Minimum alcohol pricing

[Captain Sensible]

Minimum pricing only works if you go Scandinavian on its ass. £5 for a can of beer and £8 a pint in the pub. £20 for the cheapest vodka etc.
Just throwing 50p on a can of beer or £1.25 on a bottle of cider, is gonna make no difference at all. It will just mean the lowest earners will have to fork out more for drink. It might put a few people off that aren't really drinkers. But it won't stop alckies and boozers, they'll still buy, still have health problems. So I'm glad they're dropping it.

 

[birthofanorange]

I'd imagine your taste buds are probably shot anyway if you've spent 20 years knocking back 3 bottles of vodka a day.

I'd imagine your bank balance (if you had one!) would be shot too! Who could afford to drink like that unless in well paid full time employment, and how would you function in said employment with that level of consumption?

Anyway, I'm pleased that this seems to have been shelved for the time being.

 

[sten_super]

Anyway, I'm pleased that this seems to have been shelved for the time being.

I'm not, I'm thoroughly depressed, as it's yet further evidence of this government disposing of evidence-based policy in favour of ideology-based policy (and I say this as someone who was broadly supportive of the Tories and Coalition when they came to power). Research suggested that a 45p minimum price per unit could have reduced drinking by 4.3%, and saved thousands of lives, yet because it doesn't fit within the Tory ideology the idea is scrapped. Don't even get my started on Lansley (who is my local MP) opposing the idea when he was Health Secretary...

 

[BigGully]

I'm really struggling to reconcile this response with Durston's post. Do you think you have been a bit OTT?

No I dont, otherwise I wouldnt of posted it.

 

[5mins-from-amex]

I'd imagine your bank balance (if you had one!) would be shot too! Who could afford to drink like that unless in well paid full time employment, and how would you function in said employment with that level of consumption?

Anyway, I'm pleased that this seems to have been shelved for the time being.

I resently found out that when my dad left my mum almost 30 years ago now, he would do a bottle of vodka/whiskey a day and he still managed (some how) to keep his addiction from his employers for well over a year! Happy to say he sorted himself out now and lives a good life.

As for the Minimum price on alcohol i really dont think it will make any difference, look at the price hikes of Cigarettes, people who want to smoke will always find the money! Alcohol would be no different.

 

[birthofanorange]

Research suggested.... could have.....

That's why I'm happy - nothing conclusive, just hitting normal drinkers in the pocket...again.

 

[birthofanorange]

I resently found out that when my dad left my mum almost 30 years ago now, he would do a bottle of vodka/whiskey a day and he still managed (some how) to keep his addiction from his employers for well over a year! Happy to say he sorted himself out now and lives a good life.

As for the Minimum price on alcohol i really dont think it will make any difference, look at the price hikes of Cigarettes, people who want to smoke will always find the money! Alcohol would be no different.

Very pleased to hear that he's sorted! I hope he wasn't a driving instructor, though....

 

[5mins-from-amex]

Very pleased to hear that he's sorted! I hope he wasn't a driving instructor, though....

Thanks, no he was a mechanic, but the garage he worked at involved a 20min journey on his motorbike! Crazy looking back.

 

[birthofanorange]

Crazy looking back.

Indeed! Looking forwards would have been difficult enough. Still, it shows the amazing resilience of the body, to come back to normality after such abuse - good for him!

 

[sten_super]

That's why I'm happy - nothing conclusive, just hitting normal drinkers in the pocket...again.

What other kind of evidence would you expect for social policy? I'm not being difficult, it's a genuine question, as if all quantitative and qualitative theoretical research is discounted as evidence we're all shooting in the dark and what we're left with is complete policy inertia.

I'm also rather bemused by those citing cigarettes as an example of where pricing hasn't worked, when the complete opposite appears to be the case. NHS data shows that the prevalence of (cigarette) smoking typically follows the affordability of tobacco.

 

[birthofanorange]

What other kind of evidence would you expect for social policy? I'm not being difficult, it's a genuine question, as if all quantitative and qualitative theoretical research is discounted as evidence we're all shooting in the dark and what we're left with is complete policy inertia.

I'm also rather bemused by those citing cigarettes as an example of where pricing hasn't worked, when the complete opposite appears to be the case. NHS data shows that the prevalence of (cigarette) smoking typically follows the affordability of tobacco.

There is so much research done on countless things, most of which appears to be inconclusive, and quite often other studies can appear to prove the exact opposite of the first. Not that I am saying that that is the case here...just that I remain unconvinced. Certainly, setting the minimum price levels so low will have virtually zero impact on the consumption levels, unlike cigarettes which have increased exponentially over recent years.

 

[beorhthelm]

I'm not, I'm thoroughly depressed, as it's yet further evidence of this government disposing of evidence-based policy in favour of ideology-based policy (and I say this as someone who was broadly supportive of the Tories and Coalition when they came to power). Research suggested that a 45p minimum price per unit could have reduced drinking by 4.3%, and saved thousands of lives, yet because it doesn't fit within the Tory ideology the idea is scrapped. Don't even get my started on Lansley (who is my local MP) opposing the idea when he was Health Secretary...

you do know there is no empirical evidence behind the research. its academic work based on extrapolation of other general, broad data. the qualifications you've repeated serve to highlight this well. there have been studies that say 45p will make no impact whatsoever as it mainly impacts low to moderate drinkers, and one side effect of this minimum pricing would be to drive people to drink higher strength drinks in the case of lagers ( on the assumption they wouldnt increase to keep a price differential).

incidently, it works out the 2% lager featured in this thread and apparently elsewhere as an example of the demon drink, would be a princely sum of 40p if minimum price of 45p a unit is applied. yep, its less than one unit.

 

[sten_super]

you do know there is no empirical evidence behind the research. its academic work based on extrapolation of other general, broad data. the qualifications you've repeated serve to highlight this well. there have been studies that say 45p will make no impact whatsoever as it mainly impacts low to moderate drinkers, and one side effect of this minimum pricing would be to drive people to drink higher strength drinks in the case of lagers ( on the assumption they wouldnt increase to keep a price differential).

I'm fully aware of how government policy research functions. The UK-centric studies are based upon modelling work (i.e. as you say, extrapolating trends). Without introducing the policy in the first place, how on earth would you propose the impact of the policy measure is calculated? As I said earlier, if you dismiss any theoretical policy analysis as bunkum (as 'there's no evidence') then policy is left in an almost permanent state of paralysis. Let me put it this way - would you prefer that policy was based upon soundly-researched, admittedly limited (in the sense that it's largely theoretical, rather than practical) evidence building, or done on the back of an envelope based upon whatever a given MP believes to be 'right'?

This is all without the fact that there have also been studies based upon real data that have highlighted the potential impact (see Does minimum pricing reduce alcohol consumption? The experience of a Canadian province - Stockwell - 2012 - Addiction - Wiley Online Library).

 

[Durlston]

You dont day ... !!!

Well I do and I too sometimes go out on a Friday night, usually consume more units that some transient body has designated that is good for me.

Just like the vast majority of like minded people and I laugh till my sides split, bond with friends and colleagues reaffirm friendships and then toddle home without disrespecting the police, without log jamming the A&E department.

I do not know if you are a 'sick quitter' when it comes to alcohol, but you have a very narrow minded view of the responsible drinker, if in fact you recognise any responsible consumer of alcohol is valid.

So you just as this body of doctors should not impact on my life choices, give me the facts and allow us educated, sensible adults to make a considered judgement, without imposed sanctions.

I wasn't having a pop at you or any other responsible drinkers. There's no harm in having a couple of cans or pints of beer after a hard week of working. It's knowing when to stop and getting into trouble because of alcohol.

I've given up drink just over a year ago and I don't miss it. There's the odd occasion when I'd like to have one or two - New Year's Eve was difficult but my medication makes alcohol poison in my body.

The budget next week will probably hike up the prices on pints in pubs and cigarettes as usual. The minimum price rise could have helped hospitals that deal with the consequences of bad things happening through the influence of drink.

So that's just my opinion. I'm never rude to people on nsc because a lot of people have given me help and support on here that have made things a lot easier to deal with.

Peace mate.

 

[beorhthelm]

The budget next week will probably hike up the prices on pints in pubs and cigarettes as usual. The minimum price rise could have helped hospitals that deal with the consequences of bad things happening through the influence of drink.

interesting how people misunderstand or are misinformed. the proposed minimum price wasnt going to go to the treasury, just a law that retailer has to charge a minimum. the existing duty, minimum pricing in effect anyway, already goes to the pay for the consequences. rather confusing that you should be against duty increase but for the minimum price.

 

[BensGrandad]

interesting how people misunderstand or are misinformed. the proposed minimum price wasnt going to go to the treasury, just a law that retailer has to charge a minimum. the existing duty, minimum pricing in effect anyway, already goes to the pay for the consequences. rather confusing that you should be against duty increase but for the minimum price.

This was my interpretation of the scheme so the only winners would be Tesco Asda Morrisons etc.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I paid £6.95 for a half of Stillwater/Mikkeller/Fanø Gypsy Tears (Red Wine Barrel Aged Edition) last night in Craft Beer. This price definitely affected my decision to drink this beer in huge volumes.