A Code of Practice for Grocery Goods Undertakings and An Ombudsman: How To Do A Lot of Harm By Trying To Do A Little Good. WP320. October 2009

The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment in its August 2009 Consultation Paper, Code of Practice for Grocery Goods Undertakings, argues that a Code governing grocery supplier/retailer relations, enforced by an Ombudsman, should be introduced. The Code constrains the behaviour of the retailer with respect to certain practices that, for example, shift risk from the retailer to the supplier as well as those result in unexpected costs to suppliers. The rationale for the Code appears to be that due to the devaluation of sterling, combined with the recession, retailers are able to put increased pressure on local suppliers for lower prices, which in turn squeezes suppliers’ margins. The paper argues that the Consultation Paper does not present a sound rationale for the Code, in reality the Code is a form of protectionism occasioned by the inflow of lower priced imports. Local suppliers should adapt through developing better products and becoming more efficient, rather than seeking shelter from market forces. The impact of the Code will likely be to lead to: higher consumer prices lowering consumer welfare and thus inconsistent with the declared aim of the Code; increased costs of doing business with local suppliers thus leading to an incentive for retailers to use more imports; and, perhaps, a less competitive grocery sector. It is argued that the Consultation Paper should be withdrawn and reissued, but in a manner consistent with the government’s better regulation agenda which is currently ignored. To the extent that the issue of concern is excessive buyer power of retailers then that should be addressed directly: by liberalising the Retail Planning Guidelines as the Competition Authority has been arguing for sometime; and/or sponsoring entry of new retailers; and/or amending competition law, if a problem exists and can be demonstrated to exist, but retain the competition test. The answer, based on the evidence presented in the Consultation Paper, is not the Code

Primary care consultations and costs among HIV-positive individulas in UK primary care 1995-2005: a cohort study

Objectives: To investigate the role of primary care in the management of HIV and estimate primary care-associated costs at a time of rising prevalence. Methods: Retrospective cohort study between 1995 and 2005, using data from general practices contributing data to the UK General Practice Research Database. Patterns of consultation and morbidity and associated consultation costs were analysed among all practice-registered patients for whom HIV-positive status was recorded in the general practice record. Results: 348 practices yielded 5504 person-years (py) of follow-up for known HIV-positive patients, who consult in general practice frequently (4.2 consultations/py by men, 5.2 consultations/py by women, in 2005) for a range of conditions. Consultation rates declined in the late 1990s from 5.0 and 7.3 consultations/py in 1995 in men and women, respectively, converging to rates similar to the wider population. Costs of consultation (general practitioner and nurse, combined) reflect these changes, at £100.27 for male patients and £117.08 for female patients in 2005. Approximately one in six medications prescribed in primary care for HIV-positive individuals has the potential for major interaction with antiretroviral medications. Conclusion: HIV-positive individuals known in general practice now consult on a similar scale to the wider population. Further research should be undertaken to explore how primary care can best contribute to improving the health outcomes of this group with chronic illness. Their substantial use of primary care suggests there may be potential to develop effective integrated care pathways

The regulation of diffuse pollution in the European Union:science, governance and water resource management

Reducing diffuse pollution is a perpetuating problem for environmental regulators. This paper will consider novel ways to regulate its impacts on the aquatic environment, with particular reference to rural landuse. It will look at the relationship between science, policy and law, and the contributions of integrated water resources management and governance at regional, national and river basin scales. Regulatory frameworks for water in the European Union will be explored, along with their implementation nationally in Scotland and at catchment scale in the Tweed river basin. It will conclude that regulation has a role to play, but that it is necessary to take a visionary holistic and integrated approach, nesting regulation within a governance framework that involves all stakeholders and takes full account of developing science and socio-economic drivers to meet environmental objectives

Unpacking commercial sector opposition to European smoke-free policy: lack of unity, 'fear of association' and harm reduction debates

Objective: Tobacco companies have made extensive efforts to build alliances against comprehensive smoke-free legislation. This article analyses the interaction between actors who opposed the development of the European Council Recommendation on smoke-free environments. Methods: Drawing on data from 200 policy documents and 32 semistructured interviews and using qualitative textual analysis and organisational network analysis, opponents’ positions on, and responses to, the policy initiative, strategies to oppose the policy, and efforts to build alliances were investigated. Results: The non-binding nature of the policy, scientific evidence and clear political will to adopt EU-wide measures combined to limit the intensity of commercial sector opposition to the comprehensive EU smoke-free policy. Most tobacco companies, led by the Confederation of European Community Cigarette Manufacturers (CECCM), voiced reservations against the proposal, criticised the policy process and fought flanking measures on product regulation. However, some companies focused on instigating harm reduction debates. These divergent approaches and the reluctance of other commercial actors to demonstrate solidarity with the tobacco sector prevented the establishment of a cohesive commercial sector alliance. Conclusions: The comparatively limited opposition to EU smoke-free policy contrasts with previous accounts of tobacco industry resistance to tobacco control. While context-specific factors can partially explain these differences, the paper indicates that the sector's diminished credibility and lack of unity hampered political engagement and alliance building. Industry efforts to emphasise the benefits of smokeless tobacco during smoke-free policy debates highlight the potential of harm reduction as a gateway for tobacco companies to re-enter the political arena