Alcohol trade bodies are "deeply disappointed" and believe the Health Committee's failure to acknowledge progress under the Responsibility Deal is "premature".
Henry Ashworth, chief executive of the Portman Group, said he was "deeply disappointed" that the committee "failed to understand the significance of the innovative unit reduction pledge".
However he welcomed the "view that the majority of people enjoy alcoholic products responsibly and that alcohol producers and retailers are vital partners in helping to tackle the harms caused by misuse".
"We also fully support the recommendation that locally led alcohol partnerships provide the best solution to tackle local issues. "
The Wine & Spirit Trade Association chief executive Miles Beale said it was "premature" to prejudge voluntary commitments under the Responsibility Deal, and "regretted" its support of minimum pricing.
"Evidence suggests the industry is making good progress towards fulfilling the voluntary labelling initiative and significantly reducing the quantity of alcohol units sold through the UK market," added Beale.
"We welcome the Committee's recommendation that activity in this area should be subject to independent evaluation."
"We regret the Committee's readiness to support minimum unit pricing when by its own admission there is a lack of evidence about the specific effects of different price levels. Given that, it must make sense for the government to apply a sunset clause to minimum pricing as the Committee suggests."
Alcohol Concern's chief executive Eric Appleby welcomed the report, but criticised the alcohol industry. He said: "In particular the MPs said that the alcohol industry claims are not always credible- for example, the MPs made it clear that alcohol advertising does have an effect on people's drinking and that for the alcohol industry to claim otherwise while spending lots of money on marketing does not add up.
"Alcohol Concern supports the Health Committee's call for a review of the rules of alcohol advertising in order to protect children and young people.
"The committee make it clear that the Responsibility Deal which has been going for more than a year has not yet delivered. A review of the Deal should take place and it must not be a substitute for government policy."
Derek Lewis, chairman of alcohol education charity Drinkaware, said: "We are encouraged that the Committee and the Alcohol Strategy both endorse the importance of Drinkaware's education and awareness campaigns which are already showing early signs of achieving behaviour change."
The group was criticised for a perceived lack of independence given it is funded by drinks companies. In response, Lewis said: "We share the Committee's view that Drinkaware's independence from the alcohol industry and other stakeholders is critical.
"Drinkaware's independence is assured by the non-industry trustees who represent a majority of the board and by having a separate Medical Advisory Panel that vets all of the material published by the charity. However, we recognise that some stakeholders are not convinced of the charity's independence and this was one of the reasons for the announcement last week of an Independent Review Panel. The Panel will commission and publish an independent audit of Drinkaware's effectiveness, including an assessment of its management and editorial independence. Further action will be taken to reinforce the charity's independence if such a need is indicated by the audit report."
On the criticism over alcohol marketing, a spokesman for the Advertising Association said: "The Committee's call for more restrictions doesn't add up.
"We already know the suggested measures don't work. Eight years after its introduction, the French Parliament and anti-alcohol campaigners labelled Loi Evin ‘ineffective' and ‘weak' in reducing high-risk drinking.
"Strong UK regulation already demands that advertising avoids appealing to under-18s and our exposure rules are strict and effective. Government figures show consumption, harmful drinking and binge-drinking are all in decline. People in ads only ever drink responsibly, and more and more of us are following their lead."
The Committee of Advertising Practice added: "The Health Select Committee (HSC) has stated its clear commitment to evidence-based policy making for minimum pricing, we would hope it has adopted a similarly rigorous approach to its advertising recommendations. As such, we would like to see the new evidence on which the HSC has based its proposals.
"The strict UK alcohol advertising rules already respond to the best available evidence, which shows a small but consistent link between young people's awareness of advertising and their propensity to drink. The rules are not voluntary, as stated in the HSC's report, they are mandatory and all ads in the UK must comply with them. They prohibit the targeting of alcohol ads at under 18s through their content or placement. 99.7% of alcohol ads keep to the rules and the Advertising Standards Authority takes action to remove the few that don't.
"CAP is fully engaged with government's alcohol strategy to ensure that alcohol advertising remains responsible."
If you'd like to share your views on the Health Committee's report, email Gemma McKenna at