Minimum pricing for alcohol

[juneau]

A good idea or yet another example of the nanny state?

It's both, I suppose, but as someone who only ever drinks moderately and who thinks the cost of alcohol in this country is already ridiculous, thanks to all the duty slapped on by the chancellor, I resent the idea that I'll have to pay more for my modest intake just because others can't control themselves. The rebel in me is getting pretty fed up with being told what I can and can't do too, as a tax-paying, consenting, adult.

I also question whether it will have much, if any, impact. After all, if you're an alcoholic, is a modest price increase really going to make you stop drinking?

jesuswhatnext, they had the progressive Hillary Benn on the Daily Politics the other day, and he is a teetotaller and Andrew Neil said that the price increase on booze would not affect him. They also had a Tory on with him, and of course he supported the price increase too.

Isn't it time we had people in parliament who really represented ordinary people, understood and listened to their needs?

These people live in expensive homes and are so divorced from ordinary people and their lives that it is beyond a joke.

claig, i wasnt taking the piss - i am an alcoholic, thankfully i have never reached a point where i drank extra strong lager or frosty jacks from the bottle, but i have seen the terrible damage those cheap drinks have helped cause - i dont pretend to know what the answer is, what i do think is that you never see a 'down and out' slugging down a bottle of chardonnay!

The subplot to the whole thing is the usual one of downgrading the poor.

The message is that people who can only afford cheap booze and cheap cider are feckless and reckless and drink to excess, they are "off their face". They don't respect ordinary people, they think they are shirkers and feckless and drunk binge drinkers.

These price rises don't affect rich wasters who are pissed from daybreak to midnight because they don't even need to work for a living. The price rises only affect ordinary people who can only afford cheap booze.

In their eyes, the problem drinkers are the poor.

'what i do think is that you never see a 'down and out' slugging down a bottle of chardonnay!'

Have you been to the House of Commons bar?

yes claig i have, many times! and tbh, your last post kind of makes you look like you have a large chip on your shoulder.

i agree that many of those in power have no idea of how life is for huge swathes of our population, i still am yet to meet those 'rich wasters' who dont have to work though!

They say that people are 'off their face' in town centres, tanked up on cheap booze. Well if that is the case, arrest them for being drunk and disorderly and fine them for antisocial behaviour, but don't force every poor responsible drinker who wishes to have some alcohol with their meal to pay more for that pleasure.

Don't stop people buying 3 for 2 deals so that they can save some of their hard-earned money. These people don't get expenses for bath plugs, they can't flip their homes. Give them a break.

And their other message is that they want to stop us buying 3 for 2 deals because we are so irresponsible that we will down all three crates in one night. That's not why we do it. We buy 3 for 2 to save money and we save the drink for another day.

Don't the toffs have cellars stocked full of wine? Well why can't we store 3 packs for the price of 2? Why do they want us to pay more? We are already paying for the bankers' bonuses and the NHS Trust bosses salaries and the MPs' bath plugs, why do we have to pay even more?

I agree with you OP. From what I understand, a heroin habit is expensive, but that doesn't stop addicts. If alcohol becomes more expensive, won't addicts just end up turning to crime to pay for their booze?

What happened to personal responsibility? Seeing as how most people aren't alcoholics, I don't see why they should hike the price of alcohol for the masses.

In their eyes, the problem drinkers are the poor.

Yes, how dare they have any respite from the drudgery. They should stick to stale bread and water and show some bloody gratitudet!

' i still am yet to meet those 'rich wasters' who dont have to work though!'

That's because they live in Mayfair and Chelsea so we don't bump into them.
It's not their fault that they are wasters. I don't want anyone to be a waster, but we read about some rich people who fritter their life away and die early. Just because they are rich, doesn't mean they are different to any of us. We are all human and all have problems. But there are as many rich alcoholics and drug addicts as there are poor, possibly even more as they can afford it.

i think we have more of a social responsibility towards people though than to keep arresting them, if they are using and causing anti-social behaviour, making themselves very ill, blighting their own lives and perhaps that of their families i think we have a moral duty to try and do something, if that is putting up the price of gut rot cider then so be it!

i would like to see proper funding for real, workable rehabs, more help for people in dispair!

'toffs'!! im off!

It's already been mentioned up the thread that it isn't going to impact moderate drinkers that much. It's an assumption that poorer people who want to enjoy drink will only buy cheap crap. I would hazard a guess that nobody who buys shitty cider does so because they enjoy the taste and are having the odd drink at home.

I'm not advocating a "nanny state" but at the same time, if we're already paying millions cleaning up the mess of a binge drinking culture and treating health ailments brought about by excessive drinking, maybe the burden should be put on those who drink excessively. It is true that rich people will carry that burden more easily, but that's the same with everything isn't it? Unless you suggest a Marxist revolution by the proletariat to bring down the bourgeoisie and make everyone equal.

' i think we have a moral duty to try and do something'

The number one moral duty of the government is not to make life harder by increasing costs for ordinary hard-working people who are already paying through the nose for bankers' bonuses, NHS Trust bosses salaries and bath plugs for toffs who went to Eton and are millionaires.

'Unless you suggest a Marxist revolution by the proletariat to bring down the bourgeoisie and make everyone equal.'

No I believe in treating people with respect and not thinking that poor people are irresponsible. The majority of the country is poor and many are on benefits of one kind or another. Millions of these people enjoy a drink and they buy what they can afford. There is nothing wrong with cheap cider.

I am against any increase in teh cost of living on poor people. They are already facing the brunt of the austerity and have already bailed out the bankers.

'if we're already paying millions cleaning up the mess of a binge drinking culture and treating health ailments brought about by excessive drinking'

That cost is dwarfed by the billions that we paid to clean up the mess of the binge gamblers in the banking casinos.

Most people are not binge drinkers and therefore they should not pay anything extra for booze. If it is really about cost, which I do not believe, then let's impose a windfall tax on the bankers, that will more than pay for the cost of binge drinking.

To stop people on a budget from buying 3 for 2 deals on alcohol which they may want over Christmas is scandalous in my opinion. And this is imposed by people who don't even count the cost, some of whom don't even know what the price of milk and bread is.

My nan used to love her brandy and beer and she lived in a council house and saved every penny, and to think that some millionaire toffs would increase the cost of her small pleasures in life while we all pay for their bath plugs, is disgraceful.

I think this policy really isn't about denying anyone small pleasures. This is about public health. As a nation we drink too much, more than is good for us. The average alcohol consumption has risen as prices fall. I think large sections of society are in denial about the reality of their alcohol consumption (baby boomers I am looking at you).

In real terms prices have fallen rapidly and social change is slower.So effectively we have a culture which evolved with alcohol being a rare treat in which alcohol is freely available and relatively inexpensive.

Southern Europe is culturally different, wine is always taken with a meal and children are "taught" to drink moderately ata 'relatively young age. In fact in much of southern Europe the younger generation drink very little believing it be old fashioned and getting drunk is shameful.

Claig this isn't about class as I said this public health. As a nation we are all drinking too much we need to take collective responsibility for this.

'The average alcohol consumption has risen as prices fall. I think large sections of society are in denial about the reality of their alcohol consumption'

That's wrong. Average alcohol consumption has fallen.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12397254

This is a punitive policy that prevents people on tight budgets from economising by taking advantage of bargains of 3 for 2. All it means is that the price of alcohol increases for ordinary people.

Fortunately, the Tories are not in the main progressives and therefore many of them are rebelling about this policy. They do not believe it is fair to penalise responsible people in their millions for the excesses of the few, unlike the progressives. People are right to say tha the parties are all the same, but on this issue, real conservatives differ from progressives.

'Claig this isn't about class as I said this public health.'

Haven't you learned from all their spin?
Was the Iraq war about WMDs?
Are the carbon footprint taxes about saving the planet?
Was 'light touch regulation' good for the country?
Were the projected costs of the Olympics correct?
Were the NHS Trust bosses the best people to run our NHS and provide good patient care?
Was the target culture good for patient care?
Were gagging clauses helpful?
etc. etc. the list goes on an on

As countless people have said, it won't impact those who are moderate drinkers that much. Guidelines for healthy amounts of alcohol are currently 10 units per week. At 50p a unit, this is £5 per week. And this isn't going to be an additional £5, as I understand it, it's going to be making what tax you're already paying on alcohol up to £5 per week. Even on benefits, this isn't a huge amount to pay for a treat when you think of the cost of other treats you could have.

Yes, there are a lot of things wrong in this country, but surely improving health by making people physically aware of how much their drinking and reducing the numbers of people in A&E (of all classes) on a Saturday night is a step in the right direction.

Do you really believe that at Christmas time people will buy less alcohol for their celebrations and parties? They will buy the same amount of alcohol as before. But the free market will have been interfered with bu "Tories" to make sure that they are not allowed to take advantage of 3 for 2 deals in order to save money. They will still buy the same amount of alcohol but they will just have to pay more for it - more of their earnings gone.

Bring back Thatcher to tell the nanny state ninnies to listen to the people.

caughtinagiggleloop, the Mail examples showed that it is a 100% increase in cider prices and a 15% increase in beer prices. On top of all the 10% fuel and water increases and everything else this is a huge increase.

You may not think it is a huge increae, but the wiser heads in the Tory party realise that it is "political suicide" and that is why it will not happen. They have already done lots of u-turns and I don't hold that againstthem, because if they get things wrong, then they are prepared to change things. But even I, a Daily Mail voting Tory, am beginning to lose faith in them now, because they are making more u-turns than a teenage joyrider makes handbrake turns and it does not inspire confidence that they know what they are doing or that they are in tune with ordinary people.

The bookies have already written them off for teh next election and this progressive policy which does not have public support is just the nail in the coffin.

This policy is in large part aimed at younsters "off their face" in town centres on cheap booze. By the way they are not just increasing cider prices, but the minimum price per unit on all booze.

This policy is like saying that millions of responsible drivers need to pay more for petrol because of some irresponsible boy racers who have car crashes. The argument is that paying more for petrol will save lives.

People won't buy it, some Tories are saying that it is "political suicide", and it looks like people are challenging Cameron over it.

Well isn't that a reason that tax and fuel duty went up - to save the planet. i'm sure I remember it being part of a green policy. Added to which it is an essential. Without fuel everything grinds to a halt and yet everyone accepts the relentless creep in prices.

We don't need booze on any level and it's killing us.Why not make it the treat it should be and not expectation of a good weekend.

I agree pubs and breweries are a vital part of our British economy though. Make drinking in pubs cheaper and off license including wine merchants as well Morrisons more expensive.