My View: The Scotch Whisky industry has not been troubled

Written by Harpers Editorial team

Friday, 19 October 2007

In October, Defra announced a consultation on new regulations for Scotch whisky, with the possibility of legislation by spring 2008.

The legislation goes much further towards creating a domestic "appelation" system

The designation "Scotch whisky" is already protected at both UK and EU level.

However, the proposed legislation goes much further towards creating a domestic "appellation" system, albeit only for Scotch whisky.

The proposals include five geographical indications - Islay, Campbeltown, Speyside, Highland and Lowland - and five designations indicating whether a whisky is malt, grain or blended.

To date, the Scotch whisky industry has not been much troubled by confusion between different regions. So why put up legislative fences around these areas?

France pioneered the first modern appellation system in the early 20th century. Delineating a boundary around each region's products allowed for equity to be built up in a clearly identified regional brand.

By gaining leverage from "collective" action rather than mass-production, high-quality artisan producers could compete with the household names of the mid-20th century and benefit from brands with global reach.

Defra's proposals will open the door to similar opportunities, particularly for smaller producers.

The legislation may not be strictly necessary - but it will certainly be beneficial.

Hastings Guise is a trademark and brand protection lawyer at Field Fisher Waterhouse LLP

Jon Allen said:

So where do Talisker (Skye), Arran (guess), Tobermory/Ledaig (Mull), Highland Park and Scapa (Orkney) fit? An 'Island' style? Or four new categories? Will Arran be cla*sified a Lowland and Skye a Highland? When Diageo's predecessor launched The Cla*sic Malts in the late 1980s, the six malts they chose to represent Scotland's whisky-making regions included Talisker and Oban (dubbed West Highland). There was no Campbeltown, once a major producing centre, because they owned no distillery there. The Cla*sic Malts have done a job of increasing consumer understanding magnificently and the whole industry has benefitted. Do we really need legal definition of the areas? Obviously we have to prevent the unscrupulous describing their whisky as Speyside if it is not made there - but doesn't existing legislation cover that? What happens when a new distillery opens outwith the designated areas? Would it not produce legal single malt whisky? Instead of more laws, couldn't we continue with educating the consumer?

report abuse

vote down

vote up

October 22, 2007
Votes: +0

Hastings Guise said:

Jon Allen's comment suggests that I ought to clarify a couple of points:

1 The regional designations would be available to producers in those regions, but there would be no obligation on producers to use them. So a producer outside those regions can still produce "Scotch Whisky".

2 The proposals do include the possibility that other regional designations could be added to the initial five at a later stage.

Hastings Guise

report abuse

vote down

vote up

October 28, 2007
Votes: +0

maggan said:

	we live in a celebrity obsessed culture http://www.frogmix.com/search/culture, whether it be here in the US or Korea. take a look at the Hills, tons of girls watch this show not only to see the semi-fake drama, but also what the girls are wearing.
	report abuse vote down vote up