Minimum unit pricing

[John Gentleman]

On 16/11/2017 at 05:45, Cruyff Turn said:

I think it's a bit daft, Alki's are still going to drink whether they are paying 4 quid a bottle or a tenner. 

Or a lot of folk will make the stuff at home. Any vegetable/fruit/grain is fermentable and if off-the-shelf stuff becomes too pricey, they'll do it themselves. This has actually happened in Russia – with disastrous public health consequences.

Here in Australia the government pulled the same trick with beers, ciders and spirits about 16 years ago but, under pressure from the wine industry, wine was exempted under the (disingenuously) named "wine equalisation tax". The result is a nation of winos, with the resultant health consequences now manifesting to clinicians. People seem to have this daft idea that wine is less dangerous than other forms of alcoholic drinks. It's not, of course. And as JamboX2 correctly points out, it's middle/upper income earners who largely buy it it in bulk (cases) and down it in large quantities at home.

Edited November 17, 2017 by John Gentleman

[Boris]

10 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Did the supermarkets stand against it?

 

Certainly the Scotch Whiskey guys did.

 

No idea regards the supermarkets, probably not given they want to screw the manufacturers as much as possible so they can put on their deals/loss leaders etc.

 

What is this Scotch Whiskey you speak of?

[ri Alban]

31 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

No idea regards the supermarkets, probably not given they want to screw the manufacturers as much as possible so they can put on their deals/loss leaders etc.

 

What is this Scotch Whiskey you speak of?

Ulster Scots firewater

 

 

 

 

The usual #SNPBAD agenda.

 

Labour's smoking ban has been a tremendous success, so let's give this SNP policy a chance. With bad health and violence caused with our drinking habits, and the pressure put on the emergency services something has to be done. One step at a time and maybe we can sort our pitiful health problems out.

 

Oh, and maybe the pubs can compete again and the super strength cider and lager will become a thing of the past.

Edited November 17, 2017 by ri Alban

[Space Mackerel]

14 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Alcoholism is a disease. I am not sure why alcoholics, borderline or otherwise are a source of amusement.

 

The proposals will do nothing to stop alcoholics, borderline or otherwise, from drinking, Nor will they stop people seeking their kicks, if they are so inclined, from doing so in one way or another, some ways even more dangerous than alcohol and with even wider social consequences.

 

But the SNP and the Scottish Government gets another tick for its progressiveness which is the point.

 

 

 

It’s  a small start trying to correct Scotland’s booze habit. 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

7 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

For an alcoholic it is not a choice. The levels of ignorance about alcoholism on this thread are amazing. The idea that alcoholism is about "jakeys" getting a fix from cheap booze is so wide of the mark ... but it seems to be informing the Scottish Government's policy. The main reason why alcoholism is putting increasing pressure on NHS resources is that people who grew up in a culture where excessive alcohol consumption was the norm have continued to live that way but have survived long enough for the consequences to catch up with them. The fact is most young people  today drink less than their parents or grandparents, who continue with old habits. The real problem drinkers won't be affected by minimum pricing.

 

This article is from 2011 but things haven't improved since then, as I remember seeing an interview with a liver specialist on TV just a few months ago, who was saying that he is treating more and more people in their 20's with cirrhosis of the liver when he used to only see it in people in their 40's or 50's.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/dec/01/liver-problems-alcohol-young-adults

 

[Ray Gin]

How about the Icelandic approach instead of just ramping prices up.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/stories-41973296/how-one-country-persuaded-teens-to-give-up-drink-and-drugs

 

 

[Francis Albert]

2 hours ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

This article is from 2011 but things haven't improved since then, as I remember seeing an interview with a liver specialist on TV just a few months ago, who was saying that he is treating more and more people in their 20's with cirrhosis of the liver when he used to only see it in people in their 40's or 50's.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/dec/01/liver-problems-alcohol-young-adults

 

Yet it is true that average alcohol consumption per head has been declining in the UK for a decade or more and the decline has been steepest among young people. How does that square with the rise in numbers of young people with alcohol-related liver disease?

Maybe because averages aren't the whole story. Maybe a minority of young people are drinking more self-destructively? Will a relatively modest price increase deter those who seek a high (or oblivion) at whatever risk?

[Jambo-Jimbo]

6 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Yet it is true that average alcohol consumption per head has been declining in the UK for a decade or more and the decline has been steepest among young people. How does that square with the rise in numbers of young people with alcohol-related liver disease?

Maybe because averages aren't the whole story. Maybe a minority of young people are drinking more self-destructively? Will a relatively modest price increase deter those who seek a high (or oblivion) at whatever risk?

 

Probably answered your own question there and I'd tend to agree with you.

 

It would explain the increase of liver disease in the 20 something's but also the fall of drinking overall amongst the same age group.

What I would like to see is the levels of drug use amongst this same group, remembering that the liver has to deal with that as well, so amongst a small group who drink and take drugs to excess, I wouldn't like to think what state their livers are in. 

[Craig_]

At what point are Scottish people going to be able to critically think and form their own opinions again, rather than basing everything on the way they voted in 2014?

[Cade]

2 hours ago, Ray Gin said:

How about the Icelandic approach instead of just ramping prices up.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/stories-41973296/how-one-country-persuaded-teens-to-give-up-drink-and-drugs

 

 

Have you seen the price of booze in Iceland?!

[Bindy Badgy]

2 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

Also linking the smoking ban to this policy is a terrible analogy. They’re not similar in any shape or form. This is akin to raise duty on fags. No idea how successful or not that was at stopping people smoking. 

 

 

Unfortunately, I think this is spot on. I have so many friends that said they were going to quit smoking when the prices reached a certain amount. Surprisingly enough they didn't. Hopefully, it prices under age drinkers out of the market.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

21 minutes ago, Stokesy said:

 

Unfortunately, I think this is spot on. I have so many friends that said they were going to quit smoking when the prices reached a certain amount. Surprisingly enough they didn't. Hopefully, it prices under age drinkers out of the market.

 

Lost count of the number of times I used to say the same.

 

I'll quit when they go up to £3.50 a packet, then it was £4, then it was £4.50, then it was £5 then it was.................................................

I think they were £5.52 when I finally quit, and I quit for health reasons and not the cost.

 

Putting the price of alcohol up will not stop people from drinking, as folks will just pay more, and I'm not on about the alcoholics but everybody and that includes myself, if the price goes up I'll still buy and drink beer, fair enough I might buy less or not buy a bottle of beer over £3.50, but I do this now anyway, it is very rare that I spend over £3.50 for a bottle of beer out of a shop or online.

[Boris]

2 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

 

Very much agree with this. Sadly I think a lot of people are struggling move on and seems to view everything thing through a set lends. A bit sad and depressing imho.

 

On the policy meh. I think it’s a bit nanny state but I’m very much around individual choices. 

 

That aside the policy is well intended, however, education and cultural changes, which take time will be much more successful. I assume the govt are pursuing those as well.

 

In reality no one suffers from the policy. A few people have a couple of quid onto weekly bill.

 

Also linking the smoking ban to this policy is a terrible analogy. They’re not similar in any shape or form. This is akin to raise duty on fags. No idea how successful or not that was at stopping people smoking. 

 

I assume hollyrood don’t have control over duty hence the reason just never jacked the duty up to inflated that way plus got the tax. Would have seemed a easier solution.

 

 

 

 

I agree with the point regards moving on from 2014 and viewing any proposed legislation critically.

i see your point regards taxation as different from the smoking ban, however, to me at least, the similarity is in legislation aimed at promoting a public health policy.

I saw the smoking ban as an attempt to discourage people from smoking, but it was also about protecting those that didn't from a poisonous environment.

Minimum unit pricing is, IMO, an attempt to make the "jungle juice" type alcohol less attractive. It is also, again IMO, a long term strategy in prevention of chronic alcohol use especially amongst younger people.

[pablo]

 

Bit meh about the whole thing. But then I'm enjoying a £4.50 pint of Moretti in my local.

 

Scotland does need to do something about it's relationship with the peeve. But I will always been uneasy with State control over lifestyle choices.

 

 

[Radio Ga Ga]

Slightly off topic, but another SNP alcohol policy that grinds my gears is not being able to buy a bottle of wine whilst out doing my weekly shop on a Thursday morning, if I go straight off the night shift and am unable to buy alcohol until after ten, why?

 

I assume it’s to stop the jakeys but it punishes everybody IMO and don’t see the point of this law. 

 

[Seymour M Hersh]

16 minutes ago, pablo said:

 

Bit meh about the whole thing. But then I'm enjoying a £4.50 pint of Moretti in my local.

 

Scotland does need to do something about it's relationship with the peeve. But I will always been uneasy with State control over lifestyle choices.

 

 

 

Is our relationship with booze really as bad as it's painted though? I have my doubts and feel the continual negative reporting is part of the plan to pass these sorts of laws.

[Rocco_Jambo]

11 minutes ago, Radio Ga Ga said:

Slightly off topic, but another SNP alcohol policy that grinds my gears is not being able to buy a bottle of wine whilst out doing my weekly shop on a Thursday morning, if I go straight off the night shift and am unable to buy alcohol until after ten, why?

 

I assume it’s to stop the jakeys but it punishes everybody IMO and don’t see the point of this law. 

 

 

The other alcohol policy they introduced was the banning of happy hours and special offers in pubs which ironically lead to an increase in the amount of people buying cheap supermarket booze the same thing their new policy is designed to combat.

[Space Mackerel]

1 hour ago, Radio Ga Ga said:

Slightly off topic, but another SNP alcohol policy that grinds my gears is not being able to buy a bottle of wine whilst out doing my weekly shop on a Thursday morning, if I go straight off the night shift and am unable to buy alcohol until after ten, why?

 

I assume it’s to stop the jakeys but it punishes everybody IMO and don’t see the point of this law. 

 

Buy 2 or 3 and save yourself the grief? 

[Space Mackerel]

1 hour ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Is our relationship with booze really as bad as it's painted though? I have my doubts and feel the continual negative reporting is part of the plan to pass these sorts of laws.

 

Scotlands alcohol consumption is 20% more than England’s per head according to statistics. 

 

But that isnt necessarily a Scottish thing, the further North you go it seems to increase. Maybe something to do with the long dark nights etc. Alaskan, Russian etc people have a worse drink culture than ours, we are mere pansys compared to the amount they shift. 

 

 

[Unknown user]

3 hours ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Is our relationship with booze really as bad as it's painted though? I have my doubts and feel the continual negative reporting is part of the plan to pass these sorts of laws.

Yes, undoubtedly, of course it is. The drinking culture in the UK is unrivaled in any country I've been in, it's mental. 

[JamboX2]

18 hours ago, Boris said:

 

No idea regards the supermarkets, probably not given they want to screw the manufacturers as much as possible so they can put on their deals/loss leaders etc.

 

What is this Scotch Whiskey you speak of?

 

Exactly on the former.

 

"Christ... what 'ave ah dun" on the latter 

[deesidejambo]

The reason people can’t move on from 2014 is because of the permanent threat of a second referendum.   That will never go away and those who support Indep ndence will continue to agitate for it.

 

as to the pricing, I agree the intent is benign but not sure the policy will be effective.   It’s similar to the doomed Named Person legislation - good intent but bad implementation.  You need both for policies to be seen as effective.

 

 

[ri Alban]

20 hours ago, Ray Gin said:

How about the Icelandic approach instead of just ramping prices up.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/stories-41973296/how-one-country-persuaded-teens-to-give-up-drink-and-drugs

 

 

I think it starts here, make drink to dear for weans to start drinking in the first place, especially super strength cheap cider. 

People going on about jakeys , ffs. 

 

Another thing, these arseholes in Parliament need to stop their heavy drinking culture paid by Tax payers. The behaviour of these hypocrites , they have no shame.

[Jambomb]

2 hours ago, Hunky Dory said:

 

Bad implementation?  A variant of the scheme has been running successfully in Edinburgh and beyond for some time.  I think I've told you that about 4 times over the last couple of years, you appear to ignore it as it fails to tie in with the anti-SNP agenda you so dearly cling onto.

 

What is this variation, can you give details?

[Jambomb]

1 hour ago, Hunky Dory said:

 

Here's an acknowledgement that a variation has been running since 2009, more information is out there if you look.

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/information_on_the_named_person

 

Thanks, but it’s not really the same as Named Person with fundamental differences regarding consent.

[Space Mackerel]

Another thread decends into EssNPee bad for the millionth time. :-/

[Jambomb]

6 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

Another thread decends into EssNPee bad for the millionth time. :-/

 

Maybe if they stopped implementing Headline ‘look at me policies’ with poor implementation and just got on with running the country there would be less SNP is bad Chat!

[Space Mackerel]

21 minutes ago, Jambomb said:

 

Maybe if they stopped implementing Headline ‘look at me policies’ with poor implementation and just got on with running the country there would be less SNP is bad Chat!

 

“look at me policies” :-D

 

Trying to combat Scotlands massive drink culture, particularly at youth level and hidden child abuse are to frowned upon now? 

 

 

 

 

[JamboX2]

1 hour ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

“look at me policies” :-D

 

Trying to combat Scotlands massive drink culture, particularly at youth level and hidden child abuse are to frowned upon now? 

 

 

 

 

No. They're good. But constructively criticising policies proposed by the SNP government isn't "SNP bad" it's democratic accountability being exercised by reviewing, discussing and testing the deficiencies in legislstion.

 

To oppose a policy out right for a point of political principal also is not a "SNP bad" it's just not agreeing to something you don't believe in for say reasons of fears around: over burdening teachers with more work, or invasion of privacy.

 

Legitimate concerns shouldn't be passed off as "SNP bad" so flippantly.

[Jambomb]

2 hours ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

“look at me policies” :-D

 

Trying to combat Scotlands massive drink culture, particularly at youth level and hidden child abuse are to frowned upon now? 

 

 

 

 

 Policy making to attract headlines, policies that lack analysis or supporting evidence and policy announcements to meet populist demands have become the Government’s hallmark.

[AlimOzturk]

If the Scottish Tories or Labour parties have any sense they will put in their party Manifesto that this bill will be revoked. So many angry Nat's out there over this. 

Edited November 18, 2017 by AlimOzturk

[Space Mackerel]

36 minutes ago, Jambomb said:

 Policy making to attract headlines, policies that lack analysis or supporting evidence and policy announcements to meet populist demands have become the Government’s hallmark.

 

So you agree Frosty Jack should be £3.50 or whatever for 2 litres? 

[Space Mackerel]

1 hour ago, JamboX2 said:

No. They're good. But constructively criticising policies proposed by the SNP government isn't "SNP bad" it's democratic accountability being exercised by reviewing, discussing and testing the deficiencies in legislstion.

 

To oppose a policy out right for a point of political principal also is not a "SNP bad" it's just not agreeing to something you don't believe in for say reasons of fears around: over burdening teachers with more work, or invasion of privacy.

 

Legitimate concerns shouldn't be passed off as "SNP bad" so flippantly.

 

Same question to yourself.

[Jambomb]

7 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

So you agree Frosty Jack should be £3.50 or whatever for 2 litres? 

I don’t agree supermarkets will get all the cash! Taxing and investing in education and healthcare associated with alcohol  I could understand. 

[Space Mackerel]

30 minutes ago, Jambomb said:

I don’t agree supermarkets will get all the cash! Taxing and investing in education and healthcare associated with alcohol  I could understand. 

 

You honestly think the money will go to the supermarkets?

It will end up in HM Treasury as all alcohol duty raised in Scotland does. 

[deesidejambo]

7 hours ago, Hunky Dory said:

 

Here's an acknowledgement that a variation has been running since 2009, more information is out there if you look.

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/information_on_the_named_person

This is nothing like the proposed Named Person scheme.    One of the first Named Persons is now on the sex offenders register.   Good luck with getting it implemented, similar to the also doomed sectarian law.

[Jambomb]

1 hour ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

You honestly think the money will go to the supermarkets?

It will end up in HM Treasury as all alcohol duty raised in Scotland does. 

It’s not additional duty, it’s minimum pricing. You better go and read up on your SNP headline policies

[Space Mackerel]

3 hours ago, Jambomb said:

It’s not additional duty, it’s minimum pricing. You better go and read up on your SNP headline policies

 

A certain percentage of the value of the sale is tax. Yes or no. 

[Jambomb]

1 hour ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

A certain percentage of the value of the sale is tax. Yes or no. 

Go check how duty is set!

 

only gain government sees is the additional vat.

 

As I said previously, additional tax I could understand if ring fenced for alcohol education and health care.

its not, big winners are supermarkets, big losers are those that need the most help.

 

headlines sound good though!

upsidedownannoyingsmiley;:

[Space Mackerel]

26 minutes ago, Jambomb said:

Go check how duty is set!

 

only gain government sees is the additional vat.

 

As I said previously, additional tax I could understand if ring fenced for alcohol education and health care.

its not, big winners are supermarkets, big losers are those that need the most help.

 

headlines sound good though!

upsidedownannoyingsmiley;:

 

Its not just VAT though, it’s also specific duty applied to the product consumed.

 

https://www.gov.uk/tax-on-shopping/alcohol-tobacco

 

Maths time ^^^

Edited November 18, 2017 by Space Mackerel

[Space Mackerel]

53 minutes ago, Hunky Dory said:

 

The council acknowledged the existence of GIRFEC which in essence is Named Person, and that they have been running it since 2009.

 

What are you failing to understand?

 

Im sure Highland Council ran a pilot scheme too? Or certain parts did?

[deesidejambo]

8 hours ago, Hunky Dory said:

 

I said that it was a variation, although it was original precipitator that developed into NP.  There is actually little difference between the two of them.

Completely wrong.

 

the Named Person is mandatory and not voluntary.  Neither the child nor the child’s parent would have a choice.

 

the Named Person is allowed unfettered access to teenage girls medical records including sexual activity and contraception activities.  The parents of these girls are not allowed access.  The girls doctor would be legally obliged to provide these highly sensitive and private medical records to the Named Person.

 

so sexual predators can have a field day, hence one of the first ever Named Persons ending up on the sex offenders register.

 

hence at the moment the Named Person act is being radically revised and is still likely to be deemed illegal again  even after revision.    If it is such a good policy as you say then the revision wouldn’t be necessary 

[deesidejambo]

58 minutes ago, Hunky Dory said:

 

Absolute garbage as always.  We provided input into the GIRFEC scheme and also NP.  What is your relationship with the programs?

 

You throw yourself head first into sexual activities without considering the broad scope of what NP offers.  It has been running in Edinburgh and in the Highlands, in all but name, for nearly a decade.  How many issues has it run into?  It will be adopted into law soon enough.  Every charity in Scotland supports it, that's all you need to know.

 

Stick to playing golf.

If you care to check you will see that a NP from the Highland scheme is now on the sex offenders register.  

 

And the trial schemes do not allow unfettered access for the NP to teenagers medical records.   The NP does, unless the current consultation changes it.   Also the NP scheme was mandatory with no option for parents or children to opt out.   In order to get this into law the SNP will drop this requirement.

 

Edited November 20, 2017 by deesidejambo

[deesidejambo]

5 hours ago, Hunky Dory said:

 

So you have one example from a scheme that has effectively been in operation for a decade?  How many children have been protected through its application?

 

Every children's charity in Scotland backs it.  Tells you everything you need to know.

You are also unaware that the Law lords declared it illegal hence it is now back for further review.

 

as part of the rework it is likely that it will change from mandatory to voluntary, meaning the parents of the child need to agree to have a NP, thereby making it useless as an abusing parent is unlikely to agree to having a NP in the first place.

 

as I posted earlier, the intent is justifiable, but the implementation simply won’t work.

 

same with the sectarian law and minimum alcohol pricing.    Diddy policies by amateur legislators.   Most will agree these issues are worth addressing, but better law is needed otherwise they will fail.

[Space Mackerel]

On 21/11/2017 at 06:32, deesidejambo said:

You are also unaware that the Law lords declared it illegal hence it is now back for further review.

 

as part of the rework it is likely that it will change from mandatory to voluntary, meaning the parents of the child need to agree to have a NP, thereby making it useless as an abusing parent is unlikely to agree to having a NP in the first place.

 

as I posted earlier, the intent is justifiable, but the implementation simply won’t work.

 

same with the sectarian law and minimum alcohol pricing.    Diddy policies by amateur legislators.   Most will agree these issues are worth addressing, but better law is needed otherwise they will fail.

 

 

Sems like deeside wants our future youngsters to grow being sexually abused, alcoholic bigots.

What a thought. :-/

[jack D and coke]

On 17/11/2017 at 12:13, Craig_ said:

At what point are Scottish people going to be able to critically think and form their own opinions again, rather than basing everything on the way they voted in 2014?

 

 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

 

Thread seems to have veered off topic lately, so back on track.

 

1 May 2018 is the date minimum pricing is planned to begin.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-42066394

 

[tian447]

So, that's it here.

 

Anyone actually that bothered by it?  If a 4 pack of Budweiser goes up a few quid, I don't have much of an issue with it.  I drink too much as it is anyway, so increasing the price will probably make me cut back in all fairness.  It's not that having a few beers has suddenly become unaffordable overnight, but the cumulative cost will certainly add up over the weeks and months.

 

Tripling the price of a 3 litre bottle of cheap industrial cider will have absolutely no impact on my life, and it can only be a good thing for people to stop drinking that shite.  Dundee is absolutely rampant with people swigging cheap cider and high-percentage low-cost beer on a daily basis, especially in public.  Cutting that shite out can't be a bad thing, right?  Let's be honest, no-one drinks Frosty Jacks for the taste, they drink it to get absolutely ****ed.

[gjcc]

I don't drink in the house so not bothered in the slightest by this. 

 

In fact, I'm off to scotmid shortly to pick up a parcel. I'll swing by the booze aisle to have a giggle at the prices. 

[Space Mackerel]

I’m pretty sure the prices in pubs, clubs and off license sales will pretty much be about the same apart from certain brands mentioned above. 

 

A lot of people losing their shit for no reason at all on social media, just shows how ill informed some people are. 

 

 

Edited May 1, 2018 by Space Mackerel