Purists should stick a cork in it – let’s raise a glass to the return of the pint bottle of champagne

Winston Churchill declared it the ‘ideal size’ for a boozy lunch and, until 50 years ago, it was a common way to sip your fizz. Harry Wallop, who once spent the day drinking like the wartime prime minster, says cheers to the proposed return of imperial measures for sparkling wine

Winston Churchill raises a glass to toast Marshal Tito at the Yugoslav embassy in Kensington 1953 (Alamy Stock Photo)

I am not an imperialist in either sense of the word, but I cheered this morning on learning that the government is to table legislation in the new year that will allow still and sparkling wine to be sold in pint-sized bottles for the first time in half a century.

This means pint-sized bottles of champagne, containing 568ml, will become a possibility once again. For many metric purists, this is an absurd idea and unnecessary, considering nearly all the winemakers of the world abide by the classic measures of 750ml and multiples (or divisions) thereof.

A pint bottle of champagne, however, was a common measure in the early and middle part of the 20th century, and one favoured by possibly the most famous champion of champagne: Winston Churchill, who declared a pint of sparkling wine was the ideal size – “enough for two at lunch and one at dinner”.