Daily Junction.mobi portalNews · May 15, 2024 · Daily Junction Editorial Team · 9 min
Scotland's minimum unit pricing for alcohol, introduced in May 2018 at 50p per unit and raised to 65p in 2024, has reduced alcohol-related deaths by 13% and hospital admissions by 8%. But the policy remains controversial, with critics arguing it unfairly penalises low-income drinkers and has limited impact on heavy drinkers.
Scotland's minimum unit pricing (MUP) for alcohol, introduced in May 2018 at 50p per unit and raised to 65p in September 2024, has achieved its primary goal: reducing alcohol-related harm. Alcohol-related deaths in Scotland fell by 13% from 2018 to 2023, with the largest reductions among the most deprived groups who bear the greatest burden of alcohol harm. Hospital admissions for alcohol-related conditions fell by 8%, saving an estimated £40 million in NHS costs. Consumption of cheap, high-strength products—white cider, strong lager, cheap vodka—fell by 25-30%, precisely the products targeted by the policy.
Yet the policy remains controversial. Critics argue that MUP is regressive, penalising low-income moderate drinkers while having limited impact on dependent drinkers who prioritise alcohol over other essentials. The alcohol industry has fought the policy at every stage, and some public health experts question whether the benefits justify the costs. As Wales follows Scotland's lead and England considers introducing MUP, the Scottish experience offers crucial lessons on the potential and limits of pricing policy as a public health tool.
Minimum unit pricing sets a floor price per unit of alcohol. One unit equals 10ml of pure alcohol, roughly equivalent to:
At Scotland's current rate of 65p per unit:
The policy does not affect products already priced above the minimum, such as premium spirits, craft beer, or restaurant wine. It targets cheap, high-strength products that are disproportionately consumed by heavy drinkers and people with alcohol dependence.
Scotland has one of the highest rates of alcohol-related harm in Western Europe. In 2017, the year before MUP was introduced:
The link between cheap alcohol and harm is well-established. Research by the University of Sheffield shows that:
MUP was designed to target the products causing the most harm without significantly affecting moderate drinkers. Unlike a general tax increase, which raises prices across the board, MUP only affects the cheapest products.
The Scottish Government commissioned a comprehensive evaluation of MUP, led by Public Health Scotland and the University of Glasgow. The results, published in May 2024, show:
Alcohol-related deaths in Scotland fell from 1,136 in 2017 (the year before MUP) to 1,051 in 2023, a 13% reduction. The decline was largest among:
The reduction is statistically significant and cannot be explained by trends in England (where deaths remained stable) or other factors.
Alcohol-related hospital admissions fell by 8% from 2018 to 2023, from 35,000 to 32,200. The largest reductions were for:
The reduction in hospital admissions saved an estimated £40 million in NHS costs over five years.
Sales of cheap, high-strength products fell sharply:
These products are disproportionately consumed by heavy drinkers and people with alcohol dependence, so the reduction in sales suggests MUP is reaching its target population.
Sales of premium products (craft beer, wine, premium spirits) were largely unaffected, as these were already priced above the minimum. Moderate drinkers reported little change in their purchasing behaviour.
There was no increase in consumption of:
This was a key concern before MUP was introduced, but the evidence suggests it did not materialise.
Despite the positive public health outcomes, MUP remains controversial:
Critics argue that MUP is regressive, meaning it places a greater burden on low-income households. A moderate drinker on a low income who previously bought cheap lager or wine now pays significantly more, while a wealthy drinker who buys premium products is unaffected.
The Institute of Economic Affairs, a free-market think tank, has called MUP "a tax on the poor" and argued that it violates principles of fairness and individual liberty.
However, supporters counter that:
Some evidence suggests that people with severe alcohol dependence have not reduced consumption as much as hoped. Instead, they have:
A 2023 study by the University of Stirling interviewed 50 people with alcohol dependence and found that 60% reported cutting back on food or heating to afford alcohol after MUP was introduced.
This highlights a key limitation of pricing policy: it can reduce consumption among price-sensitive heavy drinkers, but it may increase hardship among dependent drinkers who cannot or will not reduce consumption. Critics argue that MUP should be accompanied by increased investment in treatment services, which has not happened in Scotland.
MUP does not generate tax revenue—the extra money goes to retailers and producers, not the government. A 3-litre bottle of white cider that previously cost £3.50 now costs £14.63, but the government receives no additional tax. The extra £11.13 goes to the retailer or producer.
Critics argue this is a missed opportunity. A tax increase would generate revenue that could be invested in treatment services, public health campaigns, or other priorities. Instead, the policy enriches private companies.
The Scottish Government has defended this, arguing that the priority is reducing harm, not raising revenue. However, the criticism has political resonance, particularly on the left.
The alcohol industry fought MUP at every stage, including a legal challenge that went to the UK Supreme Court. The industry argued that MUP was:
The Supreme Court ruled in 2017 that MUP was lawful and proportionate, clearing the way for implementation in 2018. However, the industry continues to lobby against MUP and has opposed its introduction in England and Wales.
In September 2024, Scotland raised the minimum price from 50p to 65p per unit, a 30% increase. The decision was based on:
The increase was controversial. Critics argued it would:
![[View image]](/img/minimum-alcohol-pricing-scotland-success.jpg){kind=link}