Driven to drink
Wednesday, October 22, 2008 Sixty One Whitehall is home of the Royal United Services Institute. It was also the venue for yesterday's seminar, 'Alcohol & Responsibility', organised by the Westminster Health Forum.
Fittingly, perhaps, the event was organised with military precision. The first session, chaired by Lib Dem health spokesman Norman Lamb MP, began on cue at 9.05 and finished, on schedule, 40 minutes later. There were four panellists - Professor Sir Charles George (British Medical Association), Cathie Smith (British Institute of Innkeeping), the rather fearsome Professor Mark Bellis (Centre for Public Health, Liverpool John Moores University), and me.
We were each given 4-5 minutes to give a short speech on binge drinking. After four minutes a yellow card was held up at the back of the impressive Duke of Wellington Hall. Sixty seconds later a red card appeared and we had to stop.
I was the last to speak. Needless to say, I was just getting into my stride when the yellow and then the red cards were held aloft. In my allotted time I expressed scepticism at the extent of Britain's "binge drinking culture" and the ever-changing definition of what constitutes "binge drinking". I also voiced concern that if the scale of the problem is exaggerated, then the reaction to the problem will also be exaggerated (eg Boris Johnson's booze ban).
Alcohol, I said, is a legal consumer product. (Sound familar?) Adults have every right to purchase alcohol, to consume alcohol, and to enjoy alcohol. People have every right to "binge drink" or get drunk, if they so wish. And if, when they get drunk, they become boorish or bad-tempered, fall asleep in their chair or wake up with a hangover, they have every right to do that as well.
What they DON’T have the right to do is to become violent or aggressive or threaten people and damage property. But we already have laws – and a police force - to deter that sort of behaviour, so I see no need for yet more rules and regulations. Or to tar all drinkers with the same brush.
The audience (a mixture of MPs, peers, civil servants, health professionals, PR execs and people from the drinks industry) seemed a bit non-plussed. When I confessed (shock horror) to being an occasional binge drinker myself (according to government guidelines) there wasn't a murmour - not even a titter.
It wasn't my best performance but I must have made some impression because Norman Lamb prefaced his closing remarks by saying, "Simon Clark issued a challenge". (Challenge? I'd hardly started.) Inevitably, though, he concluded by saying that the evidence (of the harm allegedly caused by binge drinking) supported a "powerful case for society to intervene". (Funnily enough, he said much the same in his opening remarks so no-one can accuse him of inconsistency. A decent chap but better, perhaps, if we'd had someone more impartial in the chair.)
As for the "evidence", I'm still not convinced. A lot of it is based on statistics: 40% of all male drinking sessions are binge-drinking sessions; Britain’s drinking culture is costing the country £20 billion a year; 17 million working days are lost to hangovers and drink-related illness each year; 40% of A&E admissions are alcohol-related; and (best of all) 5.9 million people drink more than twice the recommended daily guidelines on some occasions (my italics) - as if this is a terrible, anti-social thing to do!!
Afterwards the director of the Westminster Health Forum invited me back to speak on other issues. No problem, I said. But first, I need a drink.
Reader Comments (7)
I no longer live in England, but I still have friends there many of whom have also been recently reclassified as binge drinkers. Now I live in Norway where binge drinking has historically been a fact of life. The reasons were manifold, but the main reasons for the Norwegian habit of throwing it down the neck as fast as possible when alcohol was available were because alcohol was rarely available, socially frowned upon and therefore consumed largely in secret and the legal variety was mind blowingly expensive. Are the suggestions that alcohol becomes more difficult to obtain (Norwegians took to distilling their own, quite toxic, versions in the past), more expensive and less socially acceptable really, seriously intended to address a problem that may not even exist? Norway has liberalised it's alcohol policy substantially in the last few decades with a quite deliberate emphasis in the media on the European model of civilised wine consumption. The majority of young Norwegians no longer wait for Saturday night and then drink themselves into unconciousness as quickly as possible. The point the neo-puritans never seem to understand is that every single restrictive practice they suggest has already been tried somewhere and failed. A more adult approach is required, one which most sdults seem well able to achieve all by themselves.
I spent last week in Norway. Stavanger, to be exact. I can confirm that despite going out every night (quite usual when I am out of the UK, and particularly when it is a global sales gathering) until 1am, I saw zero binge drinking. In fact, I saw very few drunk people. I tried to visit all the pubs at Stavanger's beautiful marina/harbour, so that I could get a conclusive handle on attitudes to drinking (and smoking), and can report that the place is jam-packed with friendly, happy people.
Mind you, I did pay £7 for half a pint of beer, so surely only the mighty-rich can afford to binge drink anyway......
(According to my Visa statement, I bought many half pints at seven quid a throw, suggesting that I met and exceeded government guidelines every time I sallied forth).
Despite this insult to my organs, I can confirm I am hale and hearty.
I hardly drink at all, but on the odd occasion, if the mood takes me, I might go out with a friend and drink a whole bottle of wine, all by myself! I get quite tipsy, but not so drunk I don't know what I am doing and I don't wake up with a hangover, despite the wine probably being of the red variety!
My normal alcohol consumption is one or maybe 2 small glasses of wine a week!
Of course, according to the government and the health fanatics, I am a binge drinker! These little episodes might be a year or more apart, but I am still, apparently, a binge drinker.
I absolutely hate seeing hoards of people, young or otherwise, out of their skulls on drink and am very intimidated by the behaviour, even if it is just fun and high spirits, with no kind of violence involved. Sadly, the violience often occurs when there is interference by the police! Yes, these people can be a bit rowdy, but left to their own devices, can probably also get themselves home sooner or later, none the worse for wear, accept perhaps for the hangover. When intolerant people get the police involved, or these bloody intrusive cctv cameras get the wrong angle on what is going on or whatever, and the police are called, they seem to go in looking for trouble instead of standing back and assessing the situation.
Obviously, people who have had a few too many are not always going to be quiet and compliant, but that does not mean they are doing anyone any harm, so why wade in and start a situation just to fill the local police cells with drunks, sleeping it off overnight and then appearing in court the next morning to be fined for breach of the peace, or whatever.
It is like everything else these days, take a sledge hammer to crack a nut!
Maybe because of my age I know my limit. When I go out drinking I binge drink, but my limit is four or five pints. I drink a lower alcohol real ale and am full up after those four or five pints.I may not walk home in a perfect straight line, but am not drunk.
Those idiots are enough to drive anybody to drink.
Sir Charles George, eh? My bete noire. For many people, I imagine that Sir Liam Donaldson is probably the archetypal anti-smoking barstead, but for me that role is filled by Sir Charles George. It was reading a report in the Independent back in 2004, in which he called for a ban on smoking, that first roused my interest - and later, deep concern - about smoking bans and their justifications. Earlier this year, I wrote a piece for F2C about the experience: Tiny, tiny particles.
Last thing I read about Sir Charles George was that in 2005 he'd stepped down as head of the BMA and BHF, and joined the board of a pharmaceutical company, Bioaccelerate Holdings. I assumed he'd retired to enjoy his ill-gotten gains.
It's rather ominous that this sharp practitioner (among other things, referencing unpublished research is sharp practice) should re-appear in public. Having played a key role in pushing for a smoking ban, it wouldn't surprise me if he's now after a drinking ban as well.
Does he still sport a very-well-lunched double chin? And did he have anything significant to say?
'Alcohol & Responsibility' was an event organised by the Westminster Health Forum and you duly attended. Does it never occur to you Simon that no amount of going to these events will have little or no effect on the smoking ban. This is an entirely different issue that dilutes your efforts. If I had been invited then I would have said yes…providing I can intergrate some remarks about the smoking ban.
Should they have said no, then don’t bother attending…after all what would you have lost – eh? Those that organize these kind of events know who you are and your views, so they are perfectly happy to have you talk about anything and it’s granny so long as it’s not about…the smoking ban!
Do you suppose that the Westminster Health Forum would ever countenance an event concerned specifically with the smoking ban…of course not!
This kind of event was always preaching to the converted…except you naturally…and so you will always be pushing water uphill. One could have easily have written the script for the rest of the panel.
You say the director (I bet he’s such a lovely chap) wants you back to speak again…about what. Why not suggest…er…guess what…the smoking ban.
For what it’s worth…don’t hold your breath on that one!
I can see what you are saying Chris, but don't forget, that like Freedom2Choose, Taking Liberties is not a forum solely for the purposes of smokers. It is a forum, in my view, for anything that impinges on the liberties of the population of an apparently Free Country!
If Simon only concentrated on the smoking ban, then do you think he might be taken perhaps a little less seriously on that and other issues?
From my viewpoint, all power to Simon, a non smoker, for spreading the voice of the pro smokers and the pro-libertarians.
Apart from which,much as it would serve them right, in many respects, the knife being out for drinkers now and of course, lets not forget the obese (many of whom have become obese due to giving up or reducing - due to working conditions - the 'evil weed'), is just as bad as the smoking ban was.
I would not particularly miss going out for a drink if all the pubs were to close, but I do miss going out because I can't smoke anywhere!
Keep up the good work Simon.