96 replies to this topic

[Northern Sol]

Care to expand on that?

A liberal ain't interested in saving you from yourself. They'll campaign for your right to drink yourself to death.

A conservative, on the other hand, would be appalled enough to stop you.

[Padge]

Simply ban supermarkets from holding a retail alcohol license. That way they cannot possibly use the cheap (below cost) alcohol trick to entice shoppers in.

Return to pubs provide off sales or independent retail off-licenses.

Just threaten the supermarkets with that and see how fast they want to tow the line.

Minimum retail price will never work because the accountants will soon work out a scam to get around it that's so complicated you will never be able to work out the real price.

[JohnM]

This should sort it....
David Cameron has been warned that proposals to set a minimum price for alcohol in England and Wales are illegal under European law.

see http://www.telegraph...nk-pricing.html

[Methven Hornet]

This should sort it....
David Cameron has been warned that proposals to set a minimum price for alcohol in England and Wales are illegal under European law.

see http://www.telegraph...nk-pricing.html

Which is why he is letting the Scottish Government fight the case, with his government's support.

[Saint Billinge]

I'm not really sure why you are singling out the older, wealthier generation as being the target for this legislation. Surely your point that it would have little effect on relatively wealthier people suggests that they are not the ones being targeted. If the minimum for a bottle of wine under the Westminster government's proposals is going to be £4.22 (a figure I have seen), is that really going to discourage this demographic group from excessive drinking; especially when older people, probably with more disposable income (and a more discerning palate, perhaps?) might go for more 'upmarket' products.

Surely the proposals are aimed at the cheaper end of the market, where you can get really cheap lagers and ciders for just a few pence.

It was reported on TV that it includes the older, wealthier generation, with many drinking far in excess. That is why I said that I couldn't understand this statement. Unless they mean living a "comfortable" lifestyle but it did say "wealthy".

Edited by Saint Billinge, 29 November 2012 - 09:05 AM.

[Saint Billinge]

It was reported on TV that it includes the older, wealthier generation, with many drinking far in excess. That is why I said that I couldn't understand this statement. How they define wealthy as opposed to comfortable living is anyone's guess!

[gingerjon]

Minimum retail price will never work because the accountants will soon work out a scam to get around it that's so complicated you will never be able to work out the real price.

That's why it's a price per unit rather than a tax or other duty.

[gingerjon]

Comparing 'drug' use to alcohol is a red herring. Of course there will be less cases, not that many people actually take drugs in reality. I know a lot do but the number in comparison to drink will be very small.
If the same amount of people that drink, took drugs then we might get a fair comparison. But then, I doubt we'd have a functioning society.

By any measure you care to use alcohol is one of the most destructive drugs we know of - and that's allowing for a pro rata assessment.

[gingerjon]

A liberal ain't interested in saving you from yourself. They'll campaign for your right to drink yourself to death.

That would be a libertarian.

[Steve May]

The Scotch Whisky Association has asked for a judicial review in the Court of Session in Edinburgh, arguing that the measure contravenes the Act of Union's clauses on trade within the union.

That's fairly stupid. It's in the interests of the Scotch Whiskey Association to put prices up. Minimum alcohol pricing means that higher quality producers will no longer be undercut at the low end - why pay a lot for awful slop when you could pay the same for a decent drop?

If they act wisely, they'll see their sales increase. British businesses are not generally famous for acting wisely though..

[Steve May]

Simply ban supermarkets from holding a retail alcohol license. That way they cannot possibly use the cheap (below cost) alcohol trick to entice shoppers in.

Return to pubs provide off sales or independent retail off-licenses.

Just threaten the supermarkets with that and see how fast they want to tow the line.

I think the chances of any government taking on Tesco and Asda are pretty slim. But I agree. The idea of minimum alcohol pricing is essentially a good one, but it could be improved by differentiating between on and off license sales.

My thoughts would be to impose a high minimum per unit price in the off-trade and bring in limits on the number of off-licenses. I'd then impose a much lower rate of duty and lower minimum price for the on-trade. This would encourage people to drink in pubs, bars and clubs, not at home. The social and economic benefits of that should be self evident.

My basic idea is that, as a general rule, it should never be cheaper to buy alcohol in a shop than in a pub.

The other thing I'd do is to toughen up the legal powers to deal with landlords who allow excessive drunkenness on their premises.

[Johnoco]

By any measure you care to use alcohol is one of the most destructive drugs we know of - and that's allowing for a pro rata assessment.

Most people, and by that I really mean most, drink a little (or even a lot) and still have 'normal' fully functioning lives. The same can't be said for drug users by and large.

I'm not denying the big problems that alcohol abuse can and does cause, I've known too many people who have died from it, but you need to put the numbers into perspective. Most people don't have a problem, don't treat them like they do.

[WearyRhino]

That's fairly stupid. It's in the interests of the Scotch Whiskey Association to put prices up.

Perhaps they could sell e' s to make ends meet?

[Griff9of13]

I think the chances of any government taking on Tesco and Asda are pretty slim. But I agree. The idea of minimum alcohol pricing is essentially a good one, but it could be improved by differentiating between on and off license sales.

My thoughts would be to impose a high minimum per unit price in the off-trade and bring in limits on the number of off-licenses. I'd then impose a much lower rate of duty and lower minimum price for the on-trade. This would encourage people to drink in pubs, bars and clubs, not at home. The social and economic benefits of that should be self evident.

My basic idea is that, as a general rule, it should never be cheaper to buy alcohol in a shop than in a pub.

The other thing I'd do is to toughen up the legal powers to deal with landlords who allow excessive drunkenness on their premises.

Unfortunately far too many actively encourage it. There are far too many ''larger barns'' and music pubs in town centres offering multi-buy deals, happy hours and ridiculously low priced shots about. These places don't advocate responsible drinking.

[JohnM]

Any lessons from the Nordic countries on what works/what doesn't work? Rationing, state outlets, tougher licencing .

agree with Steve on this

toughen up the legal powers to deal with landlords who allow excessive drunkenness on their premises

but not this: it should never be cheaper to buy alcohol in a shop than in a pub

[Johnoco]

Not everyone who buys loads of cheap booze from the supermarket actually drinks it themselves though. I'm getting loads in for Xmas but then I am having lots of people round.

Anything that doesn't get drunk over Xmas will be drunk over the year. In fact, I've still got quite a bit unopened from last year. Why should this option be removed from me due to other peoples irresponsibility?

[Phil]

Not everyone who buys loads of cheap booze from the supermarket actually drinks it themselves though. I'm getting loads in for Xmas but then I am having lots of people round.

Anything that doesn't get drunk over Xmas will be drunk over the year. In fact, I've still got quite a bit unopened from last year. Why should this option be removed from me due to other peoples irresponsibility?

Exactly, I rarely drink at home but like a can of beer or a glass of wine now and again. Almost all of my drinking is done in pubs The anti-drinking lobby are obviously growing in confidence and are becoming quite vocal. If you don't drink fine, I won't compel you to, but equally don't try and stop me drinking till the world goes dark and I fall over if that's what i want to do.

[JohnM]

Some while ago, when the anti-smoking lobby was winning it arguments (quite correctly in my opinion) we were cautioned to expect attention soon to be turned to alcohol. What really concerns me is that we are rushing headlong into measures that will not work, and for all the wrong reasons.

The anti-supermarket brigade who seize any opportunity to denigrate them
The " do as I say not do as I do" brand of middle class socialists
Many other axe grinders from across the political spectrum

etc etc etc


So, minimum pricing is brought it, but does not appear to work. I know, lets increase the minimum price progressively until only MPs can afford it on expenses, rather than saying, well, that didn't work so we'l change tack, you KNOW that is what will happen.

Edited by JohnM, 29 November 2012 - 10:11 AM.

[Ackroman]

There's always been a drink problem in this country. Half the working Victorians were ###### up. The difference nowadays is that there aren't enough slums to hide them in.

A minimum price on drinking won't be affect anything, we'll just end up with a Still where the cannabis plants were once kept.

[Johnoco]

Gin Street?