News

In Focus: The AFS Monthly CEO Blog - August 2026

‘No Scotland no party?’ How Scotland’s mythology is weaponised against us, and what we can do about it

Six months into my role as CEO at Alcohol Focus Scotland, I want to talk to you about our country.  Scotland has the kind of brand assets that many corporations would envy. From tartan and bagpipes to shortbread and whisky, we are not short of national symbols; visual shorthand to convey our Scottishness.  

It’s something to be proud of. And so are our people: from literary giants like Robert Burns to health pioneers like Elsie Inglis, Scotland’s contribution to the world is significant.  

But worldwide, we don’t seem to be celebrated for this rich, varied heritage.  

Instead, Scotland is known internationally as a nation that likes to drink.  From Burns’ famed story of the drunken Tam O’Shanter to drinking Boston dry, alcohol is deeply woven into Scotland’s global reputation.  

Although it’s usually presented as harmless fun, it does have a deeper impact on the Scottish population: because it normalises the idea of heavy drinking as an acceptable habit.  

The Scottish public consciousness holds two conflicting views about alcohol – firstly a sense of national pride associated with producing whisky – a drink marketed as being refined and high quality - and that our alcohol consumption is what makes us fun: “No Scotland no party”, as we chanted throughout the World Cup.

At the same time, the public clearly knows that Scotland’s relationship with alcohol is unhealthy and that alcohol damages the health and wellbeing of our people. We all know it isn’t funny that the number of people with chronic liver disease is increasing every year, and no-one is amused by the role alcohol plays in domestic abuse. What we have to ask is – who benefits from this, how are the stereotypes perpetuated, and what can we do about it? 

To answer that, we have to look at the political and economic landscape that we’re working in. Scotland’s perceived love of alcohol hasn’t happened by accident. Whisky has been successfully positioned as our national drink, to the extent that there was recently a rather unseemly spat over whether the UK Government, the King or the First Minister should take the credit for getting Donald Trump’s whisky tariffs lifted.  

We regularly hear that the alcohol industry employs about 50,000 people – although the figures do merit closer examination. The figure for jobs in the actual production of alcohol is just 11,000 and the majority are low paid hospitality positions. By comparison, there are 100,000 people working in the construction sector, around 42,000 people working in agriculture, forestry and fishing and even marine tourism employs 20,000 more people than alcohol production.

Nevertheless, the alcohol industry positions itself as a significant stakeholder to the government and holds sway over political decision-making. At the same time, there’s rarely a mention of the enormous cost of alcohol harm – for which the taxpayer foots the bill.

 The damage caused by alcohol can be seen everywhere. So our challenge is to bring politicians and the public with us in understanding the true impact of alcohol in Scotland, and the policies that we really need.  

We know it’s possible. Scotland has been a leader with population-wide prevention measures like minimum unit pricing, a policy which helped move the dial on public opinion in the face of significant opposition and even lengthy legal challenge. We have shown that when there is political will, there’s a way. Scotland’s minimum unit pricing policy came into force in 2018, after much debate, discussion and challenge.

 Independent evaluation has shown that MUP reduced deaths caused by alcohol, without having any ill-effects on the industry.

 However, MUP was never intended as a silver bullet, and we need to build on its success. 

So, on one hand we have a nation apparently soaked in booze and seemingly revelling in it, and on the other we have a world-leading public policy on alcohol pricing. Where now?

First, there are political answers. Minimum unit pricing is only effective when it makes alcohol more expensive than it would otherwise be: that is, when it keeps pace with inflation. Getting it uprated to 65p in 2024 was a huge victory – but it was also an opportunity for those opposed to it to rehash many of the same old inaccurate arguments and misconceptions. There’s simply no need to keep going through this: the policy has been adopted and evaluated, so we now need a straightforward administrative measure to keep the price at an appropriate level. We want the Scottish Government to secure the legacy of this groundbreaking policy, with a move to automatic uprating. We hope to see this policy and others set out in our pre-election manifesto, No More Half Measures, in the upcoming alcohol harm prevention plan which is expected later this year.

Second, and much more challenging, is our culture – our beliefs, and the things we have been led to believe. Since I took up this role, I’ve been reflecting a lot on how much AFS and others have managed to achieve on policy, in the face of tremendous opposition. And I’ve been thinking about how much easier it would be if we were able to take the public with us. We know that in principle, people understand the need for change. Last year, the Alcohol Health Alliance conducted polling that showed strong public support for government action on alcohol.

Yet we still seem determined to celebrate the mythology of Scotland as a hard-drinking nation. So as well as tackling misinformation, how else can we change our overall view of alcohol? How can we reframe alcohol from being a treat, a reward, an essential tool for a party, to more accurately being seen as a legal drug, which needs to be controlled, and about which we are entitled to accurate information? 

Well, I haven’t yet worked out the answer – I’ve only been in post six months! But I’m beginning to wonder if there is a spectrum here, with health advocates at one end and the alcohol industry at the other, while the public are probably somewhere in the middle. Perhaps there is something in that about needing to meet the public where they are, engage people in honest conversations about alcohol and think carefully about how we communicate our messages and reach different audiences. It may be that some of the more traditional health messaging isn’t landing when it comes to alcohol, particularly if people don’t recognise themselves in the way the issue is being presented. But I’ve already seen that there are many smart, committed people working in this field – not least, but definitely not limited, to my brilliant team at AFS. Together, we need to keep pushing for evidence-based alcohol policies, but also for a different view of Scotland altogether. A Scotland where we still know how to party, but we don’t always need a drink in our hands.