  and studies are falling out of the trees. Alcohol is a national problem; many call it a crisis. "More and more," says Róisín Shortall, a Labour TD in Dublin, "the problems arising at community level relate to alcohol rather than drugs. It is one of the biggest issues now for politicians." So the questions arise.

Where is the political will to tackle it? Is there collusion between the drinks industry and the politicians? A much too cosy relationship between the publicans and gardaí? A shade too much understanding between local gardaí and politicians as to which pubs are off-limits?

In a drink-dependent culture and a society in denial, politicians and gardaí are no more immune than anyone. It's human nature, says one TD, to want to go for a few drinks without being harangued for trying to shut the place down or raising alcohol taxes. It's a populist thing; alcohol accounts for 13 per cent of the average household budget.

"The vast majority of politicians are drinkers, too. The fact is that they're social animals by nature," says Jim Glennon, a Fianna Fáil TD in Dublin. Their working lives are, from funerals to fund-raisers, intimately linked with alcohol. Even the few anti-alcohol crusaders among them hold their clinics in pubs: it's cheap, convenient and warm, and waiting constituents can get a cup of coffee, explains one sheepishly.

Bertie Ahern, whose affinity with Bass is well known, has probably set a record for the number of pubs ceremoniously opened by a prime minister. A typical invitation: "I wish to invite you to the opening of the Pub, by An Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern. The Taoiseach will speak from 8.30-8.45 p.m., after which there will be an open bar and some finger food available for all attendees."

Although most closely identified with Fagan's of Drumcondra, he is said to spread his custom diplomatically around several pubs in the north city, on different nights of the week. His kitchen cabinet includes a substantial publican. His annual constituency fund-raiser included at least five large-scale publicans, each hosting a €1,780-table of eight.

Last October, within days of a new drive by Micheál Martin to ban drinks promotions from college campuses, the Taoiseach was the guest of honour at the launch of Freshers' Week for the students of St Patrick's teacher training college in Drumcondra - held in the morning, at the local Cat and Cage pub, where at least "some" free drink was available, according to reports.

Seanad Éireann has always had a member known as the vinters' nominee. The licensed vintners, says Labour TD Pat Rabbitte, who was a lobbying target while in government, have always worked assiduously at maintaining the inside track, in a way unmatched by others. "They have always nurtured a leg in all camps. Their organisations have always had access. And access is what it's all about".

Paddy Jordan, the genial director of the Irish Brewers' Association (made up of Guinness, Beamish, Heineken and Bass), says that there has always been a very close and trusting relationship between government and themselves. "About €800 million is collected by the brewing industry in excise and VAT alone. They are huge tax collectors, so it would obviously be foolish to suggest that they would have no clout with government."

So what kind of lobbying does the IBA get up to? "We lobbied to ensure that tax did not go up - and will continue to do so," says Jordan. Did it work? "Tax went up once in nine years - and that was in 1994." A palpable success then, in lobbying terms? "What you have to remember is that, historically, in terms of tax, we in Ireland were miles and miles ahead of other countries. Now we're only miles ahead." His handy IBA leaflet confirms that, in 2000, Ireland came first, second and fifth in Europe for excise tax rates on wine, beer and spirits respectively. Alcohol excises contributed 2.39 per cent of the total Government tax burden, making it the top European contributor, followed by Finland at 1.68 per cent.

ANY industry worth a cool €5 billion will fight tooth and nail to defend its interests, and this industry's success is evident. The recent report of the Strategic Task Force on Alcohol (STFA) noted that "almost all of the measures developed [to fight alcohol abuse and under-age drinking\] are poised to influence the demand side of alcohol (information, education, training), while the supply side had few initiatives . . . " And the few that have come - such as the Responsible Serving of Alcohol programme - have been purely voluntary.

Alcohol advertising is self-regulated; the IBA freely admits that there has been "slippage" towards the glamorising of alcohol and says it is now moving to remedy this with a new "copy-clearance programme". The National Age Card, introduced in 1999, controlled by the Garda and relatively foolproof, remains voluntary; the fact that it is rarely looked for by pub and club security staff doubtless accounts for its low take-up.

The National Alcohol Policy, launched in 1996 to reduce the level of alcohol-related problems, made the controlling of marketing, promotion and sponsorship a priority. A separate report on the impact of alcohol advertising found that many teenagers believed the ads were directly targeted at them.

Yet, as the STFA report states, in the past 10 years, the drinks industry has managed to increase its visibility. Its sponsorship deals are thought to run to at least €60 million a year.

Despite such vast investment, the industry insists that such activities do not attract new, young drinkers. It contends - as the tobacco industry once did - that they merely promote brand loyalty.

But in a recent beer and cider commercial newspaper feature, the editor of Drinks Industry Ireland magazine, Pat Nolan, explained cider's amazing revival: "Bulmers . . . pumped money into a sophisticated campaign throughout the 1990s, which repositioned the image of cider to make it a desirable drink for the new generation entry level drinkers . . . " Guinness UDV, explaining recently how it managed to halve the rate of sales decline, put it down to a combination of beefed-up investment in quality, increased marketing and the success of the "Believe" advertising campaign. Advertising works. Somehow.

Meanwhile, the STFA's report highlighted the divisions between the industry and those outside it. A review of international literature on the effectiveness of different alcohol policy measures yielded some surprising results.

Among the least effective approaches, according to Prof Robin Room of Stockholm University, are alcohol education in schools, voluntary codes of bar practice, providing alcohol-free activities as an alternative to drinking and regulating the content of alcohol advertising. The most effective approaches in terms of demonstrated effects on rates of alcohol problems in the population as a whole, he said, are taxes, regulating availability, harm reduction and deterrence, in the context of drinking-driving.

But, he points out, what is most effective generally is not what is politically popular. Why?

"One simple answer, of course, is that effective strategies are opposed because they will hurt economic interests," Prof Room maintains. "The alcoholic beverage industry has learned that it can live quite comfortably with school education. Some educational messages, indeed, may even help its interest. 'Drinking is an activity for grown-ups, so don't do it until you are an adult', for instance, cements in the symbolic meaning of drinking as a claim for adult status."

IN A minority view for the STFA's report, Pat Barry, representing the Drinks Industry Group, laid out its stall. The DIG was "disappointed", he said, "that greater emphasis was not placed on substantially increasing education programmes". It was seriously concerned at the notion of increased alcohol taxes which, he argued, "may lead to increased smuggling and, of course, impact on the CPI [consumer price index]". He questioned the recommended lowering of the blood alcohol limit - "particularly as 60 per cent of those detected are more than twice the existing limit". Above all, the group strenuously rejected the contention - contained in Prof Room's literature review - that a reduction in overall consumption of alcohol will lead to a reduction in alcohol-related harm.

So how effective is lobbying? Come back in a year or so and check how many of this report's recommendations have been implemented.

Back in Leinster House, strong men and women are wondering what became of the brave new world of just a couple of years ago, when they happily voted through the Intoxicating Liquor Act, facilitating extended opening hours. Pat Rabbitte is pretty sure that industry lobbying was not a factor then.

"There was a broad consensus across the parties that our licensing laws were out of date. We all thought it was a sensible gesture at the time . . . Those of us who are old fogies in the Dáil didn't know about the phenomenon of binge drinking among young kids. And I wonder if we are not confusing our perception of the drinks industry and the licensed trade with the real problem, which is underage drinking, which is excessive drinking, which seems to me to be the unmanageable and unmanaged problem - to get drunk in the fastest possible time. I think binge drinking has taken us genuinely by surprise. This phenomenon is different."

It is not Labour policy, however, to rescind the Act, he says. But deputies such as Jim Glennon, who have spoken of the "staggering" number of drink-related problems that cross their desks from constituents, have already asked for a review of it and Micheál Martin is said to be in favour of a review.

SO, too, is Pat Rabbitte's party colleague and fellow Labour leadership candidate, Róisín Shortall, who has campaigned steadily on these issues. She blames the problem partly on the fact that young people now have a lot of disposable money, which gives them access to "an adult lifestyle", and so has called for much greater police enforcement of employment legislation, which forbids under-18s to work after 10 p.m.

She "very much" welcomed those parts of the 2000 Intoxicating Liquor Act that introduced heavy penalties for publicans serving under-18s, measures which can close a pub for seven days after a first offence and for 30 days for a second, and described by John O'Donoghue at the time, as "the most draconian in Europe".

Enforcement, however, has been patchy, to put it nicely. Dáil questions put by Shortall revealed that, up to February of this year, not one closure order had been issued in the Dublin Metropolitan region. This contrasted with 45 in the west - 23 of them in Mayo alone. Such a discrepancy seems inexplicable.

Shortall knows of off-licences in the Dublin area who deliver to teenagers drinking in the fields. "I have reported it. Gardaí will say that it is difficult to prove where they got the drink, though it's hardly beyond their wit to mount regular sting operations."

When a garda suggested that every off-licence should have to have its name on the bags, she raised it through Brendan Howlin. "John O'Donoghue thought it was a great idea and even wanted to go one better, making every container identifiable. Great."

Sure enough, it appeared as section 17 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2000. Oddly, it has never been signed into law.

By their deeds shall ye know them.

(Series concluded)