My diary is currently full until mid-August, I have festivals in the diary such as ButeFest 2022 and hopefully get to play both EH6 and Vibration Festivals for the second time. I also obviously have my ‘Subtle As Dynamite’ album launch tour in April and May so for now the main focus is on that. Then I’ll just see what the rest of the year brings. What do your career highlights look like so far? The NIADA made a complaint against 11 Dragon Soop products in September last year, which was not upheld by the Independent Complaints Panel. The company then explained that in terms of the overall impression of the product, there was no evidence of confusion about the offering, its marketing, or the can artwork amongst its target audience. The company reiterated that despite selling over 3 million cans of Dragon Soop Venom since its launch in October 2018, it had not received any complaints regarding the Venom name or branding, or any concerns that the brand was associated with bravado or was linked to boldness that was intended to impress or intimidate. The Panel considered that this also contributed to the overall impression that the product was inherently linked to poison, danger and intimidation, and that it therefore created an association with bravado.

In the complaint headed paragraph ‘strength’, the company stated that NIADA had cited an unsubstantiated figure to make a subjective and misleading statement where it read “One day of drinking 3 and a half cans exceeds this limit for adults.” The company said that the statement did not withstand rigorous scrutiny. The company explained that the same assertion could be used for any alcoholic drink which was abused by people with alcohol or substance abuse difficulties. The company highlighted that NIADA had not presented any evidence that people abused Dragon Soop more than they would abuse vodka, cider, wine or any other alcoholic beverage. The company stated that this information could not be relied upon, nor was indicative of the wider market, since the participants in the sample group were unable to limit their intake of alcohol. Heavy - Active for much of the day, walking non-stop and carrying objects. Typical jobs: hospital/ward nurse, waitressing in a busy restaurant, cleaner, porter, labourer/construction worker, gardener, farm worker. Leisure Activity Level Light - Have a job that involves long periods of sitting (office-based / driving) or are home-based and sitting for much of the day. Typical jobs: office worker, sales rep, bus/taxi/lorry driver.

FREE diet profile

In addition, the muted colour scheme, the font and the imagery were not considered to have a particular appeal to under 18s. It may be necessary to inform consumers that a product contains certain ingredients, for example high caffeine content, but this must be done in a factual and ‘non emotive’ way.”

Whilst creativity and brands expressing their identities through their products is to be encouraged, care must be taken to avoid associating alcohol with bravado, or suggesting a consumer must be daring to drink it.. In this case, the name and imagery created an overall impression that was over the line of acceptability. For these reasons, it was a breach of the Code.” The company then explained that Dragon Soop Venom had similar dominant flavour notes to its on-trade namesake which included orange, other fruit hints and a touch of the rich, round caramel associated with Bourbon. The company stated that it had respect for the work of specialist organisations like the Northern Ireland Alcohol and Drugs Alliance (NIADA) and supported the work it did to aid and educate the often vulnerable, under-privileged young people who were addicted to immoderate and dangerous behaviour with regard to substances and alcohol. However, the company stated that NIADA’s focus was narrow and specialised and its evidence that had been taken solely from its work with this particular group was not impartial. As a membership group that delivers alcohol and drug services daily to a large number of young clients, we feel the need to raise our concerns around this drink as It breaches numerous codes of conduct. Therefore, we are asking you to consider all points made above and take on board our recommendations to reduce both the alcohol and caffeine content and rethink the marketing strategies of this brand and particularly the impact it has on our young people and their health.” The product was also found to contain 3.75 units of alcohol, which is below the recommended four units in a single-serve non-releasable container and contained a responsible drinking message and a link to the Drinkaware wesbite.The panel also found that while the product’s alcoholic strength was clearly communicated there was no undue emphasis of the strength or intoxicating nature. With regard to the research submitted by NIADA in support of its complaint, the company noted from previous Panel rulings the stringent standards that the Panel required when research was accepted. The company stated that it was confident that the Panel would agree that NIADA’s research did not meet these standards.