The latest twist in the row over alcohol sponsorship of sport is puzzling, to say the least. At this stage, it appears that the Cabinet has agreed that it should be phased out; some say by 2020, but other sources say no date has been set.
The broad agreement seems to be that the €20 million or so that sport gets from the drinks industry should be replaced with alternative funding. Some reports indicate this will come from a tax levied on the industry itself or through exchequer grants.
The logic of this appears to be that the Government will compound a regulation making it harder for the drinks industry to market its products by imposing an extra tax on it.
The assumption must be that these businesses will be able to afford to hand over more cash to the State as they are spending less on sponsorship.
Politicians like banning things, particularly when the target is an easily identified bogeyman, as it makes them look like they are doing something.
The debate over alcohol sponsorship has delivered a very identifiable bogeyman in the form of the drinks industry, which stands accused of trying to lure young people to its products by aligning itself with popular sports and cultural events.
This ignores the fact that it is illegal to sell alcohol to young people under the age of 18 in the first place. It is the State’s job to enforce this law. If it does this job well, it need not worry about marketing campaigns. If it is failing in this, then that is the problem it should be tackling.
It also follows that once somebody reaches the age of 18, they have the right from that point to decide for themselves what they will drink, with no direct interference from the State, which, after all, has plenty of opportunities to inform and educate them about the risks involved in alcohol abuse.
Drinks companies are not by any means candidates for sainthood, but it needs to be recognised that they are producing and selling legitimate products and already operate in a heavily regulated and taxed business. Further regulations and taxes will have an impact on the industry, but they may never produce whatever outcome the Government intends, assuming it has a clear idea of what that outcome should be in the first place.
