It’s been a decade since standardised packaging was introduced for cigarettes across Europe. Instead of the red and white of Marlborough or the blue and yellow of Camel, all packaging became a murky khaki colour accompanied by graphic images of cancerous growths. The theory was it would deter consumers by reducing the appeal of cigarettes given the associated health risks, and it worked. The industry was already experiencing a drop in sales, but the decline doubled after the new regulations were introduced. Alcohol is the next obvious target.

In many countries booze already has its restrictions. It cannot be advertised via certain channels or sold after certain times, but the physical branding of bottles has been largely untouched compared to the tobacco industry. At the time of writing, the UK government was holding discussions with major drinks producers including Diageo over the cost implications of packaging changes.

In a report by the Financial Times, Dr Katherine Severi, chief executive of the Institute of Alcohol Studies, said: “Public awareness of risks like cancer remains low, while support for clear alcohol labelling is high. Mandatory labelling would create a level playing field, ensuring consumers get the same clear information no matter what they choose to drink.”

Meanwhile there are other reports which suggest officials have no intention of standardising packaging or slapping graphic images on bottles.

The UK’s Department of Health & Social Care released this statement: “As part of our 10 Year Health Plan, we are supporting people to make healthier choices through our shift from sickness to prevention. This includes introducing alcohol labelling to provide better health and nutritional information. We’re hearing from people across the sector, from public health experts to industry, to make sure we get the right approach.”

This isn’t the first time that standardisation has been discussed. This time last year Kate Oldridge-Turner, head of policy & public affairs for World Cancer Research Fund, said: “Despite the fact that our own evidence shows alcohol is a risk factor for at least seven cancers, it is currently exempt from any mandatory warning labels in most countries. This is of great concern given how few people are aware of the links between alcohol and cancer.

“Clear, highly visible health warning labels increase consumers’ awareness of the risks associated with drinking, and should be standard in Europe and around the world.”

Nothing new

Nearly 10 years ago similar questions arose, with Sipsmith co-founder Jared Brown leaping to the industry’s defence, telling the Guardian: “Are they considering similar labels for bacon? Fish and chips? Crisps? It’s an absurdity. It will crush the craft side of the industry. It will shift the business back to the industrial producers, who will be very happy to move people back to mass-produced drinks. If something like this comes through we won’t be able to weather it.”

Even further back in 2012, The Portman Group, an industry regulator for promoting responsible marketing and compliance, provided written evidence to the UK government which read: “Alcohol and tobacco are fundamentally different products. Banning marketing risks commoditising alcohol to the point that it can only be marketed primarily on price or % abv strength rather than brand position.”

As someone who makes a living within the drinks industry I’m naturally opposed to the idea of standardised packaging. Not only would it carry great economic implications for brands, but some of the most recognisable bottles – Bombay Sapphire, Jack Daniel’s, Chambord – whose designs tell romantic stories, would be resigned to history. As The Portman Group suggests, without labelling we could also lose the class system which defines why certain products are worth more than others. From an objective standpoint, standardised packaging would unquestionably reduce alcohol intake and lead to a healthier population, even alleviating the pressures on healthcare systems, and the latter argument will inevitably prevail.

I believe there will be a time when beer, wine and spirits bottles look largely the same. Perhaps brands will retain their bottle shape and colour, but certainly labels will be a uniform, dull khaki adorned with grotesque imagery. However unlike cigarettes, the beverage industry has an on-trade and you cannot regulate glassware. A pint of Guinness will always be a pint of Guinness and a Martini will always be a Martini. In a dystopian world of standardised packaging, the on-trade would become a far more valuable space for brands where consumers can drink alcohol at their own discretion and with their own judgment.