I wonder will it be challenged under Human Rights legislation Velvet 

I think it's a good idea, they should IMO go back to only off licences being allowed to sell it, and reduce opening hours.  I have seen too many people's lives ruined by it.

I like the idea of minimum pricing. In Germoney a decent ale can be bought for about 40p per half lures. Sekt about two poond and a quaffable ouzo at four poond. That would be a start.

I think the propasals are a step too far.

Perhaps a ban on the promoting of dirt cheap two for one from ASDA.

And stuff like White Lightening should have a minimum tariff designed to make people buy less.

But out-pricing people's pockets is unfair to the casual user

Bad for your pocket but good for your liver.

Before long, we'll all have a collar and leash, no matter what animal we are.

Soon you won't be allowed to show your ankles

we're already not allowed to buy cheap drink though, velvet - every tried to get a multibuy in a scottish supermarket recently?     I'm well p'd off - Sainsbury's are doing their 'buy 6 bottles of wine and get 25% off' deal with the 'not available in Scotland' proviso.   that's what we get for being a nations of p1$Sheads that need a nanny government.

Recently i've bought 2 bottles of Port - only cos it was half price.

Do i over drink it? Nope - its a rare treat.

 

The many are being punished because if the problems the few display

The oil companies and utilities can run riot and booze is too cheap?  

I believe the drinks industry will challenge the legalities of such a law in the European Courts because of price fixing.

Hi Velvet

 erin  

I do hope this applies to The Strangers Bar

 

MP'S benefit from one of the most subsidised facilities in British public life. In the Strangers’ Bar it costs but £2.55 for a tot of Scotch or a measure of Cointreau, while a glass of Merlot comes in at a thirst-inducing £2.35. No wonder MPs are often accused of being out of touch with ordinary life. Whenever one of their constituents asks them how much a pint of bitter costs, they cheerfully reply “£2.40”. Which, as anyone who has ventured into such an institution recently will tell you, will buy less than a half in many a London pub.

Soon we'll be reduced to poitin stills like in the old days.

... and the utilities are encouraged to put their prices up so the can work on developing 'greener' energy.     They'll be pretty gteen when nobody can afford to use any power.

For years I've thought the Gov't should raise the age of drinking to 21 as in the US as it's mainly the young that start binge drinking that causes problems for so many, and a huge cost to the NHS who have to deal with the young drunks.

 

In parts of Europe wine is allowed to their children at a young age and by the time they're older they have a more sensible approach to it than young Brits - who have a bad reputation abroad with their drunken loutish behaviour, they're an embarassment.

Can I ask a question please?

 

Why is it that our parent's generation was/is healthier than we are? They weren't told what to like and dislike, how much to smoke or drink or eat. Why are so many more ppl bothering their quacks now that we are all so enlightened. It's carp. I remember some ppl back home being in the pub all day and lots of ppl not. Same when I moved here. Everything is justified by expenses now, but the NHS worked well all these years ago when we were supposed to be skinned.

Raise the  drinking age to 21 and really enforce it....it'll stop the younger ones getting off their heads, but in this country many in their 20s are bingers too......However the resultant drop in bingers will look good on govt statistics....so all are happy

I think people were limited by how much they had to spend ........possibly - also I think the supermarkets weren't stocked aisle upon aisle floor to ceiling with sweets and crisps etc. I also don't remember people drinking at home a lot - I suppose they drunk with limited opening hours - maybe - or maybe it's just my experience.

TOTALLY AGREE.

NANNY STATE.

Dutch Brewers were fined millions for price fixing

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6566827.stm

Damn right!

Some years ago I watched a documentary that showed back in the day of rationing during the war people were much healthier then than now. Ration books allowed families to only buy a specified weight of things like butter and meat etc - can't remember now all the foods that were rationed but they were all much smaller quantities than people eat now. Also in those times many families grew their own veg and fruit, and unlike today in supermarkets they weren't laced with pesticides from crop sprays.

I've often felt it's all the additives, colourings, pesticides and E numbers in food  that's causing many of today's health problems. A few years ago I was shocked to learn that white bread had 26 additives, I've never eaten it since then. It's hard to find any food that's not beeen contaminated in some way along the food chain.now. There were no fast food outlets then either, except maybe fish and chips wrapped in newspaper lol.

I think we may be comparing a wartime diet, with a modern fast food, lard, sugary drink, and getting carted about in cars, sort of diet.

A programme called The 1940's House, put a family into replicated wartime (WW2) conditions for a month or so. At the end of it, every one of them, from grandparents to grandchildren were healthier.

it's not such a bad idea, for moderate drinkers  it's not going to make difference , and they should stop the  bogoffs, maybe then a few more pubs could keep going.cheap supermarket booze has almost killed the  pub trade, not that the smoking ban helped much either.and it's the supermarket booze that kids get hold of and sit in the park puking  up and  swearing at passers by, and  clogging up the hospitals.

i don't think you'll ever stpo the relatively well off oldies from  swigging vast quantities of the stuff , they'll carry on regardless of price.they think it's a race against time....

It's not a race against time you cheeky young whippersnapper (whatever that means) It's decorating time.

Crimbo Avvie Velvet

Have to admit I think it's a shame so many pubs have had to close down, especially the old traditional ones that families have used for years as a social meeting point. You make a good point Jackson about youngsters buying cheaper alcohol from supermarkets and sitting in parks etc. They're probably the very ones that shouldn't be allowed to legally drink until they're 21, and carry id like in the US to prove they're of age. Don't know what the right answer is that would satisfy everyone re the problem.

Nanny state and a war on the poor. 

 

I like a drink and if the government wanted to tax it more then I would not mind a bit.  The case would be a higher tax to offset for consequence to society of consumption - everyone would be treated the same according to their consumption.  What the government have done is just made it more expensive for poorer people to have a drink without raising much tax revenue at all.  It won't touch the better off drinker whose tipples are well beyond 45p per unit and it won't stop a better off alcoholic from wrecking their liver.

 

I don't honestly believe it would stop a poorer alcoholic wrecking theirs either, do you?   It'll probably kill them off quicker - I'm not convinced an alcoholic would look in their purse and say 'oh.. i better not buy any booze today or I won't have enough money to buy dinner' 

 

My understanding is that these proposals will only affect very cheap alcohol. The prices we pay in the pubs will not change as the unit price is already above the threshold.

 

Edit: Forgot to add that I am an infrequent drinker, ironically going out tonight, but that's because I have a friend up from Birmingham. But I will probably only have two pints and then coffee or soft drinks.