New defining law for Scotch Whisky agreed, but Mark Reynier at Bruichladdich suspects fault play

Posted on October 14, 2007
Filed Under Islay, WhiskyBuzz |

Last week the UK Government revealed plans, that was warmly welcomed by the The Scotch Whisky Association (SWA), to introduce new legislation in 2008 to better protect Scotch Whisky. The announcement followed detailed discussions between the SWA, the UK and Scottish Governments on securing the highest levels of protection for Scotch Whisky and for consumers worldwide.

But are the new laws really there to protect all distillers or only the giants of the industry?

Mark Reynier, MD Bruichladdich Destillery suspects fault play.

He says critics claims a fait accompli by the SWA, which wants to define whisky as ‘single malt’, ‘blended whisky’, ‘blended malt’, ‘single grain’, and ‘blended grain’

According to Mark most distillers disapprove of ‘blended malt’ title which replaces the existing term ‘vatted malt’ in use for over a century for a bottling of several single malts together.

Mark continues: This new suitably bland and innocuous looking term will be a charter for deception. Overseas consumers are less likely to differentiate between the two similar terms. But that appears to be precisely what the SWA’s members want to achieve following the Cardhu debacle. Then, Cardhu, a single malt, was to become a vatted malt (whisky from several distilleries – not one) so that the limited supply could be increased at will. But highly misleadingly, the vatted malt was to look almost the same as the prestigious single malt presentation - the general consumer would be none the wiser.
This led to fierce accusations by the rest of the industry of bully boy tactics by Diageo, and the SWA risking the credibility of the whole single malt sector.

“They were mighty annoyed when they couldn’t get away with it then - so here they are changing the laws instead to suit their marketing needs instead” says Mark.

Comment by WhiskyGrotto.com
It seems that not everyone in the whisky industry is agreeing with the comment below from The SWA.

“Scotch Whisky is vital to the Scottish and UK economy, with exports of £2.5bn a year
supporting over 65,000 jobs. At a time when international demand for Scotch is growing, distillers will applaud proposals to bring forward this important legislation.” Gavin Hewitt, Chief Executive of The Scotch Whisky Association.

Click to listen to this post

If you liked this post you'll love these:

Comments

3 Responses to “New defining law for Scotch Whisky agreed, but Mark Reynier at Bruichladdich suspects fault play”

Mike Dereszynski on October 15th, 2007 2:14 pm

I agree with Mark .I think the SWA and UK Goverment’s time and money would be better spent providing dependible fuel supplies to the Islay distillers rather than creating new rules and legislation defining Scotch Whisky.
Question,where does Talisker,Jura,Highland Park and the other Island Whiskies get “new legal protection” for traditional regional names?Are not these Islands uniquely regional”terrair”?
Also,according to the new rules:”a distillers name will not be allowed as a brand name on any Scotch Whisky which has not been wholly distilled in the named distillery.Misleading labelling of Single Malt Scotch Whisky under a name which,whilst appearing to be the name of the distillery,is not in fact the distillery,will be prohibited.”
I guess this means the “Bad Boys of Bruichladdich” will have to change PC-5 &6 ect. from Port Charlotte 5 & 6 to Politically Correct 5 & 6 !!!
In any case I still want a dram.
Slainte.
Mike”w.m.d.”Dereszynski
The Man in the Grotto on October 16th, 2007 5:09 am

It seems to me that SWA are confusing the industry with new rules. Yet, me not being a purist have to ask my self. Is there then needs to create some new classifications for Scotch whisky.

I mean, the industry is innovating it self at the moment with a lot of different bottlings, cask maturations etc.

For example, Compass Box recently had to pull back their “Spice Tree as a result of the existing rules. I personally think one of the biggest threats against Scotch whisky is to not make it possible for small distilleries to follow trends.

What classifications could be added? “Blend Innovation” “Malt innovation”…or should the rules stay untouched for ever?
Debate about Mike Reyniers - Bruichladdich, thoughts on the new legislation to better protect Scotch Whisky that SWA has been helping develop. » WhiskyGrotto.com on October 17th, 2007 5:31 am

[...] over to IPKat and read it, and please come back here and continue commenting the earlier post. Listen to this article Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where [...]