Minimum alcohol pricing is nigh

weldoninhio

Stonerloner wrote: »

No, we can't , they've too much money and influence in Irish politics.

Of course there is ways, but people would need to mobilise. It would take a huge effort thought. But the social/casual drinkers of Ireland would need to stick together. If, say, they picked a random Saturday and decided to refuse to go to a pub it'd show the strength of the consumer. How much would they lose if even 40% stayed home, with the threat of ongoing "strikes" for want of a better word.

Jayop

VinLieger wrote: »

OR maybe the pubs could stop charging an arm and a leg for pints as well as providing some kind of update to the 1950's atmosphere that still pervades many rural pubs to try draw punters back instead of trying to force them to come back by making the alternative too expensive.

The answer to a failing business modeling is not legislating for a government bailout its learning how to innovate which the vintners have consistently refused to do.

I'm totally against this new legislation, but in fairness a lot of rural pubs don't charge a lot and they're the ones going under. You can still get a pint of porter where I am for less than 4 quid.

BuilderPlumber

A cynical move to increase VAT revenue. If politicians were interested in rural pubs indeed rural Ireland, they'd tackle the rising costs such rural businesses face. But that would reduce VAT revenue. That's all the government cares about. If they were interested in people's health, they'd tackle the REAL killer of people: work and life related stress. These politicians and media people are so out of touch. They can be driven to any pub or hotel or restaurant, drink the most expensive alcohol and have no life or work stress.

kylith

VinLieger wrote: »

OR maybe the pubs could stop charging an arm and a leg for pints as well as providing some kind of update to the 1950's atmosphere that still pervades many rural pubs to try draw punters back instead of trying to force them to come back by making the alternative too expensive.

The answer to a failing business modeling is not legislating for a government bailout its learning how to innovate which the vintners have consistently refused to do.

Just a case study in this vein (though I quite like the 1950s atmosphere): I stayed in rural Clare a couple of years ago. We walked to the local pub, but were concerned about how we'd get back. However the pub laid on a minibus to drop people home, and took the opportunity to tell you about live music/prawn festival/karaoke on in the pub the rest of the week, finishing with "I'll pick you up at 8, will I?" I thought to myself, that's a pub that's moving with the times; look after getting people there and home, and once they've agreed to be picked up another night you're pretty much guaranteed their custom.

Ubbquittious

Ubbquittious wrote: »

Not a bad idea tbh. So many small pubs around the country slowly dieing out some attempt should be made to save them

You have to acknowledge why pubs both big and small are dying out and then try to address those problems, not punish people for choosing to drink at home and then hope they return to the pub.

There are numerous factors affecting pubs. One is overheads and the cost of doing business. Rates demanded by the council amounting to 8 or 9 thousand. Insurance costing thousands. Even the incerase in the minimum wage affects a pub trader. A sky subscription for a pub can hit a thousand euros a month. Other factors include the smoking ban, the tighter drink driving laws, and that people don't have as much disposable income as they used to. The country might be back in the boom, but many people are still feeling the pinch and they are still being careful with their money.

If the government is really trying to help out pubs, how about address operating costs? Allow longer opening times? Provide tax relief?

Instead, they try to force people back to the pub by making it too expensive to drink at home. Instead people will go up north or go on booze cruises to france, homebrew will become mainstream, and instead of looking for criminals the gardai will be out patrolling for illicit poitin stills. After taking 3 steps forward as a nation, legalising gay marriage and having a gay leader, we've taken 5 steps back to the 80s.

BuilderPlumber

VinLieger wrote: »

OR maybe the pubs could stop charging an arm and a leg for pints as well as providing some kind of update to the 1950's atmosphere that still pervades many rural pubs to try draw punters back instead of trying to force them to come back by making the alternative too expensive.

The answer to a failing business modeling is not legislating for a government bailout its learning how to innovate which the vintners have consistently refused to do.

A lot of pubs are depressing dives with dour and sour bar people who inspire no confidence. Why would anyone be enticed to go to such places that charge a fortune for ordinary drinks like Guinness and Powers Whisky when you can have the same drinks at home in a nicer surrounding.

These excuses about 'drink problem' in Ireland don't wash with me. A cynical move to up prices of non-pub drink to get in handy VAT and to get more people into pubs is what it is.

Sure, there are people who abuse drink and are problems when they have drink in them. Sadly, these people have issues already and are drinking to excess because they are not happy and these individuals need help. The rest of us should not suffer because of the actions of the few. The vast majority of people who consume alcohol are responsible.

Have blanket alcohol legislation and demonising it is basically not that far removed from so-called 'Islamic' dictatorships that ban it in the name of that religion when what that religion says about alcohol is actually not as cut and dried as that. Some 'Islamic' dictatorship's real reasons for banning alcohol included alcohol being a distraction for soldiers to fight in the wars, the scarcity of water in desert lands and to control a restive population which alcohol may give confidence to.

Here in Ireland, we can also see the REAL reasons for alcohol legislation and it is NEVER to improve the people's lot. It is to look after pubs, collect more VAT and to push premium brands.

Ubbquittious

Deleted User wrote: »

You have to acknowledge why pubs both big and small are dying out and then try to address those problems, not punish people for choosing to drink at home and then hope they return to the pub.

There are numerous factors affecting pubs. One is overheads and the cost of doing business. Rates demanded by the council amounting to 8 or 9 thousand. Insurance costing thousands. Even the incerase in the minimum wage affects a pub trader. A sky subscription for a pub can hit a thousand euros a month. Other factors include the smoking ban, the tighter drink driving laws, and that people don't have as much disposable income as they used to. The country might be back in the boom, but many people are still feeling the pinch and they are still being careful with their money.

If the government is really trying to help out pubs, how about address operating costs? Allow longer opening times? Provide tax relief?

Instead, they try to force people back to the pub by making it too expensive to drink at home. Instead people will go up north or go on booze cruises to france, homebrew will become mainstream, and instead of looking for criminals the gardai will be out patrolling for illicit poitin stills. After taking 3 steps forward as a nation, legalising gay marriage and having a gay leader, we've taken 5 steps back to the 80s.

They definitely need to do something about the operating costs. The insurance lobby is too strong here and nobody wants to face up to them, even the government pussyfoots around them like they're some unstoppable group of horsemen sent down from above. Nobody wants to do anything about the ridiculous public liability insurance requirements and claims that were brought in during the 80's and have only got worse since. Maybe if they made life easier for the rural pub and brought in minimum prices as well they might eventually meet in the middle

Ubbquittious

You had me until this sentence:

Ubbquittious wrote: »

Maybe if they made life easier for the rural pub and brought in minimum prices as well they might eventually meet in the middle

One of the reasons people arent going to the pub is they can't afford to. Thats not going to change by making it even more expensive to drink at home.

jimmycrackcorm

I disagree, the "drinking problems" are myths from the government.

BuilderPlumber wrote:

Sure, there are people who abuse drink and are problems when they have drink in them. Sadly, these people have issues already and are drinking to excess because they are not happy and these individuals need help. The rest of us should not suffer because of the actions of the few. The vast majority of people who consume alcohol are responsible.

I don't believe the conspiracy theory that minimum pricing is an effort to encourage pub use. I think it's a simple fact that under pricing of alcohol is contributing to alcohol abuse and it's mute widespread than people care to admit.

My local Centra stopped closing later than 10 because, as the manager said to me, it's the off sales that is bringing people in.

Perhaps people being critical of price changes should suggest better alternatives to tackling alcohol abuse, because it sure will have some effect.

Ubbquittious

Deleted User wrote: »

You had me until this sentence:



One of the reasons people arent going to the pub is they can't afford to. Thats not going to change by making it even more expensive to drink at home.

I doubt the pubs will ever be able to compete with shops selling cans for €1 each even if they got rid of Sky, didn't have insurance and teleported a lad in from India willing to pull pints for 10c an hour. A lot of this stuff is pure piss anyway designed and marketed purely for alcoholics and teenagers who can't afford anything else, be no harm to see less of that swill around the place

No matter how nice you make the pub and what value added extras like music and lifts home you offered you'll never get the lad who just wants to sit at home and get pisht unless your booze is cheaper

Ubbquittious

Ubbquittious wrote: »

I doubt the pubs will ever be able to compete with shops selling cans for €1 each even if they got rid of Sky, didn't have insurance and teleported a lad in from India willing to pull pints for 10c an hour. A lot of this stuff is pure piss anyway designed and marketed purely for alcoholics and teenagers who can't afford anything else, be no harm to see less of that swill around the place

What "swill" are you talking about? And where can you buy beer for 1 euro a can?

Ush1

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I don't believe the conspiracy theory that minimum pricing is an effort to encourage pub use. I think it's a simple fact that under pricing of alcohol is contributing to alcohol abuse and it's mute widespread than people care to admit.

My local Centra stopped closing later than 10 because, as the manager said to me, it's the off sales that is bringing people in.

Perhaps people being critical of price changes should suggest better alternatives to tackling alcohol abuse, because it sure will have some effect.

I don't think it works and who's to say there shouldn't be such rules on products with sugar or whatever else the government decides is bad?

It's nanny state nonsense. People who have alcohol issues are usually having mental health problems that drink helps them escape.

People who have plenty of money but have drink problems will not be effected. To change a drink culture is a complicated thing but ultimately no matter what you do some people will abuse substances, expensive or cheap, legal or illegal.

VinLieger

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I don't believe the conspiracy theory that minimum pricing is an effort to encourage pub use. I think it's a simple fact that under pricing of alcohol is contributing to alcohol abuse and it's mute widespread than people care to admit.

My local Centra stopped closing later than 10 because, as the manager said to me, it's the off sales that is bringing people in.

Perhaps people being critical of price changes should suggest better alternatives to tackling alcohol abuse, because it sure will have some effect.

But that myth of widespread alcohol abuse being caused by low prices is busted when the statistics show our consumption rate has steadily been dropping year over year for the last 15 years. In 2002 it was at 14.9 in 2015 we were down to 10.9 and well on our way to get very close to the target of 9.1, the OECD average, by 2020.

There is also ZERO proof MUP will have any effect on alcohol abuse, the canadian study has been completely discredited

Jayop

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I don't believe the conspiracy theory that minimum pricing is an effort to encourage pub use. I think it's a simple fact that under pricing of alcohol is contributing to alcohol abuse and it's mute widespread than people care to admit.

My local Centra stopped closing later than 10 because, as the manager said to me, it's the off sales that is bringing people in.

Perhaps people being critical of price changes should suggest better alternatives to tackling alcohol abuse, because it sure will have some effect.

Then maybe your local centra will be in bother if this stupid law passes.

Ubbquittious

Deleted User wrote: »

What "swill" are you talking about? And where can you buy beer for 1 euro a can?

Some of the Dutch Gold knockoffs that I seen around the place.

No harem to see the local Centra in a bit of bother. They've wiped out the old shop with the dark wooden counter and the ham slicer and had it too good for too long!

kylith

Ubbquittious wrote: »

Some of the Dutch Gold knockoffs that I seen around the place.

No harem to see the local Centra in a bit of bother. They've wiped out the old shop with the dark wooden counter and the ham slicer and had it too good for too long!

So did my local Spar, but considering that beside the bacon slicer the shelves were full of stuff that was months out of date I wasn't too broken up about it.

Zubeneschamali

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Perhaps people being critical of price changes should suggest better alternatives to tackling alcohol abuse, because it sure will have some effect.

I have said many times that they should simply raise excise on all alcohol. A percentage increase on all alcohol, all forms, at all points of sale.

But they won't, because

a) The Vintners wouldn't like it
b) FG voters wouldn't like it.

So instead we get minimum pricing, which

1) Doesn't affect pub prices, keeping the Vintners happy
2) Doesn't affect FG voters, who wouldn't drink Dutch Gold if it was free.

VinLieger

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I have said many times that they should simply raise excise on all alcohol. A percentage increase on all alcohol, all forms, at all points of sale.

But they won't, because

a) The Vintners wouldn't like it
b) FG voters wouldn't like it.

So instead we get minimum pricing, which

1) Doesn't affect pub prices, keeping the Vintners happy
2) Doesn't affect FG voters, who wouldn't drink Dutch Gold if it was free.

We already have the highest excise in Europe why do we need to raise prices when consumption is already coming down?

The problem with your argument is its based on the assumption the alcohol problem is getting worse and not better which the facts show is not true

Also your delusional if you honestly believe this isn't gonna affect prices across the board

dan1895

Ubbquittious wrote: »

Some of the Dutch Gold knockoffs that I seen around the place.

No harem to see the local Centra in a bit of bother. They've wiped out the old shop with the dark wooden counter and the ham slicer and had it too good for too long!

And to the job centre for those who work there yeh?

Zubeneschamali

Deleted User wrote: »

What "swill" are you talking about? And where can you buy beer for 1 euro a can?

Aldi: 12 500ml cans of 4% swill for 8.79

Geuze

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I don't believe the conspiracy theory that minimum pricing is an effort to encourage pub use. I think it's a simple fact that under pricing of alcohol is contributing to alcohol abuse and it's mute widespread than people care to admit.

"Under-pricing"?

We have some of the most expensive alcohol in the EU already.

The cheapest 50cl of beer in German supermarkets is 29c.

Zubeneschamali

VinLieger wrote: »

We already have the highest excise in Europe why do we need to raise prices when consumption is already coming down?

Sorry, I didn't mean that I want them to do this, I mean that IF the objective is to use pricing to drive consumption down this is how to do it.

Minimum pricing is not even trying to reduce consumption, it is trying to interfere with competition in the market to benefit the Vintners without charging FG voters a cent extra.

howamidifferent

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Aldi: 12 500ml cans of 4% swill for 8.79

For someone who simply would like to sip on a cool beer or two on a sunny evening, I see nothing wrong with this beer. Perfectly drinkable in moderation.

Ubbquittious

dan1895 wrote: »

And to the job centre for those who work there yeh?

To the local hardware shop to buy a new hardwood counter top for the new combined shop+pub they are opening up.

listermint

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I have said many times that they should simply raise excise on all alcohol. A percentage increase on all alcohol, all forms, at all points of sale.

But they won't, because

a) The Vintners wouldn't like it
b) FG voters wouldn't like it.

So instead we get minimum pricing, which

1) Doesn't affect pub prices, keeping the Vintners happy
2) Doesn't affect FG voters, who wouldn't drink Dutch Gold if it was free.

Stupid idea,

Alcohol sales have fallen year on year since 2010 here.

Some of the rubbish spouted on this thread is laughable.

we have the highest excise in Europe and our consumption is going down and down.

What more do you want !

VinLieger

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Sorry, I didn't mean that I want them to do this, I mean that IF the objective is to use pricing to drive consumption down this is how to do it.

Minimum pricing is not even trying to reduce consumption, it is trying to interfere with competition in the market to benefit the Vintners without charging FG voters a cent extra.

Agreed however I still disagree that it won't cost everyone more.

Schwanz

I disagree, the "drinking problems" are myths from the government.

Just back from Majorca where Irish & British drank like fcuk and not one fight across a week.

2 euro beer and a family atmosphere.

So basically what I'm saying is that there always is a small amount of plonkers who'll always ruin it for the majority who are just out for a good time.

Why let the few instigate a mass change???

Oh that's right.... not tax.

Richard Hillman

Another fake reason they roll out are drunk people ending up in A&Es over the weekend.

Joe Bloggs is less likely to end up in A&E if he's at home drinking as opposed to a night in a pub /club. There are a million more variables on a night out.

VinLieger

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Another fake reason they roll out are drunk people ending up in A&Es over the weekend.

Joe Bloggs is less likely to end up in A&E if he's at home drinking as opposed to a night in a pub /club. There are a million more variables on a night out.

Reminds me a while ago i remember hearing a vintner lobbyist on the radio claiming people drinking at home was very dangerous and that the safest place to have a drink was in a pub cus it was far safer to have a "trained professional" serving you alcohol

I had to stop the car i was laughing so hard, they were actually implying that barmen in ireland have some special medical or other training to step people getting paralytic and out of hand on booze.

hatrickpatrick

How much crowd funding would it take for someone to lodge a challenge to this in the high court if it passes, and then challenge it under EU law? The ECJ ruled last year that it's for national courts to decide whether the policy ultimately contravenes EU competition law.