THE leader of Glasgow City Council has been accused of a dramatic u-turn on his long-standing opposition to the widespread availability of alcohol by backing plans for its reintroduction at football.
Gordon Matheson, who once launched a campaign on liquor abuse with the claim "Glasgow has a problem with alcohol", said he now supported a "moderate drinking at Scottish football matches".
A change in the law would see Mr Matheson's authority have a veto on whether the country's three biggest stadia, Celtic Park, Hampden and Ibrox, would be licensed.
His support of the scheme comes as his party leader, Jim Murphy, headed a summit at Hampden, along with representatives of clubs and the Scottish Football Association, calling for the the 35 year ban on booze within grounds being lifted.
Asked on his views on the issue, Mr Matheson said: "I think the time is right to consult on the phased re-introduction of moderate drinking at Scottish football matches, perhaps on a trial basis. Corporate guests at football games and everyone at rugby matches can drink.
"Why do some in authority find it so hard to trust working class football fans?"
But health experts have criticised the stance, while opposition politicians have pointed to his previous statements on alcohol.
Two years ago, when bringing Glasgow into line with most of the rest of Scotland on earlier Sunday pub openings was mooted, he described the plan as "retrograde step" and "utterly perverse", insisting he would oppose its introduction.
In 2011 he also launched a task force on alcohol, claiming there had been too long an acceptance of "booze culture"and weekend binge drinking, adding: "Glasgow has a problem with alcohol - it's no secret, it's there for all to see."
Leading Glasgow SNP councillor Graeme Hendry said: "Cllr Matheson's rapid move from being the city's leading prohibitionist to leading libertarian on alcohol availability shows the fundamental lack of belief in anything at the heart of Labour."
He also said the council leader had neglected to support fans on other issues, adding: "Maybe he could investigate why his council is dragging its heels so much on safe standing areas."
Barbara O'Donnell, deputy chief executive of Alcohol Focus Scotland, said: "Those calling for the sale of alcohol at football grounds should consider the broader implications, including the impact on health, disorder and violence. "Reversing this ban would be a backwards step. The annual cost of alcohol in Glasgow alone is already £364 million. We should be focusing on reducing the availability of alcohol to reduce consumption and harm, not creating yet more opportunities to drink.
Dr Peter Rice, chair of the Scottish Health Action on Alcohol, said previous legal challenges raised questions on whether limits could be set on alcohol availability at football, adding: "This isn't a one-way discussion. People are thinking about this. Some claims by the general public are much less knee jerk than those made by some politicians."
Asked about his previous comments Mr Matheson said alcohol at football approach was entirely consistent with tackling excessive, public and underage drinking, adding: "Public policy must address alcohol-fuelled anti-social behaviour while allowing adults to enjoy themselves responsibly."
After the Hampden summit, Mr Murphy, who was heckled by serial protester Sean Clerkin as he arrived, said: "Football has changed so much in three and half decades. Is there still the odd idiot? Absolutely.
"What we are talking about is people being allowed to drink for a proscribed period in a supervised way inside the stadium in a controlled environment."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article