Hansard

I thank the Scottish Government for bringing this important debate to the chamber.

Presiding Officer, I respect your initial remarks on the sub judice issue. However, I am confused about why a sub judice issue was included in a Government motion. My understanding is that Government motions set the parameters for the debate. I raised the issue with the clerks yesterday, and I was told that a sub judice issue could be included in a Government motion but could not be discussed. I accepted that explanation, although I am not sure that I understand it fully.

I am happy to say that Labour members will support the motion, and I thank the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Sport for accepting our amendment.

I am sure that most if not all of us in the chamber and beyond the walls of the Parliament do not need to look far in our own lives to see how alcohol can impact individuals, relationships, families, children and people’s incomes, work, careers and friendships.

Today, we as a Parliament, along with the Scottish Government, consider how public policy can reduce alcohol consumption to mitigate some of those effects on people’s lives. The difficulty in doing that is that alcohol is legal, widely available, sociable and, in many ways, a good thing. Ultimately, it is up to our own volition and ability to moderate its consumption. That is a very liberal argument, but it is at the heart of the debate—the balance between restrictions through legislation and public policy and control of our own behaviour. What can be such a good thing in moderation—a libation, a social relaxant, a treat, and an enjoyable reward for celebration and hard work—can tip into being a culture, a crutch, and something that no event or social occasion can be without. That takes us to the place that, unfortunately, many of our communities are in, where too many lives are lost and impacted by its devastating consequences.

We cannot be under any illusion how damaging alcohol is to Scotland. The briefings that we have received for the debate have been helpful. They point out that, in Scotland, there are 20 deaths every week due to alcohol misuse. Deaths from liver cirrhosis in 2010 were around 40 per cent higher than the European Union average. We drink almost a fifth more than our neighbours in England and Wales. Despite modest recent improvements, rates of alcohol-related hospital admissions in Scotland are more than four times higher than they were in the early 1980s. Harmful drinking is not unique to Scotland, but seeing our name right at the top of the league tables on every measure of alcohol abuse is a deep stain on our image and pride in our country.

I have touched on the social and human impact of alcohol abuse, but it is important not to forget its effect on our economy and our ability to work and be productive. That, as well as the human cost and the health impact, must be a crucial element of the debate.

Rebalancing Scotland’s relationship with alcohol is a shared ambition across the Parliament. There is a range of views on how best to achieve that and a lot of consensus. I acknowledge the Government’s commitment to the issue, as noted in the motion.

Without easy or simple solutions, it is difficult to bring about the change of culture that we require. I am sure that the ban on multibuy discounts and other measures that the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Sport highlighted played a significant role in the recent fall in consumption, although the economic downturn is acknowledged as another factor.

We welcome some of the modest improvements that have been made. Scotland was the first country in the world to implement alcohol brief interventions, whose effectiveness is long established, in a national programme. The fact that the programme has outperformed its initial targets is an excellent recommendation for the Scottish Government to continue it.

The reduction in alcohol-related deaths among the most deprived people in Scotland signals a small start to reducing health inequality, which we must welcome and fully support. Although there has been a 35 per cent fall since 2003 in alcohol-related deaths, that still leaves deaths 40 per cent higher than in the 1990s, according to Scottish Health Action on Alcohol Problems. As the cabinet secretary said, the rise in alcohol-related deaths since 2013 is concerning but does not challenge the overall downward trend.

I also welcome the constructive way in which the Government approached the motion and the cabinet secretary’s willingness to consider other additional measures. In that respect, I hope that the Scottish Government will consider the measures that my colleague Dr Richard Simpson proposes in his member’s bill, given his undoubted expertise in, and passion for, the subject.

I will take members briefly through some of the proposals in Richard Simpson’s bill. I do not want to leave that to the closing speeches, as I would like some of the issues to be debated. The bill has some constructive proposals in a range of areas, such as alcohol advertising and retailing, licensing laws and how we rehabilitate offenders with alcohol problems.

Packaging up multipacks and selling them off so that each unit is cheaper encourages heavier drinking, so there are proposals on that in the bill.

There are also proposals to restrict alcohol marketing, especially where children might be exposed. It is within the scope of the Scotland Act 1998 to do that in public areas on billboards, in bus shelters and on public transport. I noted the cabinet secretary’s initial comments that broadcasting is reserved to Westminster, but I am sure that, with the increase in representation at Westminster that her party has recently enjoyed, its MPs can make the case along with our colleagues there.

Richard Simpson’s bill proposes restrictions on caffeinated alcohol. It seeks to establish a legal limit of 150mg of caffeine per litre of pre-mixed alcoholic drinks, based on the limit in Denmark, that would apply to the retail of such products only. It does not propose an outright ban.

I know that the cabinet secretary feels strongly about alcohol education. The bill would require the Scottish Government to publish a programme of public alcohol education, evaluate its effects and report to Parliament on its successes.

Other ideas in Richard Simpson’s bill are a presumption against discrimination against 18 to 21-year-olds in off-sale premises, and community consultation, in which an approach similar to that of New Zealand would be adopted, where a neighbourhood is consulted and must have its views taken into account by the licensing board when it issues, renews or extends a licence. I am sure that the cabinet secretary will be aware of that example. It may sound overly bureaucratic but there was a situation in our home city of Dundee recently in which the health board objected to a local cafe’s application to sell alcohol. The community council’s voice was not part of that process. A community consultative approach, as Dr Simpson has proposed, might be a more inclusive and constructive way of engaging the community in licensing decisions, as opposed to a process in which organisations and individuals can lodge objections directly to the licensing board. I hope that suggestions in Richard Simpson’s bill will be discussed at greater length during the debate.

We know that Scotland is changing and I believe that our relationship with alcohol is changing, too. We would be silly to deny that the macho culture of hard drinking still exists in our communities. Much of it is ingrained in our identity and is still celebrated and joked about in an unhealthy way. My strong sense, though, is that people today—especially young people—have greater awareness of their health. They have a stronger desire to live healthier lives and understand that too much alcohol is not compatible with that.

In time, our health service and our justice system will see the benefit of that, but we must do much more to ensure that that trend is ingrained and continues, particularly given that, in the national health service, the pressure on our doctors and nurses grows every day. Every day in this Parliament, we should work towards our ambition for a healthier Scotland, in which people from all backgrounds are educated and empowered to make better decisions with healthy bodies and healthy minds. A big part of that is to tackle harmful drinking. We can look at the progress in recent years and take some comfort, while recognising the long way that we still have to go.

I move amendment S4M-13358.1, after “help tackle alcohol misuse” to insert:

“including restrictions on alcohol retailing and advertising, changes to licensing laws and improved alcohol-related rehabilitation for offenders”.