That's what Charles MacLean, arguably "Scotland's foremost whisky writer", seems to think.
In Sunday's The Telegraph (Calcutta India), Charles MacLean, was interviewed in regard to the long-running, and imminent sale of Whyte & Mackay to the UB group.
MacLean also said the “Scottish Whisky
Association has been trying to bully the Indian government” into
lowering tariffs — and he forecast this, too, would happen since lower
taxes would be good both for the Indian government and the Scottish
whisky industry.
Wow. Does MacLean really view the very reasonable attempts by the SWA to get tariffs lowered as "bullying"?
<UPDATE 1: If Mr. MacLean was misquoted by the
Indian Press, I certainly invite him to let everyone know that fact
here on The Scotch Blog and demand a retraction from the Telegraph!>
Perhaps it is MacLean's existing business relationship with Mallya that is coloring his views:
In
November, UB flew him to India for a hectic tour of Delhi, Mumbai,
Calcutta, Bangalore, Hyderabad and Goa during when his mission was to
speak about Black Dog, a brand first made by Whyte & Mackay in 1879
but now owned and marketed by Mallya.
“When
someone as astute and as close to the levers of power as Vijay Mallya
starts looking to secure spirit supply by buying Scotch distilleries
and brands and promoting his own Scotch, Black Dog, which I helped with
last November, then the writing is on the wall,” said MacLean.
MacLean must have also bought into the propaganda of the Indian government/media/beverage industry triumvirate and accepted the Indian claim that this molasses-based distilled beverage is, in fact, whisky, and not the more appropriately named "rum".
MacLean pointed out. “Bear in mind that India is the
largest consumer of whisky in the world by a long chalk — 70 million
cases per annum; global sales of Scotch amount to a mere 85.5 million
cases. All but less that one per cent of the whisky drunk in India is
locally made.”
The regulations of most nations do not agree that it can be called
whisky - and every legal definition of the countries which do not allow the India spirit to be imported dictate that whisky is a
distillate made from grains.
The sun never sets...
Mr. Mallya has made a ridiculous correlation between the SWA's protection of the Scottish Whisky industry and 19th century "British imperialism".
"This imposition of British imperialism is
unacceptable," Mr Mallya was quoted as saying last year. "The SWA has
to understand there are two sides to the coin. They have double
standards. I will continue to oppose SWA coming to India until they
allow us to sell in England and Scotland."
The SWA has NO desire to "go to India" they simply want to allow Scotch whisky to have a fair shot at being sold in Asia. Campbell Evans' quote from yesterday's story was on the money:
"This is often dressed up as an issue
for the Scottish industry, but there are 70 countries around the world
that have legal definitions that whisky be made from cereals.
If you've read The Scotch Blog in the past, you'll know that I
appreciate what the SWA does on many fronts, and I disagree with them
on as many. On this one, I am 150% behind them.
Fallout?
If you thought the saga of the purchase of W&M was interesting, wait until the
purchase actually happens - which according to sources will (barring last-minute problems) be announced
tomorrow in Glasgow for somewhere around £610m.
Will Mallya withdraw Whyte & Mackay as an SWA member? Will the SWA extend an olive branch - by way of a council seat to Mallya? Will there be a talent flight from W&M?
<UPDATE 2: When
a member company's ownership changes, under SWA rules, that company
ceases to be a member of the Association. Anyone who is a distiller,
bottler, or blender of Scotch Whisky, who is prepared to sign up to the
terms of membership, can apply to join.>
Two things are for sure.
- Resumes are being freshened up at Dalmore House, and
- Willie Tait and Richard Paterson will be told not to talk to me anymore :).
