SINGLE malt whisky faces a "doomsday scenario" with the creation of a new classification that will confuse the consumer and dumb down the category, experts warned last night.
Distillers, producers and retailers have said the industry faces an uncertain future if whisky follows the route of sherry, cognac and brewing by creating a homogenised sector dominated by a few "mega brands".
Proposals prepared for the Governmen
t by the Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) say a "blended malt" category should be introduced to give drinkers a clear idea of what they are buying.
But John Glaser, director of specialist Scotch whisky maker Compass Box, said the move would affect sales and could lead to a fall in prices.
He said: "Essentially this move is bad for business. My main concern with this is about consumer confusion and the potential dampening of sales of products forced to carry the term blended malt Scotch whisky.
"It is bad for business, and now we are hearing from Taiwan that there is evidence that brands that are going to put blended malt Scotch whisky on their labels are having to lower their price to the price of blends in order for them to sell, because consumers don't understand."
Glaser has drawn up a petition that he will present to the Department for the Environment Food and Rural Affairs next month, entitled "Say no to Blended Malt Scotch Whisky!"
His views were echoed by Mark Reynier, owner of Islay's Bruichladdich distillery, who pointed to a "doomsday scenario".
Reynier argued that under the new proposals, the industry could end up with a situation where a "blended single malt" of Lagavulin could really be any other whisky with only a dash of Lagavulin thrown in. It would retain its association with Lagavulin "as long as it is clear that not all the whisky was distilled at that distillery". Consumers could be fooled into thinking they were getting a Lagavulin single malt, when in fact it would be a blend.
Reynier said: "Anyone who actually has to sell whisky or buy it does not agree with this term at all. The term visually is a confusion. In Taipei or Bangalore, when a consumer is faced with three whiskies – a blended Scotch whisky, a blended malt Scotch whisky and a single malt Scotch whisky – he is not going to have a bloody clue what is going on. It is going to be deliberately used to confuse and undermine the credibility of single malt whisky, purely for commercial gain by big whisky companies."
The SWA hopes that the new regulations on Scotch categories will enshrine in law once and for all strict legal definitions of Scotch whisky.
Four years ago, the Scotch industry faced turmoil when the Grant family, owner of Glenfiddich, one of Speyside's most powerful brands, persuaded Diageo to withdraw its Cardhu pure malt blend. Diageo had started selling malt whisky derived from two distilleries in the same bottle with almost the same label as it had previously used for a single malt from a single distillery. Its single malt had been called Cardhu single malt. The new spirit was called Cardhu pure malt, and it was selling fast all over southern Europe. After five months the gloves came off, and Speyside's distillers, led by Grant, forced Diageo to back down.
Last night the SWA said that the "overwhelming majority of the industry was supportive of the Government's proposals for new Scotch whisky regulations".
A spokesman said: "It is a broad package of proposals and SWA members strongly support the legislation. Our members believe the measures will ensure consumers worldwide receive clear, consistent and accurate product information. The aim is to tackle deceptive practices that could undermine consumer confidence in Scotch whisky.
"The regulations will also introduce even stronger protection for Scotch whisky from unfair competition. For example, for the first time, this will include formal legal protection for the term 'Islay' and other regional names traditionally associated with whisky production, as well as introduce rules to prevent the misleading marketing of single malts."
