Lobby Watch: The drinks industry

The Portman Group
Claire Harkins, doctoral candidate
1 Department of Geography and Sociology, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G1 1XN
c.harkins@strath.ac.uk
When it comes to alcohol awareness, is the government under the influence of the drinks industry?
The stated aim of the Portman Group is to promote social responsibility in the alcohol industry, with a particular focus on responsible marketing. Established in 1989, it claims to "show leadership on best practice in the area of alcohol responsibility" and to "foster a balanced understanding of alcohol-related issues."1 2
Its former chief executive, Jean Coussins, rejected any suggestion that the group "represent[s] the industry" or acts as a "trade association or lobby group."3 However, the evidence of its involvement in research and policy consultations indicates that it is not independent of the industry and that it lobbies on behalf of the industry.
In its statements the group emphasises individual responsibility, blaming a minority of heavy drinkers for alcohol related problems. This ignores many aspects of alcohol related harm and is inconsistent with the evidence base that supports current public health thinking.4 5 The group recently flexed its muscles in the debate around the Scottish government’s plans to introduce a minimum price per unit of alcohol—a policy that is supported by public health professionals worldwide but that has been criticised by the group.4 6 7 The group also attacked8 recent work from Sheffield University that found that minimum pricing in England and Wales would reduce the number of deaths directly attributable to alcohol by 3400 and the number of unnecessary hospital admissions by 100 000 a year.5 The chief medical officer for England, Liam Donaldson, supported the Sheffield University findings and minimum pricing in his annual report on public health.9 The group claims that alcohol advertising has no effect on the level of sales and therefore is not a driver of consumption but only of brand choice.8 It subsequently criticised Sir Liam, the BMA, and Alcohol Concern for their evidence based calls for such a ban.10 11
The Portman Group was set up by the alcohol industry, reportedly at the suggestion of a Tory peer.12 Twenty years later the same companies (Bacardi, Beverage Brands UK, Carlsberg UK, Coors UK, Diageo GB, InBev, Pernod Ricard, and Scottish & Newcastle) continue to finance the group. Its directors are all alcohol industry executives.13
The group’s influence on the UK government was evident in the 2004 alcohol strategy for England and Wales.14 The final strategy ignored government commissioned testimony from a group of 17 independent experts who called for restrictions on alcohol pricing and availability. Instead the Portman Group was the only "alcohol misuse" group cited in the final report. Alex Stevens, at the European Institute of Social Services at the University of Kent, said that the strategy adopted the "language and ideas of the alcohol industry . . . This seems a clear example where external pressure on government by a powerful group has influenced the use of evidence in policy."15
In 1994 the group was shown to have paid academics £2000 (2200; $3200) each to write anonymous critiques of a report from the World Health Organization that opposed the alcohol industry’s position on effective alcohol control policies.16 17 Professor Tom Babor of the University of Connecticut, one of the most respected experts working in the field of addictions and public health, commented: "When one begins to see scientists with industry connections being encouraged to attack independent researchers, industry supported commentators attacking publicly supported policy makers and commercial interests trying to set the research agenda, this is not only a cause for concern, but a recipe for disaster."18
Existing alcohol policy and the government’s close relations with the alcohol industry came in for criticism in the parliamentary health select committee’s recent report on alcohol, which stated: "We are concerned that government policies are much closer to, and too influenced by, those of the drinks industry and the supermarkets than those of expert health professionals."19 The Portman Group’s chairman, Seymour Fortescue, accepted that alcohol related harm is growing but argued that consumption was falling and advocated persevering with the current strategy of educational campaigns and targeted measures towards binge drinkers and alcohol dependent consumers.20 This position contradicts a growing body of evidence that overall consumption is too high and that educational campaigns are of limited practical use.19 The select committee report is valuable to those fighting for coherent and effective alcohol policy, not least for its endorsement of a public health centred approach to alcohol control. However, the alcohol industry and trade organisations such as the Portman Group are well placed in UK policy circles to defend their position. The UK still has some way to go before the sentiments expressed in the select committee’s recent report are translated into a policy that provides effective alcohol control.
Cite this as: BMJ 2010;340:b5659
Lobby Watch is a regular column that looks at people and organisations who have an influence on public health and on how health care is delivered. It is put together with the help of the public interest research team at Strathclyde University and those who work on the Spin Profiles website (www.spinprofiles.org).

Mehr