I think it's important to state that we in UKIP do acknowledge that there are individuals who do abuse alcohol, and alcohol abuse can—[Interruption.] Alcohol abuse can have a devastating effect both on individuals and on their families. It is not that we aren't concerned by this issue. We are. We are simply questioning whether minimum unit pricing, or MUP, will work as a means of effectively combatting alcohol abuse. Our considered conclusion is that is won't.

Now, we know that the Welsh Government doesn't simply do things without research. Yes, they have their research. They have sourced research from the University of Sheffield, for instance, which estimates that a minimum unit price of 50p a unit would save the Welsh economy £882 million over a 20-year period. That works out at about £40 million a year, which sounds like an appreciable saving. This is due to reductions in the fields of crime, illness and workplace absence. The problem is that the methodology behind this report has been criticised by other academics and think tanks. 

For instance, the Centre for Economics and Business Research have come up with an alternative appraisal of the MUP plan, which includes a critique of Sheffield university's work, particularly focusing on alcohol demand elasticity—that is, the willingness of problem drinkers to pay more money to get their fix of alcohol. The CEBR felt that the Sheffield study didn't properly distinguish between different types of drinker and different types of drinking behaviours. In other words, it didn't take enough account of the readiness of problem drinkers to pay more money to get their fix, or that problem drinkers tend to exhibit behaviours that are different to average behaviour.

We have to accept that we are dealing here with people who have an addiction, people who have an illness, so they will not always act in rational ways. Addicts will often tend to carry on getting hold of the substance that they are addicted to, even if the price goes up.