Spotlight - Alcohol industry advocates face tough crowd in Stockholm

The second conference on alcohol-related harm convened by the Swedish Presidency of the EU included a large representation of NGOs opposed to self-regulation as a way of tackling alcohol-related harm. Ben Cooper asked representatives of the two industry bodies invited to speak whether they received a fair hearing.

To those with a sense of etymological whimsy, it is rather apt that CEPS director general Jamie Fortescue's surname literally means 'strong shield'. Fortescue was virtually the sole representative of the drinks industry to speak at a recent conference convened under the auspices of the Swedish Presidency of the EU, which gathered together many of the sternest critics of the drinks industry and ardent self-regulation sceptics. Strength and resilience were clearly the order of the day.

This was the second conference organised by the Swedish Presidency, the first being an informal meeting of health ministers in July. It covered four key topics, identified by the Swedes as areas of high concern: alcohol pricing, marketing communication, young people (including unborn children) and alcohol and the elderly.

Billed as a conference of experts, the fact that there was so little official industry representation will be a source of frustration for drinks companies, but will have surprised few.

However, Fortescue says the conference, held at the Norra Latin Conference Centre in Stockholm in late September, was less "hostile" than a similar one held in Barcelona last year. The Swedish government did not wish to be seen to be presiding over "a health NGO love fest", Fortescue says. "They wanted this to come over as a serious conference so in order to do that they needed to try and provide some sort of balance."

Also, while at one stage slated only to be on one panel, Fortescue ended up being on three during the two-day conference. He therefore had the opportunity "to tell the CEPS Charter story", and just as important report on the progress of the Alcohol and Health Forum's Taskforce on Marketing Communication.

As an example of cooperation between industry, NGOs and public administration, the work of the Forum and the taskforce in particular was highly relevant to the debate within the conference on the merits of self-regulation. "Part of the good thing about the forum process is that industry and NGOs are engaging with each other more than they have in the past," Fortescue says.

He believes that the more considered hearing he was given at this conference, in comparison with other such events in the past, shows progress is being made. "We are as industry being given the opportunity to have our say which I think is good progress. We are getting a hearing. There are certainly still out there some very radical NGOs who don't want to listen but they will never be convinced anyway. And I think we're gaining ground in the middle ground. People realise increasingly that it makes more sense to work with industry than constantly criticise it. I wouldn't say we're there yet but I think the Alcohol and Health Forum has helped to generate a more constructive dialogue than we've had in the past."

He adds that while there is still scepticism at a higher level within NGOs, there is increasingly more cooperation at a local level and, "at the end of the day that's where the work has to be done".

Another positive for Fortescue was the moderating influence EU Commissioner Robert Madelin at the conference. "He's very engaged in this whole process which is extremely helpful because I think he as an individual is someone who is trusted by both sides. He's a good arbiter in this whole debate, and realistic."

This is representative of generally positive noises coming from the Commission on self-regulation, which Fortescue welcomes. "They are still making clear that it's not good enough yet but they're also positive about what it can achieve if done properly and our challenge as industry is to get it properly implemented and up and running in all 27 member states. We're not there yet but that's what we've committed to try and do."

The last CEPS Charter report indicated that countries with only a limited code or no code in place last year were Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, Romania and the Slovak Republic. Fortescue is candid about the challenge CEPS faces. "We've still got a number of gaps to fill and I certainly wouldn't say that everywhere else the system is perfect. But I think we are now going through a constructive process, certainly with the Commission but even with some of the less hostile NGOs, in terms of trying to fill in the gaps that need to be filled."

While CEPS was the only drinks industry organisation invited to speak, representatives from its peer wine and beer associations were in attendance. In addition, Ildiko Fazekas, president of the European Advertising Standards Alliance (EASA), and Laure Alexandre, its projects and compliance officer, were given the opportunity to fly the flag for self-regulation in advertising.

Laure Alexandre found the reception more hostile than Fortescue, which is interesting given that EASA is not a representative organisation for the drinks industry as such. She also believes there was an over-emphasis on marketing communication at the event.

When asked if self-regulation of advertising received a fair hearing, Alexandre says "absolutely not". And she goes on to say that more than just criticism, there was "a lack of trust". She adds that there were more moderate NGOs present but "they were not given the floor".

Alexandre says the conference organisers had "started from a specific standpoint which was not favourable to either self-regulation or the alcohol industry which was why the agenda of the event was designed in such a way".

However, Alexandre's qualms notwithstanding, there are some positives to draw. In particular, the fact that industry had the opportunity to engage with a largely sceptical audience, and had something substantive to say on what it is doing to tackle alcohol-related harm, can be seen as progress. And Fortescue believes that even at the Stockholm conference, changing opinions could be discerned. "There are clearly some out there who are still suspicious but I think bit by bit the dialogue is improving."

Those charged with defending self-regulation have to face such audiences from time to time, and Stockholm clearly was, to coin a phrase, a 'tough crowd'. But equally, engaging with the most sceptical stakeholders, as uncomfortable as that may be, is arguably the best way to test the robustness and validity of the self-regulatory ideal.