HL Deb 30 March 2001 vol 624 cc559-62

12.27 p.m.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 28th February be approved [10th Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this order permits the use of 70m1 capacity measures for use for trade for the purpose of measuring gin, rum, vodka and whisky—collectively defined as "intoxicating liquor".

Under the Weights and Measures (Intoxicating Liquor) Order 1988, as amended, gin, rum, vodka and whisky, when sold by the glass for consumption on licensed premises, may be sold only in quantities of 25ml or 35ml, or in multiples of 25ml or 35ml. In practice, other spirits are also sold in the prescribed quantities.

The purpose of selling spirits in prescribed quantities is to enable consumers to make price comparisons and to provide protection against short measure. In practice, 25ml and 50ml—what the consumer. is taken to order when he or she asks for a "single" or a "double"—are the quantities which are most commonly served in the UK. However, 35ml and 70ml quantities are also sold, principally in Scotland.

These quantities can be measured in a number of different ways. Spirit measuring instruments, generally of the push-up type, are very common; but some establishments prefer to use capacity measures, otherwise known as thimble measures.

Thimbles of 25ml, 35ml and 50ml are already provided for in the legislation. The order adds 70ml "double" capacity measures to be used where customers request a "double" serving. The benefit deriving from this is that bar staff can carry out a single measuring operation where a "double" measure is requested, without having to fill a 35ml capacity measure twice.

The purpose of prescribing capacity measures is to provide an accurate measuring instrument to enable bar staff to measure the prescribed quantities. I should point out that the introduction of 70ml capacity measures does not mean that such measures must be held by establishments selling intoxicating liqueur; the change merely provides them with an optional alternative means of measuring and serving 70ml of intoxicating liqueur. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 28th February be approved [10th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Lord McIntosh of Haringey.)

Viscount Falkland

My Lords, the Minister explained the order very well, but his explanation was not as clear as some of the comments made in the regulatory impact assessment, a copy of which I took the trouble to obtain this morning. In view of my long association with the all-party group on alcohol misuse and my connections with various treatment centres for drug and alcohol abuse, it would be remiss of me—indeed, it would be perceived as such—not to delve a little into the background of alcohol consumption and its associated problems. If this order had been dealt with on another day—not a Friday—someone else would have spoken for these Benches. I apologise because, in that case, noble Lords would not have had to listen to me drawing their attention to the fact that this seemingly innocuous measure, which appears to be just a tidying-up measure as regards weights and measures, has implications that need to be mentioned.

Most of the alcohol abuse in this country that grabs the newspaper headlines—though probably not enough headlines—relates to binge drinking, which is mainly indulged in by young men between the ages of 14 and 18, and does not involve the kind of alcoholic beverages that are featured in the order now before the House. That is a particular case apart but is of much concern to this Government, as, indeed, it was to previous governments. Older people tend to drink whiskey, gin, rum and vodka, which for the purposes of this debate are what we are discussing. The original single tot of 25ml could be served as a 50ml double under Schedule 3 to the weights and measures Act. However, as regards the additional 35ml measure, it is now proposed that it should be possible to have a 70ml measure served as a large double.

When I sought a copy of the regulatory impact assessment, I was interested to find out what the benefits of the order would be. Quite simply, the benefits are that bar staff serving large double measures of intoxicating liqueur will need to fill a measure only once, not twice. As I believe the Minister explained, that increases the speed of service—if, indeed, that is a good thing, bearing in mind the constraints on people's drinking time, and so on. However, I accept that point.

Perhaps I may illustrate the concern that many people may have in this respect. I telephoned Alcohol Concern this morning to find out what the relationship was between a double if it was served as a result of this order—a 70ml double—and the permissible amount of alcohol that is allowed to be in the blood for those driving motor vehicles. As far as concerns the measurement of the lowest tot or measure of 25ml, I was told that four of those measures would put the average 11-stone man just below the limit allowed to drive a motor vehicle. For a small man or woman, that measurement would put them just above the limit. We are talking about 100ml. In that case, a 70ml double would put a small man or woman just about on the level of what is permissible to drive a motor vehicle.

As a result of this order, I suggest to your Lordships that at times when people are accustomed to drinking more—for example, Christmas, Easter, public holidays and at other times of celebration—it will be more common for people to go for the "double"; indeed, they will probably have two doubles. If you have two doubles, which amount to 140ml, you will, no matter what size you are, be above the limit permitted in this country for driving a motor vehicle. At Christmas and at other times of celebration, people are most at risk from being injured by motorists who do not obey the law. Unhappily, there are still far too many casualties as a result of drink driving, although it must be admitted that there has been a welcome culture change in the attitude towards drinking and driving, especially among young people. That is why I make the point. However, that change does not apply quite so much to older people, who tend to run a pretty fine line between what is and what is not permitted. I believe that more people may well fail the breath test at such times as a result of this order.

I have a further point to make regarding those who travel abroad. I have in mind France in particular, which, after all, is the most favoured country for tourism. When driving, the permitted level of alcohol in the blood in that country is only just over half what is permitted here. If people become accustomed to drinking a double measure of rum, gin, vodka or whiskey and they believe that they can do so in France, they will have to be extremely careful. They could put themselves above the permitted level. The authorities in France are very harsh in this respect. People could run the risk of being arrested, having their cars impounded, and so on. I shall not spoil noble Lords' weekend by delving further into the horrifying consequences that face those who abuse the laws in that country.

Therefore, the order is not quite as simple as it appears: it is not just a tidying-up measure. Its implications will be watched most carefully by organisations like the government-sponsored body, Alcohol Concern, the all-party group on alcohol misuse and all those bodies that are pressing government—and, indeed, pressed successive governments—to take a more serious attitude towards the abuse of alcohol in this country. After all, alcohol abuse is responsible for many more deaths, fatalities and illnesses and much greater family disintegration than drugs, either soft or hard. That is a matter of statistics. It just happens that drugs and their abuse are featured in newspaper headlines at present, while drink, because it is permissible, is the subject of general national denial, if I may put it that way.

I shall cease to harangue your Lordships on these matters further. In the past, when I used to speak more often on the subject, I did not have anyone sitting behind me on these Benches. I am happy to see that three of my noble friends are present today. No doubt they have been tricked into being here. I dare say that I shall be subject to some pretty grim looks from my colleagues later. However, we are discussing serious matters which must be addressed.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, the noble Viscount is right in one respect: a 25ml measure is, indeed, one unit. Therefore, a 70ml unit is substantially more. It is roughly equivalent to half a gill in old measures. I totally reject his suggestion that this has anything to do with alcohol abuse. I simply do not believe that people drink more because it is possible for a bar tender to serve a Scottish double or a large double in one movement rather than in two.

If it were the case that the size of the measure used to pour alcohol affected alcohol consumption and alcohol abuse, one would not allow anyone to sell anything in bottles. One would not allow people to order doubles; one would force them to go to the bar and buy another single. It just does not make sense. There is no connection between alcohol consumption and the way in which a measure is poured.

Viscount Falkland

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for giving way. I am not suggesting that there is any direct relationship between this order and an increase in alcohol abuse. However, those who are habitual drinkers of these kinds of alcoholic beverages are liable, perhaps unconsciously, to fall into the habit of ordering in larger quantities. I am talking about older people. Nevertheless the habits of young people in this country are directly related to the example set them by older people. That is another aspect of the matter. As I say, I accept that there is no direct relationship between the order and an increase in alcohol abuse. However, I thought it only right to point out the possible effects of the provision. The fullness of time will show whether I am right.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, I simply do not agree. People can order doubles, small doubles, large doubles or gills. My grandmother used to order a quarton of gin in the east end of London. I have no idea what that is. The point here is that we are providing for a different measure. We are not dictating what size drinks people should order.

On Question, Motion agreed to.