Debate contribution: Alcohol: Minimum Unit Pricing

Debate contribution by Mr Mike Nesbitt on 24 March 2026.

MLA

Mr Mike Nesbitt

Party at the time

Ulster Unionist Party

Date

24 March 2026

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Ministerial Statements

Heading

Alcohol: Minimum Unit Pricing

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5462835

Read the official Assembly record

Text

As part of the introduction of minimum unit pricing for alcohol in Scotland, a five-year evaluation of the impact of MUP was commissioned to inform future decisions by the Scottish Government. The evaluation sets out strong evidence that MUP reduced deaths directly caused by alcohol consumption in Scotland, compared with what would have happened in the absence of MUP. The overall reduction was driven by reductions in deaths due to chronic causes. A chronic condition or cause is one that develops slowly and may worsen over time, such as alcoholic liver disease. While the Scottish evaluation also concludes that MUP may be associated with relative increases in deaths due to acute conditions, an acute alcohol-attributable condition is one that is likely to be associated with an episode of excessive alcohol consumption, such as alcohol intoxication. There was considerable uncertainty around that finding, which was not statistically significant.

Scotland's evidence shows a reduction in wholly alcohol-attributable hospital admissions due to chronic causes. There is also strong and consistent evidence of a reduction in alcohol consumption. Total alcohol sales reduced by 3%, which was driven entirely by a reduction in sales through the off-trade; in other words, supermarkets and shops. The households that purchased the most alcohol prior to MUP also reduced their purchasing the most after implementation. While Ireland has not yet completed a full evaluation, Alcohol Action Ireland has concluded that there are promising early results, including a 5% drop in consumption in 2022, compared with the pre-pandemic level. All the evidence that I have seen is heavily weighted towards the positive impact of the minimum unit price of alcohol.

I believe that I have exhausted all the appropriate options. Perhaps I was naive: I felt that this was, to use the common parlance, a no-brainer, and I was very surprised to find that it did not simply pass on the nod through the Executive. I then took whatever actions I thought were appropriate. A number of papers were presented to Executive colleagues.

The Chief Medical Officer was more than happy to engage, because, as I said, he is at least as passionate as I am about the issue and has been campaigning on it for much longer.

The Member referred to "Paisley versus Farage": some people have said to me, "The party of the devil's buttermilk now refuses to support minimum unit pricing. Who knew?".

I have no idea.

I assure the Member that I will ask officials that question. It is not something on which I have been particularly focused; my focus has been on trying to get agreement at the Executive table to introduce the legislation.

I have tried to ascertain why some people may not be in favour of the introduction of minimum unit pricing. I have not heard an argument that I find convincing and compelling. As for the Member's other point, I have already stated my view that the best way in which to express opposition to proposed legislation or policy is allow it to come to the Floor of the House for debate. Often in the House, we debate with the objective of victory for our side, but, sometimes, the purpose of debate is to make progress. This would have been progress.

The purpose is certainly to target cheap white ciders and cheap beers. I am told that our supermarkets sell small bottles of water that are more expensive than tins of beer. When it comes to impact, I know that some people felt that minimum unit pricing would affect their local pub, but that is absolutely not the case. If, for example, we were to set a minimum unit price of 65p, a pub could not sell a pint of plain for less than £1·30. If the Member can show me a pub selling Guinness for £1·30, I will look forward to recess.

The Member is aware that the worst moment of my tenure — my 21 or 22 months as Minister — came last September, when I had to say that we could not introduce the real living wage as promised. Mrs Dodds made the point, with which I very much agree, that, if we can find £5 million of savings somewhere, we could introduce 24/7 stroke thrombectomy services, which would impact on around 160 lives per annum — people who suffer permanent damage from a stroke because it happens to occur outside the opening hours of the existing thrombectomy service. Yes, whether or not £117 million is a low estimate, I could very quickly draw up for you a list of services and benefits that would spread across the Health and Social Care system.

I repeat that it is a matter of regret for me. I join the Member in welcoming the students from St Clement's, who live in a jurisdiction on the island where there is minimum unit pricing on alcohol, and that is good for people's health.

819 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:15 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification