Starmer drops plans to restrict alcohol adverts after industry outcry
US drinks companies complained that a ban would amount to a non-tariff trade barrier with America, while the £40 billion UK alcohol industry said it would mean a loss of investment and cancelled sports sponsorships.
Proposals for restrictions on alcohol advertising and marketing were originally included in the 10-year plan for the NHS, which is expected to be unveiled this week.
But The Telegraph has learnt that the plans have now been stripped out of the document, which will contain no mention of any changes to the rules on alcohol advertising, marketing or sponsorship.
It is the latest in a series of climbdowns by the Government, which have included an about-turn over the winter fuel payment cut and huge concessions over cuts to disability benefits.
Instead of a ban, Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, is expected to concentrate on educating the public about the health harms that can result from drinking too much.
The news will be greeted with relief by not just the drinks industry, but also sports, advertising and other sectors that rely on drinks marketing for revenue.
One industry source said: 'A ban never made sense and so this decision is welcomed.
'We're happy to see the Government continuing to support a special and vitally important sector of industry that is a British success story around the globe.
'The British drinks industry makes and innovates some of the best alcohol products in the world, and the Government deserves credit for recognising its importance.
'This decision not to restrict advertising, marketing or sponsorship by alcohol brands, together with the recently agreed trade deal with India that will help UK drinks brands prosper, shows what smart, pro-growth policy can deliver.'
Restrictions on alcohol advertising were championed by Mr Streeting, despite the fact that there is little evidence that a marketing ban would have any marked impact on alcohol abuse.
US firms had complained that restrictions on marketing would make it impossible for them to break into the UK market with new brands, giving an advantage to established UK brands which would have broken the terms of Sir Keir's trade deal with President Trump.
The office of the US trade representative was gearing up to formally raise the matter with the Government if any form of ban was contained in the 10-year plan.
The shadow business secretary Andrew Griffith had described proposals for a ban as 'recklessly short-sighted.'
Whitehall sources said the 10-year plan would contain proposals to help prevent harmful alcohol use, but they would be in line with Mr Streeting's 'nudge not nanny' approach that he has talked about in relation to healthy eating.
On Sunday he said that he would be working with supermarkets to 'make the healthy choice the easy choice' which, he said, did not amount to nanny statism but would nudge the public into making better decisions about their health.
In the past the Government has paid for public information campaigns encouraging moderate drinking rather than binge drinking.
A Government spokesman said: 'The 10-year health plan will not include a ban on alcohol advertising.
'We'll always back our food and drink sector and, in our recent deal with India, slashed tariffs for a variety of iconic products, including whisky and gin.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
17 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Ireland's anti-Israel posturing could cost it dearly
In 1996, the foreign editor of the Irish Times, Paul Gillespie, leafed through Ireland's first military white paper. The document was notably vague on the country's role in global affairs. 'Precisely the absence of strategic interests,' he warned, 'can tempt small states into a moralistic response to international political issues.' How prescient that now seems. After October 7, the Irish government wasted no time clambering onto a soap box to issue proclamations about the most complex urban war in living memory, from the comfort of an island on the edge of Western Europe. Free from threats, and with the RAF guarding its skies, the solutions to a conflict 3,500 miles away seem irritatingly obvious to Dublin. Hamas tunnel networks dwarfing the London Underground, booby-trapped homes, hospitals repurposed as terror bunkers, were mere details repeatedly brushed aside with calls for 'de-escalation' and, more fatuously, a 'two-state solution.' This may have had a cathartic effect – for both politicians and constituents, who are joined by much of the world in their dismay at the destruction in Gaza. But wars are not won with platitudes, nor with hollow gestures dressed up as policy. To the extent this basic truth has dawned on Dublin – and the odd glimmer of self-awareness suggests it might have – it hasn't dampened its appetite to intervene. This week, Ireland raced to become the first European country to ban imports from Israel's occupied territories. 'There isn't another country in the European Union,' boasted the foreign minister, Simon Harris, 'that you can visit today and ask a government minister about their bill to ban trade… because they don't have one.' The braggadocio didn't end there. Ireland stood, in his estimation, as a lone beacon for humanity, 'speaking up and speaking out against the genocidal activity in Gaza.' All very well. But what exactly does that entail? On Wednesday, the cabinet approved the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Prohibition of Importation of Goods) Bill. The Bill is a curious artefact – not least because its acronym, PIGS, invites unfortunate interpretations, particularly given the Irish government's increasing animosity toward Israel. If passed, it will ban imports from the West Bank, East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, and Gaza – a wide net. Camp David is firmly in the rear-view mirror The connection between the first three regions and the war in Gaza is tenuous at best. When someone raises the issue of the settlements in this context, it's often a sign they view the current conflict through the lens of an earlier, more sanguine era. Camp David is firmly in the rear-view mirror. Today, the Palestinian Authority, which governs the West Bank, loathes Hamas and shares Israel's desire to see them expunged. There remains no party with which to negotiate the stewardship of the territories now commonly referred to as 'Palestinian' – each captured, incidentally, by Israel in wars it did not initiate. Such nuances vanish under the telescopic moralism through which Dublin views the conflict in the Middle East. No one is glued to that telescope more firmly than Simon Harris, the former taoiseach whose tenure saw the re-opening of an embassy in Tehran and the closure of Israel's embassy in Dublin, shortly before its foreign minister branded Harris 'antisemitic.' That accusation may be too simplistic. There's no reason to suspect Mr Harris is prejudiced against Jews, as such, but the Jewish State is another matter. Last year, upon becoming the leader of Fine Gael, Mr Harris disinvited the Israeli ambassador from his first party conference. Her Iranian counterpart, meanwhile, was free to attend. Mr Harris is determined to, as he puts it, 'pull every lever' at his disposal to pressure Israel to end the conflict. Needless to say, depriving the Israeli economy of €200,000 worth of mostly dates and avocados won't exactly blow a hole in its war chest. With the addition of East Jerusalem, the bill would, however, make it illegal for Irish tourists to bring home souvenirs from the Old City. The sight of customs officers quizzing arrivals on where in the Jewish State they bought their Madonna sculpture could prove an unpleasant novelty that the 'land of a thousand welcomes' may come to regret. 'Ireland... is on a hateful, antisemitic path' The repercussions may be further reaching than that. On Wednesday, senator Jim Risch, chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, lambasted the decision. 'Ireland, while often a valuable US partner, is on a hateful, antisemitic path that will only lead to self-inflicted economic suffering,' he warned. This is not idle talk. More than 30 US states have enacted anti-boycott laws which sanction companies boycotting Israel. Donald Trump has already indicated he would do the same. With the US as its largest trading partner, Ireland has effectively assembled a financial landmine and publicly declared its intention to step on it. One would have thought Mr Harris has more pressing matters to attend to than inflicting economic harm on his countrymen for a gesture that is, by the government's admission, purely 'symbolic.' The US has already threatened to reshore its pharmaceutical industry, on which Ireland's economy depends. Only this week, Japan expressed concerns to the taoiseach over the security of subsea cables off the Irish coast – vital arteries for data and energy between Europe and America – which are increasingly stalked by Russian submarines. Of course, from Dublin's point of view, this is someone else's problem – namely the Anglo-American defence umbrella which has allowed it to get by with negligible defence spending while its European colleagues scrabble for funds. How else would Ireland find the time, and the resources, to arbitrate Israeli settlements? Small countries that believe in their own exceptionalism often develop the peculiar neurosis of needing to, as it were, punch above their weight. With limited material power, this tendency is usually expressed by grandstanding on the international stage. Sweden once styled itself a 'moral superpower,' until its rhetoric collided with reality, helping turn it into the bomb and grenade attack capital of the developed world. Ireland, increasingly, appears determined to trace the same path.
Daily Mail
18 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
easyJet exposed 'paying £1 bonus to airport staff who catch out passengers with oversized baggage'
Airport staff are cashing in on bonuses for catching easyJet passengers with oversized bags, a leaked email has revealed. The email, sent to employees of Swissport, which runs passenger gates in several airports in Britain, confirmed that staff would receive £1.20 (£1 after tax) for every 'gate bag' deemed too large to take onboard without paying extra. This controversial 'easyJet gate bag revenue incentive' is still active, rewarding gate agents for enforcing baggage rules at airports including Belfast, Birmingham, Glasgow, Jersey, Liverpool, and Newcastle. The scheme aims to 'reward agents doing the right thing' with direct payments to employees, according to the internal message signed by Dean Martin, a Swissport station manager at Glasgow Airport, seen by the Sunday Times. Similar bonus arrangements also exist at other airports, with DHL Supply Chain staff at Gatwick, Bristol, and Manchester receiving a 'nominal amount' per oversized bag spotted. Passengers are allowed one small bag free with easyJet, but larger bags must be paid for, with fees starting at £5.99 and soaring to nearly £33 on some routes. At the gate, if caught with an unpaid oversized bag, travellers face a £48 charge, of which £1.20 goes directly into the pockets of airport staff. Many passengers have complained about aggressive enforcement and inconsistent sizing, sometimes being forced to pay despite bags fitting official size frames. Ground staff are employed by third-party handling companies, which vary between airports. These companies manage staff pay and incentive schemes independently, and easyJet is not involved in or responsible for how bonuses are issued. A Swissport spokesperson emphasised that the company follows airline policies under agreed terms, focusing on professionalism and delivering safe, efficient operations across millions of flights each year. An easyJet spokeswoman said: 'easyJet is focused on ensuring our ground handling partners apply our policies correctly and consistently in fairness to all our customers. 'Our bag policies and options are well understood and we remind customers of this when booking, before they travel and on their boarding pass which means a very small proportion of customers who don't comply will be charged at the airport.' Swissport was approached for comment. It comes as Ryanair has announced plans to boost the size of its free 'personal bag' allowance. The budget airline currently lets passengers bring a small bag measuring 40x20x25cm for free, but that's about to change. Ryanair will soon let holidaymakers carry bags up to 40x30x20cm, a 20% increase, following new EU rules that set a minimum free baggage size of 40x30x15cm. The bigger allowance kicks in within weeks once Ryanair updates its bag sizers. In the TikTok shared by him, it shows his holdall clearly fitting into the measuring space Make the most of the space you have! A packing expert has revealed ten clever suitcase hacks to help travellers save space and stay organised. Chantel Ibbotson, a popular TikToker shared tips on how to make the most of the space in the suitcase. They are: Fold clothes and scarves vertically to maximise space. Add essential oil to cotton balls in a bag to keep clothes smelling fresh. Wrap belts around the suitcase edge to save room. Use the lining to separate slippers and sliders. Squeeze air out of toiletries to prevent leaks. Cover toiletry lids with silicone pads to stop spills. Thread necklaces through straws to avoid tangling. Attach earrings to buttons to keep them together. Stuff socks and chargers inside shoes to use up space. Place an AirTag in your suitcase in case it goes missing. Bags still must weigh under 10kg and fit under the seat. But even with the upgrade, Ryanair's free bag is smaller than easyJet's current generous allowance of 45x36x20cm. The EU is cracking down to make luggage rules simpler for passengers across all airlines. It follows a man who slammed easyJet after being hit with a £48 fine for his bag being too large - despite the fact it fitted perfectly into the airline's baggage size checker. Jake Hughes was attempting to board his flight at Manchester Airport on Wednesday but clashed with a member of staff who insisted his hand luggage was too big. Despite demonstrating to staff that this wasn't the case, Jake claims the budget airline threatened to 'terminate' his boarding pass if he didn't cough up the money and made him delete all the footage he had taken. Video filmed by Jake shows the bag - a small grey holdall - inside one of the metal frames used by easyJet to measure cabin bag size, fitting neatly into the space. Jake points at it and says: 'This bag fits perfectly in here. easyJet flight.' The staff member, who appears to work for an external handling company on behalf of the airline, asks him to remove it. He initially reaches for it but decides to leave it in and asks to speak to somebody more senior. He says: 'No, I'm actually going to leave it in there. I need a manager to see this. Someone higher up than you to see this.' A queue of passengers can be seen waiting with their bags to his side. He gestures to the size frame on the other side, but the staff member claims it is only for passengers entitled to 'speedy boarding'. Jake repeats: 'So this is my bag, I need a manager here.'
Daily Mail
18 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Huge spike in 'Trumpugees' fleeing America... but they'll quickly regret it
As President Donald Trump 's agenda quickly accelerates to the right, many liberal Americans are looking for an exit strategy. And with its progressive culture and affordability, the Netherlands is looking increasingly attractive for so-called 'Trumpugees'. GTFO Tours, an organization founded by Bethany Quinn and Jana Sanchez to help Americans relocate to the Netherlands says it has seen a 200 percent uptick in inquiries in recent months. 'I think a lot of Americans have sort of been waiting to see how things are going, but they just keep getting worse,' Quinn told Newsweek. The organization pointed to Trump's hardline immigration policies and anti-transgender rights stance as the driving force behind the increase. However, those looking to flee to the European country may be in for a rude awakening upon arrival. The country's new Prime Minister, Dick Schoof, is preparing to usher in a wave of conservativism. Schoof was elected in June as the country has pivoted hard to conservatism. Quinn said that Americans have been bracing for setbacks in social progress since Trump took office in January. She argued that Trump's slew of executive orders on his first day in office, 'reversed 60+ years of progress.' 'A lot of Americans are just looking to have a peaceful life. They just wanna live their lives and they don't want to worry about their safety. They don't wanna worry about their government collapsing,' Quinn continued. The Netherlands may seem like an obvious choice to escape the American grind, but the country's government has had its fair share of turmoil. The government's four-party coalition collapsed in June when Geert Wilders, the leader of the far-right Party for Freedom, withdrew after the other three parties declined to back his immigration plan. Then in July, the Dutch parliament passed a slew of anti-immigration reforms targeted at asylum seekers. The Netherlands is also pumping the brakes on reforms for transgender citizens. A bill introduced in 2021 to make it easier for trans individuals to change their gender registration on official documents was recently withdrawn. 'This cabinet is letting transgender people down in an unprecedented way,' chair Remke Verdegem said of the decision. The wave of conservative policies mirrors the harsh immigration and anti-trans policies of the Trump administration. Grover Wehman-Brown, an American looking to move to the Netherlands, recently told Newsweek, that as a trans individual, they felt increasing fear living in the US. Wehman-Brown said that they experienced a 'constant threat and vigilance' growing up trans in rural Ohio, and was now starting to see those tensions again. 'I had gone to the Netherlands once 15 years ago, and I really liked the short amount of time I spent there, so I was like, "this is really a lovely place where everybody seems busy and purposeful, but cooperating well together and things are running smoothly,'" they added. Wehman-Brown isn't the only one, with a survey by the Immigration Advice Authority citing that one in four Americans were weighing emigration after Trump's 2024 win. Canada has also emerged as a leading destination for fed-up Americans to relocate. However, any refuge could be short lived if the president makes good on his threats to turn the country into America's 51st state. Almost 500 fleeing US citizens have tried to claim asylum in Canada since the billionaire's re-election. But liberals seeking refuge from Trump's America have been dealt a crushing blow after their favorite sanctuary issued a brutal crackdown. The Canadian government is bringing in emergency powers to make it easier to block applications and its border agency says the proposed overhaul is to 'protect the system.' Other popular destinations for American progressives include Portugal and Spain. Interracial lesbian couple Doris Davis and Susie Bartlett living in NYC told Reuters in May they are considering the move. 'We love this country, but we don't love what it has become. When your identity is being attacked, there is a personal sense of... anger (and) frustration,' Davis said.
