Wasted (23 page)

C
openhagen, the city of the Little Mermaid and Tivoli Gardens, has on the surface a carefree attitude, with locals and tourists taking advantage of
the pedestrian streets and public parks that inhabit the city centre. Yet hang around a while and a different scene emerges, with the city’s open spaces colonised by hordes of drunken youths,
making them no-go areas for locals after dark. Despite its affluence and relatively low levels of social inequality, Denmark is facing an alcohol abuse crisis, with its young, to borrow a phrase,
‘probably’ some of the worst alcohol abusers on the continent.

According to an
EU
survey some years back, among 15-year-old Danish boys and girls, 70 per cent had been drunk at least twice in the past year, while 89 per cent of
16-year-olds had been inebriated. Latest government health studies (2007) show that alcohol consumption in Denmark results in approximately 3,000 deaths annually—or 5 per cent of all
mortality. The majority of these alcohol-related deaths occur at a relatively young age. Over the past few years, sales statistics are fairly constant, but high consumption of alcohol remains,
averaging 11.4 litres of pure alcohol annually for Danes over the age 14, which is lower than Ireland, yet above European average. Since 1994, national health interview surveys have shown that a
growing proportion are exceeding the sensible drinking limits (14 units of alcohol for women and 21 for men), that more men than women are exceeding these limits, and that the young and the
middle-aged in particular have very high weekly consumption. Studies also show that alcohol consumption is unevenly distributed socially, with consumption increasing as the number of years’
education increases.

When viewed from an international perspective, Danish young people rank top in Europe in terms of frequent intoxication. Out of 15
EU
countries and Norway, only four
countries have a less restrictive alcohol policy than Denmark. As a government report noted, ‘In Denmark, decisions concerning border trading and taxes seem to have gone in one direction
while efforts to tackle (e.g. age limits) seem to have gone in another. With a view to lowering total consumption in a population, particularly good effect has been achieved by regulating prices
and tax.’

Sounds depressingly familiar? Not unlike Ireland, Denmark has tangible issues surrounding alcohol misuse, fuelled in part by a minimum purchasing age of 16 in shops and off-licences (up from 15
some years back) and 18 in bars and nightclubs, low beer and liquor taxes (beer costs just 67 cents a bottle), and liberal advertising laws. ‘We are the country of Tuborg and Carlsberg, and
images of these products are everywhere,’ said Dr Pernille Due, a researcher at the University of Copenhagen. ‘I went to see
Harry Potter
—the audience was mostly
children—and there was advertising for Smirnoff and Tuborg. Denmark stands out when it comes to problem drinking, but there is not a strong will on the part of government to handle this
problem.’

——

Much like the Guinness St James’s Gate site in Dublin, the Carlsberg brewery occupies a large chunk of central Copenhagen. While the brewing operation has been moved off
site in recent years, administration and head offices remain on site, as well as a museum and visitor centre. I’m in the staff canteen, having lunch with Knud Hedeager Nielsen, Public Affairs
Manager for Carlsberg Breweries and an influential member of the European drinks lobby. Staff are allowed have beer with their daily meals, and a large fridge area carries an assortment of
Carlsberg products, from specialist brews to regular beer. Of the 30 staff having lunch, perhaps one third are drinking alcohol. For any of them who get too dependent on liquid lunches, the company
has a comprehensive alcohol treatment programme available to employees, which is 100 per cent funded. The free availability of alcohol in the workplace highlighted for me how, despite our shared
problems, different cultural attitudes exist across Europe towards the role alcohol plays in society. How would it work for an Irish brewery if drinks were allowed at lunchtime? Would it work in
Woking, for instance? Judging by the packed bar in the Rovers Return in
Coronation Street
every lunchtime, it’s highly unlikely.

In recent years, Carlsberg has had to take a leading role in Danish society in tackling issues of alcohol misuse. The manner in which they have done this, and their efforts to lead the way, are
interesting when held alongside efforts by the Irish drinks industry to do the same. ‘I think it became evident to us almost a decade ago that we also needed to play a role in the efforts to
help reduce misuse,’ says Knud Hedeager Nielsen. ‘In 2000 we defined our position in relation to these matters. There is a lot more acceptance now of companies being involved in
corporate social-responsibility-related issues. There is an expectation among public and politicians that companies should take [a] greater role on social issues. We are on the brink of launching a
new strategy on all this and on responsible drinking. But for the past seven or eight years, we have increased our activities both here and throughout the world.’

The manner in which Carlsberg tackles the issue of abuse is to focus on targeted activities. The company funds specific programmes, and say they are wary of getting involved in cosmetic projects
which have little impact on the ground. They are wary also of political manoeuvring for public relations purposes, often used across Europe, they say, by various different political parties.
‘We see and we believe, unfortunately, that to tackle misuse politicians tend to go for the easy option in the public eye,’ adds Mr Nielsen. ‘We think that is unfortunate, because
too much of that is without any behavioural impact and does not really address the issue of reducing harm caused by misuse. For example, there is a lot of good legislation already, but the
enforcement of this legislation is, we believe, inadequate. You can always add further restrictions, you can add higher age limits, you can introduce bans on advertising, and it’s what I
would call signal policies. But, unfortunately, these have very little impact.’

Again, as with many in the Irish drinks sector, the industry in Denmark is keen to return responsibility for alcohol education to the home. By way of illustrating this Nielsen tells me about his
own experiences with his teenage children. On the children entering their early teens, all the parents of his son’s school met and formed a strategy for getting their offspring through
adolescence. So, for example, it was decided that mobile phones would not be given to any of the children until they were a certain age, and a joint policy among the parents was also evolved for
introducing the children to alcohol. One positive of this type of joint approach in a small community is that it removes peer pressure, which might exist if some children were allowed drink at home
or at a younger age than others. With a united approach, parents too can better ensure children do not play one set of parents against the other or give false information as to where they are
staying. The school facilitates the meeting of parents once or twice a year, and it benefits from having universal policies and greater parent participation through what can be difficult adolescent
years. It’s the type of community-led approach that could work very well in Ireland, where, for the most part, school and home life are separate worlds, rarely colliding.

Carlsberg, like Diageo, does not believe that health warnings and advertising restrictions have an impact on problem drinkers. This is a further issue with exporters like Carlsberg, who say
pan-European trade is affected by having to apply different health warnings in different regions. ‘In terms of health warnings,’ says Mr Nielsen, ‘the health lobby was very keen
to introduce these with the blessing of many governments. However the same
NGOS
pushing for this include cancer associations who admit that it has had no impact on smokers
and their behaviour towards smoking. Why, then, do it with alcohol? Why not spend resources in terms of targeting the audience where the problem exists? I speak about targeting the youth that goes
out at night and help[ing] them in a positive way and help[ing] with guidance. We need to make sure parents are equipped to have the critical talk with kids when they enter the teenage years. We
have lots [of] example[s] of parents saying, “I don’t know what to do.” Being a father myself, we and everybody in the business cares about our kids. So it[’s] not because
we are there to get the most profits. No, we’re here to sell beer to adults. It’s a very clear position. We [are] here to produce beer for adults and not young people.’

One of Mr Nielsen’s big bugbears is being forced to place warning labels on products for specific types of drinkers, and he picks up a bottle with a label to illustrate his point. He
highlights the area of women drinking while pregnant, and says that the focus should be on involving frontline medical staff in educating about the dangers.

‘The targeted approach is for us the most effective. Take the issue of pregnant women and drinking. Now, when you look at the label and legislators decide to put a pregnant woman with a
cross over to indicate, “If you’re pregnant don’t drink this.” Do people really believe this has an impact? Again, research has produced ample evidence it has no behavioural
impact. The excuse from the anti-alcohol lobby and politicians is that, yeah, maybe, but it raises awareness. But again, there is no long-term impact of such measures. What it does have is a
tremendous cost impact for the industry to add these warnings to their product. It makes it difficult for cross-border trading and so on. If it worked, then fine, but it doesn’t work, so why
bother industry and our cost base with these initiatives?’

One of the ways in which Carlsberg and the public health lobby in Denmark work together is for the drinks company to provide information packs directly to medical staff, so that those on the
frontline of the health service can speak with authority to patients.

‘So, for instance, instead of a drinks company telling . . . pregnant women the best way to drink, it’s the doctor or midwife.’ This type of approach works when it is a
complementary support to already established protocols, but if it gets to the stage where the stakeholders in the health sector are reliant on the drinks industry to inform patients, then moderate
society might as well throw in the towel. In Ireland a collaborative approach between the drink industry and the public health lobby seems a distance away.

Carlsberg say that as far back as 1997 they got involved in the area of corporate social responsibility to do with alcohol abuse, but, much like in Ireland, it took until 2001 for concrete
programmes and initiatives to be launched. The response currently is a united one from the drinks industry in Denmark, yet that approach is showing signs of strain, with beer and spirits companies
destined to adopt different approaches and work independently of each other, thereby undermining the argument for self-regulation.

It is an admittance, in effect, that certain types of alcohol are promoted in different ways and that a united industry response to the problem of alcohol abuse is not entirely satisfactory.
When I put this point to Fionnuala Sheehan of
MEAS
, the body funded by the Irish drinks industry to promote ‘responsible drinking’, she denied this was likely to
happen in Ireland also. ‘We don’t differentiate between different types of drinks. To us alcohol is alcohol is alcohol. The industry is united on that point,’ she insisted.

The split in Denmark between on-premise drinking and off trade works out at roughly 75 per cent at home and 25 per cent in bars and restaurants, which is different to Ireland, although
we’re certainly moving in that direction. Alcohol advertising was very tightly controlled on Danish airwaves until a decade ago, when laws were relaxed. Carlsberg argue that drinking levels
have remained unchanged since then. They also feel the
EU
is fixated on introducing tougher measures which are unjustifiable. ‘This is now a huge debate within the
EU
,’ says Mr Nielsen. ‘They will come out with a report shortly looking into alcohol’s impact on consumption and misuse. Unfortunately it is not a balanced
report; we have seen some of the conclusions already. It is influenced by a political agenda. It is saying, yes, there is a strong indication that advertising has a huge impact on behaviour. We
don’t see it this way.’ This is a typical drinks industry response to the advertising debate. But if advertising doesn’t have a large impact on behaviour, then it sort of begs the
question of why Carlsberg had a £10.5 million advertisement budget for the last World Cup alone?

——

In another area of Carlsberg’s European headquarters at Valby, Eric Thorsted is helping to ease the brewing giant’s social conscience. Eric adopted the ‘Night
Raven’ programme in Copenhagen to help cope with the numbers of youths drinking on the city’s streets. Sponsored by Carlsberg and many other leading corporations, including McDonalds,
the programme involves hundreds of adult volunteers patrolling the streets at night in distinctive yellow jackets and offering advice and support to teenagers in need. They offer taxis home, point
out the dangers of excess drinking and help intervene if teenagers are in danger. In 2006, over 50,000 volunteers gave their time to the programme in Denmark, and about 45 per cent of the overall
budget is provided directly by Carlsberg. ‘We generally try to avoid government funding,’ says Thorsted. ‘As well as the nighttime work we also work primarily in disadvantaged
areas with families, where we help with parenting skills. Implementing anti-bullying projects. Companies giving up to two hours free per month for employees to do social work with families in
need.’

Thorsted began the project over 10 years ago, when he left his job as
CEO
of a major insurance company. Night Ravens had already been successfully up and running in 400
cities in Sweden and 500 cities in Norway. Last year 50,000 volunteered in Denmark, with just three reported assaults on volunteers.