Minimum Alcohol pricing to be signed into Law

rubadub

L1011 wrote: »

Cigarettes cannot be given away in price promotions anyway.

Ah right, forgot about that, you see it on supermarket vouchers. If they could it would be an obvious choice.

I am not familiar enough with the laws to be certain it is not allowed. This need not be a "price promotion" or in anyway discounted, just the normal price. I have seen tobacco sold with papers and filtered included, is it in the law that only smoking related stuff can be sold with them. So could the offie not just offer the beer & cigarette combo as a standard item, neither being available to buy separately?

Wonder what things they will sell, mixers with spirits yeah, but what with beers. Many will not want to be lugging about bulky "freebies". This is why I was thinking of non bulky high value items like cigarettes. I could see it being junk snack foods in offies, so again an unintended consequence of the "health bill".

It also allows people to combine cheap & expensive alcohol, so you could still effectively get 1euro cans, but have to buy expensive alcohol too.

jasper100

How will this effect the Dunnes vouchers €10 off for €50 spent?

If somebody buys €50 of alcohol at the minimum unit price then goes back in the next day with their vouchers and buys the same €50 of alcohol they will effecitely be getting it for 20% less than the minimum price and can repeat this every week?

L1011

jasper100 wrote: »

How will this effect the Dunnes vouchers €10 off for €50 spent?

If somebody buys €50 of alcohol at the minimum unit price then goes back in the next day with their vouchers and buys the same €50 of alcohol they will effecitely be getting it for 20% less than the minimum price and can repeat this every week?

There is existing, uncommenced legislation to ban this (and loyalty points) on alcohol. I would imagine it'll be commenced when MUP comes in.

BeerNut

L1011 wrote: »

There is existing, uncommenced legislation to ban this (and loyalty points) on alcohol. I would imagine it'll be commenced when MUP comes in.

I swear, only in Ireland. You give the Minister for Justice a power in 2008, he doesn't use it. So ten years later you give the same power to the Minister for Health without repealing the first one. The way the Oireachtas tries to solve problems by passing new laws instead of fixing/using/enforcing the existing ones is infuriating. It shows that it's all just about appearances and fark-all to do with the genuine good of society :mad::mad::mad:

L1011

I sent a rant to the local FG TD who actually sent me on a reply allegedly from Harris about stuff not being set in stone.

Points made were:

* The proposal to hide alcohol is unworkable and gave an example that made it more appealing and alluring
* There is no government in NI so they can't bring in MUP; a direct rule government won't touch it; the entire basis for MUP was on it being all-island
* They can already stop promotional sale of alcohol immediately with existing legislation
* They could prevent below-cost selling of alcohol quickly with simple, European law acceptable measures

Basically said that they were faffing around with pointless or clearly illegal measures when they could have done the important bits - advertising, sponsorship and below cost/promotional - years ago at this stage had they not wasted their time.

The hand of the LVA and VFI on this is so, so obvious. Push people to pubs, get the off licences in smaller shops closed due to being impractical and push people to buy at pub off-sales prices instead.

Brendan Bendar

L1011 wrote: »

I sent a rant to the local FG TD who actually sent me on a reply allegedly from Harris about stuff not being set in stone.

Points made were:

* The proposal to hide alcohol is unworkable and gave an example that made it more appealing and alluring
* There is no government in NI so they can't bring in MUP; a direct rule government won't touch it; the entire basis for MUP was on it being all-island
* They can already stop promotional sale of alcohol immediately with existing legislation
* They could prevent below-cost selling of alcohol quickly with simple, European law acceptable measures

Basically said that they were faffing around with pointless or clearly illegal measures when they could have done the important bits - advertising, sponsorship and below cost/promotional - years ago at this stage had they not wasted their time.

The hand of the LVA and VFI on this is so, so obvious. Push people to pubs, get the off licences in smaller shops closed due to being impractical and push people to buy at pub off-sales prices instead.

Agree there Tristar

The poor Joe, who like myself refuses to pay the gouging prices of the publicans is being penalized for buying the few cans for a good price.


Stupid law.

If this comes in I'll be stepping up the home brewing and rarely setting foot in a pub again, especially not a pub that's part of the VFI.

Gerrup Outta Dat!

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If this comes in I'll be stepping up the home brewing and rarely setting foot in a pub again, especially not a pub that's part of the VFI.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the VFI only for pubs outside Dublin?

Gerrup Outta Dat!

Gerrup Outta Dat! wrote: »

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the VFI only for pubs outside Dublin?

Not sure to be honest.

Checkmate19

This is being done to help pubs. Drinking in this country is down over the last ten years. People don't go to pubs as much anymore for a variety of reasons. If they wanted to really tackle drinking why not stop advertising it and allowing corporate sponsors etc. No because that would upset to many people.

This is done to help the pub industry and no other reason. We are becoming a bleedin nanny state. Sugar tax this putting tax next on coffee cups. Takeaway tax is next on the agenda. I bet a few brown envelopes went the way of a few politican's to get this bill as far as its gone. Pubs are behind this and i for one hope it fails.

L1011

Gerrup Outta Dat! wrote: »

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the VFI only for pubs outside Dublin?

Yes, but the LVA in Dublin are just as complicit here if not worse as they have more members with dedicated pub-adjacent off-licences that compete with the smaller retailers with off-sales that are going to be put out of the market by the enclosure rules.

One of the franchise brands of off-licence, I think Carry Out, was an LVA initiative originally.

Geuze

One idea for pubs to boost turnover would be to group together, exert pressure on their suppliers, and reduce input costs.

i.e. be more like JD Wetherspoons.

The suppliers charge more to the pubs than to supermarkets.

If pubs could reduce their costs, and pass that on in lower prices, but with the same gross margin, would volumes rise?

However, I don't really think pubs want to do that.

They want high margins and high volumes.

oblivious

Geuze wrote: »

However, I don't really think pubs want to do that.

They want high margins and high volumes.

Yep

They also have one of the most powerful lobbies in the country , if they wanted to they could have

Muahahaha

L1011 wrote: »

The hand of the LVA and VFI on this is so, so obvious. Push people to pubs, get the off licences in smaller shops closed due to being impractical and push people to buy at pub off-sales prices instead.

Oh the LVA and VFI are all over this for sure. You only need to go to www.lobbying.ie and carry out a search of their activities of how they are lobbying Fine Gael. I find it astonishing that a bunch of people selling a controlled drug are allowed to lobby the Dept of Health on a Public Health bill. But on that website if you select Health as the policy area and Licensed Vintners Association as the organisation then it shows that the LVA have held meetings with government on 5 occasions in relation to the Alcohol Bill. If you enter in the Vintners Federation of Ireland they have had no less than 13 meetings with the Dept of Health in relation to this bill. Politicians and senior civil servants who were present at these meetings are named, including one Leo Varadkar.

So between the LVA and VFI they have lobbied the Dept of Health 18 times over this bill. We can all sleep well now that we know the LVA and VFI have the publics health as their primary concern :rolleyes:

Fair play to you for contacting your TD btw. It is about the only thing now that will stop this bill as it seems like a fait accompli if you listen to Varadkar and Harris.

Checkmate19

The pubs are driving this. Pure and simple. As i said if the govt wanted a real way forward banning advertising on tv and corporate events would be a big one. But that would cause hugh uproar. The publicans want people back in pubs paying rip off prices. This bill is a disgrace and it only helps the rip off pubs and punish's people who are just enjoying a casual drink at reasonable prices. Most people can't afford to drink in pubs these days. So choose to at home and this bill punish's them. Leo and fine gael and the publicans pushing this. The publicans holding meetings over it shows this. The publicans holding meetings over a health bill with one thing in mind increasing profits not health. They couldn't care less about people's health.

Checkmate19

People against this need to get onto their politican's. I for one will. I don't drink much and this won't effect me but its not the way forward and its not being done for the right reasons. Many other ways to tackle the problem this is only going to help greedy publicans.

Spanish Eyes

I really detest being treated as an uneducated person who is like a nodding donkey in all this.

Yes Minister I know it is for my health. It isn't
Yes Minister I know this will stop people from doing the home drinking thing. It won't, that has been going on from time immemorial.
Yes Minister the pub is a safe place to have a drink. No it isn't.
Yes Minister I accept everything you say, no I don't, you are a hypocritical so and so, in the hands of the publicans.

We can see through all the guff. Unfortunately we just need to buy ourselves a few baby bibs and dummys. We are just children to be nannied in their eyes.

Checkmate19

Totally spanish eyes. We are becoming a nanny state.

Spanish Eyes

Checkmate19 wrote: »

Totally spanish eyes. We are becoming a nanny state.

Already are one.

This issue is just so blatantly cynical it is mad. But no one cares enough to fight it. Because if you do you are the local lush or something. So people keep their heads down re alcohol.

Such an easy target to benefit the publicans, nothing else.

Oh and more rules and regs. Jayzis :eek:

Checkmate19

Sugar tax. Coffee cup tax next in the pipe line. Gtd after that takeaway tax. Politicans just come up with ideas to justify doing something they are all complete muppets.

Spanish Eyes

The day the Dail removes its subsidised bar that's open all hours I will listen to the hypocrite legislators for the great unwashed (us) while they can drink at work anytime they want.

BeerNut

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The day the Dail removes its subsidised bar

It's not subsidised. It's cheaper than town but it doesn't have overheads a pub does.

Hotblack Desiato

Does it pay a market rent for the taxpayer-provided premises it operates in? If not, it's subsidised.

BeerNut

Yes. A private sector contractor runs it and is subject to public procurement rules and procedures. It (catering services in Leinster House; there's no such thing as the "Dáil bar") is run in a way that gets the best value for the taxpayer. Still means pints are cheaper than town.

Hotblack Desiato

Yes, as in the operator pays a full market rent? So why is it cheaper then?

Checkmate19

This bill is been paid for by the pubs. 16 TIMES they met on it. Its back handers to politicans with the nice brown pockets full of money to do it. 16 TIMES THE PUBS MET ON A HEALTH BILL. BACKHANDERS FROM THE PUBS TO MATES IN THE DAIL. SCUM POLITICS AND WE ALL KNOW. 16 TIMES THE PUBS MET U HAND OVER THE MONNNNNNNNNNNNNEY TO THE BOYS.

Blut2

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Yes, as in the operator pays a full market rent? So why is it cheaper then?

No need for any security staff. Thats a huge line item for most pubs in that part of town. And fewer staff in general needed, because its fairly quiet most of the time.

Its closer to a quiet rural pub in both level of business and general staffing levels, than a city centre pub. Thats why its prices are closer to those you'd find in a rural pub.

Reputable Rog

L1011 wrote: »

Yes, but the LVA in Dublin are just as complicit here if not worse as they have more members with dedicated pub-adjacent off-licences that compete with the smaller retailers with off-sales that are going to be put out of the market by the enclosure rules.

One of the franchise brands of off-licence, I think Carry Out, was an LVA initiative originally.

Carry Out originated from the Galvins Off licence group in Cork City which lost control of the chain and is now part of the Barry Group in Mallow.

rubadub

BeerNut wrote: »

It (catering services in Leinster House; there's no such thing as the "D bar") is run in a way that gets the best value for the taxpayer.

Very hard to calculate but I expect the real best value for the taxpayer is having fully sober politicians running the show, to ensure they can work to the best of their ability, there is a reason the vast majority of workplaces do not allow drinking on the job. If they want "the bar" it should be only soft drinks, or have extremely strict rules about alcohol. Just like in some workplaces I have been at I might have had a single baileys at christmas.

If no "dail bar" or whatever you wish to call it existed -and the likes of a Healy-Rae or "Ming" suggested setting one up they would be ridiculed. The idea would be laughable.

http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/politics/tds-drunk-dail-warns-mary-2066719

Some TDs had a “lot of drink on them” when massive decisions affecting the country’s future were taken, Mary Lou McDonald claimed yesterday.

The Sinn Fein deputy leader also revealed she would have slapped Lapgate Deputy Tom Barry if he pulled her onto his lap.


She told Today FM’s Ray D’Arcy that when important issues were being discussed some politicians had been drinking heavily.

She said: “The night of the promissory note and certainly the night around the abortion legislation it was very clear that some people had a lot of drink on them coming into the chamber.

“I’m not being pious about this but we’re at work and there’s no other job...if you showed up here Ray with gargle on you of course you’d be sacked.

“We shouldn’t be an different. If people want to have a drink by all means, go ahead. You don’t do it at work.”

Deputy McDonald, who is one of the country’s highest profile female politicians, said she doesn’t want the bar in Leinster House closed as it is a nice facility for visitors.

She added: “I don’t think it’s a matter of closing the bar, I think it’s a matter of members understanding that you don’t drink at work.

“When we’re at work the same standards apply to me as apply to you if you’re working in a retail store or a hospital. So when you’re at work you don’t drink.

“If you’re going to have a few drinks or a few pints you do it in your social time.

“It’s about members understanding that the Dail isn’t some kind of reality TV experience, it is a workplace.

The Dail bar has been under attack for staying open during late-night debates on the abortion Bill which saw some deputies boozing into the early hours before voting.

jimmycrackcorm

Checkmate19 wrote: »

The pubs are driving this. Pure and simple. As i said if the govt wanted a real way forward banning advertising on tv and corporate events would be a big one. But that would cause hugh uproar. The publicans want people back in pubs paying rip off prices. This bill is a disgrace and it only helps the rip off pubs and punish's people who are just enjoying a casual drink at reasonable prices. Most people can't afford to drink in pubs these days. So choose to at home and this bill punish's them. Leo and fine gael and the publicans pushing this. The publicans holding meetings over it shows this. The publicans holding meetings over a health bill with one thing in mind increasing profits not health. They couldn't care less about people's health.

I don't agree that the pubs are driving this. Sure they might think that they will get some benefit but even with the proposed pricing we will have:
* Cans in the off-licence almost half the price of a pint in the pub
* The minimum price for wine is no cheaper than any bottle in my local Centra
* Naggins of Vodka unchanged.

There is definitely a lot more excessive home drinking going on than people are prepared to admit. The French may stick to a glass of wine with their dinner, but we Irish do the bottle.