The results of the European School Survey Project on Alcohol and other Drugs for 2011 and comments by Sedqa and officials from the Justice, Dialogue and Family Ministry provoked a reaction (June 7) from The Sense Group, an organisation made up of alcohol producers and importers.

It... makes sense to ensure that the cost of alcohol is higher than it is now...- Sina Bugeja

The survey, which last year was carried out in no fewer than 39 European countries, involves the examination of the behaviour of young people born in a particular year (1995 in this case) with regard to their consumption of licit and illicit drugs.

The results for 2011 basically confirmed the trends seen in the previous four editions, with, however, a slight decline being registered practically across the board in all measures of use and abuse of substances. Despite this minor decrease in use of all substances, it is clear that, with regard to alcohol – The Sense Group’s object of concern – our 15-16-year-olds abuse drink in a worryingly severe manner.

For example, 68 per cent of Maltese respondents used alcohol in the 30 days prior to Survey Day, compared to 57 per cent of their European counterparts. Twenty per cent of all Maltese young people reported getting drunk in the previous 30 days against the European average of 17 per cent.

Most worrying of all, the rate for binge drinking during the 30 days preceding Survey Day was a massive 56 per cent (against a European average of 39 per cent).

The above explains why the ministry’s permanent secretary stated that young people are steeped in alcohol. Yet, the article penned by Ray Grech, director of The Sense Group, blandly speaks of “the very large majority of young people in Malta who never abuse alcohol”. What is the evidence for this claim?

While (rightly) insisting that all assertions about young people’s use of alcohol should be corroborated by proof, Mr Grech has no qualms about making statements that fly in the face of the available evidence and attempts to present a state of affairs far removed from proven reality.

Mr Grech lauds The Sense Group for the foresight it showed years ago when it insisted that enforcement of legislation should take precedence over the enactment of laws establishing the minimum drinking age. At the time, the laws in Malta only prohibited the sale of alcohol to young people from bars.

Children as young as 10 could buy alcohol from supermarkets without fear of any legal repercussions on anybody. Those aged 16 could (and often did) buy alcohol from bars and supply it to younger peers who could then consume it in total freedom.

The police were often criticised for not taking action when children and young teenagers were drinking alcohol in public and rightly used to retort that they were powerless to intervene because no law was being broken.

Perhaps The Sense Group director would like to reflect on the likely repercussions of the stand adopted by The Sense Group at the time, which insisted on enforcement when there were practically no laws to enforce.

Sedqa has always campaigned for changes in legislation, coupled with enforcement. It was pointed out when the survey results were launched that the worrying state of affairs is partly attributable precisely to lack of enforcement.

Our call for the introduction of minimum unit pricing – the fixing of a price below which it would be illegal to sell alcohol – has predictably raised the hackles of The Sense Group. Mr Grech’s article maintains that there are “studies in various countries” which show that it is incorrect to think minimum unit pricing would be a solution to the problem of alcohol abuse. It would have been interesting had Mr Grech, rather than making a generic reference to “studies”, actually quoted precise sources for his claims, as he has urged those opposing his views to do.

Sedqa’s position is that alcohol abuse is a multi-faceted phenomenon with more than one factor contributing to its origin. The strong link between alcohol consumption on the one hand and availability and affordability on the other has been scientifically established. For example, the study carried out by Rand Corporation on behalf of European Alcohol and Health Forum, entitled Understanding The Link Between Alcohol Affordability, Consumption And Harms, ( http://ec.europa.eu/health/archive/ph_determinants/life_style/alcohol/documents/alcohol_rand_en.pdf ) found a positive link between affordability, levels of consumption and resulting negative effects.

It is well known that young people are particularly sensitive to changes in the pricing of alcohol and that increases in prices of alcohol reduce consumption among all categories of drinkers, particularly the young (Alcohol In Europe: A Public Health Perspective by Anderson and Baumberg, a report drawn up for the EU in 2006 available at http://ec.europa.eu/health/archive/ph_determinants/life_style/alcohol/documents/alcohol_europe_en.pdf ).

It therefore makes sense to ensure that the cost of alcohol is higher than it is now if one truly wishes to reduce consumption and resultant harm.

Minimum pricing would obviously not be the only policy mechanism employed in the efforts to curb alcohol abuse among young people. Other measures, including awareness and education, would also have their place. Leaving pricing mechanisms out of the mix would, however, be irresponsible, unless, of course, one’s real intention was to encourage the adoption of mostly cosmetic policies that would ultimately ensure the status quo is maintained.

The author is chief executive officer of the Foundation for Social Welfare Services.