Minimum Alcohol pricing to be signed into Law

A Disgrace

Ciarrai76 wrote: »

Does anyone know what the situation is with an off-licence being very close to a school? How will advertising offers etc or window displays affect them if its not allowed near schools? We are a bit stumped as we don't know how it will apply to us!

And what about pubs with projecting signs. Will they have to remove them (and any other alcohol branding) from their exteriors?

I mean, it'd only be fair that they do...

rubadub

Ciarrai76 wrote: »

Does anyone know what the situation is with an off-licence being very close to a school? How will advertising offers etc or window displays affect them if its not allowed near schools? We are a bit stumped as we don't know how it will apply to us!

It is 200m from schools.

(h) in or at a school, including the grounds of the school, or within 200 metres of the
perimeter of the grounds,

https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/act/2018/24/eng/enacted/a2418.pdf

I would imagine they would have ads for heineken 0% and other drinks.

matrim

Is it 200m as the crow flies or 200m via road? There is a billboard near me that always has drinks ads on it and it is about 180m from a crèche if you measure it directly but would be about 400m if you had to walk / drive it.

Also, I wonder if this will have the unintended consequence of pubs / off-licences objecting to planning for new crèches in their areas if they are too close.

rubadub

I don't think creches are included

“school” means a recognised school within the meaning of the Education Act 1998.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1998/act/51/section/2/enacted/en/html#sec2

“school” means an establishment which—

(a) provides primary education to its students and which may also provide early childhood education, or

(b) provides post-primary education to its students and which may also provide courses in adult, continuing or vocational education or vocational training,

but does not include a school or institution established in accordance with the Children Acts, 1908 to 1989, or a school or institution established or maintained by a health board in accordance with the Health Acts, 1947 to 1996, or the Child Care Act, 1991 ;

EDIT: creches do see to be included

(i) in or at a place where an early years service is carried on or within 200 metres of
the perimeter of a place where an early years service is carried on, or

Spanish Eyes

Why is none of this nonsense required in other Continental countries like France, Spain and Italy etc. I wonder.

Now you could say that they have a healthy attitude to alcohol, but you can drink all day long from early morning till the wee hours in such countries) and I am sure there are more. Never seems to be an issue.

The freedom to do what you wish at any time regarding alcohol, together with a culture that frowns upon violent messy drunkenness, and enforcement of the law if you do, is probably a factor.

No wonder people in Med countries live till they are 105. Just being a bit lighthearted. But honestly the way we are being controlled about most enjoyable things because of the actions of the few is not really fair.

Brendan Bendar

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Why is none of this nonsense required in other Continental countries like France, Spain and Italy etc. I wonder.

Now you could say that they have a healthy attitude to alcohol, but you can drink all day long from early morning till the wee hours in such countries) and I am sure there are more. Never seems to be an issue.

The freedom to do what you wish at any time regarding alcohol, together with a culture that frowns upon violent messy drunkenness, and enforcement of the law if you do, is probably a factor.

No wonder people in Med countries live till they are 105. Just being a bit lighthearted. But honestly the way we are being controlled about most enjoyable things because of the actions of the few is not really fair.

Very simples, they don’t gannet down the dhrink like there was no tomorrow.

They take their time and drink smaller quantities from smaller glasses from smaller bottles.

You might laugh but that makes a difference and like most places they will have food with their beverage.

Pat likes to belly up to the bar open his throat and gull the pints in two ‘swipes’.

Then he doesn’t know when to stop in case anyone thinks he can’t hold his dhrink.

It’s that simple

rubadub

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Very simples, they don’t gannet down the dhrink like there was no tomorrow.

This happens most at closing time, which is the unintended consequence of it.

If you see gangs of Irish lads abroad in countries with lax laws they might go mad the first night, the the novelty wears off a lot, and there is no "last round" culture.

I was predicting the unintended consequence of the min pricing law is that kids & hardened "problem drinkers" who do not have a lot of money will switch to spirits, as there is more bang for yer buck per unit alcohol with them.

matrim

rubadub wrote: »

I don't think creches are included




http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1998/act/51/section/2/enacted/en/html#sec2

The journal article I was reading earlier mentioned that creches were included

rubadub

matrim wrote: »

The journal article I was reading earlier mentioned that creches were included

ah I see it now, had never heard the term "early years service" before

(i) in or at a place where an early years service is carried on or within 200 metres of
the perimeter of a place where an early years service is carried on, or

elperello

I just heard Noel Rock TD on RTE saying no MUP until Stormont brings it in.

Eunan McKinney still pushing for it in 3 months time.

Brendan Bendar

elperello wrote: »

I just heard Noel Rock TD on RTE saying no MUP until Stormont brings it in.

Eunan McKinney still pushing for it in 3 months time.

Can of ‘Gold ‘ for €1.60. :eek:

Fcuker ‘ell

oblivious

Hi all.

Mod Note: Legal advice cannot be given on boards.ie. So no more replys to to @Ciarrai76 post please.


Thank you

brick tamland

elperello wrote: »

I just heard Noel Rock TD on RTE saying no MUP until Stormont brings it in.

Eunan McKinney still pushing for it in 3 months time.

Well if Rocks right that could be never and will be many years away at least

Always get nervous when I see this thread bumped.

BeerNut

Zombie thread for a zombie policy: looks like an implementation date of January 2022 has been agreed at Cabinet today.

L1011

Newry off licence owners will be booking their new yacht already

youcancallmeal

It'll be interesting to see how the craft brewers approach this. I'd like to think prices should stay the same because if they increase unnecessarily it'll clearly be seen as a cash grab. They could even use it as a way to get more Irish consumers into craft beer by reducing prices in their core ranges so the likes of a can of Carlsberg wouldn't be far off a can of craft Lager. You never know though, they could double down on craft beer being seen as a premium product

BeerNut

youcancallmeal wrote: »

It'll be interesting to see how the craft brewers approach this. I'd like to think prices should stay the same because if they increase unnecessarily it'll clearly be seen as a cash grab.

The brewers don't set retail prices, though. And the beer retail sector isn't usually shy about putting them up.

Calahonda52

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Very simples, they don’t gannet down the dhrink like there was no tomorrow.

They take their time and drink smaller quantities from smaller glasses from smaller bottles.

You might laugh but that makes a difference and like most places they will have food with their beverage.

Pat likes to belly up to the bar open his throat and gull the pints in two ‘swipes’.

Then he doesn’t know when to stop in case anyone thinks he can’t hold his dhrink.

It’s that simple

Gannets and gulls... I LOVE it
perhaps the albatross would suit the long drinking sessions, in mores way that one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QooCN5JbOkU

timmyntc

BeerNut wrote: »

The brewers don't set retail prices, though. And the beer retail sector isn't usually shy about putting them up.

You'd think that for smaller breweries who have higher costs & have to retail for a higher price, would welcome the minimum being pushed up - because it makes their products look more competitive pricewise.

Now if they just decide to push things up even more then I will be mad

youcancallmeal

BeerNut wrote: »

The brewers don't set retail prices, though. And the beer retail sector isn't usually shy about putting them up.

I would've thought the brewers work closely with craft beer pubs and independent off licenses to ensure their product is priced correctly to sell. I can't imagine a craft brewer would be happy if an off license is selling(or not as the case may be) their product at 25% over the rrp?

BeerNut

timmyntc wrote: »

You'd think that for smaller breweries who have higher costs & have to retail for a higher price, would welcome the minimum being pushed up - because it makes their products look more competitive pricewise.

There's a bit of that, all right. Though it seems to be based on the notion that this change won't have any effect other than the direct one on cheap alcohol. State intervention in the market always has unintended consequences, you don't have to look any further than the 4-for-€10 ban to see that: it wasn't meant to create a load of beers at €2.50 a go, but it has. The idea that retailers will aloow the gap between basic beer and premium beer to be substantially narrowed seems incredibly unlikely to me.

youcancallmeal wrote: »

I would've thought the brewers work closely with craft beer pubs and independent off licenses to ensure their product is priced correctly to sell. I can't imagine a craft brewer would be happy if an off license is selling(or not as the case may be) their product at 25% over the rrp?

Pubs will have no problem finding a reason to put up prices across the board when they re-open. They don't need to cite MUP but I bet they would if they had to. Prices already vary a fair bit between independent off licences. The breweries who depend on them may not want to upset them, and if they can add a cut of that increase to the wholesale prices, then it's not so bad. Net result: higher beer prices for everyone.

carq

Frank Feighen just on the radio getting a free ride.

The man sounds like an idiot.
Still maintains the price will only impact own brand vodka and linden villiage.

‘The data does not agree that alcohol will become more expensive for people on low incomes’ !??

Still pushing this as a public health measure - predicting he will save 5 lives per week.

Still quoting that only 16 % of cross border trade will be spent on alcohol.

Good god

rubadub

carq wrote: »

‘The data does not agree that alcohol will become more expensive for people on low incomes’ !??

I don't know how they can say that with a straight face. The indirectly give the figures for the rise.

https://www.rte.ie/documents/news/2021/04/alcohol-report.pdf

"Currently, it is possible for a man to consume his weekly low-risk guideline limit for €7.48"

The low risk is 17 units, so that will be €17, so a €9.52 weekly increase, or €495 per year. And that is for people on the low risk amount.

The biggest issue I have is that it is not a tax. Only 19% of the increase gets taken as tax via VAT.

carq

rubadub wrote: »

I don't know how they can say that with a straight face. The indirectly give the figures for the rise.

https://www.rte.ie/documents/news/2021/04/alcohol-report.pdf

"Currently, it is possible for a man to consume his weekly low-risk guideline limit for €7.48"

The low risk is 17 units, so that will be €17, so a €9.52 weekly increase, or €495 per year. And that is for people on the low risk amount.

The biggest issue I have is that it is not a tax. Only 19% of the increase gets taken as tax via VAT.

The specific question was related to low income earners who are responsible drinkers and will this measure mean their proportion of income spent on Alcohol will increase.

Which he somehow denied !?

Marcusm

L1011 wrote: »

Newry off licence owners will be booking their new yacht already

Supermarkets most likely I expect rather than independent off licences etc. It would not impact my wine consumption as I’d rarely if ever but a bottle for 7.75. It would impact on purchase of macro lagers for me. I enjoy buying booze in the North as there can be great value irrespective of minimum unit pricing (eg champagne at 40% or less of Irish cost).

youcancallmeal

rubadub wrote: »

The biggest issue I have is that it is not a tax. Only 19% of the increase gets taken as tax via VAT.

Yeah this is my biggest problem with it too, the extra goes straight into retailers pockets. Would be nice to see it instead go to some sort of public health initiatives. To be fair I think it would be very difficult to implement but it does leave the whole MUP open to abuse with potential price increases on beer/wine/spirits that are nowhere near minimum to begin with

BeerNut

As I'm sure has been mentioned up-thread, this came from jurisdictions where the government owned all the off licences so the extra money went to the state. It's really inappropriate when the trade just pockets the difference instead, but there is no way it would have been passed without them seeing something in it for themselves.

Macy0161

carq wrote: »

Frank Feighen just on the radio getting a free ride.

The man sounds like an idiot.

Car crash stuff.

Not one bit of questioning of the Beaumont(?) consultant in the launch seemingly relying on data that was 6 years out of date? It was all in the x number of years up until 2015. Just played without any questioning.

So either they don't have more up-to-date data, or the more up-to-date data doesn't suit the agenda.

Consumption is down since the start of the pandemic, yet the pandemic is being used as the excuse to jump ahead of the North.

Tpcl20

https://alcoholireland.ie/minimum-pricing-campaign/the-facts/#:~:text=Minimum%20unit%20pricing%20(MUP)%20is,would%20apply%20per%20standard%20drink.

At what level should a MUP be set?
A MUP needs to be set at a level the evidence indicates will reduce the burden of harm from alcohol use. A minimum price will need to be reviewed on a regular basis and adjusted when necessary to maintain its value in line with inflation.

The Department of Health has announced that a MUP of €1 will be introduced as part of the Public Health (Alcohol) Bill. The University of Sheffield estimated that with a €1 MUP per standard drink (assuming that it’s updated annually in line with inflation):

Across the whole population, mean weekly consumption would reduce by 8.8%
Across the whole population, 37.5% of alcohol purchased would be affected
In both income groups (those in poverty and not in poverty), absolute reductions in consumption are estimated to be small for low risk drinkers and much larger for high risk drinkers
Across the whole population, spending increases by 1.3% or €15.70 per drinker per year (€0.30 per week)
Effects on health are estimated to be substantial, with alcohol-attributable deaths estimated to reduce by approximately 197 per year after 20 years, by which time the full effects of the policy will be seen
Similar patterns are observed amongst reductions in alcohol-related hospital admissions, with an estimated 5,878 fewer admissions per year across the population
Direct healthcare costs are estimated to reduce by €7.4m in year 1 and €254.7m cumulatively over the first 20 years of the policy
Crime is estimated to fall by 1,493 offences per year overall and the costs of crime and policing are estimated to reduce by €7m in year one and by €102.7 cumulatively over 20 years
Workplace absence is estimated to be reduced by 115,600 per year. This is estimated to lead to an annual saving of €16.1m in year one and €236.6m over 20 years
The total societal value of these reductions in health, crime and work place harms is estimated at €1.7bn over the 20 year period modelled. This includes direct healthcare costs (€255m), crime costs (€103m), workplace costs (€237m) and a financial valuation of the quality adjusted life year (QALY) gain (€1.1bn)
Overall revenue to the Exchequer from duty and VAT receipts is estimated to reduce by 2.1% or €34.3 million
Revenue to retailers is estimated to increase by €68.5million (18.1%) in the off-trade and €9.3million (0.7%) in the on-trade. This is as reduced sales volumes are more than offset by the increased value of remaining sales

Very much reminds me of this
https://alcoholireland.ie/dr-tony-holohan-chief-medical-officer-delivers-the-opening-address-at-alcohol-action-irelands-have-we-bottled-it-alcohol-marketing-and-young-people-conference/

Definitely going to start calling him Tony Alcoholohan.

Nijmegen

There's no doubt that alcoholism causes many problems. But it's a mental health issue that would likely be a lot better serviced if we had, you know, a functioning mental healthcare system. Even if this measure levied a tax that went to mental health services! But no. The ultimate poison pill for this bill ought to have come when you saw who was supporting it alongside the charities and bodies generally opposed to alcohol consumption - The people who sell alcohol. When those forces align...

There's no way this doesn't drive up the price of all products in the market. The minimum price for a can will put it above the price you can get a Guinness today in a multipack. But we're going to see brands like Guinness, Heineken, etc, continue to price at the same level as the cheapo own-brand stuff? Will they...

It's like the government are doing their best to annoy everyone this week!