Róisín Shortall Resigns As Junior Health Minister

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

What about gas and electricity? Do you not think those should be regulated or should suppliers be allowed to charge what they like?

Is a mortgage a commodity? Do you think lenders should be allowed to increase variable interest rates at will?

Thats a terrible comparison, using the governments ability to ensure prices don't get too high for one commodity as a reason for them to be allowed to force people to pay more for another.

_feedback_

Cory Short Shrapnel wrote: »

Thats a terrible comparison, using the governments ability to ensure prices don't get too high for one commodity as a reason for them to be allowed to force people to pay more for another.

While i wasn't fully convinced on her proposals about alcohol. I have to say I really think the best interests of the people and future of the the people of the country and our embedded alcohol culture were at the centre of her thoughts, rather than the usual €€€ attempts to meet budgets etc. €€€

Bannasidhe

Cory Short Shrapnel wrote: »

Thats a terrible comparison, using the governments ability to ensure prices don't get too high for one commodity as a reason for them to be allowed to force people to pay more for another.

No it's not. Either the State can interfere or it can't.

We either embrace free market economics across the board or we say the state has a duty of care to ensure it's citizen's are protected from exploitative practices. The actual commodity in question is not relevant.


Plus, the abuse of alcohol in this country is both a health issue and a very real social problem.

usernamegoes

Bannasidhe wrote: »

No it's not. Either the State can interfere or it can't.

We either embrace free market economics across the board or we say the state has a duty of care to ensure it's citizen's are protected from exploitative practices. The actual commodity in question is not relevant.


Plus, the abuse of alcohol in this country is both a health issue and a very real social problem.

I'd argue that the state shouldn't interfere with the prices of things you mention.

On you're second point I'd agree that it is a health problem for some and a social problem too.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

No it's not. Either the State can interfere or it can't.

We either embrace free market economics across the board or we say the state has a duty of care to ensure it's citizen's are protected from exploitative practices. The actual commodity in question is not relevant.


Plus, the abuse of alcohol in this country is both a health issue and a very real social problem.

So they should be allowed to set a minimum price for a loaf of bread or a litre of milk or tell an electrical shop they cant put a tv on sale for 300 euro as the minimum price is 350 euro for a tv of that spec etc. Nonsense.

palmcut

dvpower wrote: »

Reilly has had enough opportunity to explain the rationale for the new locations, but hasn't, so there's very little doubt but that they were at least partially political.

There was some contraversy (posted on the Politics thread) about the choice of centres in Roscommon.

Is there a possibility that all of the 15 were politically motivated choices?

Were some TDs being appeased by putting their constituencies on the list?

Has anyone looked at the other centres that were on the list of 15?

Were any of the TDs who support the Minister granted a political favour?

dvpower

palmcut wrote: »

Is there a possibility that all of the 15 were politically motivated choices?

Quite possibly. In the absence of a proper explanation, as Leo Varadkar says, it looks like stroke politics.

palmcut wrote: »

Were some TDs being appeased by putting their constituencies on the list?

Ditto.

palmcut wrote: »

Has anyone looked at the other centres that were on the list of 15?

Dunno. As I said, there was some speculation about Roscommon

palmcut wrote: »

Were any of the TDs who support the Minister granted a political favour?

Ditto

Bannasidhe

Cory Short Shrapnel wrote: »

So they should be allowed to set a minimum price for a loaf of bread or a litre of milk or tell an electrical shop they cant put a tv on sale for 300 euro as the minimum price is 350 euro for a tv of that spec etc. Nonsense.

They can set a standard for what constitutes a loaf of bread. They can insist on what ingredients are permissible and what are not - is that not 'nanny state interference'?

They can bring in consumer legislation which states the TV (regardless of how much one paid for it) should do what it says it does. Is that not 'nanny state interference'?

Free market economics should dictate that the onus should be on the buyer to decide if they do or do not want to purchase - so what if the bread is 5% sawdust? So what if the TV one bought breaks down a week later.

So what if the child's toy is dangerous and one's 6 month old ends up choking?

Buyer beware.

A duty of care is a duty of care. Our government either has the mandate to 'interfere' with market forces or it does not.

I don't agree with everything they do - personally I believe I should be able to eat cheese made from unpasteurised milk if I want to - but I would rather have consumer legislation/ employment legislation/ anti-monopoly legislation etc etc then the cheese.

Some people here are acting as if Shorthall had proposed Prohibition. She did not.

Some people here are acting like access to cheap alcohol is a human right. It is not.

Access to health care on the other hand is impacted greatly by the abuse of alcohol.

Ability to walk unimpeded on our city streets at night is impacted greatly by the abuse of alcohol.

Our already under pressure police force is obliged to waste valuable resources due to the abuse of alcohol.

But how dare a minister in the dept. of health attempt to introduce a small measure to try and restrict in some limited way the abuse of alcohol.

Dyr

Bannasidhe wrote: »

But how dare a minister in the dept. of health attempt to introduce a small measure to try and restrict in some limited way the abuse of alcohol.

eh she was'nt restricting the abuse of alcohol though was she? She was just trying to raise the price of alcohol. Not the same thing. And a fairly classist maneuver for a socialist to boot.

MagicSean

The Journal just published a letter supposedly sent to her by Reilly in July explaining the reasoning behind his choice of Primary care centres. So apparently she wasn't as "in the dark" as she claimed.

Bannasidhe

Bambi wrote: »

eh she was'nt restricting the abuse of alcohol though was she? She was just trying to raise the price of alcohol. Not the same thing. And a fairly classist maneuver for a socialist to boot.

No, she wasn't trying to limit it's availability - she wanted to set a fairly low minimum price to try and curb the availability of cheap alcohol and hopefully that would impact on consumption due to financial pressure.

Personally, I don't think it would have made much of a difference but at least it showed a member of the government was at lease trying to do something about our drinking culture.

Yet, to read some of her critics Shorthall wanted to ban alcohol.
She wanted to add a million euro to the price of a pint and then what would us Irish do having been deprived of this only comfort in our lives?

As for 'And a fairly classist maneuver for a socialist to boot' I honestly have no idea what that is meant to mean.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

But how dare a minister in the dept. of health attempt to introduce a small measure to try and restrict in some limited way the abuse of alcohol.

But it will do nothing but annoy people and leave them with less money for other things, I don't know anyone including myself who would drink less if drink cost a bit more for cans in the shop. I do most of my drinking in pubs anyway and spend a lot more than the minimum price would be however from time to time I like to stock up on cheap cans etc and it would p*ss me off knowing I was paying a few euro more because some politician decided to set a minimum price.

We already pay through the nose in this country for drink compared to other countries and now people want a minimum price. Its pure boll*cks.

Millicent

Cory Short Shrapnel wrote: »

But it will do nothing but annoy people and leave them with less money for other things, I don't know anyone including myself who would drink less if drink cost a bit more for cans in the shop. I do most of my drinking in pubs anyway and spend a lot more than the minimum price would be however from time to time I like to stock up on cheap cans etc and it would p*ss me off knowing I was paying a few euro more because some politician decided to set a minimum price.

We already pay through the nose in this country for drink compared to other countries and now people want a minimum price. Its pure boll*cks.

What if it's not though? What if, as the study I linked to suggests, it actually helps to lower consumption rates, lowers anti-social behaviour and crime and increases employment?

Bannasidhe

Cory Short Shrapnel wrote: »

But it will do nothing but mean people will have less money for other things, I don't know anyone including myself who would drink less if drink cost a bit more from the shop. I do most of my drinking in pubs anyway and spend a lot more than the minimum however from time to time I like to stock up on cheap cans etc and it would p*ss me off knowing I was paying a few euro more because some politician decided to set a minimum price.

There sheer fact that ' people will have less money for other things' because they will prefer to spend money on a non-essential, addictive, dangerous substance is a great indicative of the extent of the drinking culture's hold on Irish society.

It p*sses me off that I had to accompany my elderly mother to hospital in an ambulance and then sit in the waiting room for 6 hours as drunks fight, vomit, bleed and clog up the system due to their self-induced injuries.

It p*sses me off that I can wander around any continental European city on a Fri/Sat night and not have to listen to drunks fight, vomit, bleed and see grown men p*ssing in doorways but I cannot do this in my home city.

Benny_Cake

Bambi wrote: »

Bannasidhe wrote: »

But how dare a minister in the dept. of health attempt to introduce a small measure to try and restrict in some limited way the abuse of alcohol.

eh she was'nt restricting the abuse of alcohol though was she? She was just trying to raise the price of alcohol. Not the same thing. And a fairly classist maneuver for a socialist to boot.

The biggest effect of a minimum price would be on the likes of Tesco who have been racing to the bottom in terms of the price of alcohol (or the price of alcoholic fizzy water given the quality of the beer that is on special offer, but that's a matter of preference). As someone with socialist leanings, I'd like to see stores compete on the basis of essentials such as food or clothing, the prices of which have remained stubbornly high. Alcohol abuse affects us all and clogs up the public health system, government does have a role to play here.

yoyo

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Some people here are acting as if Shorthall had proposed Prohibition. She did not.

Some people here are acting like access to cheap alcohol is a human right. It is not.

Access to health care on the other hand is impacted greatly by the abuse of alcohol.

Ability to walk unimpeded on our city streets at night is impacted greatly by the abuse of alcohol.

Our already under pressure police force is obliged to waste valuable resources due to the abuse of alcohol.

But how dare a minister in the dept. of health attempt to introduce a small measure to try and restrict in some limited way the abuse of alcohol.

OK, the thing is though that increasing the price of drink is not going to solve or even change any of the alcohol related issues you mention. Also pointing out that streets are less safe at night is suggesting that it should be the pubs and clubs that be targeted for a safer drinking campaign and not the supermarkets or off licenses.
The fact is that the minimum pricing proposed legislation, that has been approved by the VFI, will only increase the prices of booze for the supermarkets and off trade. Targetting pubs and clubs to stop serving already intoxicated patrons, or indeed maybe preventing drink "promos" by them are not a target of this legislation.
I'm sure many people end up wasting medical and law enforcement resources after blowing hundreds on a night out, price increases for off trade booze will do f*ck all to prevent what is intended, but instead mean that people who drink responsibly maybe once or twice a week will end up probably paying more, as a result.

Nick

Bannasidhe

yoyo wrote: »

OK, the thing is though that increasing the price of drink is not going to solve or even change any of the alcohol related issues you mention. Also pointing out that streets are less safe at night is suggesting that it should be the pubs and clubs that be targeted for a safer drinking campaign and not the supermarkets or off licenses.
The fact is that the minimum pricing proposed legislation, that has been approved by the VFI, will only increase the prices of booze for the supermarkets and off trade. Targetting pubs and clubs to stop serving already intoxicated patrons, or indeed maybe preventing drink "promos" by them are not a target of this legislation.
I'm sure many people end up wasting medical and law enforcement resources after blowing hundreds on a night out, price increases for off trade booze will do f*ck all to prevent what is intended, but instead mean that people who drink responsibly maybe once or twice a week will end up probably paying more, as a result.

Nick

As I said, I never thought it would have much of an impact but I do support the fact that finally a government minister was attempting to do something, ANYTHING.

My objection is to how some have reacted to this flawed and limited proposal with howls of 'prohibition' and 'nanny state' and act as if access to cheap alcohol is a right.

It is not.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

It p*sses me off that I can wander around any continental European city on a Fri/Sat night and not have to listen to drunks fight, vomit, bleed and see grown men p*ssing in doorways but I cannot do this in my home city.

All of the above are not half as common as you make it sound, yes people are drunk but most just mind their own business.

Also your a hell of a lot safer walking around an Irish city at night though than most continental European cities. I'd much rather have a few drunks around than the scum that frequent a lot of European city centers. Ask people from these countries and they will tell you.

suicide_circus

Bannasidhe wrote: »

There sheer fact that ' people will have less money for other things' because they will prefer to spend money on a non-essential, addictive, dangerous substance is a great indicative of the extent of the drinking culture's hold on Irish society.

It p*sses me off that I had to accompany my elderly mother to hospital in an ambulance and then sit in the waiting room for 6 hours as drunks fight, vomit, bleed and clog up the system due to their self-induced injuries.

It p*sses me off that I can wander around any continental European city on a Fri/Sat night and not have to listen to drunks fight, vomit, bleed and see grown men p*ssing in doorways but I cannot do this in my home city.

while i sympathise with your ordeal, this happens because our health system is a shambles, not because people can buy alcohol at reasonable prices. Your mistake is believing that the government are acting out a sense of public duty. EVERY action is calculated to benefit lobby groups and vested interests.

suicide_circus

Bannasidhe wrote: »

As I said, I never thought it would have much of an impact but I do support the fact that finally a government minister was attempting to do something, ANYTHING.

My objection is to how some have reacted to this flawed and limited proposal with howls of 'prohibition' and 'nanny state' and act as if access to cheap alcohol is a right.

It is not.

I agree that SOMETHING should be done. But it needn't impact on the average Joe.

Bannasidhe

Cory Short Shrapnel wrote: »

All of the above are not half as common as you make it sound, yes people are drunk but most just mind their own business.

Also your a hell of a lot safer walking around an Irish city at night though than most continental European cities. I'd much rather have a few drunks around than the scum that frequent a lot of European city centers. Ask people from these countries and they will tell you, Irish cities are a pleasure compared to some.

Really? Personal experience tells me otherwise.

I defy anyone sober to try and walk down Patrick Street in Cork on a Fri/Sat night and call that 'a pleasure'.

I have safely - without encountering anyone p*ssing in a doorway or screaming drunken abuse - walked through Amsterdam, Basle, Bern, Zurich, Paris, Granada, Palma, Munich, Geneva, London, Barcelona, Milan, Rome etc etc.

Only twice did I encounter large groups of drunken people - New Years in London and Barcelona. I also saw the police deal quickly and effectively with the issues.

As for talking to the locals, I remember being amazed at being told that Italy has no policies on restricting the sale of alcohol. I asked an Italian friend if that meant children could buy alcohol - he was horrified at the notion that anyone would give alcohol to a child and wondered if this terrible thing happens in Ireland. I had to admit it does.
I

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I have safely - without encountering anyone p*ssing in a doorway or screaming drunken abuse - walked through Amsterdam, Basle, Bern, Zurich, Paris, Granada, Palma, Munich, Geneva, London, Barcelona, Milan, Rome etc etc.

I've lived on London for a short time and regularly felt much more uneasy around at night than in Ireland and there is just as much p*ssing (a hanging offence :pac:) and drunkenness around.

Been to Geneva, its quiet and safe, but its dead around at night no atmosphere or craic at all.

Been to Barcelona but wasnt around much at night so cant comment, bar being told that pick pockets are rife.

Paris is a dangerous city, this is coming from a French friend of mine from Paris who told me its a sh*t hole of a place (at night). Turn the wrong corner and you will be lucky to get out with your life.

I work with a number of Italians and I am good friends with them, they would not walk around Milan at night said its dangerous. They laugh when they hear someone calling Irish cities dangerous.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

As for talking to the locals, I remember being amazed at being told that Italy has no policies on restricting the sale of alcohol. I asked an Italian friend if that meant children could buy alcohol - he was horrified at the notion that anyone would give alcohol to a child and wondered if this terrible thing happens in Ireland. I had to admit it does.
I

Again I'm glad you picked Italy as I can give a proper response. Italy has a massive problem with underage drinking, when the lads I know hear talk of underage drinking here they say its nothing compared to Italy, its absolutely rife there. I doubt any Italian was horrified about anything to do with drink, they love the stuff.

Bannasidhe

Cory Short Shrapnel wrote: »

I've lived on London for a short time and in general felt much more uneasy around at night than Ireland and there is just as much p*ssing (a hanging offence :pac:) and drunkenness around.

Been to Geneva, its quiet and safe, but its dead around at night no atmosphere or craic at all.

Been to Barcelona but wasnt around much at night so cant comment, bar being told that pick pockets are rife.

Paris is a dangerous city, this is coming from a French friend of mine from Paris who told me its a sh*t hole of a place. Turn the wrong corner and you will be lucky to get out with your life.

I work with a number of Italians and I am good friends with them, they would not walk around Milan at night said its dangerous. They laugh when they hear someone calling Irish cities dangerous.



Again I'm glad you picked Italy as I can give a proper response. Italy has a massive problem with underage drinking, when the lads I know hear talk of underage drinking here they say its nothing compared to Italy, its absolutely rife there. I doubt any Italian was horrified about anything to do with drink, they love the stuff.

Perilously close to calling me a liar there.

the groutch

Cory Short Shrapnel wrote: »

Been to Geneva, its quiet and safe, but its dead around at night no atmosphere or craic at all.

if you're associating people falling around drunk and fighting on the streets with atmosphere/craic, then there's you're problem.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Perilously close to calling me a liar there.

Maybe he was horrified but I can't see how he would be surprised considering underage drinking is such a widespread issue in his own country.

the groutch wrote: »

if you're associating people falling around drunk and fighting on the streets with atmosphere/craic, then there's you're problem.

No I'm associating it with bars being half empty, no atmosphere in the places I went, streets more or less empty etc. It appeared to be a pretty boring place to go at night, though with the price they charge for a drink I'm not surprised. We ended up putting on music and drinking cans in the hotel room a number of nights as there was more of an atmosphere and we weren't being robbed on the price of drink

suicide_circus

the groutch wrote: »

if you're associating people falling around drunk and fighting on the streets with atmosphere/craic, then there's you're problem.

He never said anything of the sort. We get it, drinking -bad, Ireland - bad. Consider your axe ground.

Bannasidhe

Cory Short Shrapnel wrote: »

Maybe he was horrified but I can't see how he would be surprised considering underage drinking is such a widespread issue in his own country.



No I'm associating it with bars being half empty, no atmosphere in the places I went, streets more or less empty etc. It appeared to be a pretty boring place to go at night, though with the price they charge for a drink I'm not surprised. We ended up putting on music and drinking cans in the hotel room a number of nights as there was more of an atmosphere and we weren't being robbed on the price of drink

So it's a case of No alcohol = No Fun.
And there you have it folks - the Irish drinking culture in a nutshell.

I lived in Geneva and while it may not be party central for the 20 year old I was at the time I did enjoy wandering around the old city in safety, being able to go into shops as late as 9 pm, sitting by the lake eating damn good ice cream or having a beer or two and watching the world go by with nary a stagger or a vomit to be seen.

But then even at the age of 20 I would have found the idea of sitting in a hotel room drinking cans to be utterly pathetic and quite sad.

Bannasidhe

suicide_circus wrote: »

He never said anything of the sort. We get it, drinking -bad, Ireland - bad. Consider your axe ground.

groutch never said that. Think you might be guilty of doing what you are accusing him of doing.

suicide_circus

Bannasidhe wrote: »

So it's a case of No alcohol = No Fun.
And there you have it folks - the Irish drinking culture in a nutshell.

I lived in Geneva and while it may not be party central for the 20 year old I was at the time I did enjoy wandering around the old city in safety, being able to go into shops as late as 9 pm, sitting by the lake eating damn good ice cream or having a beer or two and watching the world go by with nary a stagger or a vomit to be seen.

But then even at the age of 20 I would have found the idea of sitting in a hotel room drinking cans to be utterly pathetic and quite sad.

Mind you don't fall off your horse there, it's awfully high.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

So it's a case of No alcohol = No Fun.
And there you have it folks - the Irish drinking culture in a nutshell.

I lived in Geneva and while it may not be party central for the 20 year old I was at the time I did enjoy wandering around the old city in safety, being able to go into shops as late as 9 pm, sitting by the lake eating damn good ice cream or having a beer or two and watching the world go by with nary a stagger or a vomit to be seen.

But then even at the age of 20 I would have found the idea of sitting in a hotel room drinking cans to be utterly pathetic and quite sad.

Geneva was a nice place, well the centre of the city is, especially during the day. It was not as well kept as I expected it around the outskirts though, a lot of places could have done with a lick of paint etc.

Also we were not sitting there exclusively drinking cans. We were there for a week for work, go for dinner in the evening and have a few pints but between the combination of the price of drink and the lack of atmosphere in the pubs that you got for the price of the drink meant instead of staying out late we would head back and have few cans or a few vodkas or whatever in the hotel room.

Bannasidhe

suicide_circus wrote: »

Mind you don't fall off your horse there, it's awfully high.

Mind you don't descend to personal comments there, rather than debate the issue in an adult manner.

Bannasidhe

Cory Short Shrapnel wrote: »

Geneva was a nice place, well the centre of the city is, especially during the day. It was not as well kept as I expected it around the outskirts though, a lot of places could have done with a lick of paint etc.

Also we were not sitting there exclusively drinking cans. We were there for a week for work, go for dinner in the evening and have a few pints but between the combination of the price of drink and the lack of atmosphere in the pubs that you got for the price of the drink meant instead of staying out late we would head back and have few cans or a few vodkas or whatever in the hotel room.

You were there for a week for work but had to have a few drinks (cans, vodka, whatever) every night? Do you not see what may be a problem with this?

suicide_circus

Look. Ireland has a problem with alcohol. No argument there. Is this due to the cheapness and availablility of alcohol? No. Historically alcohol has always been expensive in Ireland. And even now, alcohol is wildly expensive here in comparison to almost everywhere else in the world. So maybe instead of these limp lipservice ideas of price fixing, the former junior minister could have tackled the real ingrained cultural, difficult issues from which the problem with alcohol stems. But no, she aimed low and went for the old favorite of Irish government - "problem? Jack up the price!" and sure that'll pacify the publicans into.the bargain.

Cienciano

Bannasidhe wrote: »

There sheer fact that ' people will have less money for other things' because they will prefer to spend money on a non-essential, addictive, dangerous substance is a great indicative of the extent of the drinking culture's hold on Irish society.

It p*sses me off that I had to accompany my elderly mother to hospital in an ambulance and then sit in the waiting room for 6 hours as drunks fight, vomit, bleed and clog up the system due to their self-induced injuries.

It p*sses me off that I can wander around any continental European city on a Fri/Sat night and not have to listen to drunks fight, vomit, bleed and see grown men p*ssing in doorways but I cannot do this in my home city.

Where abouts in the city do you see all those fights/public pissing/vomit? It wouldn't happen to be in temple bar where you can't get a drink for under a fiver?
Why can't we police what some drunken people do properly? e.g, have police on the streets at night, you're caught having a piss, it's a €500 fine. Leave out public toilets. Change closing time so it can be staggered instead of emptying the entire city out of pubs at the exact same time. Have a few police in the A&E's.
Why does every solution to out problems have to be "make it more expensive?". Look at the price of cigarettes. That makes no difference to the smoking rates in ireland, where the smoking ban at least helps deal with the problem. The biggest uproar over that was the publicans, the same publicans who want below cost selling of alcohol banned. Don't think they have the public health in mind when they call for below cost alcohol banned.
Education is the key, not make it more expensive. Look at drink driving, everyone did it in the 70's and even the 80's as it was the norm, now it's socially unacceptable. Make going out and getting so drunk that you puke on yourself socially unacceptable by educating young people. And proper education, not the bullshite "having more than 2 drinks is binge drinking and means you have an alcohol problem"

Bannasidhe

STUDENTS AT UNIVERSITY College Cork have been asked to sign a ‘pledge of honour’ in a bid to crack down on anti social behaviour during Freshers week.
The written agreement was issued to more than 4000 first year students by president of the university Michael Murphy, following complaints from local residents over rowdy and drunken behaviour during previous Fresher and Rag Week celebrations.

http://www.thejournal.ie/cork-students-asked-to-sign-pledge-of-honour-in-anti-social-clampdown-612102-Sep2012/

No problems with alcohol fueled anti-social behaviour here folks - move along, nothing to concern yourself with. Mind the vomit now and don't worry about the fella p*ssing in your doorway - sure a bit of Jeyes fluid will clean that up a treat.

Bannasidhe

Cienciano wrote: »

Where abouts in the city do you see all those fights/public pissing/vomit? It wouldn't happen to be in temple bar where you can't get a drink for under a fiver?
Why can't we police what some drunken people do properly? e.g, have police on the streets at night, you're caught having a piss, it's a €500 fine. Leave out public toilets. Change closing time so it can be staggered instead of emptying the entire city out of pubs at the exact same time. Have a few police in the A&E's.
Why does every solution to out problems have to be "make it more expensive?". Look at the price of cigarettes. That makes no difference to the smoking rates in ireland, where the smoking ban at least helps deal with the problem. The biggest uproar over that was the publicans, the same publicans who want below cost selling of alcohol banned. Don't think they have the public health in mind when they call for below cost alcohol banned.
Education is the key, not make it more expensive. Look at drink driving, everyone did it in the 70's and even the 80's as it was the norm, now it's socially unacceptable. Make going out and getting so drunk that you puke on yourself socially unacceptable by educating young people. And proper education, not the bullshite "having more than 2 drinks is binge drinking and means you have an alcohol problem"

I agree. But I do welcome any attempt to deal with a serious problem.

As I have said on several occasions I am arguing against the 'she tried to take our drink' mentality that is being used as the basis for attacks on Shorthall.

yoyo

Bannasidhe wrote: »

So it's a case of No alcohol = No Fun.
And there you have it folks - the Irish drinking culture in a nutshell.

I lived in Geneva and while it may not be party central for the 20 year old I was at the time I did enjoy wandering around the old city in safety, being able to go into shops as late as 9 pm, sitting by the lake eating damn good ice cream or having a beer or two and watching the world go by with nary a stagger or a vomit to be seen.

But then even at the age of 20 I would have found the idea of sitting in a hotel room drinking cans to be utterly pathetic and quite sad.

I agree with you, it was mentioned earlier in this thread that a "cafe" type alcohol licence was rejected due to opposition from, you guessed it the VFI. It is more to do with the way alcohol is treated in this country and restricted in my view the reasons why the problems arise. In countries like France and Spain, where you can get a beer in McDonalds and at any time of the day there are far fewer issues than here.
It is not a cost reason that alcohol is a problem in Ireland and the UK, it is in my view the media hype surrounding it, the explicit licensing restrictions and the lack of alternatives to the pub at night (not really an excuse, but appart from cinemas most places close up shop in the evening).
Also there is nothing wrong with having a few beers once or twice a week, I mean jesus, if people enjoy sitting down to a six pack and a takeaway after a hard weeks work I don't see whats wrong with that, drinking 6 cans or pints everyday is obviously an issue, but raising the cost of that pack won't stop the alcoholics and it will only affect the responsible drinkers.

Nick

Dyr

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Perilously close to calling me a liar there.

There's a difference between being told you're wrong and being called a liar

Bannasidhe

yoyo wrote: »

I agree with you, it was mentioned earlier in this thread that a "cafe" type alcohol licence was rejected due to opposition from, you guessed it the VFI. It is more to do with the way alcohol is treated in this country and restricted in my view the reasons why the problems arise. In countries like France and Spain, where you can get a beer in McDonalds and at any time of the day there are far fewer issues than here.
It is not a cost reason that alcohol is a problem in Ireland and the UK, it is in my view the media hype surrounding it, the explicit licensing restrictions and the lack of alternatives to the pub at night (not really an excuse, but appart from cinemas most places close up shop in the evening).
Also there is nothing wrong with having a few beers once or twice a week, I mean jesus, if people enjoy sitting down to a six pack and a takeaway after a hard weeks work I don't see whats wrong with that, drinking 6 cans or pints everyday is obviously an issue, but raising the cost of that pack won't stop the alcoholics and it will only affect the responsible drinkers.

Nick

However, in my job I see the after effects of drinks 'promotions' every time they happen. It is very frustrating to try and lecture to a bunch of students (if they bother to turn up) who reek of stale alcohol or are still drunk and for all the attention they are paying may as well have stayed at home.

It doubly annoys me that after the grants come in I know half the students won't turn up because the 'booze' money has arrived.

That is not 'responsible' by any stretch of the imagination.

Bannasidhe

Bambi wrote: »

There's a difference between being told you're wrong and being called a liar

Unless they were there when I had that conversation they have no basis for disputing what I said. To infer that I am not correctly recounting a conversation one was not privy to is to infer I am lying.

SilverFox261

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Really? Personal experience tells me otherwise.

I defy anyone sober to try and walk down Patrick Street in Cork on a Fri/Sat night and call that 'a pleasure'.

I have safely - without encountering anyone p*ssing in a doorway or screaming drunken abuse - walked through Amsterdam, Basle, Bern, Zurich, Paris, Granada, Palma, Munich, Geneva, London, Barcelona, Milan, Rome etc etc.

Only twice did I encounter large groups of drunken people - New Years in London and Barcelona. I also saw the police deal quickly and effectively with the issues.

As for talking to the locals, I remember being amazed at being told that Italy has no policies on restricting the sale of alcohol. I asked an Italian friend if that meant children could buy alcohol - he was horrified at the notion that anyone would give alcohol to a child and wondered if this terrible thing happens in Ireland. I had to admit it does.
I

I've been following this thread as i think the discussion is very interesting but i saw the bit in bold above and the first thought that i had was is this not an indication that because police in both these cities enforced the law better than is done here you felt safer as a result?

Bannasidhe

SilverFox261 wrote: »

I've been following this thread as i think the discussion is very interesting but i saw the bit in bold above and the first thought that i had was is this not an indication that because police in both these cities enforced the law better than is done here you felt safer as a result?

TBH - it made me vow to never spend New Years in either city again .

But, the police did act swiftly to contain the situation which made me feel a bit safer as I got my arse as far away from Trafalgar Square and Las Ramblas as fast as I could.

yoyo

Bannasidhe wrote: »

However, in my job I see the after effects of drinks 'promotions' every time they happen. It is very frustrating to try and lecture to a bunch of students (if they bother to turn up) who reek of stale alcohol or are still drunk and for all the attention they are paying may as well have stayed at home.

It doubly annoys me that after the grants come in I know half the students won't turn up because the 'booze' money has arrived.

That is not 'responsible' by any stretch of the imagination.

I agree with you there, particularly with the grants and waster students who spend most of their time drinking rather than college. The thing is though increasing the price of the off licence drink won't stop students drinking and getting drunk, I'm sure the majority of students coming in on a friday morning hungover are as a result to drinking in town or the student union bar.
The point I've been making here is just increasing the off licence prices won't stop any of the anti social behavior associated with it, it is just a measure the VFI lobbied to the government for their advantage

Nick

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You were there for a week for work but had to have a few drinks (cans, vodka, whatever) every night? Do you not see what may be a problem with this?

It was only one or two pints any evening I had important stuff the next day, I didn't have stuff to attend everyday, well every morning anyway and also spent the weekend there on my own time.

A week away like that is obviously not going to be approached in the same way a normal week at home is.

Bannasidhe

Cory Short Shrapnel wrote: »

It was only one or two pints any evening I had important stuff the next day, I didn't have stuff to attend everyday, well every morning anyway and also spent the weekend there on my own time.

See, and I am not attacking you in anyway, I honestly just don't understand this. If I have important stuff do do the next day the thought of having any pints wouldn't cross my mind. I'd be far more concerned with making sure I had everything I need and a good night's sleep.

Maybe after I had all the important stuff safely out of the way I'd have a pint to celebrate - but not before.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

See, and I am not attacking you in anyway, I honestly just don't understand this. If I have important stuff do do the next day the thought of having any pints wouldn't cross my mind. I'd be far more concerned with making sure I had everything I need and a good night's sleep.

Maybe after I had all the important stuff safely out of the way I'd have a pint to celebrate - but not before.

Just a drink or two with dinner I mean not going out for a drink on purpose, as you tend to have dinner in groups when away like that you would be out for a while anyway so one pint with dinner isn't going to change much for the next day and I agree with the being prepared and good nights sleep part, I wouldn't stay out late if I had important things to do, even drinking soft drinks.

Bannasidhe

yoyo wrote: »

I agree with you there, particularly with the grants and waster students who spend most of their time drinking rather than college. The thing is though increasing the price of the off licence drink won't stop students drinking and getting drunk, I'm sure the majority of students coming in on a friday morning hungover are as a result to drinking in town or the student union bar.
The point I've been making here is just increasing the off licence prices won't stop any of the anti social behavior associated with it, it is just a measure the VFI lobbied to the government for their advantage

Nick

I agree with you Nick.

But given the over-reaction to Shorthall's proposal, which is also being considered in the UK, I think that any attempt to restrict access to alcohol or enforce existing legislation will be put on the back burner as politicos fear a similar backlash against them.

The fact is that alcohol mis-use and outright abuse costs us dearly - according to Reilly 2,000 beds were occupied every night in Irish acute hospitals due to alcohol associated problems and it costs the health service 1.2bn euros. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-16758609

Factor in absenteeism and crime we have a figure of €3.7 billion :eek:
http://www.thejournal.ie/minimum-prices-for-alcohol-may-be-introduced-soon-minister-323503-Jan2012/

If we could even half that figure it would go some way to easing the pressure on our health and emergency services. That can olny be a good thing.

Dyr

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Unless they were there when I had that conversation they have no basis for disputing what I said. To infer that I am not correctly recounting a conversation one was not privy to is to infer I am lying.

It's a basis to dispute that what you said was wrong, not to dispute that you said it.

Nothing to do with recounting conversations, he's just telling you that your waffle about irish cities being lawless dens of depravity in comparison to all other european cities is pretty much wafflepops.

Also: Geneva is boring. :P

Bannasidhe

Bambi wrote: »

It's a basis to dispute that what you said was wrong, not to dispute that you said it.

Nothing to do with recounting conversations, he's just telling you that your waffle about irish cities being lawless dens of depravity in comparison to all other european cities is pretty much wafflepops.

Also: Geneva is boring. :P

Thank you for your contribution to the debate and introduction of the term wafflepops. I shall look forward to you continuing well reasoned and incisive commentary on my life experience.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I agree with you Nick.

But given the over-reaction to Shorthall's proposal, which is also being considered in the UK, I think that any attempt to restrict access to alcohol or enforce existing legislation will be put on the back burner as politicos fear a similar backlash against them.

The fact is that alcohol mis-use and outright abuse costs us dearly - according to Reilly 2,000 beds were occupied every night in Irish acute hospitals due to alcohol associated problems and it costs the health service 1.2bn euros. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-16758609

Factor in absenteeism and crime we have a figure of €3.7 billion :eek:
http://www.thejournal.ie/minimum-prices-for-alcohol-may-be-introduced-soon-minister-323503-Jan2012/

If we could even half that figure it would go some way to easing the pressure on our health and emergency services. That can olny be a good thing.

Not trying to stir things here but I would like to see a net figure offset against the amount of money the government take on excise duty and vat on alcohol sales. That figure would be drastically reduced.