The English whisky GI: why the uproar?

The English Whisky Guild (EWG) announced on 19 February 2025 that a Geographical Indication (GI) for English Whisky was edging ever closer.

Four years after its submission, the GI has reached approval and is awaiting Ministerial sign-off before proceeding to public consultation. Stakeholders and interested parties can now review and give feedback on the application. However, the EWG is confident its application will be approved.

Finally: an English whisky GI… right?

Some have called this long overdue. The other UK nations of whisky, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (the latter as part of the wider Irish Whiskey Technical File) each have national Whisky GIs that legally protect whisky production. 

Not everyone is behind the news, however.

The Scotch Whisky Association has taken issue with the proposal to define English single malts. A spokesperson said it “only requires distillation at [a] single distillery location and not the creation of the spirit from malted barley at a single site”.

This negative response has created a storm within the whisky industry. Is the SWA upholding necessary rigorous standards to protect the good name of single malt? Or is it undermining a new GI for protectionism and self-interest? 

Beyond that, there are questions about the GI from within English whisky, with some feeling it’s too restrictive and doesn’t allow for innovation. 

There are so many elements to this debate, so let’s try and wade through it together and figure out what’s going on.

Who are The English Whisky Guild?

First, let’s understand the players in this drama.

The English Whisky Guild was officially founded in May 2022 as a non-profit membership organisation that intends to promote and protect English Whisky. 

Originally 15 members strong, now 26 distilleries are part of the organisation: 

Adnams Southwold; Ad Gefrin Distillery; Cooper King Distillery; Copper Rivet Distillery; Cotswolds Distillery; East London Liquor Co.; Ellers Farm Distillery; Fielden (formerly The Oxford Artisan Distillery); Grasmere Distillery; Henstone Distillery; Lancaster Spirits; Ludlow Whisky; Retribution Distilleries Co; Spirit of Manchester; Spirit of Yorkshire Distillery; Ten Hides; The Elsham Wold Distillery; The English Whisky Co.; The Lakes Distillery; Trevethan; West Midlands Distillery; Wharf Distillery; White Peak Distillery; Whittaker’s Distillery; Witchmark; and Yarm Distillery.

Who are the Scotch Whisky Association?

The Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) is the trade body that represents the Scotch whisky industry.

It works to promote and protect the interests of Scotch whisky producers, both domestically and internationally. The SWA advocates for policies that support the industry, works to prevent counterfeit products, engages in regulatory matters, and pushes for recognition of Scotch whisky’s geographical indication status. 

Essentially, it’s a voice for the Scotch whisky industry on the global stage.

What is English whisky?

English whisky had all but died out by the beginning of the 20th century. But a revival began slowly in the early 2000s and has now picked up real pace. Over 30 new distilleries have opened in the last three years alone, and more than 60 distilleries across England have laid down stocks of whisky. A total of 32 are actively selling whisky, and there are 122 English whiskies currently available, with 97 new bottles released in 2024*.

With such a rapid expansion, there was consensus from many distilleries within the English whisky industry that a GI would be necessary to uphold standards. To create it, the English Whisky Guild worked with its 26 member distilleries “through equal and collegial input” and also DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs) to ensure the English Whisky standard aligns with UK GI criteria. 

The English Whisky Guild doesn’t speak for all of English whisky, however. When it first applied for a GI, Circumstance Distillery felt it limited innovation (read more in our article on this topic) and left the organisation in March 2022. Bimber Distillery is also no longer part of the organisation, while plenty of others haven’t joined (at least not yet), like Bankhall, Dartmoor, Forest, Pocketful of Stones, or Weetwood Brewery & Distillery.

What does the English GI outline?

The GI application says the term ‘Single’ can only be applied to English whisky where all the whisky in the product has been distilled at a single distillery. But not that it has to be mashed and fermented at that site. Which is the crux of the issue. It notes that the whisky can be distilled in one or more batches at a single site. 

This is in line with the definition of single malt under UK legislation, which determines that the name ‘whisky’ or ‘whiskey’ can be accompanied by the term ‘single malt’ only if it has been distilled exclusively from malted barley at a single distillery.

The application also outlines two subcategories, ‘Malt English Whisky’ and ‘Grain English Whisky’, with two subcategory prefixes, ‘Single’ and ‘Blended’.

The term ‘malt’ by itself can only be applied to English whisky where all the whisky in the product has been made using 100% malted barley (without the addition of any other cereals), yeast, saccharified by the diastase of the malt contained therein, water, and matured in casks. 

The English whisky product specification application also states that, where oak casks are not used, the type of wood must be specified on the front of the label, with a font and weight that give equal prominence to the subcategory information. It further adds that the spirit must be batch-distilled in a copper pot still at least twice.

What do producers make of the English GI?

Dan Szor, CEO and founder of the Cotswolds Distillery, says this GI provides “clear legal definitions for English whisky, focusing on production methods, maturation, and geographical criteria”. He adds that the rules also state restrictions on permissible additives and flavouring agents and stresses the enhanced labelling requirements to ensure transparency and traceability. 

Chico Rosa, whisky maker for Fielden, says the English whisky regulations introduce “a new sense of origin where all grain used for English whisky has to be grown in the UK, the entire process until maturation has to happen in England”. He also notes that, different to Scotch whisky regulations, English Whisky allows for different woods to be used in barrel maturation. “We have been experimenting with chestnut, applewood, cherrywood and acacia”. 

Both distinguish the regulations as being different from Scotch whisky, which they note typically has stricter controls over production and maturation. However, Rosa points out the Scotch regulations have no requirements related to grain origin, so the malted barley (or other grains) can be sourced from other countries or continents. This also applies to single malt Welsh whisky requirements, although it can mature in any wooden barrel, whereas Scotch can only mature in oak barrels.

Why do we even need a GI?

If creating a GI causes this much fuss and potentially limits creative freedom, then it’s worth asking the question: “Do we even need one?” 

“The regulations aim to establish English whisky as a premium product, boosting its credibility and recognition internationally,” Szor says. This defined set of characteristics is thought to give consumers a simpler product to understand while reassuring them of its standards.

“Even in the most strict and protected products, there is always room for innovation,” Rosa adds. “With a defined set of rules that will help describe and identify English whisky, but are also broader, its producers can thrive through imagination, originality and symbiosis with local culture, heritage and natural opportunities” 

At Fielden, the idea is to rethink every step of the process. “What if we mimic how grains used to grow in the past? Do they process well through a classic distillery setup? What innovation is happening in the beer world that we can bring into whisky-making? Combining old and new while learning with lessons of the past to thrive in the future is part of our DNA,” Rosa explains. 

Szor adds that, at the Cotswolds Distillery, traditional techniques and equipment are used, but with “A more modern, mindful approach, such as longer fermentations, higher cuts during distillation, and the use of the STR barrel to create excellent whisky at a young age”.

Limitations of the English Whisky GI

One man’s genius is another man’s crazy scientist, so drawing the line in a way that pleases everyone is tough. Still, I’ve seen plenty of reactions online from people who feel this GI has missed some opportunities. Complaints range from “Why isn’t there a defined rye whisky category?” to “They should have ensured you can’t chill-filter or add additional colouring to make a statement”. 

Paul Abbott, founder of Grasmere Distillery, for example, has called for stricter regulations for English single malt whisky, arguing they should exceed Scotch whisky standards. He believes this will ensure the category is taken seriously, specifically calling for a ban on caramel colouring, insisting it’s unnecessary and detracts from transparency. He sees the emerging English whisky industry as an opportunity to set new benchmarks rather than merely mirroring Scotch regulations. For him, anything less would undermine the credibility of English single malt.

Circumstance Distillery founder Liam Hirt wrote this article to outline his objections, which are centred around this part of the GI: “The spirit must be batch distilled in a copper pot still; Malt English Whisky must be distilled for a minimum of two times”. 

Hirt sees this as unnecessarily restrictive; Wales allows any type of still and does not specify copper or distillation count. Ireland has no still material requirements, while the USA and Japan have no restrictions on still type or distillation count for ‘single malt’ labelling.

He also feels it disregards England’s distilling history, quoting Alfred Barnard’s Whisky Distilleries of the United Kingdom (1887), in which he described Bristol Distillery (the oldest in the country at that time, dating back to the 17th century) using a hybrid system of “A large Old Pot Still united to a Coffey’s Patent Still”. 

Hirt adds that the GI penalises innovation. English distilleries that use single distillations or non-copper stills would be barred from using the term ‘Single Malt English Whisky’ despite aligning with global norms.

“The current GI framework prioritizes arbitrary restrictions over historical accuracy and innovation. While GIs should protect regional identity, this proposal imposes foreign standards and limits English whisky’s potential”, Hirt explains. “The argument against the GI is not a rejection of regulation but a call for one that respects England’s distinct practices and fosters a fair, inclusive industry”.

In an email to me, Hirt also expressed his surprise that the SWA have objected. “I know (from my time on the board of the EWG) that they were heavily involved in drafting the English Whisky GI, at least in the early stages”. He also points out that the CEO of the EWG, Morag Garden, worked for the SWA between 2007 and 2021, being head of sustainability and innovation. 

He added, “The SWA objection is such nonsense I wouldn’t be surprised if it were merely a tactic to divert attention from other aspects – notably the definition of malt whisky, and by extension single malt whisky”.

No such thing as a perfect GI

No category-wide definitions suit everyone, and Szor concedes that smaller distilleries may struggle with the cost of compliance, such as sourcing equipment or meeting traceability standards. He also says that producers focused on experimental or unconventional styles may face restrictions. 

As Rosa sees it, small distilleries tend to be more creative with their processes and products, and sometimes they might not fit within the framework, but “The English whisky standards are defined in a way they can be inclusive and ensure the production of great quality spirits”. He adds that larger producers tend to have a more standard approach to whisky-making that will naturally fall within the English whisky framework.  

Rosa summarises, “In some cases, there might be whiskies that don’t fit within the framework, but that’s normal with any standard. In the end, it is a producer’s decision to produce English whisky or any other style of whisky”. 

The SWA position

The Scotch Whisky Association hasn’t taken issue with the GI limiting innovation, however.

Let’s divide the keywords in this equation to simplify its objections. According to the Scots, single malt is comprised of:

Single – meaning the production process occurs at one distillery

Malt – the whisky is made from 100% malted barley

The English whisky standard concurs on the second point, not the first. Mashing and fermenting must occur at the distillery for Scotch whisky, but they don’t have to in the proposed English GI.

The current English whisky definition was described as “Entirely inconsistent with the reputation of single malt whisky, which is famous for its integral connection to place” by an SWA statement, which adds it: “Would undermine the single malt Scotch whisky category. 

“It would be very damaging for the reputation of single malt whisky from the UK, and by extension single malt Scotch whisky, if English whiskies were allowed to describe spirit as ‘single malt’ despite being produced in a different manner to the established process and long-standing traditions of the Scotch whisky industry,” the statement continued.

The SWA, which claims more than 99% of single malt whisky produced in the UK is made in Scotland, says it will be responding formally to the DEFRA consultation to “robustly defend against any devaluation of the single malt category.”

The EWG response

The EWG was quick to respond. 

“Ensuring quality and innovation are at the forefront of all we do, so it is vital for this fast-growing English whisky industry to receive GI status and legal protection. It is important to note that the English whisky GI allows companies to partner with local breweries, leveraging their brewing expertise to create innovative and distinct whiskies.”

The EWG said this approach was “consistent with practices in other global whisky-producing regions”, such as the US. The EWG statement also highlighted similar standards in the EU, as well as in Wales (also a UK whisky category, of course), where the single malt rules align with the proposed English whisky GI by being distilled at a single distillery.

“These differing standards support the creation of quality whisky while fostering innovation and differentiation in each country,” the statement continued. “English whisky uniquely combines the innovation of new world whisky with the craftsmanship of UK manufacturing, positioning it perfectly in the market.

“While ‘Single’ whisky can be complex legislatively, for consumers, we believe it is simpler: think of it as the contrast between black and white. ‘Single’ means whisky from one distillery, while ‘Blended’ comes from several. Helping consumers understand the whisky’s origin. We agree with the SWA that provenance and a sense of place are critical element of whisky. Our GI requires all grain to be sourced from the UK, which is unique across the four UK whisky nations and supports our local farmers. Many of our members also grow their own barley as well as brewing and distilling themselves”.

“We believe our GI ensures each bottle of English whisky embodies the essence of its origin.”

English single malt: a unique problem?

There’s been a huge amount of reaction since the publication of these responses. A lot of people have asked why the SWA didn’t raise a complaint when Wales applied for a GI for its whisky or the recent American single malt legislation. Both of these definitions only require distillation to happen at a single distillery. The same is true for Irish single malt. There are other differences, too, that didn’t lead to any backlash. Irish single malt, for example, allows for the use of external enzymes during fermentation. 

Perhaps there’s a fear that people will equate English single malt with UK single malt and believe that Scotch whisky falls into this category. This is where education is key. But it does feel like English single malt has been singled out. 

Ian Palmer, founder of the InchDairnie Distillery, has been vocal on this issue on LinkedIn, and it’s worth hearing his perspective: “I know of one German single malt that is milled, mashed and fermented in the local brewery with the fermented wash delivered in a tanker to the distillery. This is then distilled in the stills they use to distil their Kirsch. This is a huge cost advantage to this distiller, who is competing against Scottish distillers. This meets the EU rules. The cost of building a full distillery is a big barrier to entry into the Scotch whisky business. I know the Scotch whisky badge does bring some value, but I think this badge is losing ground. When the cost of make exceeds the value then it’s time to pull the plug”.

The Filey Bay conundrum 

It’s a fair point. But then consider the complex matter of Filey Bay whisky, made by the Spirit of Yorkshire Distillery. It was founded and continues to be owned by the same company that operates the nearby Wolt Top Brewery, so malting and fermenting are done there. 

Here’s where it gets interesting. Filey Bay also grows its own English barley on neighbouring farms.

“We work across two sites to make our award-winning Filey Bay Yorkshire Single Malt Whisky, making use of our long-time expertise as barley farmers (since 1945), brewers (since 2003) and distillers (since 2016)”, a statement from the Spirit of Yorkshire Distillery reads. “We absolutely believe in maintaining the quality set by Scottish distillers and in other countries around the world, and everything we do in our production process, from field to bottle using 100% homegrown barley, is a testament to this. In fact, our ethos is ‘respecting tradition but doing things our own way’”. 

“In the spirit of working in a united way, we’ve invited John Swinney, the First Minister of Scotland, and Graeme Littlejohn and Mark Kent, from the Scotch Whisky Association, to come to our farm, distillery and brewery to hear, see and taste the quality of our award-winning whisky”, the statement continued. “We’ve also asked them to extend this invitation to other relevant MSPs and members of the SWA, and we really hope they come to see us”. 

Putting the single in single malt

This raises the fundamental question: What does the single in single malt actually mean? What should it mean? 

Curiously, this move from the SWA has opened up Scotch whisky to some uncomfortable questions. First, the English GI proposes that all grain comes from the UK. There is no such rule in Scotch whisky. Technically, you can make Scotch whisky with barley from anywhere. Some comes from Canada, some from Poland. Ironically, there’s a lot of Scotch whisky being made with English barley, even Yorkshire-grown barley. 

It’s also drawing a line at mashing and fermenting being crucial stages to add provenance to production, but not malting. Few Scotch whisky distilleries, in fact, a very small percentage of distilleries in the world (impossible to calculate but simple to ascertain by the lack of on-site maltings in the industry), malt their own barley. Most malted barley is bought from major third-party suppliers. 

Then, you have the issue of maturation. There are Scotch whisky distilleries that create whisky in one location but then send it miles away to mature. Ever heard a distillery tell you its signature salty character comes from maturation in close proximity to the sea? Look into it, and you’ll find there’s plenty of whisky made on islands around Scotland that’s then shipped to huge warehouses in the likes of Glasgow, where they age next to vast quantities of whisky from other distilleries. 

There are logistical considerations here for Scotch. So much whisky is made in Scotland that, of course, all the barley for it couldn’t be grown there. There’s only a certain amount of room on Scottish islands to store barrels of whisky. But if you’re going to make a fuss about ‘place’, then it’s fair for people to raise questions about the nature of your provenance. 

Is a whisky made from North American barley, malted by a third-party supplier, then mashed, fermented, and distilled at a single site before being shipped miles away to a warehouse really reflective of a sense of provenance? And what affects flavour more, using a local strain of barley or mashing it a few miles down the road at a secondary location? What matters more to the consumer? 

Ultimately, a sense of place is about traceability. But neither GI can guarantee that in totality without creating a series of unrealistic economic roadblocks. 

What is a GI for?

A certain amount of grey area in a GI is a practical solution to the problem that you can’t be all things to all people. GIs also tend to reflect what the people writing them care about. Just look at the Irish single pot still debate (this article will help clear all that up). 

You’re also missing the point of a GI if you create one that is a regurgitation of another category’s standard. Otherwise, what makes you unique? Nothing I’ve seen suggests that English whisky or The English Whisky Guild wants to mimic Scotch. Most English distillers are at pains to distinguish themselves as individual from Scotland, seeing that identity as crucial to their marketing.  

The fundamental purpose of a GI is to stop bulk quantities of inferior products from flooding the market. But while the English Whisky Guild is not a faultless beacon of whisky production standards, surely the amount of hard work and consideration it has taken into its GI, one supported by no fewer than 26 distilleries, many of whom have already distinguished themselves with outstanding products, shows that fear is unfounded. This debate has also steamrolled what could have been a celebratory moment for English whisky. The headlines don’t read so pretty now. 

The Scotch Whisky Association has a platform and a power that is useful for upholding standards and ensuring consistency. But this is also coming across as big guy vs little guy to some. It doesn’t serve Scotch whisky for people to feel that protectionism and self-interest are ruling the day. Ultimately, nobody has or should have a monopoly on the idea of single malt. Suing tiny Canadian distilleries and undermining the English whisky category right as it’s finding its feet doesn’t feel like the pursuit of a noble purpose in action. It’s tough to justify how controlling 99% of a market benefits consumers, too. 

What happens next

This week, the UK Government announced it will not ‘water down’ the single malt whisky definition. Tracy Gilbert, Labour MP for Edinburgh North and Leith, raised the concerns outlined in this article, to which Labour chief secretary to the treasury Darren Jones replied: “Scotch whisky is a proud British brand and export. This Government will always support the industry. I’ve checked with DEFRA ministers and can confirm to my honourable friend that we will not be watering down the definition of single malt whisky.”

 

*Stats from English Whisky Guild