Minimum unit pricing for alcohol

[EH11_2NL]

Over £6 now for the cheapest bottle of vino. Decent stuff will be over £7 easy. That's getting a bit high for me! I remember 3 for £10 in Asda back in the day.

[Ray Gin]

That's the point. To stop you tanning 3 bottles of cheap wine and make you drink less.

[pablo]

2 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

That's the point. To stop you tanning 3 bottles of cheap wine and make you drink less.

 

He didn't mention tanning them though. Maybe he drank them over a couple of weeks?

 

I thought the point of it, which obviously won't work, is reducing alcoholism?

[Ray Gin]

7 minutes ago, pablo said:

 

He didn't mention tanning them though. Maybe he drank them over a couple of weeks?

 

I thought the point of it, which obviously won't work, is reducing alcoholism?

 

Well he'll still be drinking less.

[Lord Montpelier]

Chief Mammys Nanny State legacy

[Victorian]

15 minutes ago, pablo said:

 

He didn't mention tanning them though. Maybe he drank them over a couple of weeks?

 

I thought the point of it, which obviously won't work, is reducing alcoholism?

 

Although the World Health Organisation endorses the Scottish Government's evidence that it does work.

 

https://www.who.int/europe/news/item/26-07-2023-no-place-for-cheap-alcohol--scotland-s-minimum-unit-pricing-policy-is-protecting-lives

 

 

[hughesie27]

14 minutes ago, Lord Montpelier said:

Chief Mammys Nanny State legacy

Backed by other parties as well.

[Ministryofdad]

No doubt it does work. £13.10 minium for a 10 pack. Then add 1.30 on for each can. 

 

Where as down England an 18 pack of carling is £11

[hughesie27]

Must be handy living near Berwick Upon Tweed.

[pablo]

16 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Although the World Health Organisation endorses the Scottish Government's evidence that it does work.

 

https://www.who.int/europe/news/item/26-07-2023-no-place-for-cheap-alcohol--scotland-s-minimum-unit-pricing-policy-is-protecting-lives

 

 

 

I can't see how the effect of MUP will be anything other than limited at best. After all, alcohol related deaths were at a 15 year high last year and higher than other parts of the UK where it hasn't been introduced. 

Tragic. 

[Craig_]

I'd be a lot more inclined to support this if the extra revenue was being funnelled into support for alcohol abuse, rather than just going into the supermarkets' coffers.

[If carlsberg did rivals...]

The only people this will hurt are workers on low incomes who like the occasional drink. The rampant jakies will find the money by hook or by crook to fund their white lightning habit.

[Mysterion]

7 minutes ago, Craig_ said:

I'd be a lot more inclined to support this if the extra revenue was being funnelled into support for alcohol abuse, rather than just going into the supermarkets' coffers.

 

^^ This.

[If carlsberg did rivals...]

6 minutes ago, Craig_ said:

I'd be a lot more inclined to support this if the extra revenue was being funnelled into support for alcohol abuse, rather than just going into the supermarkets' coffers.

Is it not a government tax mate? If so it's funding the next campervan for whichever unelected leader we have now at Holyrood, rather than benefiting the supermarkets.

[If carlsberg did rivals...]

41 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

Must be handy living near Berwick Upon Tweed.

A couple of my mates do booze runs there from Edinburgh, split the petrol and fill the car for 3 months home drinking, a wee day out and money saved! It used to be you had to head to France for a booze run, we really have a lot to thank the SNP for!

[Victorian]

37 minutes ago, pablo said:

 

I can't see how the effect of MUP will be anything other than limited at best. After all, alcohol related deaths were at a 15 year high last year and higher than other parts of the UK where it hasn't been introduced. 

Tragic. 

 

The evidence,  which appears to be accepted by all political parties,  suggests a mortality reduction of 13% compared to what mortality would be projected to be without MUP.  It is rising in all parts of the UK.  But the most relevant point is that it looks like MUP does reduce the figures from where they would otherwise be.  

 

That does call into question why mortality in Scotland does not yet show a subsequent improvement compared to UK.  

 

As others say,  the additional profits and VAT should be allocated to health programmes.  It's a bit silly this isn't the case.

[hughesie27]

5 minutes ago, If carlsberg did rivals... said:

A couple of my mates do booze runs there from Edinburgh, split the petrol and fill the car for 3 months home drinking, a wee day out and money saved! It used to be you had to head to France for a booze run, we really have a lot to thank the SNP for!

Good idea.

 

It received support from opposition parties too though.

[Victorian]

9 minutes ago, If carlsberg did rivals... said:

Is it not a government tax mate? If so it's funding the next campervan for whichever unelected leader we have now at Holyrood, rather than benefiting the supermarkets.

 

Not a tax or levy.  It is extra margin for business.

[If carlsberg did rivals...]

10 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Not a tax or levy.  It is extra margin for business.

Cheers, I assumed it was a tax as introduced by government. It's not like politicians to miss a  chance for an extra carriage on the gravy train!

[manaliveits105]

It will maybe help cut down the Friday night wibble on here from Mammy's boys

 

[Gundermann]

23 minutes ago, If carlsberg did rivals... said:

A couple of my mates do booze runs there from Edinburgh, split the petrol and fill the car for 3 months home drinking, a wee day out and money saved! It used to be you had to head to France for a booze run, we really have a lot to thank the SNP for!

 

As someone else said, it's backed by the other parties too. I believe Labour are looking into something similar for England.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/08/30/pub-bosses-warned-government-minimum-alcohol-pricing/

 

Am not against scheme but would prefer it to be a health type levy that sees money going to the NHS.

[Gundermann]

38 minutes ago, Craig_ said:

I'd be a lot more inclined to support this if the extra revenue was being funnelled into support for alcohol abuse, rather than just going into the supermarkets' coffers.

 

I know. Would've been more of a vote-winner if they'd done this, unless there's some kind of legal obstacle to doing so.

 

Giving yet more dosh to Tescos and Sainsburys...

 

[Victorian]

Actually,  including myself for being slow on the uptake,  maybe the reason for the extra margin is that it is expected that the MUP policy will inevitably reduce the volume of sales.  For the mega supermarket and the small local shop.  The additional margin to represent compensation for the loss of sales volume?

 

 

[Morgan]

18 minutes ago, Gundermann said:

 

I know. Would've been more of a vote-winner if they'd done this, unless there's some kind of legal obstacle to doing so.

 

Giving yet more dosh to Tescos and Sainsburys...

 

Tesco and Sainsbury's. 

[Ally]

54 minutes ago, If carlsberg did rivals... said:

A couple of my mates do booze runs there from Edinburgh, split the petrol and fill the car for 3 months home drinking, a wee day out and money saved! It used to be you had to head to France for a booze run, we really have a lot to thank the SNP for!

Berwick Upon Tweed Morrisons is my favourite road trip destination. 

[Lord Montpelier]

8 minutes ago, Ally said:

Berwick Upon Tweed Morrisons is my favourite road trip destination. 

South of the border next week

Looks like it will be sensible to fill the car up on the way back 

[Ally]

1 minute ago, Lord Montpelier said:

South of the border next week

Looks like it will be sensible to fill the car up on the way back 

I think there were people at the border during Covid telling people they weren't welcome in Scotland, waving signs and wearing hazmat suits. Maybe temperance advocates will be doing the same and asking for spot checks on people's car boots.

[Craig_]

26 minutes ago, Victorian said:

Actually,  including myself for being slow on the uptake,  maybe the reason for the extra margin is that it is expected that the MUP policy will inevitably reduce the volume of sales.  For the mega supermarket and the small local shop.  The additional margin to represent compensation for the loss of sales volume?

 

 

 

Its an interesting justification, however I suspect the real reason is they couldn't be arsed setting up the systems to collect the cash. 

[Pepe le pew]

Are they putting forward this legislation whilst lapping it up in holyroods subsidised bar 

[AlimOzturk]

3 minutes ago, Pepe le pew said:

Are they putting forward this legislation whilst lapping it up in holyroods subsidised bar 

Of course they are one rule for them another for us. 
 

This is nothing more than further nannying and treating the people with contempt. Don’t let them fool you into thinking they give a shit about health. All about control. 

[Victorian]

12 minutes ago, Craig_ said:

 

Its an interesting justification, however I suspect the real reason is they couldn't be arsed setting up the systems to collect the cash. 

 

It wouldn't be a justification surely,  rather a decision for a purpose.  If you aren't gaining from something then why the need to justify it?  It must be a considerable sum of money as well.

 

I tend to think it's been a specific sweetener for business based on a belief that sales would suffer.  Quite possibly advocated for by affected business and trade associations,  etc.

[JudyJudyJudy]

23 minutes ago, Ally said:

I think there were people at the border during Covid telling people they weren't welcome in Scotland, waving signs and wearing hazmat suits. Maybe temperance advocates will be doing the same and asking for spot checks on people's car boots.

Dont encourage them please 

9 minutes ago, AlimOzturk said:

Of course they are one rule for them another for us. 
 

This is nothing more than further nannying and treating the people with contempt. Don’t let them fool you into thinking they give a shit about health. All about control. 

Yep 

[doctor jambo]

1 hour ago, Victorian said:

 

The evidence,  which appears to be accepted by all political parties,  suggests a mortality reduction of 13% compared to what mortality would be projected to be without MUP.  It is rising in all parts of the UK.  But the most relevant point is that it looks like MUP does reduce the figures from where they would otherwise be.  

 

That does call into question why mortality in Scotland does not yet show a subsequent improvement compared to UK.  

 

As others say,  the additional profits and VAT should be allocated to health programmes.  It's a bit silly this isn't the case.

when you make peoples lives crap, they use substances.

when their lives are better they use less.

Scotland needs an economic plan, coupled with people feeling better off - we need to stop the DRIVE to use substances, not hammering those who do.

Closing down the north sea and hiking taxes and discouraging work whilst encouraging state dependency , its not a recipe for personal well being.

If people feel good, they dont use.

The people feel bad, and this is a coping mechanism.

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, doctor jambo said:

when you make peoples lives crap, they use substances.

when their lives are better they use less.

Scotland needs an economic plan, coupled with people feeling better off - we need to stop the DRIVE to use substances, not hammering those who do.

Closing down the north sea and hiking taxes and discouraging work whilst encouraging state dependency , its not a recipe for personal well being.

If people feel good, they dont use.

The people feel bad, and this is a coping mechanism.

 

I agree that there must be some other forcing factor that has prevented a net reduction in harms.  Mortality,  hospitalisations and ongoing illness.  But it does appear to be a net overall picture,  in spite of the apparent benefit from MUP.

 

With that in mind,  MUP would appear to be a red herring.  The actual causes of harm must lie elsewhere,  therefore that must be the focus.  A lot of what you highlighted no doubt contributes.

 

 

[New Town Loafer]

2 hours ago, Lord Montpelier said:

Chief Mammys Nanny State legacy

It really is pathetic. Scots are treated as children by the omniscient, benevolent big state.

 

Just utterly crazy that people vote for this type of government.

[Craig_]

29 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

It wouldn't be a justification surely,  rather a decision for a purpose.  If you aren't gaining from something then why the need to justify it?  It must be a considerable sum of money as well.

 

I tend to think it's been a specific sweetener for business based on a belief that sales would suffer.  Quite possibly advocated for by affected business and trade associations,  etc.

 

Not sure about others, but I know that the Scotch Whisky Association were dead against it, even trying to challenge the SG in court over the matter (unsuccessfully as it happened).

[AlimOzturk]

6 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

I agree that there must be some other forcing factor that has prevented a net reduction in harms.  Mortality,  hospitalisations and ongoing illness.  But it does appear to be a net overall picture,  in spite of the apparent benefit from MUP.

 

With that in mind,  MUP would appear to be a red herring.  The actual causes of harm must lie elsewhere,  therefore that must be the focus.  A lot of what you highlighted no doubt contributes.

 

 

You have to ask how many of the drinkers have simply changed their habit from alcohol to some other cheaper alternative drug. 
 

The black market will eventually pick up the void if they make it too expensive to buy legitimately. There was already cases in West Lothian where black market alcohol with god know what in it was floating around. God help us all if that becomes a thing. 

[Victorian]

3 minutes ago, Craig_ said:

 

Not sure about others, but I know that the Scotch Whisky Association were dead against it, even trying to challenge the SG in court over the matter (unsuccessfully as it happened).

 

Yes they do all appear to oppose it.  But that doesn't exclude retailers from being given compensation for losing sales.

 

Certainly retailers benefit from wider margin is very different from the effects on producers.  It stands to reason that they will feel the effects of reduced demand,  but see no benefit on the achieved price of the product they supply into business.

[Victorian]

3 minutes ago, AlimOzturk said:

You have to ask how many of the drinkers have simply changed their habit from alcohol to some other cheaper alternative drug. 
 

The black market will eventually pick up the void if they make it too expensive to buy legitimately. There was already cases in West Lothian where black market alcohol with god know what in it was floating around. God help us all if that becomes a thing. 

 

Yeah it's inevitable.  Counterfeit alcohol is not new though.  It may become more common.  

[JudyJudyJudy]

Best thing is educating about the harmful effects of alcohol in every way .

[John Findlay]

Like smoking. Smokers still get their cigarettes.

Drinkers will still get their booze.

Cost will be their last thought.

[OBE]

4 hours ago, EH11_2NL said:

Over £6 now for the cheapest bottle of vino. Decent stuff will be over £7 easy. That's getting a bit high for me! I remember 3 for £10 in Asda back in the day.

 

Glad you survived the 3 for 10...couldn't have been good, the dregs...

[AlimOzturk]

13 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Best thing is educating about the harmful effects of alcohol in every way .

Yep. I have absolutely no problem with banning advertising, ramping up education and things to tackle this. But to simply make it more expensive is just a lazy, narrow view point which ultimately doesn’t tackle the root problem. Which is the general health crisis of the population. 
 

If as others have said they had been funnelling any extra taxes raised from this to tackle health issues it would be easier to swallow. As would be if they just set the rate and left it at that rather than raising it, which isn’t doing anything other than hitting folk in the pockets. 

[Byyy The Light]

I'm not against MUP as a tool in the arsenal for improving our countries shocking relationship with alcohol.  It is definitely not a golden bullet and others have made some great points around using the extra money better, some of the social drivers and just education overall.

 

It's also not helpful to point out recent death figures as these people will have developed their harmful drinking habits long before the MUP came in to force. It will be years until the true impact is known.

 

I grew up in the 90s, my drinking habits are absolutely shocking, as are pretty much all of my mates and social groups.  I certainly don't want my kids to have the same relationship with alcohol that I had growing up.  Hopefully over time things will change, at the very least, MUP is a good conversation starter to get people thinking about it.

 

 

[John Findlay]

8 minutes ago, Byyy The Light said:

I'm not against MUP as a tool in the arsenal for improving our countries shocking relationship with alcohol.  It is definitely not a golden bullet and others have made some great points around using the extra money better, some of the social drivers and just education overall.

 

It's also not helpful to point out recent death figures as these people will have developed their harmful drinking habits long before the MUP came in to force. It will be years until the true impact is known.

 

I grew up in the 90s, my drinking habits are absolutely shocking, as are pretty much all of my mates and social groups.  I certainly don't want my kids to have the same relationship with alcohol that I had growing up.  Hopefully over time things will change, at the very least, MUP is a good conversation starter to get people thinking about it.

 

 

Your responsibility to the educate your children on the perils of alcohol.

All it took for me was a simple sentence from my father.

You rule alcohol, it doesn't rule you.

[hughesie27]

Pretty sure the young generation today are drinking less and less alcohol so they must be doing g something right.

[Victorian]

15 minutes ago, Byyy The Light said:

I'm not against MUP as a tool in the arsenal for improving our countries shocking relationship with alcohol.  It is definitely not a golden bullet and others have made some great points around using the extra money better, some of the social drivers and just education overall.

 

It's also not helpful to point out recent death figures as these people will have developed their harmful drinking habits long before the MUP came in to force. It will be years until the true impact is known.

 

I grew up in the 90s, my drinking habits are absolutely shocking, as are pretty much all of my mates and social groups.  I certainly don't want my kids to have the same relationship with alcohol that I had growing up.  Hopefully over time things will change, at the very least, MUP is a good conversation starter to get people thinking about it.

 

 

 

Far and away the best and most comprehensive post so far.  

[Byyy The Light]

17 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

Your responsibility to the educate your children on the perils of alcohol.

All it took for me was a simple sentence from my father.

You rule alcohol, it doesn't rule you.

 

Which is something I am very conscious of and fully intend to do.  That's great it was so simple and easy for you. Sadly that's no the case for thousands upon thousands of people.  

[Byyy The Light]

20 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

Pretty sure the young generation today are drinking less and less alcohol so they must be doing g something right.

 

They also take more drugs.

 

One thing I read recently was the rise of social media and camera phones has had an impact on young people getting pissed as they are scared of what is recorded and sent out.  One of the few positives I've heard about social media tbh.

[escobri]

How much will a can of soup be now? 🐉