Minimum alcohol pricing is nigh

Thelonious Monk

There is no opposition, there were no votes against the proposals

dubrov

In fairness, the best play for the position is to sit tight.

If the government bring this in they'll be hammered by those opposed to it. If they don't, they'll be hammered by those for it.

Tony EH

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

In my opinion pricing doesn't stop addiction or poor habits.

But education and early education does.

How about teaching children about alcohol and its affects on health in primary and secondary schools? I mean really not just one or two workshops

While I agree that pricing has no affect/effect on addicts, I don't think that "education" on alcohol will have any real effect on potential future alcoholics either, other than possibly terrifying a tiny few into never touching a drop ever just in case.

Alcohol is a peculiar "drug", though, in that it isn't an automatic addiction like nicotine or heroin. The vast, vast, majority of people who drink will not become addicted. They can drink all of their adult lives and still remain unaddicted. Unlike people who use heroin or smoke who, by and large, won't be able to escape an addiction. So, education on the affects/effects of their use is clear and very apparent.

The issue, with drinking, is that it's the alcoholic that is the problem, not necessarily the alcohol which the majority of people can enjoy without the devastating side effects of alcoholism. And you cannot educate people to not become an alcoholic. They are probably predisposed to becoming one, whether they are educated or not.

Unfortunately, people who are or will become alcoholics will certainly not be put off by the price. All they know is that they "need" a drink whatever the cost.

Henry Ford III

Taxes on alcohol are already the 2nd highest in Europe.

Is this just another revenue generating exercise masquerading as a public health initiative?

odyssey06

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Taxes on alcohol are already the 2nd highest in Europe.

Is this just another revenue generating exercise masquerading as a public health initiative?

Yes, although most of the revenue being generated is going to be in the retailers (if people pay the higher prices there) OR pubs (if people switch to drinking in pubs as price gap narrows). Which is why publicans have been pushing for this.

Thelonious Monk

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Taxes on alcohol are already the 2nd highest in Europe.

Is this just another revenue generating exercise masquerading as a public health initiative?

It's some kind of pandering to a few busy body puritanical TDs and Senators and anti-alcohol groups from what I can tell

PTH2009

After the sweets now

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2021/0506/1214172-food-additive/

So odd there is no opposition to this. Would think SF might have reason to object given their voter demographics.

Plus Ca change, plus ca la meme choose, as they say in Germany.

(French speakers in Germany).

robbe

PTH2009 wrote: »

After the sweets now

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2021/0506/1214172-food-additive/

There is already a health working committee in place on high fat, salt and sugar foodstuffs comprising many of the same parties as the one which recommended the alcohol measures (the min unit pricing element was just one part of a larger strategy around advertising/sponsorship/visibility in stores and pricing). Expect more of the same but not in the short term, however as they've possibly created an obesity issue with the sedantary lockdown period and restriction of kids sports/training there may be a slightly quicker path for this. Below is the commitee which sat back in 2012......we can't build a house for the homeless/renters in the country but we can legislate the bejaysus out of the enjoyable things...........

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/press-centre/press-releases/20120314-health-committee-to-discuss-substance-misuse-strategy-with-minister-roisin-shortall/

Tony EH

fvp4 wrote: »

So odd there is no opposition to this. Would think SF might have reason to object given their voter demographics.

What do you want them to say though? The people who are pro this have all the cards. If you are against it, they'll just tar you as a supporter of addiction and a proponent of Ireland's "alcohol problem".

They would, simply, be unable to win any argument against MUP and come out looking worse than their opponents.

10000maniacs

Tony EH wrote: »

What do you want them to say though? The people who are pro this have all the cards. If you are against it, they'll just tar you as a supporter of addiction and a proponent of Ireland's "alcohol problem".

They would, simply, be unable to win any argument against MUP and come out looking worse than their opponents.

The vintners lobby is huge in this country. It's like the freemasons.
Almost everybody in power is beholden to these people in some way, whether by ownership, family or in a "nudge nudge wink wink", we'll sort you out kind of way.
That's a good racket Tommy, €6 a pint and it only costs €0.50 wholesale. Give me some skin.

Capt'n Midnight

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Taxes on alcohol are already the 2nd highest in Europe.

Is this just another revenue generating exercise masquerading as a public health initiative?

Revenue won't see one extra cent in excise. Not a single one.


It's a bailout for the publicans by making supermarket drinks more expensive so as to encourage people to drink in pubs instead of at home.

Or rather it would be if distributors don't increase prices. And a reduction in disposable income won't encourage people back into pubs.

ShamNNspace

Tony EH wrote: »

What do you want them to say though? The people who are pro this have all the cards. If you are against it, they'll just tar you as a supporter of addiction and a proponent of Ireland's "alcohol problem".

They would, simply, be unable to win any argument against MUP and come out looking worse than their opponents.

I don't think so, any decent debater should be able demolish the pro mup lobby argument that the measure will be benificial to the health and well-being of the less well off in society thereby gaining the support of a massive cohort of the electorate had they the courage to do so. I've seen or heard very little support for this measure either on the street or on social media, save for those joyless few on whom these measures will have absolutely no effect, but that doesn't stop them from disproportionately forcing their nonsense on the rest of us lapped up by the usual suspects who never had an original idea or thought in their lives. There's room for a courageous common sense politician here and imv his/her courage will be rewarded in the long run

odyssey06

Waterford Whispers...
Minimum Alcohol Pricing Hailed A Success As Young People Turn To €5 Yokes

https://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2021/05/04/minimum-alcohol-pricing-hailed-a-success-as-young-people-turn-to-e5-yokes/

Tony EH

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Revenue won't see one extra cent in excise. Not a single one.

Yet.

Capt'n Midnight

Tony EH wrote: »

Yet.

How exactly will MUP increase Revenue ?

The only ways are if people divert spending on lower VAT rated goods and services like food OR if they dip into savings OR wages go up.



On the other hand increasing excise would affect everyone equally. But it might affect alcohol consumption in pubs.

goose2005

robbe wrote: »

There is already a health working committee in place on high fat, salt and sugar foodstuffs comprising many of the same parties as the one which recommended the alcohol measures (the min unit pricing element was just one part of a larger strategy around advertising/sponsorship/visibility in stores and pricing). Expect more of the same but not in the short term, however as they've possibly created an obesity issue with the sedantary lockdown period and restriction of kids sports/training there may be a slightly quicker path for this. Below is the commitee which sat back in 2012......we can't build a house for the homeless/renters in the country but we can legislate the bejaysus out of the enjoyable things...........

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/press-centre/press-releases/20120314-health-committee-to-discuss-substance-misuse-strategy-with-minister-roisin-shortall/

"it's disgraceful that children can buy a bag of sweets for as little as 50 cents. We need to set a limit of €1 per 50g of sugar"

PTH2009

goose2005 wrote: »

"it's disgraceful that children can buy a bag of sweets for as little as 50 cents. We need to set a limit of €1 per 50g of sugar"

'Some places selling Sweets cheaper than Water'

Tony EH

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

How exactly will MUP increase Revenue ?

Revenue on drink can be increased in a budget.

-=al=-

‘The shops are like an ocean of sugar’ and ‘awash with cheap chocolate buttons’

They’re fudging the numbers good with their examples and they know it

Hotblack Desiato

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

How about teaching children about alcohol and its affects on health in primary and secondary schools?

Because the vast majority of our schools are run by religious dickheads whose answer to anything is "just say no".

Hotblack Desiato

kingstevii wrote: »

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/revealed-the-hidden-cost-of-new-price-rules-for-alcohol-40392053.html

So they used 440ml cans, of strength 4%! Does anywhere even sell 440ml cans?? Its not just a few extra cents, it's a lot of extra cents!

The whole thing is based on lies and they are assuming nobody will check their (wrong) figures.

If we had a TD who was actually numerate...

Hotblack Desiato

PTH2009 wrote: »

After the sweets now

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2021/0506/1214172-food-additive/

More bullshít, titanium metal (hip implants etc.) is biologically inert, so its oxide in a less reactive state cannot be a risk

Actually the reason Ti is regarded as safe is because implants etc. are covered in a layer of TiO2. So if they ban the sweets, they ban the hips... Brainless shyte.

Hotblack Desiato

ShamNNspace wrote: »

There's room for a courageous common sense politician here and imv his/her courage will be rewarded in the long run

Defintely not Sinn Fein then...

senordingdong

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Revenue won't see one extra cent in excise. Not a single one.

It is being said that the extra monies will go to the supermarket /off license.
Both of these pay taxes on their takings.

ohnonotgmail

senordingdong wrote: »

It is being said that the extra monies will go to the supermarket /off license.
Both of these pay taxes on their makings.

a small fraction.

senordingdong

senordingdong wrote: »

It is being said that the extra monies will go to the supermarket /off license.
Both of these pay taxes on their takings.

And as vat is a percentage, it will increase in tow with the retail price.

odyssey06

senordingdong wrote: »

It is being said that the extra monies will go to the supermarket /off license.
Both of these pay taxes on their takings.

The significant majority of the extra price will go to the retailers even accounting for VAT or corporate taxes.

ohnonotgmail

senordingdong wrote: »

And as vat is a percentage, it will increase in tow with the retail price.

it will but will be any additional vat revenue? will they be spending more money or shifting spending to alcohol from other items?

odyssey06

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

it will but will be any additional vat revenue? will they be spending more money or shifting spending to alcohol from other items?

Yes, remember this is supposed to reduce alcohol consumption!