I am a strong supporter of the Government's call for a "big society" and encouraged by its appreciation of the important role that pubs can play.
I remain concerned, however, that excessive drinking leading to anti-social behaviour by a visible minority who are able to buy cheap alcohol at pocket money prices will undermine any efforts to create a more cohesive society.
The current favoured approach of Government seems to be that banning below cost selling of alcohol is an answer to this problem. It is not.
Earlier this year, a leading grocery retailer announced a self-imposed ban on below cost selling using the "duty plus VAT" definition of cost.
This initiative would not affect the majority of cheap alcohol currently sold, as highlighted by data from the Institute for Fiscal Studies, and reported in a paper published on Tuesday by FTI Consulting, commissioned by Greene King.
The below cost selling proposals that have been tabled would be an ineffective way of tackling problem drinking of alcohol.
Our analysis of our beers sold in the off-trade confirms this; none of our beer sold in supermarkets is sold at anywhere near a cost price of "duty plus VAT".
Others have suggested raising taxes on alcohol, but this is not the right answer either. Taxation will hit problem drinkers and responsible drinkers equally. It will hit responsibly priced drinks in the same way as it will affect the most discounted alcohol.
It will deliver the same burden to the pub industry, which is not the main source of the problem, as it will to the off-licences and supermarkets.
There is also the risk that tax increases are not passed on fully to customers. This would reduce its efficacy as a policy instrument to tackle problem drinking.
The report also highlights that taxation is likely to result in more cross-border alcohol buying by raising the price of alcohol indiscriminately.
We need to find measures that address the causes of the problem with as little collateral damage as possible. One such solution would be the adoption of a minimum price for alcohol.
Price is clearly a major factor in influencing demand, especially for cash-poor younger drinkers. The failure, therefore, to introduce a minimum pricing of alcohol in Scotland was disappointing.
I hope that the debate about tackling problem drinking, including minimum pricing, continues at UK level and that it is factored into the UK Treasury's current review of alcohol taxation and pricing.
These views have been endorsed by those who have to deal with the consequences of anti-social behaviour, such as the Association of Chief Police Officers and the medical profession.
Commenting on a study commissioned by the Department of Health that found that a minimum price of 50p a unit would save 2,000 lives a year, Dr Nick Sheron of Southampton University wrote in the British Medical Journal: "The ingenuous benefit of minimum pricing is that it would not affect prices in pubs; the average unit of alcohol in a pub already costs more than £1".
Dr Sheron also went on record as saying that pubs are not the problem and that only 5% of the people he saw who suffered from liver disease bought their alcohol in pubs.
The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence has also backed minimum pricing, arguing that it - along with other measures that make it harder to buy alcohol, like reducing the number of outlets selling alcohol in a given area or the days and hours that it can be purchased - will help to save thousands of lives each year.
A national minimum price would need to be combined with other policy measures, such as restrictions on promotions, alcohol displays and time of sale, all of which I would welcome.
To achieve this, we need the Government to show leadership and focus on the objective of finding targeted but practical solutions that are fit for purpose, and the industry must play a part in this.
My fear is that if no attempt is made to solve this growing culture of irresponsible drinking then the alcohol industry is likely to face indiscriminate and punitive sanctions.
Such a crackdown wouldn't just hurt the profits of companies like mine - it would be detrimental to the hundreds of thousands of people who work in pubs, restaurants and breweries, and to the millions of our customers who enjoy, rather than abuse, drink.
A solution must be found to this damaging problem that goes beyond banning cost selling, which does not go far enough, and raising taxes, which is too blunt an instrument.
If we can do this then the vast majority of us who drink responsibly can continue to enjoy a pint of ale or a glass of wine without facing onerous taxes, and our city centres will be much safer places to be.
Rooney Anand is chief executive of Greene King
This article first appeared in the Daily Telegraph