Harold Coop: Liquor adverts deliberately aimed at hooking children

The season of peace and good swill approaches, and I doubt if many parents, grandparents or politicians realise how cleverly our children are targeted, even from overseas.

Nor does Damien O'Connor, the Associate Health Minister responsible for alcohol policies. He promulgates the liquor industry's line that it benefits from, and supports, moderate drinking. He actually seemed to believe that.

Why, then, would the industry target those very groups that have trouble with moderation - Maori, Polynesians and young people?

The images of rottweilers with sunglasses, the young man returning to the whanau, the chinheads, are the result of sophisticated psychological research.

A 3000-signature petition for an inquiry into alcohol promotion and sponsorship has just been declined. Our Group Against Liquor Advertising (not prohibitionist) submitted this to Parliament's health select committee, where it received minority support by the Greens and some other MPs. The Government now has 90 days finally to decide about a full inquiry, and some facts should be aired.

Scottish university researchers have chillingly described how the industry devises a unique marketing strategy for 11 to 14-year-olds and 15 to 17-year-olds.

The first group responds to highly coloured labels, fruity flavours, wacky names and humour. By 15 that's kids' stuff; they want real brand names, adult packaging and increased price is okay.

Both groups want ready-to-drink screw tops. Both are under-age, but they'll obtain these tailored products from older siblings or other means.

How can these European industry promoters sleep at night? They are pushers; the products they worked out are on our shelves, and your children are in their sights.

Our international affiliates, the Global Alcohol Policy Alliance, published 18 months in advance the next international strategy. The industry will try to infiltrate what should be independent boards set up to advise governments. Sure enough, the industry here requested a seat on the Alcohol Advisory Council (Alac). Its argument was that Alac is financed from tax on liquor so it should have a seat on that council.

That's fairly close to the argument Mr O'Connor uses to congratulate the industry on shouldering the increased levy to allow a moderation campaign to proceed. Does this levy prove the industry is good at heart and genuinely wants moderation, or is there a snag? You bet there is.

First, research shows the 10 per cent of heaviest drinkers consume 50 per cent of all alcohol. The industry depends on them for profits.

Secondly, our affiliates published a table listing all the measures tried worldwide to lessen alcohol harm. Tax, raised drinking age, curbed advertising and less availability are effective. Regrettably, research shows that educational campaigns supporting moderation are not. They cannot be when most countries achieve at best a one-in-10 advertisement ratio of moderation to promotion, and the latter expenditure is huge.

Next, they listed the measures the liquor industry has supported, and those they opposed. Guess what? The industry strongly opposes effective measures, and trumpets its support of others, as we are seeing here, to impress the public.

Liquor advertising is self-regulated by the Advertising Standards Authority. But its recent review brought TV evening advertising forward from 9pm to 8.30pm, against the National Alcohol Strategy, against opinion from the Ministry of Health and Alac, and in the face of our country's worsening situation.

Websites show ample evidence from important organisations such as the World Health Organisation, governments and the American Medical Association of the effect of alcohol promotion on young people.

So is this an ethical industry keen on moderation, not on more consumption and profit? Ethical? At the Advertsing Standards Authority review, a major brewery claimed its proposed looser code had been "reviewed and endorsed by Hugh Rennie, QC, a top legal mind".

What Mr Rennie in fact wrote was that code language should be unambiguous (we agree), then he added: "What should be permitted and what should be prohibited is a separate issue, and not one on which I am either asked to advise, or specially qualified to do so."

There is a voluntary code for advertisements. It says: "They must not imply social or sexual success for young people."

"Her butt walked into my hand. Yeah right" - that is, you'll be cool and sexy if you drink our beer. This principle is regularly and cleverly flouted.

There is a completely ineffective self-regulated mechanism for complaints. These are dismissed on specious grounds, or decisions are delayed until the damage is done. Obviously promotion of alcohol is only part of the problem. But politicians are merely tinkering with minor adjustments.

They won't properly review and discipline an extremely powerful, callous industry and a whole culture that promotes alcohol in this country.

So the problems in binge drinking, teenage alcohol hospitalisations, crime, traffic accidents, date rape and domestic violence, so often alcohol-associated, will worsen.

MP Matt Robson has described the liquor industry lobbyists with their expensive functions as among the most influential visitors to Parliament.

The first class actions against alcohol have been filed in the United States. Let's hope the Government ignores industry lobbyists and makes the final decision for a proper select committee inquiry into advertising and sponsorship, including a drinking age review, and not fail our youth.

* Dr Harold Coop, a former Auckland eye surgeon, is a committee member of the Group Against Liquor Advertising (www.gala.org.nzc).