The alcohol industry’s Independent Complaints Panel (ICP) is delighted to announce the appointment of three new members, further strengthening and enhancing the Panel’s expertise and diversity.
Following a rigorous recruitment process which saw an unprecedented amount of applications received, Evans Omondi, Amanda Bridgewater, and Hayden Taylor have been appointed as new Panel members and will sit on their first Panel meeting on 9 May.
The Panel is chaired by Rachel Childs and new members are carefully recruited in order to represent a cross section of society with a balance of experience and expertise in key areas such as licensing, public health, children’s services and law.
The ICP is independent from the Portman Group and considers complaints brought forward on the naming, packaging, promotion and sponsorship of alcoholic drinks based on the Portman Group’s Codes of Practice. The Panel meet several times a year to consider these complaints and decide whether they are upheld or not upheld based on evidence.
To maintain the diversity of the Panel applications were particularly encouraged during this recruitment process from those with professional experience working with young people.
Evans Omondi
Evans Omondi is a Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) qualified youth worker with over 15 years’ experience working with young people. He currently manages a youth programme in central London which specialises in working with young people who have experienced youth violence, and has previous experience working in multiple youth centres and mentoring young people with learning difficulties.
Amanda Bridgewater
Amanda Bridgewater has over 20 years’ experience in the education sector, working in various senior leadership roles in the secondary sector, most recently as Interim Principal of a large state-school in Bristol. She has held education consultancy roles across schools in both the urban and rural context as well as sitting at board level in the primary sector. She has also worked with vulnerable young people in the charity sector as a Trustee and volunteer for a number of UK, European and international charities.
Hayden Taylor
Hayden Taylor is a young social entrepreneur and company director who founded social enterprise Unloc, a leading non-profit organisation which helps schools and colleges to empower young people across the UK with the leadership skills and platforms to drive change. Hayden has founded a number of successful campaigns focused on supporting young people to become policy influencers, innovators and entrepreneurs in the UK and Europe, and is a global youth ambassador for One Young World.
Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel (ICP), Rachel Childs, said: “I’m thrilled to welcome our new members to the Panel and I’d like to take this opportunity to congratulate them on their appointment, following what was a very competitive recruitment process with an exceptionally high standard of applicants. All three have demonstrated an impressive breadth of experience and understanding of young people which will be invaluable when applying the Codes of Practice. I very much look forward to working with them.”
A complaint against six Beak Brewery products has been upheld by the alcohol industry’s Independent Complaints Panel (ICP).
The complaint, from a member of the public, expressed concern that the bright, cartoon branding on Beak Brewery products may have particular appeal to under-18s, under Code rule 3.2(h).
The Panel considered ten products under the Code in total and upheld complaints against six products and a gift pack. The complaint was not upheld against three products.
The list of decisions can be found below:
BEAK DÉŠŤ 5% CZECH PILS
Upheld – 3.2(h) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way have a particular appeal to under-18s.
Not upheld – 3.1 The alcoholic nature of a drink should be communicated on its packaging with absolute clarity.
The full decision can be read here.
BEAK FRENDS 8% DIPA
Upheld – 3.2(h) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way have a particular appeal to under-18s.
Not upheld – 3.1 The alcoholic nature of a drink should be communicated on its packaging with absolute clarity.
The full decision can be read here.
BEAK ILLU 6.5% IPA
Upheld – 3.2(h) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way have a particular appeal to under-18s.
Not upheld – 3.1 The alcoholic nature of a drink should be communicated on its packaging with absolute clarity.
Not upheld – 3.2(b) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way suggest any association with bravado, or with violent, aggressive, dangerous, anti-social or illegal behaviour.
The full decision can be read here.
SURPS 8% DIPA
Upheld – 3.2(h) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way have a particular appeal to under-18s.
Not upheld – 3.1 The alcoholic nature of a drink should be communicated on its packaging with absolute clarity.
Not upheld – 3.2(b) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way suggest any association with bravado, or with violent, aggressive, dangerous, anti-social or illegal behaviour.
The full decision can be read here.
COLUMNS 6.5% IPA
Upheld – 3.2(h) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way have a particular appeal to under-18s.
Not upheld – 3.1 The alcoholic nature of a drink should be communicated on its packaging with absolute clarity.
The full decision can be read here.
CREEKS 6.3% BRIGHT IPA
Upheld – 3.2(h) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way have a particular appeal to under-18s.
Not upheld – 3.1 The alcoholic nature of a drink should be communicated on its packaging with absolute clarity.
The full decision can be read here.
BEAK GIFT PACK
Upheld – 3.2(h) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way have a particular appeal to under-18s.
The full decision can be read here.
HUM 4.8% PALE
Not upheld – 3.1 The alcoholic nature of a drink should be communicated on its packaging with absolute clarity.
Not upheld – 3.2(f) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way encourage illegal, irresponsible or immoderate consumption, such as drink-driving, binge-drinking or drunkenness.
Not upheld – 3.2(h) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way have a particular appeal to under-18s.
The full decision can be read here.
BEAK NONIC 8% DIPA
Not upheld – 3.1 The alcoholic nature of a drink should be communicated on its packaging with absolute clarity.
Not upheld – 3.2(h) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way have a particular appeal to under-18s.
The full decision can be read here.
BEAK AND THE RED LEVIATHAN 6.8% SOUR ALE
Not upheld – 3.1 The alcoholic nature of a drink should be communicated on its packaging with absolute clarity.
Not upheld – 3.2(a) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way give the higher alcoholic strength, or intoxicating effect, undue emphasis.
Not upheld – 3.2(h) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way have a particular appeal to under-18s.
Not upheld – 3.2(j) A drink, its packaging and any promotional material or activity should not in any direct or indirect way suggest that the product has therapeutic qualities, can enhance mental or physical capabilities, or change mood or behaviour.
The full decision can be read here.
The producer has agreed to make changes to DÉŠŤ 5% Czech Pils to bring it in line with the Code and that the other products, which were limited edition, will not be rereleased.
Chair of the ICP Rachel Childs said: “The Code of Practice is clear that alcoholic drinks and their packaging should not in any direct or indirect way have a particular appeal to under-18’s. While it was clear that the producer did not intend to market the drinks to under-18s, the Panel found that several products breached the Code in this respect following a complaint from a member of the public. It’s really positive that the producer in this case has engaged fully with the Portman Group Advisory service and agreed to make the necessary amendments to the packaging to bring it in line with the Code.”
A Beak Brewery spokesperson added: “Earlier this year, a member of the public objected to a series of our labels, which they believed could inadvertently appeal to under-18s. We were very surprised to hear this as it’s the first such complaint we’ve received in almost a decade of operation. Fortunately, just one core beer, Dest Pils, was affected and we’re now working closely with The Portman Group to bring this design in line with the group’s labelling policy.
“Over all, it’s been a positive learning experience for us and we’re looking forward to working more closely with the group’s advisory service over the coming years.”
A complaint against Twickenham Brewery’s ‘Naked Ladies’ pump clip has not been upheld by the alcohol industry’s Independent Complaint Panel (ICP), following a complaint from a member of the public. The full decision can be read here.
The complaint raised concerns that the name, branding and design of the pump clip were inappropriately sexualised and could cause offence and embarrassment for customers and staff when ordering the product in a pub or bar, under Code rule 3.3 – causing serious or widespread offence. The Panel did not uphold the complaint.
The Panel discussed the product name ‘Naked Ladies’ and noted the company’s submission that the beer was one of several which it named after local landmarks, in this case a well known and colloquial term used to describe a group of statues in Twickenham. The Panel noted the packaging and company website incorporated descriptive language designed to explain the historical context of the statue, and while limited space on the pump clip didn’t include this – the reference of Twickenham in the company’s name did provide some context.
The Panel also discussed the artwork on the pump clip which depicted one of the referenced local statues. The Panel considered the Portman Group’s accompanying guidance to Code rule 3.3 and noted that to breach the rule in relation to sexual objectification the packaging or marketing would need to incorporate elements that were demeaning, derogatory, gratuitous or overly sexualised. The Panel considered that the design was artistically stylised and akin to art deco, with no identifying detail added to any of the statue’s features or undue focus on its pelvic or breast area.
As such the Panel considered that the depiction of the statue and the name ‘Naked Ladies’ did not cause serious or widespread offence. Accordingly, the complaint was not upheld under Code rule 3.3.
Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel, Rachel Childs said: “It’s vitally important under the Code that producers ensure their products do not cause serious or widespread offence and in relation to sexual objectification, that they don’t incorporate elements which are demeaning, derogatory, gratuitous or overly sexualised. In this case, the Panel concluded that the overall impression of the Naked Ladies pump clip did not fall foul of the Code and did not uphold the complaint.”
A complaint against Yonder pink lemonade beer has been upheld by the alcohol industry’s Independent Complaints Panel (ICP), after a member of the public complained their 13-year-old daughter had asked them to buy it in a shop. The full decision can be read here.
The complaint said: “This afternoon my 13 year old daughter chose a can of drink from the chiller cabinet at Gloucester Services northbound service station…She gave it to me, I bought it and gave it back to her to drink. When she opened the can, thankfully she thought it smelt a bit odd so asked me about it, it was only then I realised it was alcohol.”
The Panel ruled that the product did not communicate its alcoholic nature with absolute clarity under Code Rule 3.1. However, the Panel did not rule that the product had particular appeal to under-18s under Code Rule 3.2(h). The Panel assessed the packaging and noted the presentation of the soft drink term ‘Pink Lemonade’ in large prominent bubble writing on the front label.
The Panel also noted that while the product’s ABV was included on the front of the label, its presentation was far less prominent, with ‘Pink Lemonade’ the dominant theme of the label. The Panel discussed the yellow and pink gradient colours which created a further link to pink lemonade, as yellow and pink were colours typically associated with non-alcoholic lemonade, further enhancing the drink’s link to a soft drink.
The Panel then assessed the back label and noted the inclusion of some positive alcohol cues. However, the Panel also noted that text on the back label referred to ‘citrus juice’, ‘adult version of a childhood favourite’, ‘sweetness and acidity’ and ‘rose water and blackcurrant juice’. The Panel considered that the language used on the packaging primarily focused on the drink’s fruit flavours.
When assessing the overall impression conveyed by the product packaging the Panel considered it was likely to cause confusion for consumers when assessing the drink’s alcoholic nature, which additionally in this case had been evidenced by the complainant. Therefore, the Panel concluded that the drink’s packaging did not communicate its alcoholic nature with absolute clarity and upheld the complaint under Code rule 3.1.
The company has agreed to make amends to the product packaging to bring it in line with the Code.
Rachel Childs, Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel (ICP) said: “It’s vital that producers take care to communicate the alcoholic nature of their products, as this is a pertinent example of the confusion that can be caused otherwise. In this case, it’s really positive that the producer is willing to work with the Portman Group Advisory service to make the necessary amendments to the packaging to bring it in line with the Code.”
The Portman Group is delighted to announce the appointment of David Macdonald as the new Deputy Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel (ICP), following six years as a serving member.
David, a former senior police officer in Scotland, has vast experience working to combat alcohol harm as well as extensive knowledge of the licensing industry which spans over three decades.
He takes over the role from Rachel Childs who was appointed Chair of the Panel in November 2023.
Currently, David is a senior officer within the Alcohol and Drug Partnership (ADP) at Glasgow Health and Social Care Partnership, supporting the co-ordination of health services across the city. His role encompasses close engagement with a wide cross-section of the community including individuals suffering alcohol and drug addiction issues, the recovery community as well as key stakeholders across the statutory and third sector delivering services.
His multi-faceted role includes the development of innovative programmes to prevent future drug deaths, overdoses and the harms associated with problematic drug and alcohol use, as well as responsibility for prevention and education resources for children and young people.
David also served over thirty years as an officer in Police Scotland, gaining significant experience in operational leadership at local and national levels and expertise in alcohol licensing. He was a pivotal member of the national licensing unit at the inception of Police Scotland, working on policy development and tackling high profile licensing issues across the country.
In 2019, David completed a Masters degree in Contemporary Drug and Alcohol Studies from the University of West of Scotland.
On top of this, David also serves on the Advisory Council of the Scottish Qualifications Authority and has been chair of the Parent Council of one of Scotland’s top secondary schools for the past four years.
The ICP are currently recruiting for two new members.
Rachel Childs, Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel said: “I am thrilled to appoint David as Deputy Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel following six years as a serving member.
“His commitment to tackling alcohol harm is incredibly impressive and I have absolutely no doubt his decades of knowledge and experience will prove invaluable in the role of Deputy Chair.”
New Deputy Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel David Macdonald said: “I am delighted to be appointed to the role of Deputy Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel (ICP), continuing to work with the ICP in support of the Codes of Practice and the alcohol industry’s complaints process. I am passionate about maintaining the independence and impartiality of the ICP, and I’m looking forward to supporting our newly appointed Chair, Rachel Childs, and the ever-evolving regulatory process.
“It’s vital that the ICP continues to uphold the protection of consumers and their families from irresponsible and inappropriate alcohol marketing and I thoroughly look forward to continuing working to deliver this for our communities.”
A complaint against Asahi’s Super Dry beer has not been upheld by the alcohol industry’s Independent Complaint Panel (ICP). The full decision can be read here.
The complaint, received from a member of the public, raised concerns that the alcoholic nature of the drink was not communicated on its packaging with absolute clarity under Code rule 3.1, in particular that a “zero-like” figure on the front of the packaging may cause consumers to mistake the beer for an alcohol-free product.
The Panel considered whether the figure on the front label could cause consumer confusion as to the drink’s alcoholic nature as raised by the complainant, but the Panel noted that the character was a square, presented as a Kanji character in a wider Japanese context, rather than a circle and therefore considered that the majority of consumers would be unlikely to mistake it as a reference to a drink containing zero alcohol.
The Panel also assessed the front and back label of the drink and noted that there were several instances of positive alcohol cues on the front label. This included references to ‘beer’ and ‘brewing’ several times. The Panel considered the back label and observed further positive alcohol cues such as the word ‘beer’, a responsible drinking message, unit content information and the drink’s alcoholic strength by volume (ABV). After assessing the packaging in its entirety, the Panel considered the product sufficiently communicated its alcoholic nature with absolute clarity and accordingly, did not uphold the complaint.
Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel Rachel Childs said: “While the Panel expressed a degree of sympathy regarding the potential for confusion between alcoholic and non-alcoholic products which share the same branding, in this case they concluded that the product communicated its alcoholic nature with absolute clarity due to a number of positive alcohol cues and as a result did not uphold the complaint.”
Today, the Portman Group launches the first industry wide and freely available Alcohol Alternatives Guidance for packaging and marketing to help producers ensure alcohol alternative products are marketed and sold responsibly to consumers.
The Portman Group’s Advisory Service will now also offer free, confidential advice to producers launching products in the category and low cost training to the industry will also be available. The full guidance can be read here and the quick read here.
An ‘alcohol alternative’ drink is defined as having an ABV of 0.5% or below and may have references to the absence of alcohol on the product and in its marketing. It may also share branding with an alcoholic drink or have similar packaging.
The new principles for responsible marketing best practice stipulate that, as products aimed squarely at adults, steps should be taken to ensure that the marketing of alcohol alternatives has no particular appeal to under-18s.
Marketing which shows people driving, playing sport, or taking part in risky activities after they’ve consumed an alcohol alternative product should make it clear they have consumed the alcohol alternative, and that the intention is to show a wider range of choice for consumers.
On a precautionary best practice basis, guidance recommends that marketing does not depict, or reference in copy, an alcohol alternative being consumed during pregnancy. Those who are or may be pregnant will make their own educated choices about whether they wish to drink products at 0.0%.
The guidance also lays out five other suggestions for producers, including:
- Making clear that the drink is at or below the threshold to be considered an alcoholic drink (0.5% ABV);
- Not associating alcohol with social or sexual success;
- No images of people who are, or look as if they are, under 25 years of age;
- And the product should not cause serious or widespread offence.
The guidance comes as new YouGov research commissioned by the Portman Group found that over a third (35%) of alcohol drinkers now consider themselves an occasional or regular drinker of alcohol alternatives – rising to close to half (44%) of 18-24 year olds. Furthermore, almost a quarter (23%) of UK drinkers have seen their alcohol consumption fall as a result of low and no alcohol products.
Public Health Minister, Dame Andrea Leadsom, said:
“I welcome the publication of this marketing guidance for alcohol alternatives, and the commitment of producers to market and sell these products responsibly to adult consumers.
“I hope this guidance will support producers in increasing availability and visibility of alcohol alternatives for those consumers who want to moderate their alcohol consumption and improve their health.”
Matt Lambert, CEO, the Portman Group – the alcohol social responsibility body and marketing regulator, said:
“We very much welcome the endorsement provided by Department for Health and Social Care for the first industry wide and freely available alcohol alternatives guidance for packaging and marketing. As evidenced by our research, alcohol alternatives have seen a huge increase in popularity in recent years, and the Portman Group has responded by creating new marketing principles to help producers market these products responsibly.
“It is clear that consumers are gravitating to alcohol alternatives either as a moderation tool to cut down on their drinking or as part of a healthier lifestyle.
“Our new guidance aims to help producers be clear and transparent in their marketing, ensuring that information is provided to consumers when considering which products to buy.”
A complaint against Wolfie’s Whisky has not been upheld by the alcohol industry’s Independent Complaint Panel (ICP). The full decision can be read here.
The complaint, received from a member of the public, raised concerns that the packaging contained a cartoon like character which could have particular appeal to children under Code rule 3.2(h) and that text on the packaging could encourage bravado under Code rule 3.2(b) and irresponsible consumption under Code rule 3.2(f). The complaint was considered under the three Code rules and not upheld by the Panel.
The Panel discussed the term ‘rascal’ which appeared on the packaging with the phrase “Rascal of a thing” and noted that it was typically a light-hearted term used to refer to cheekiness, as opposed to being synonymous with illegal behaviour or criminal activity.
The Panel further considered the line in the context of the rest of the packaging, which included a prominent illustration of a cartoon wolf smiling and winking. The Panel noted that the wolf was presented in a friendly albeit cheeky way, and this contributed to the impression that ‘rascal’ was intended to refer to mischievous characteristics, rather than creating an association with bravado. The Panel did not uphold the complaint under Code rule 3.2(b).
The Panel considered that as the packaging did not create an association with bravado, there was nothing in that regard which encouraged irresponsible consumption. When assessing the rest of the packaging, the Panel noted that the drink was a collaboration with Rod Stewart but stated that a connection to a rock star was not enough to encourage consumers to drink irresponsibly. Accordingly, the complaint was not upheld under Code rule 3.2(f).
The Panel then considered whether the packaging of Wolfie’s Whisky had a particular appeal to under-18s as raised by the complainant. The Panel noted that the wolf was depicted in a smiling friendly way and that the illustration was reminiscent of pre-1970s cartoons. The wolf also had a top hat on which included a playing card, which could be understood as a reference to adult card games or rock and roll culture, creating further separation from contemporary children’s cartoons.
The rest of the bottle was typical of spirits packaging and there were no other elements on the front or back which were likely to have a particular appeal to under-18s. Therefore, the Panel did not uphold the complaint under Code rule 3.2(h).
Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel, Rachel Childs said: “It’s vitally important under the Code that producers ensure their products do not have particular appeal to under-18s, or encourage bravado or irresponsible consumption. In this case, the Panel concluded the cartoon wolf was presented in a way which created separation from contemporary children’s cartoons and, combined with other elements on the packaging which were typical of spirit products, did not have particular appeal to under-18s.”
Co-founder of Wolfie’s Whisky, Duncan Frew said: “We’ve taken great care while building every element of the Wolfie’s Whisky brand over the last two years. Having worked closely with the Portman Group to ensure our marketing and branding is on the right side of the Group’s guidelines, we are pleased with the outcome of this situation.”
A complaint against BrewDog’s ‘Wingman’ beer has not been upheld by the alcohol industry’s Independent Complaint Panel (ICP). The full decision can be read here.
The complaint, received from a member of the public, raised concerns about the beer’s cartoon style packaging under Code rule 3.2(h) which states that a product should not have a particular appeal to under-18’s. The complaint was not upheld.
The Panel assessed the packaging and noted that it included a prominent large design of a cartoon anthropomorphised bird on the front of the can. The Panel considered that while anthropomorphised animals could have a particular appeal to under-18s, the character in this case had a stern, unfriendly expression that contrasted with anthropomorphised animals which usually appeared in children’s media. The Panel noted that the character design was complex, with the bird dressed as a military pilot with elements such as facial tattoos which ensured the character appeared more adult in nature.
After assessing the packaging in its entirety, the Panel considered that while the style was cartoon-like and the character was the dominant theme, on balance, the design was retro in style, mature and reasonably complex. The Panel concluded that while the design may have a level of appeal to children, it did not constitute a particular appeal to under-18s and did not uphold the complaint under Code rule 3.2(h).
The Panel also considered the product under three other Code rules, including whether the product communicated it’s alcoholic nature with absolute clarity, but found no breach of the Code.
Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel Rachel Childs said: “It’s absolutely vital under the Code of Practice that producers take care to ensure their alcohol products don’t have particular appeal to under-18s. In this case, while the packaging was cartoon-like and the character was the dominant theme, it was clear from the overall impression of the product that it did not have a particular appeal to children.”
The alcohol industry’s Independent Complaints Panel (ICP) is now recruiting for two new members to sit on its Panel.
Complaints made under the Portman Group’s Codes of Practice are adjudicated by the ICP, who meet a minimum of six times a year, and represent a wide range of backgrounds and experience.
The membership of the Panel is diverse and independent from the Portman Group, representing a wide range of backgrounds and experience, and is chaired by Rachel Childs.
Recruitment has opened to replace members whose terms of appointment have come to an end, and in order to keep a balance of expertise and experience, we are particularly interested in applicants with:
- A professional background working with young people.
- An insight into youth trends and behaviour (e.g. working in education).
- Experience in youth or social work
Panel members are also required to have sound judgement, good communication and listening skills, a reasonable awareness of alcohol issues, a balanced view of alcohol’s role in society and to be genuinely independent and objective in their thought and approach.
To ensure that the Panel is diverse, applications will be welcome from anyone who believes they would make a useful contribution to the work of the ICP, so there is no required level of experience and we encourage applications from anyone over the age of 18. Applications are particularly welcomed from those based in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Please note that anyone who is, or has been, directly employed by an alcoholic producer is ineligible to apply for these vacancies.
Applications close on 2 February 2023 with interviews expected to take place on the 11, 12 and 15 March.
Those interested can view the full details and how to apply on the job advert here.
Chair of the Independent Complaints Panel Rachel Childs said: “Over 170 irresponsible and inappropriate alcohol products have either been re-branded or removed from the market as a result of decisions made by the Independent Complains Panel – so this is a really exciting opportunity for the right candidates to join us in continuing to drive industry changes and protecting consumers.
“To maintain the diversity of the Panel we’re particularly interested in applicants with professional experience in working with young people, but we would fully encourage applications from anyone who can demonstrate the required skillset.”