The Pub trade is dying - Minimum price for Alcohol?

Cienciano

seamus wrote: »

"Maybe"? Surely when we make laws we should be doing so on an evidential basis and international best practice, rather than bringing in laws, crossing our fingers and seeing what happens?

Have they even gone as far as doing a simple poll to find out if people would buy less?

Never mind a link, there isn't even the slightest correlation between binge drinking and the price of alcohol. We already know this, yet for some reason it's being completely ignored.

The way the Irish drink alcohol is 100% a cultural matter.

A minimum price for alcohol will increase the number of alcohol-related deaths, it will increase the cost of policing and cause a drop in government revenue as more people turn to self-importing, self-brewing and black market stalls.

We will gain nothing in return.

You're forgetting the real reason its coming in. To try and get people to go to pubs. If we were drinking the same amount of alcohol in pubs, this wouldn't be coming in

Sh1tbag OToole

seamus wrote: »

"Maybe"? Surely when we make laws we should be doing so on an evidential basis and international best practice, rather than bringing in laws, crossing our fingers and seeing what happens?

Sometimes tis not a bad idea to try something new for the craic, have a lash off bringing in something to see how people react. "international best practice" is a buzzword used by corporate zombies who sit in board rooms breathing in the stale air under fluorescent lighting while wearing an uncomfortable suit desperately trying to avoid a situation where they would be taking a risk of some sort. They are the real-life equivalent of the lad who always lets someone else jump into the pool first in case something goes wrong.

Bongalongherb

You think this alcohol pricing is bad. You won't be able to smack your own ass soon without being arrested for self discipline. The full government control of Irish citizens is getting nearer. All I want to do is enjoy a 6pk or 12pk of beer in the comfort of my own home over the weekend bothering no-one, and soon I will have to pay double for the pleasure. Not a happy camper at all with this.

Politicians sticking their fascist legislation down my throat again. Don't blame me because of **** that abuse alcohol. Cheers, and take a puff of this and fcuk off.

dr.fuzzenstein

Sh1tbag OToole wrote: »

Sometimes tis not a bad idea to try something new for the craic, have a lash off bringing in something to see how people react. "international best practice" is a buzzword used by corporate zombies who sit in board rooms breathing in the stale air under fluorescent lighting while wearing an uncomfortable suit desperately trying to avoid a situation where they would be taking a risk of some sort. They are the real-life equivalent of the lad who always lets someone else jump into the pool first in case something goes wrong.

Yes, but they wear suit and tie and that hypnotizes the average yokel into hanging on every word they say and blindly believe it, because "wow, he must be sooo professional, look! He's wearing an expensive suit! Wow! He must be really intelligent!"

hatrickpatrick

Cienciano wrote: »

You're forgetting the real reason its coming in. To try and get people to go to pubs. If we were drinking the same amount of alcohol in pubs, this wouldn't be coming in

It's in Fine Gael's manifesto, they couldn't give a bollocks about public health. This is pure protectionism, which is why I'm fairly confident that the ECJ will save our asses and disallow it.

Bongalongherb

Looks like I'll be driving the scenic route again to Newry next year when this double pricing of alcohol is activated It would be a nice straight drive but for the pot-holes but a nice day out nonetheless. The European Court of Justice won't interfere with this I think.

All hail Newry, the new drink-hole of cheap beer. Take me there on a placid journey of clean-tasting refreshing goodness.


Ah sh!t, I just remembered the quantitative easing implemented recently, now I'm really fecked. What's the point in going up north now, ye just can't win.


PS: Time to make your own home brew and cut out the middle-man.

rubadub

Sh1tbag OToole wrote: »

Sometimes tis not a bad idea to try something new for the craic, have a lash off bringing in something to see how people react.

But it's not new. Scotland already tried it and found themselves in the embarrassing situation of having to put all plans on hold.

http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Health/Services/Alcohol/minimum-pricing

The Alcohol (Minimum Pricing) (Scotland) Act 2012 was passed in June 2012. It has not yet been implemented due to a legal challenge led by the Scotch Whisky Association:

Looks like its against EU law, quite foolish of them to let it get that far along.

So you would think "once bitten twice shy", but oh no, looks like we will get ravaged by the same dog, and go roll in his shit for good luck and extra embarrassment. I would like to know how much money they have already pissed away on this plan, and how much they reckon it is going to cost in legal fees when it is opposed here too.

Clive Bisquette

The ordinary Joe who likes to quaffe a few tins in the comfort of home (his own or rented) is being sacrificed for the lazy publicans who gouge people unmercifully at every opportunity.

This is the nanny state being brought to ridiculous lengths.

Will be off to Newry Mysell...if there is any worthwhile savings to be made.

Bongalongherb

I'd say for sure that this is also implemented to get folk back into the pubs as well, as the publicans have a bit of a grip on government. They always wanted price increases attached to super-markets especially.

A Publican... A person who owns or manages a pub.
(in ancient Roman and biblical times) a collector or farmer of taxes.
"publicans and sinners"

Rings a bell.

Capt'n Midnight

the groutch wrote: »

even worse it's moved people on to the poorly regulated E-cigs.
god knows what chemicals they put in those things, and could well be worse for people's health than real cigs.

That's not fair

Only 94% of the ones tested had flavouring compounds "which may pose a respiratory hazard in the workplace"

http://www.nhs.uk/news/2015/12December/Pages/Flavouring-found-in-e-cigarettes-linked-to-popcorn-lung.aspx

At least one of the three chemicals was detected in 47 of the 51 flavours tested. Diacetyl was detected above the laboratory limit of detection in 39 of the flavours tested. Acetoin and 2,3-pentanedione were detected in 46 and 23 and of the flavours, respectively.

B17G

rubadub wrote: »

But it's not new. Scotland already tried it and found themselves in the embarrassing situation of having to put all plans on hold.

http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Health/Services/Alcohol/minimum-pricing


Looks like its against EU law, quite foolish of them to let it get that far along.

So you would think "once bitten twice shy", but oh no, looks like we will get ravaged by the same dog, and go roll in his shit for good luck and extra embarrassment. I would like to know how much money they have already pissed away on this plan, and how much they reckon it is going to cost in legal fees when it is opposed here too.

Minimum unit pricing on tobacco has already been declared illegal according to EU law.

http://www.scotch-whisky.org.uk/media/24988/4_mar_2010_ecjruling.pdf

I'm not sure how Varadkar hopes to get this legislation passed without a challenge going by the current situation re Scotland's bill..

Cletus van_damme

rubadub wrote: »

If you don't drink and are concerned about tax you should be calling for an increase in excise. Why the hell should the retailers be allow cream it in.

Because some of those retailers are also publicans, where I live about 75% of the pubs have an off license attached, this new legislation means a nice bump for them as it means supermarkets cant undercut them.

If a 6 pack is the same price in the off license as the supermarket no need to go to the supermarket, and with that price increase they can sell less than they do now and still make more money.

Double win.

Capt'n Midnight

Geuze wrote: »

Excise duty tends to rise every few years, to keep up with general inflation.

We already have high excise rates on alcohol.

This proposed MUP is different, and represents a much stronger intervention into the market.

While high compared to the EU, our excise rates are historically low.
The excise on a pint of 4.4% has gone up by just 7c since Jan 1994.

And increasing excise could help fund lots of health related stuff. Like more trolleys.

For Beer Exceeding 2.8% volume today it's €22.55 per hectolitre per cent of alcohol in the beer
back in the day it was €19.757 (£15.65 per hectolitre per cent alcohol by volume)

rubadub

Cletus van_damme wrote: »

Double win.

Yep, huge benefits for publicans, and the taxpayer loses out big time, no win for them. Thanks for further confirming how fucked up the idea is.

Geuze

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

While high compared to the EU, our excise rates are historically low.
The excise on a pint of 4.4% has gone up by just 7c since Jan 1994.

And increasing excise could help fund lots of health related stuff. Like more trolleys.

For Beer Exceeding 2.8% volume today it's €22.55 per hectolitre per cent of alcohol in the beer
back in the day it was €19.757 (£15.65 per hectolitre per cent alcohol by volume)

That link is from April 2009.

Okay, beer excise duty was steady for many years, then fell, then rose again.

Here is more precise info:

http://www.revenue.ie/en/about/statistics/incidence-taxation.pdf

2003 to 2009 = 47 c per pint
2010 to 2012 = cut to 37c
2013 = 54c



That 7cent rise over a decade seems hard to believe, it just shows that pub price rises are down to brewers and pubs.

Bongalongherb

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

While high compared to the EU, our excise rates are historically low.
The excise on a pint of 4.4% has gone up by just 7c since Jan 1994.

And increasing excise could help fund lots of health related stuff. Like more trolleys.

For Beer Exceeding 2.8% volume today it's €22.55 per hectolitre per cent of alcohol in the beer
back in the day it was €19.757 (£15.65 per hectolitre per cent alcohol by volume)

I'm sorry captain, but I think you are living in a land of make-believe if you think any of this is going to advance more trolleys. If they wanted more trolleys they would just credit the government of taxpayers cash to fund it anyway as they have been doing constantly.

This is going to hurt the competent folk that want to have a quiet drink at home at their leisure but will now have to pay the price because of uneducated parents and uncontrolled brats. They take it out on the genuinely competent folk with this bastard legislation.

Everyone pays the price because of the few neantherthals and so-called parents that never had control of their brats, so it now affects all folk. Idiotic fascism from a backward draconian government/politician.

oppenheimer1

Bongalongherb wrote: »

I'm sorry captain, but I think you are living in a land of make-believe if you think any of this is going to advance more trolleys. If they wanted more trolleys they would just credit the government of taxpayers cash to fund it anyway as they have been doing constantly.

This is going to hurt the competent folk that want to have a quiet drink at home at their leisure but will now have to pay the price because of uneducated parents and uncontrolled brats. They take it out on the genuinely competent folk with this bastard legislation.

Everyone pays the price because of the few neantherthals and so-called parents that never had control of their brats, so it now affects all folk. Idiotic fascism from a backward draconian government/politician.

Oh how naive. This is a sop to the pub industry to get them behind FG in advance of an election, all dressed up as a health measure.

Eugene Norman

Cienciano wrote: »

You're forgetting the real reason its coming in. To try and get people to go to pubs. If we were drinking the same amount of alcohol in pubs, this wouldn't be coming in

Of course. That's what the thread title is about. Pubs dying. Increase tax on take always.

The pseudo moralising on binge drinking is Orwellian claptrap. The vast majority of heavy drinkers in Ireland drink in pubs, the vast majority of alcoholics drink mostly in pubs and the members of the vitners association who pushed for these laws serve alcohol everyday to people way past the binge drinking limits, and in small communities to known wife beaters, and to known alcoholics.

The debate here is beyond surreal.

enricoh

Iirc the Nordic countries put up the price of drink in pubs n off licenses to cut the level of drinking and it worked.
If it worked there it'll work here.
I live near the beach n every summer it's full of teenagers getting there 20 bottles of Miller for e15 n thrashing the place. It should help put a curb on that.
Since fags went up no.s smoking with teenagers has really dropped off.

hatrickpatrick

enricoh wrote: »

Iirc the Nordic countries put up the price of drink in pubs n off licenses to cut the level of drinking and it worked.
If it worked there it'll work here.
I live near the beach n every summer it's full of teenagers getting there 20 bottles of Miller for e15 n thrashing the place. It should help put a curb on that.
Since fags went up no.s smoking with teenagers has really dropped off.

Is it fair to pursue a policy which penalises everyone to deal with the few though? What's needed there is a greater police presence and courts which will properly punish anti social behaviour.

Chimichangas

This idea is a nonsense. The big plus that Varadkar and his ilk push is that drinks in the pub wont increase in price. And unless you spend less that a tenner on a bottle of wine, wine drinkers wont be affected either. Especially if its jacobs creek...is that right leo?
This does nothing to the problem that is the culture of drinking in ireland, except encourage people and the next generation to go back to the pub and not miss out on the culture of drinking in ireland. Yahoo! Up ya boyo! Get some hairs on your chest!

Mesrine65

The pub trade is dead

Long live the síbín, the poitín distiller of repute & the home brewer...

All is not lost...keep the faith

foggy_lad

Mesrine65 wrote: »

Leo Varadkar is an Irish born, duly elected TD...

That's not what many would call him!

The Backwards Man wrote: »

The idea behind this is to deal with the health problems associated with binge drinking, not with alcoholism. Two very different kettles of fish, and the opposition to the proposal in this thread highlights how very real the problem of binge drinking is in this country.

The suggestion that the person dependent on alcohol will forego the beans and bread for the six cans is ridiculous, that person always foregoes the beans and bread. This is aimed at the person who buys a dozen cans at the weekend with the weekly shop and downs the lot before heading down the town and being a nightmare to deal with for all and sundry,, maybe, just maybe, they might cop themselves on and only buy six.

I bought 4 x 8 cans of cider @€;10 each in my shopping a few weeks ago and 3 of those are still in a corner of my kitchen waiting patiently to be chilled and drank.

Why am I being penalised by this waste of space of a minister who cant even keep our oldest and frailest pensioners safe in hospital A&E corridors?

This Leo clown is a fool of a politician who spends most of his time interfering in other ministers folios while his own patients are dying on trolleys, he hasn't got a clue about the real world!

Those people who cause hassle in town on weekend nights are still going to cause trouble except the chips on their shoulders will be even bigger and they will be taking head shop sh1t as well as other illegal drugs instead of the large doses of alcohol.

The Backwards Man wrote: »

In fairness, people that home brew aren't usually the type that tear up emergency wards or steal school buses just to burn them out. Unless you're different

So why are they being targeted? People that home brew are the same people who enjoy a box of 8 cans or a couple bottles of wine in the privacy of their own homes but this absolute gobsh1te of a politician wants to dictate what we can and can't do in private! He'll be in the bedroom next telling you what to do with it!

hatrickpatrick

To add my voice to the above, I bought two slabs (48 cans) of Guinness about 6/7 months ago (before my May finals), and I still have one slab (24 cans) unopened. The other one was shared between me and three friends over maybe three or four weeks, usually one or two in the gaff while catching up or watching a match. Why then did I buy in bulk? Because they were special offers and we're all students, so the difference between a can priced at €1 and a can priced at €2.20 actually is a big deal, even if you only need a handful of them.

That's the elephant in the room which Leo is ignoring. This hits people who drink responsibly and just happen to not have pocketfuls of disposable income. Those people are essentially being told that they must sacrifice one of the things they enjoy perfectly responsibly "for the greater good", even though there are a crap ton of better policies which could be introduced to curb genuine problem drinking in Ireland. And as for the pubs? People like I've described simply can't afford them. For someone living on a grant, or on an irregular income from doing freelance stuff like babysitting, teaching guitar etc (before you give out about students not getting more regular part time jobs, do a course in computer science which is 9-5 and factor in the immense amount of study which goes alongside that), €5 for a pint simply cannot be justified, especially for people living on their own who have bills and (skyrocketing) rent to pay. This won't get them into the pub, this will just cause them to quit drinking altogether, because what's the point if you can only afford one can for the whole week anyway?

Now I'm not saying that this is an appalling thing or that drinking is in any way necessary to life, I'm simply saying that this proposal removes a luxury from people whose quality of life has already been severely damaged over the last five years. Welfare cuts for the unemployed, rent hikes for everyone, massive increases in student fees, cuts to grants, rising food prices, etc etc etc. And those among that demographic who drink responsibly simply don't deserve to be targeted in that manner. It won't do much for their health because they're already not problem drinkers, it certainly won't get them back into the pub since the average pub is too expensive, full stop for those people. All it does is remove one thing they enjoy, from their lives. And that's why they're going mental about this - not because, as some are arguing, this law means they can't drink twenty cans on one night anymore.

Cletus van_damme

enricoh wrote: »

Iirc the Nordic countries put up the price of drink in pubs n off licenses to cut the level of drinking and it worked.
If it worked there it'll work here.

Why would it work here?, what we pay for booze is already at the very top of the list for Europe, increasing the price of an addictive substance does not stop it being addictive, having a doctor try to say it will is saddening.

The logic behind the whole thing is flawed, we have an increasing problem in this country with obesity, now imagine Leo had said that the days of fish & chips for under a tenner were over and for the good of the nation all takeaway food would double in price, how much good does anyone think that would do?

enricoh wrote: »

I live near the beach n every summer it's full of teenagers getting there 20 bottles of Miller for e15 n thrashing the place. It should help put a curb on that.
Since fags went up no.s smoking with teenagers has really dropped off.

Young people are already drinking less, have been for the last few years. Cant post the link correctly.

www. rte.ie/news/2015/1209/752380-children/

Upping the price would have, at best, a short term impact on problem drinking as all it does is re-baseline the price, none of the extra money generated goes towards anything that might prevent problem drinking, what a waste.

hatrickpatrick

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Is it fair to pursue a policy which penalises everyone to deal with the few though? What's needed there is a greater police presence and courts which will properly punish anti social behaviour.

Sounds a lot like the gun argument in America.

seamus

The CEO of the VFI showed his true colours on Matt Cooper last night.

Apparently we have to stop treating alcohol as "normal" and make it so special that only specific places can sell them. Maybe make "barman" a protected title too, lest people try to pour their own alcohol. (that last bit is my proposal).

He also came out with this gem: "The safest place to drink is in the pub". I guess then all of those people fighting on the streets at 2am have come pouring out of their homes to cause trouble. And 2/3rds of pedestrians killed on the road have been drinking - I guess these are all home-drinkers who decided to go out for a walk?

The VFI quite unashamedly showing that they pushed politicians to introduce this to make more money for themselves, and no other reason.

dr.fuzzenstein

The whole "safe and controlled" environment claptrap and "drink poured by untrained amateurs" killing people bullsh*t has consistently been spouted by the gombeens from the VFI.
OK, let me try this. Puts glass on the table, opens bottle, pours drink. Wow! That was easy! No, sorry I do not need to hire a trained "professional" to pour my drink for me.
Oh! Here's a business idea for the VFI:
Maybe you could lean on your good friends and relatives in government to push through legislation that would mandate a "trained professional" must be present whenever alcohol is handled. That means one would have to hire a "trained professional" to pour drinks at a party in the "correct measure" and maybe to tell people what they can and cannot drink?
Do that and I'll drive a Guinness truck into your HQ.

Sh1tbag OToole

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

The whole "safe and controlled" environment claptrap and "drink poured by untrained amateurs" killing people bullsh*t has consistently been spouted by the gombeens from the VFI.
OK, let me try this. Puts glass on the table, opens bottle, pours drink. Wow! That was easy! No, sorry I do not need to hire a trained "professional" to pour my drink for me.
Oh! Here's a business idea for the VFI:
Maybe you could lean on your good friends and relatives in government to push through legislation that would mandate a "trained professional" must be present whenever alcohol is handled. That means one would have to hire a "trained professional" to pour drinks at a party in the "correct measure" and maybe to tell people what they can and cannot drink?
Do that and I'll drive a Guinness truck into your HQ.

The real skill is in having 10 taps running at the same time and giving back the correct change when the bar is 4 deep and not spilling a drop

TireeTerror

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

The whole "safe and controlled" environment claptrap and "drink poured by untrained amateurs" killing people bullsh*t has consistently been spouted by the gombeens from the VFI.
OK, let me try this. Puts glass on the table, opens bottle, pours drink. Wow! That was easy! No, sorry I do not need to hire a trained "professional" to pour my drink for me.
Oh! Here's a business idea for the VFI:
Maybe you could lean on your good friends and relatives in government to push through legislation that would mandate a "trained professional" must be present whenever alcohol is handled. That means one would have to hire a "trained professional" to pour drinks at a party in the "correct measure" and maybe to tell people what they can and cannot drink?
Do that and I'll drive a Guinness truck into your HQ.

No you wont.

You will come on here and moan about it, but ultimately you will do as you are told.

That is the Irish way.