Examination of Witnesses (Question Numbers
940-952)
MR ALAN
CAMPBELL MP, MR
MARK COOPER,
MR GERRY
SUTCLIFFE MP AND
MR ANDREW
CUNNINGHAM
16 JULY 2009
Q940 Chairman: I do not have them
in front of me. One of the codes that people are supposed to use
states that we should not associate alcohol with sporting success.
Why would somebody sponsor a shirt of a Premier League football
team if it was not to show that their product, no matter what
it is, is concerned with the success of the football team as opposed
to Bradford City, I suppose, or Rotherham United? Why would anybody
sponsor a team in the football premiership if it was not to relate
to sporting success, given that is where the shirt sponsorship
is?
Mr Sutcliffe: I accept that they
want to advertise their product. Is the next step then to say
to Premiership League teams that they cannot have shirt sponsorship?
Are we trying to affect the ability of clubs to bring in sponsorship?
I think you have to be careful here. I take Howard's point that
if the evidence overwhelmingly proves a situation, then the Government
ahs to act, but again we have to have the evidence that proves
that. My consistent phrase today is proportionality and making
sure that we do the right thing.
Q941 Chairman: But we have evidence
on tobacco and advertising was banned throughout the United Kingdom.
Has it worked?
Mr Sutcliffe: That evidence was
clear and it was clear that that was the obviously route to forward.
Q942 Chairman: One of the other codes
is about the probability of links between alcohol and youth culture,
yet we allow alcohol to sponsor things like T in the Park and
music festivals for young people as well. Do you have a view on
that?
Mr Cunningham: Are you referring
to the Portman Code?
Q943 Chairman: Yes. We understand
that everybody should use that.
Mr Cunningham: I think the Portman
Code is about the packaging of the actual products themselves
so that the marketing of the individual product, colours and taste
and the way it looks, should not be attractive to children, should
not suggest a sexual content and things like that.
Q944 Chairman: It is the ASA and
Ofcom code of conduct on content.
Mr Cunningham: The ASA Code concerns
printed media and broadcast of alcohol advertisements, which Ofcom
are also involved with, and that code is about actual advertisements
that are around alcohol products. It does not extend to sponsorship.
Q945 Chairman: You do not think that
having a product on a Premier League football team shirt is advertising?
Although I may watch it on my television, you do not describe
that as advertising?
Mr Sutcliffe: Not in the way that
you are suggesting, that it affects young people.
Q946 Chairman: What is it then?
Mr Sutcliffe: It is a sponsorship
of that team, is it not?
Q947 Chairman: The named brand is
there to see. Is it brand promotion? Is brand promotion not advertising?
What is it?
Mr Sutcliffe: Clearly it is advertising
in the context of sponsorship of that brand. I think the argument
here is: does that affect and go outside what is a very strong
code in relation to Ofcom and the ASA? Clearly, I am suggesting
that we will reinforce the discussions with Ofcom and the ASA
about that point and report back to the committee.
Chairman: This inquiry might have something
to do with that, Minister.
Q948 Jim Dowd: We heard a lot of
evidence from the advertising industry last week. The general
thrust of it is that they are able effectively to drive a coach
and horses when they choose through most of the codes for advertising
alcohol, particularly with regard to the age gate and web-based
advertising. The Chairman mentioned the Ofcom and ASA co-regulatory
approach. How do you ensure, such as it is if indeed it is effective,
that it is working? What kind of monitoring or assessment do you
make of its effectiveness? The evidence we heard last week is
that it is almost completely ineffectual.
Mr Sutcliffe: Clearly we are concerned
to hear that and, as I said earlier, there have been various reviews—2005
and 2007 and the Sheffield Study—and so we believe we are
looking to the regulators to have powers and opportunities to
make sure that they put right any harm being done. If harm is
proven to be done, then we would want to strengthen the powers
that those regulators have. As I say, the responses so far have
not shown that evidence. We continue to monitor and to work with
the ASA and Ofcom to see what can be done.
Q949 Jim Dowd: Is this an event or
a process? Do you just have it "under review" or are
you saying that you will look at what is there and "by a
certain date we will reach a decision"?
Mr Sutcliffe: The issues around
alcohol consumption have been with me as a minister not just in
DCMS but in previous departments where I have worked. I was Consumer
Minister and Competition Minister and I have seen the problem
being tackled from a number of angles. Across government and with
this Prime Minister in particular, there have been a number of
seminars and working groups. A number of people have been called
in to look at the problems relating to alcohol and the solutions.
It is under constant review in a very positive way. Later on this
year there will be another get together of government departments
to look at the progress that we are making to see where the gaps
and weaknesses are and what more can be done. We are looking at
these reviews in that climate as to what is possible.
Q950 Jim Dowd: The code at the moment
is very much focused on content and yet a lot of the evidence
we have taken seems to indicate that it is the frequency and the
volume of alcohol advertising that has the greatest effect on
younger people and not necessarily the content. The content just
seems to be blurred; it is just repetition of the message about
alcohol that seems to have the most effect. I know you mentioned
in an answer to Howard Stoate that the department has observed
a reduction in the exposure of young people to alcohol advertising.
Could you just expand on that and draw a distinction between content
as opposed to frequency?
Mr Sutcliffe: The distinction
I was making which you have picked up was about television advertising.
Howard talked about the new media. I would be very interested
in the evidence that you have received on the difference between
content and subliminal messages. Perhaps we need to look further
at this area. We will be happy to receive the evidence that the
committee puts to us.
Q951 Jim Dowd: Last year the Safe,
Sensible, Social Consultation paper committed the Government to
taking further action on whether voluntary social responsibility
standards should be made mandatory. How is that process unfolding?
Mr Campbell: The Police and Crime
Bill has a code of practice which has mandatory elements to it
and local, discretionary elements, so there is progress.
Q952 Jim Dowd: So it will become
mandatory?
Mr Campbell: Yes. We are introducing
a mandatory code. We are consulting about what the elements of
that mandatory code will be.
Chairman: May I thank you all very much
for assisting us with this inquiry.
| 
