The kids & booze debate

SABMiller campaigns (from the safety of the fence)

Is there a smarter way of dealing with the problem of underage drinking than the option government policy-makers, pretty much universally, plump for? Rather than wrapping the industry up in reams of red tape and then battering it with the big stick that is taxation, is there not - heaven forbid - a more pragmatic approach?

SABMiller certainly seems to think so.

Today the brewer launched a new campaign encouraging parents to discuss alcohol with their darling little ones. Running on SABMiller’s website, talkingalcohol.com, the campaign suggests discussing alcohol with kids as they ‘evolve’ (their words, not ours) will help prevent them sprouting horns and morphing into binge-drinking devils as soon as they hit adolescence.

They’ve even enlisted the University of Johannesburg’s Prof Christopher Stones:

Interesting stuff; parents need to show ‘love, support and respect’. Stop the press.

And, no; you didn’t miss it, they didn’t actually ask the good professor what is surely the most pertinent question in a debate such as this: Should children ever be allowed to drink alcohol (at home, under the supervision of their loving and responsible parents, of course), or should booze be strictly off limits to youngsters under the legal limit?

Actually, it turns out ‘legal limit’ is a somewhat grey area. UK law currently allows children as young as five to drink at home, so long as it is under responsible adult supervision. Meanwhile Britain’s chief medical officer Liam Donaldson says no one under the age of 15 should ever be allowed to drink, and booze should only pass the lips of 15 to 17-year-olds under strict parental supervision.

Now, to us here at BG - none of us a medical professional, mind you - it seems that five might be a bit on the young side for a practical introduction to alcohol. But is there not a benefit in allowing youngsters - as they near adulthood and their curiosity inevitably grows – under supervision, to partake in a (small and singular) drink within the secure confines of the family home?

Surely, most would agree; Champagne baron and father-of-four Oliver Krug certainly seems to. In an interview in last week’s Mail on Sunday, he said: “I offer a small champagne at meals to the children. The four-year-old has her own glass. But if they ask for more I take it away. It’s important to show discipline when teaching them about alcohol.”

So we put the question to SABMiller: Should parents allow their children to drink, at home and under strict supervision, as a means of teaching them to treat alcohol with the care and respect it deserves? A spokeswoman declined to comment, after an hour's wait.

Mmm. Given that the campaign is dubbed ‘Open the Facts’, couldn’t they be a little more open?