Minimum alcohol pricing is nigh

People who always drank in pubs are not affected, and tended to have more spare money anyway.

This MUP will mainly affect the bottom feeders who are constantly scanning the internet for cheap drink to spend their last €20 of the week on that they cobbled together.

Bingo

The LVA VFI will see this bite them in the arse. Zealots don't stop. This thread is evidence of that. Small taste and they will want a bigger bite.

Another poster claimed that the VFI and LVA support for MUP was proof positive that MUP was all about getting people back to the pubs.

But how can that be the case if the NOFFLA also supported MUP ?

If you use the same logic surely NOFFLA support is proof positive that it's about getting people into off licenses.

I thought you were done with me when you threw your toys out of the pram a few posts back?

Flip flopping as usual.

I said - I'll quote so there is no room for mistake:

"I have no interest in going any further down this futile road with you as it adds zero to the debate about MUP.

If you want to discuss that, by all means do, but this nonsense is going nowhere. If you want clarification of my posts, read them properly."

I haven't thrown anything anywhere, but I have I believe copped on to who you were in a previous/current reg, and you're still stocking crap into your posts.

As usual, your posts have little relevance about the matter at hand.

I have no problem with your contributions, it is your non-contributions and derailing that I am referring to.

If this nonsense is finished, I would much prefer to discuss the more annoying crap that is MUP, and why it should be scrapped.

NOFFLA supported it because it benefits them. But the main reason it was introduced, was to get bums back on seats in pubs. That was the first mentioning of it in this country. The fact that it has the added effect of benefiting the off-licences probably wasn't even thought about until NOFFLA came on board with the lobbying.

The 4 biggest benefactors of MUP are the alcohol manufacturers - primarily the breweries, the pubs, the off-licences and the supermarkets that sell alcohol. 🤨🤔

I had written "That was the first mentioning of it in this country within the reality of it becoming law." I had also written another sentence hilighting the manifest text and a link, also mentioning that the UK were looking at stopping below cost alcohol at the time but it wasn't even really looked at here which would have benefited NOFFLA also but no backing at the time. but I don't know how it was edited out or deleted, I may have hilighted the whole block of text by mistake. I hadn't noticed that it was gone when I posted.

I'm not sure, but I don't think Roisin Shortall was the only person to propose MUP either.

^^^^^

By the governments, AAI's and your definition of 'cheap booze', then nothing will change. There will always be 'cheap booze'.

But if using the definition of the word cheap, then we have never really had it, for a long time now.

Cheap booze is what they have on mainland Europe. We have nothing close to it. The correct term to use when referring to it here, would be 'cheapest'. There will always be a cheapest.

The legislation is aimed at improving health outcomes, the clue being in the title. I asked before on the thread for people to report their own health experiences since MUP, rather than running crusades on behalf of poor people, or scoring political points. The other aspects of the legislation would not be there at the behest of any section of the alcohol industry, no more than MUP was forced on politicians by publicans.

PUBLIC HEALTH (ALCOHOL) ACT 2018

An Act to provide for the minimum price per gram of alcohol, to confer the power on the Minister for Health to, by order, increase that price, to provide for the labelling of alcohol products including the inclusion of health warnings and the alcohol content and energy content of alcohol products on alcohol product containers, to provide that an applicant for the grant or renewal of a licence under the Licensing Acts 1833 to 2011 and an applicant for the grant or renewal of a licence under the Registration of Clubs Acts 1904 to 2008 shall notify the Health Service Executive of the application, to provide for restrictions in relation to the advertising and sponsorship of alcohol products, generally and in relation to children, to provide procedures in relation to the exposure for sale and advertising of alcohol products in specified licensed premises, to confer power on the Minister for Health to make regulations for the purpose of prohibiting or restricting the sale of alcohol products in certain circumstances, to provide for enforcement measures, to provide for the repeal of certain provisions of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2003 and the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2008 , and to provide for related matters.

The figures are already skewed, as MUP only affects a certain demographic, and it is a relatively small one. So the figures wouldn't be showing that much difference unless they break it down a lot. As drinking/heavy drinking won't have changed much for those from a higher than low income household.

The figures may also rise when they introduce clubs and late bars being able to serve until 6:30am.

The figures would need to remove everyone that is not from a low income household. Then the homeless themselves would need to be broken down to those who drink etc. and probably even further to their actual living conditions. And probably a lot more to just get an accurate reading of how MUP has effected anything, if at all. As the latest statistics from Scotland say it hasn't.

And they haven't forgotten about the other provisions in the Bill.

I heard Louise O'Reilly Sinn Fein on TV 3 last night calling for the immediate introduction of the labelling and advertising provisions.

That's not really a political point due to the fact that all parties voted for the Bill.

The cost of living here is higher than Scotland, and there are a lot more people affected by these introductions in Scotland. At least that is the spiel that was given around Christmas when people were pointing out the difference. Not that I think that makes a difference, as the latest calls in Scotland are to raise it, as it currently seems ineffective. I wonder how many times they could expect to raise the price before it leads to criminals seeing profits worth the risk of importing.

A little off topic but there is a guy on Pat Kenny now saying that food deals should be hit next. It should be illegal to offer people discounts on their takeways or offer meals deals in the centra etc for a roll, crisps and a can of coke.

Where will all of this stop.