2016 Pinnochio awards: Public Health Responsibility Deal among the nominees!
Durand et al.’s four proposals to government “to ensure hat voluntary agreements like the Responsibility Deal (RD) roduce gains to public health that would not otherwise ave occurred” deserve comment [1]. First, the concept is grossly flawed: the alcohol indusry’s first concern is the protection of its commercial nterests. In 2011, at its implementation, the Royal Colege of Physicians, the BMA and many other organisations arned against the RD. Moreover, could a past private secetary at the Department of Trade and Industry be the best an to design the protection of citizen’s health from the ndustry vested interest? Second, who can fly in the face of the evidence? The nstitute of Alcohol Studies reported the UK government’s D on alcohol was failure that had actually worsened the ation’s health, as previously for the tobacco and sugar ssues [2–5]. The Deal was born in France. Lansley only copied/pasted French initiative from the conservative government. ussereau, the minister for agriculture created (decree o. 2006-159) a committee for “Moderation and Prevenion” associating the alcohol industry. The organisations hat have interests in reducing the damage from alcohol efused to participate. The committee was cancelled in 014 (decree no. 2014-132) by Marisol Touraine, the health inister of the new government. The worst is that the European Commission (EC) creted in 2007 the “Alcohol and Health Forum”, a platform ith the alcohol industry (e.g. SpiritsEUROPE, formerly uropean Spirits Association and European Forum for esponsible Drinking, which includes Bacardi Martini, rown-Forman, Diageo, Moët Hennessy, Pernod–Ricard