Government to set min price on gargle

Hootanany

I suppose they have to pay for the teachers so that is why.

Dravokivich

goose2005 wrote: »

But even if you only consume a small amount, this will chip away at your resources even more.

Yeah, I'm against this price fixing.

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

In the next referendum they are running they should tag on a vote asking the people do they support the minimum pricing of alcohol.

A spoilt vote is only measured as a spoilt votes. Any comments never seem to be reported on, as far as I've seen.

keeponhurling wrote: »

So what will the minimum price of a pint be ?

I reckon pricing will likely be on the units of alcohol as opposed to the quantity of the beverage.

Sand wrote: »

I don't know anyone who makes decisions on how much they will drink based on how much they can afford. Most people drink far, far, far less than they what they can afford (though some still far more than they should) so they'll just continue drinking just as much whatever the price is. They'll just have slightly less left over for any other discretionary spending.

And regardless of whatever the minimum price is, it will still be a hell of a lot cheaper than what the pubs are charging.

That would be me, I tick that box. But I do not want to have to pay more, purely because it was lobbied for, by an industry group looking to close out other interested parties. It's artificially manipulating the market and then looking to stigmatise me as an Alco because I think its not fair, unjust and market demand does not require it. If a Gov is to get involved in such a thing, it should only be to aid or stimulate the market, but this concept is destructive to the market. It's taking the incentive away from those companies who do have adapted and succeeded in the market and it has the gall to tell us it's for our own good.

Capt'n Midnight

Just a reminder that it's the first second increase in excise duty on a pint since 1994. (All of it in the last year)

Since then apart from minor changes in the VAT rate all the changes have come from industry / distributors / publicans.

It sucks but it was a hell of a long time coming.


Over the years there've been a lot of publicans in the Dail.

Atlantic Dawn

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Just a reminder that it's the first increase in excise duty on a pint since 1994.

No there was an increase in last years budget too of 10 cent also...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_budget,_2013

syklops

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

No there was an increase in last years budget too of 10 cent also...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_budget,_2013

And the duty on wine was increased in the previous budget.

Amirani

Artful_Badger wrote: »

You cant make decisions based on how it will affect addicts who will neglect their children to get their fix.

Can you not? Why are you supporting the legislation then? What business of yours is it what quantity of alcohol non-addicts drink?

SeanW

uch wrote: »

How exactly ?

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Fixed.

This sounds like a kind of "Sin tax" where the government raises the price of something ... primarily because it likes 'governing,' I expect in this case.

As to where people on low income come in; from Wikipedia:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin_tax wrote:

1) Critics of sin tax argue that it is a regressive tax in nature and discriminates against the lower classes, since taxation of a product such as alcohol or cigarettes does not account for ability to pay, therefore poor people pay a greater amount of their income as tax.
2) Sin taxes are not normally value added in nature meaning that expensive, high-quality products more likely to be purchased by the wealthy will have the tax comprise a much smaller proportion of its final purchase price, thus ensuring that the lower classes pay a much greater proportion of their lower income in tax.

On point 1) the alcohol price controls are going to disproportionately affect the poor by their very existance, assuming those with less money drink the same amount of alcohol as those with more money. Person on minimum wage that buys a six pack of beer, will pay proportionally more of their income in sin taxes (dramatically so) than a middle class or wealthy person who purchases the same drink.
Point 2 is closely related to point 1: further regressive is the fact that the kind of alcohol does not matter: A six-pack of beer or cheap vodka will attract the same attention (i.e. cost) as the kind of champaigne the D4 heads drink.
Actually, since it's a minimum price per unit, its even worse than that: a cheaper drink will be raised in price by a large magnitude, while a rich persons drink will not be affected at all in any way.

So yes, price engineering in this context is regressive, planned either explicitly to hurt the poor, OR because the career politicians we have just don't care about those with less money than them ... either frankly would be commensurate with the class of leader that we have not just in this country but our international government in Brussels.

syklops

SeanW wrote:

This sounds like ...

Excellent post.

P_1

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Just a reminder that it's the first increase in excise duty on a pint since 1994.

Since then apart from minor changes in the VAT rate all the changes have come from industry / distributors / publicans.

It sucks but it was a hell of a long time coming.


Over the years there've been a lot of publicans in the Dail.

Eh hasn't the excise duty on a pint been long considered as one of the 'old reliables' that is pretty much guaranteed to go up in each budget?

Sh1tbag OToole

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Reporting such events are generally ignored. I know someone who reported a woman who spent all her money on alcohol and drugs and sent her kids to school with no breakfast and nothing packed for lunch. In the evening they'd get a few crackers or one if those really cheap Dunnes currys. Multiple reports were made and it took 4 years before the HSE or anyone else did anything about it. The kids were put into care for a few months while the mother cleaned herself up. She got the kids back and was back drinking and doing drugs less than a week after. 5 years later and complaints are still being made yet the kids are still with their mother who will spend 150 euro on a hair cut but won't buy breakfast cereal for her children. If the kids are lucky there'll be a loaf of bread and some milk bought on dole day and that's about it b

That is awful. I thought it was all sunshine and lollipops for children in this country these days, being ferried around in a 132-D Lexus and all.

Its nice to think that something like a minimum price for booze or a maximum price for haircuts would help but i doubt thats the case

Captain Morgan Freeman

suicide_circus wrote: »

How do I know if a pub is NOT a member of the vintners association? I would like to give these establishments my business. ****ing greasy FF/FG/Publicans out to corrupt screw the population at every turn.

Fill your boots
http://vfi.ie/

syklops

Captain Morgan Freeman wrote: »

Fill your boots
http://vfi.ie/

That website has members. That poster is looking for non-members.

Captain Morgan Freeman

syklops wrote: »

That website has members. That poster is looking for non-members.

And if your local pub is not on the list then it would be a non-member wouldn't it. :rolleyes:

hatrickpatrick

Anyone willing to actively campaign against this?
A home brewing protest campaign would e a good place to start, and we should seriously consider whether an action could be taken against the government at EU level under competition law.

Even though we have an all powerful cabinet and lobbying TDs is pointless, there are actually things we can do about this.

K-9

darkpagandeath wrote: »

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/9789264183896-en/02/06/g2-06-01.html?contentType=/ns/StatisticalPublication,/ns/Chapter&itemId=/content/chapter/9789264183896-25-en&containerItemId=/content/serial/23056088&accessItemIds=&mimeType=text/html

And were in the middle for alcohol consumption not the top by any stretch of the imagination. So why the constant shouting were the biggest drinkers in the EU boll*x come from ?

In fairness I don't think our problem is levels of alcohol consumed, it's we tend to binge drink more than others.

I doubt many would argue we don't have a problem with drink culture in Ireland but I doubt raising drink prices is going to make that much of a difference. It might put the ordinary drinker off, but an alcoholic isn't going to be that bothered, they'll just look for the cheapest hit.

Wine used to have one of the highest duty levels in Europe 6/7 years ago, must be the highest now.

Bit like the sugar tax, it comes down to education, and as the article in the OP mentions, there's no ban on sports related advertising from drink companies. That would suggest a consistent approach.

Then again, we've bans on cigarette advertising, doesn't seem to make that much of a difference, nothing that education wouldn't do anyway.

syklops

Captain Morgan Freeman wrote: »

And if your local pub is not on the list then it would be a non-member wouldn't it. :rolleyes:

Not sure what the rolleyes is for. If you go in the door of your local you will see the VFI logo somewhere and if you don't its not a member. No need for any fancy interweb tomfoolery.

Even though we have an all powerful cabinet and lobbying TDs is pointless, there are actually things we can do about this.

Im certainly open to ideas.

BNMC

The cabinet today decided to proceed with a range of measures to try and control the abuse of alcohol but the proposed sports sponsorship ban which was due to come into force in 2020 has been kicked to touch.

I see what they did there.

Stheno

goose2005 wrote: »

I think there have been Irish tourists in Indonesia who drank suspect spirits and died

You are possibly thinking of the tragic death of Roisin Burke (Rozabeez on here) who became ill and died in Indonesia, and her inquest mentioned the probability of it being caused due to methanol contaminated spirits.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/family-blames-local-drink-for-teachers-holiday-death-28903864.html

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056285334

Very sad story, tragic loss of life.

darkpagandeath

Stheno wrote: »

You are possibly thinking of the tragic death of Roisin Burke (Rozabeez on here) who became ill and died in Indonesia, and her inquest mentioned the probability of it being caused due to methanol contaminated spirits.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/family-blames-local-drink-for-teachers-holiday-death-28903864.html

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056285334

Very sad story, tragic loss of life.

I'm struggling to see how this affects the price of alcohol in Ireland. Yes a tragic death but a little off topic. Not saying you raised it either.

Stheno

darkpagandeath wrote: »

I'm struggling to see how this affects the price of alcohol in Ireland. Yes a tragic death but a little off topic. Not saying you raised it either.

Just answering the original post I referenced, there is an underlying topic in this thread regarding the dangers of methanol when incorrectly used is all.

I actually can't see this being upheld by the EU so I suspect this is an attention grabbing headline to get the vintners back on board the government support wagon tbh

Capt'n Midnight

P_1 wrote: »

Eh hasn't the excise duty on a pint been long considered as one of the 'old reliables' that is pretty much guaranteed to go up in each budget?

Yeah that's the impression

but in reality it didn't increase from 1994 until this year

other drinks yes, but beer no

P_1

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Yeah that's the impression

but in reality it didn't increase from 1994 until this year

other drinks yes, but beer no

Really? Guess ye learn something new every day. What accounted for the price rises in a pint since then so?

hatrickpatrick

Stheno wrote: »

I actually can't see this being upheld by the EU so I suspect this is an attention grabbing headline to get the vintners back on board the government support wagon tbh

Any particular reason for this? Is there a directive dealing with alcohol excise and so on?

This EU directive was used to prevent minimum tobacco prices being imposed:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=31995L0059&model=guichett

As reported by RTE:
http://www.rte.ie/news/business/2010/0304/128369-cigarettes/

The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled that Irish legislation fixing a minimum retail price for cigarettes infringes EU law.
The legislation here breaches Directive 95/59 which has rules on excise duty affecting the consumption of tobacco products.
The court says imposing a minimum price on cigarettes can undermine competition by preventing some manufacturers taking advantage of lower cost manufacturing prices, so as to offer more attractive retail selling prices.
The court says that while the directive [95/59] ensures health protection, it does not prevent member states from combating smoking.

Anyone know if any similar directive exists with regard to alcohol? Unfortunately that one deals specifically with tobacco so it can't be assumed that there are similar rules governing alcohol pricing...

Whisko

Learn to brew.

25c a pint, hard to beat.

tomdempsey200

Whisko wrote: »

Learn to brew.

25c a pint, hard to beat.

i just made 25 litres of 12% alcohol for 7 euro

tube tomato puree,pack bread yeast,5 bags sugar..:)

alright with a bit of flavour added

Whisko

tomdempsey200 wrote: »

i just made 25 litres of 12% alcohol for 7 euro

tube tomato puree,pack bread yeast,5 bags sugar..:)

alright with a bit of flavour added

I prefer grain hops and yeast myself but each to their own!

Enjoy!

Capt'n Midnight

P_1 wrote: »

Really? Guess ye learn something new every day. What accounted for the price rises in a pint since then so?

Maybe it's the raw materials ?

You can make 10,000 pints from 1.25 tonnes of barley
http://www.wellsandyoungs.co.uk/home/our-beers/barley

And barley costs about €200 a tonne
http://www.farmersjournal.ie/site/farming.php?newsid=17694

So that's about 2.5c per pint.

To put that into perspective Budweiser use rice because it's even cheaper.


In fairness they have to pay for processing and hops and wages, but yeah it's down around that sort of price.



BTW the Guinness Index
http://www.finfacts.ie/Private/bestprice/guinnessindex.htm

rubadub

SeanW wrote: »

Actually, since it's a minimum price per unit, its even worse than that: a cheaper drink will be raised in price by a large magnitude, while a rich persons drink will not be affected at all in any way.

Yes, if the politicians had a tradition of owning or befriending restaurant owners they might want to introduce a min price on red meat, to combat all the nasty below cost selling the evil supermarkets & butchers all obviously do. They can point to some study saying red meat is bad as their cover story, people are binge eating red meat at home and are overindulging well beyond safe advisable limits, at least in the controlled restaurant environment the waiter can tell them when they have had enough.

Say €20 per kilo, so this does not effect people who only would be eating more expensive steak cuts. It not only effects the poorer people who would usually be on mince or stewing beef but it effects the suppliers of mince. This is part of the reason this min pricing is illegal, to protect producers whose target is the cheaper end. If the min price of a can is raised to €2 then the producers of beer who do not engage in the marketing of others producing a very similar beer are now screwed, people will tend to buy ones which were relatively expensive before the min price. Notice I do not call it cheap muck or anything, lots of the currently more expensive beers are of a similar quality, but have massive marketing costs which many gladly pay for.

Caliden

Being honest I don't see how removing Alcohol sponsorship from sport would've achieved anything. France removed it from sport years ago and their drinking culture hasn't changed.

jester77

Caliden wrote: »

Being honest I don't see how removing Alcohol sponsorship from sport would've achieved anything. France removed it from sport years ago and their drinking culture hasn't changed.

I don't get this either. Most people will watch sports with a beer, either at home or in the pub. Removing sponsorship will not change this. All sponsorship does it promote brand awareness and anyway, most people stick with their favourite beer regardless of who is sponsoring. I've never had a Heineken/Carslberg (forget which of them is the sponsor) during a Champions League game.