Several papers are reporting today that the UK Government is moving towards fixing a minimum price for alcohol. The Daily Telegraph reports that:
'The scheme could see the starting cost of drinks fixed at between 40p and 50p per alcoholic unit – leading to a six-pack of lager costing about £6 and a bottle of wine costing £4.50. Cheap bottles of cider could quadruple in price.'
Such a scheme would affect the retail sector more than restaurants and pubs where alcohol already tends to be more expensive. Although I don't have much sympathy for the supermarkets who have made great play of offering cheap deals on wine, beer and spirits, it is difficult to see how such a minimum scheme would operate, assuming that it doesn't breach European trade legislation. If the Government force up wine that currently costs £3.29 to £4.50 – a rise of £1.21 – who gets the additional money? The Government? So another tax on alcohol? The supermarkets who are already making huge profits? It would be good if the producers got a decent price for their wine but this isn't going to happen, is it?
Although alcohol clearly can be a problem, I'm not very convinced by the panic about binge drinking if only because I see very few examples of it. I regularly catch buses late at night from the centre of London to Forest Hill and rarely come across drunks, although to be fair there are occasionally instances if you take the train instead. Nor are there places where you can drink 24 hours a day – most pubs on the journey back are closed by midnight or just a few customers finishing their drinks.
'The scheme could see the starting cost of drinks fixed at between 40p and 50p per alcoholic unit – leading to a six-pack of lager costing about £6 and a bottle of wine costing £4.50. Cheap bottles of cider could quadruple in price.'
Such a scheme would affect the retail sector more than restaurants and pubs where alcohol already tends to be more expensive. Although I don't have much sympathy for the supermarkets who have made great play of offering cheap deals on wine, beer and spirits, it is difficult to see how such a minimum scheme would operate, assuming that it doesn't breach European trade legislation. If the Government force up wine that currently costs £3.29 to £4.50 – a rise of £1.21 – who gets the additional money? The Government? So another tax on alcohol? The supermarkets who are already making huge profits? It would be good if the producers got a decent price for their wine but this isn't going to happen, is it?
Although alcohol clearly can be a problem, I'm not very convinced by the panic about binge drinking if only because I see very few examples of it. I regularly catch buses late at night from the centre of London to Forest Hill and rarely come across drunks, although to be fair there are occasionally instances if you take the train instead. Nor are there places where you can drink 24 hours a day – most pubs on the journey back are closed by midnight or just a few customers finishing their drinks.
14 comments:
I'm not sure if it's the alcohol or the kudos attached to bad behaviour but the centre of our town in Derbyshire is a no-go area for 4/7 nights of the week. The pavements are crowded with people, predominantly 20-30's but all age groups, staggering around, brandishing drinks and wearing - hardly anything - Nick quite approves of that bit. They pee publicly against the doors of shops and business also the gravestones in the churchyard. The language is desperately offensive and at the risk of sounding more like my mother every day, I just don't like it. You never know when you're going to be a target for some bloke you just happened to glance at as you stepped off the pavement to get around him and his mates. It happens a lot, especially to people of our age who are trying to look half-decently dressed on a night out to the theatre. Of course, we tend to feel safer if we're in our biker gear.
Making alcohol more expensive won't change anything. These same people will still buy the cheap stuff from the supermarket and get tanked up before they go out for the night. The large chains of pubs and clubs will still find ways of offering the booze cheap enough to get the punters in for the night.
I was amazed once, when the girl that does the hairwashing was describing her great night out to the girl at the next sink one Monday morning. Greatness is inversely proportionate to how much you can remember. If you get completely blathered by midnight and can't remember how you ended up back home, that's good.
There's no easy solution but peer pressure is the root of the problem, not the price of booze.
You're right, it's the smaller retailers and we, the social drinkers who will be worse off.
Jean. Many thanks for your long note. We, Londoners, must lead a sheltered life. Fortunately we can buy wine in the Loire and bring it back!
Jim - it was a bit of a rant I'm afraid - but I tell it like it is !!
That's fine, Jean
Jim,
I am not sure that minimum price does not have some potential. Contrary to Jean's point it, as you say, will only really be supermarkets it impacts on - indeed my tentative support for it is as much to support the imperilled pub, though it should have some impact on drunkness - though hardened drinkers will drink whatever the price, the opportunity cots should make some people reduce consumption - what it won't do is make much differnce to the pubs and clubs (except perhaps in reducing 'happy hours').
I should make one important point though - State controls (including taxes) have historically been the most successful constraint on excessive drinking in Britain (see inter alia this month's History Today which has an interesting article on this theme,
Graham
Graham. I'm not entirely against minimum price limits and it does concern me that supermarkets have been pushing very cheap alcohol. However, I need to see who will get the additional revenue – certainly not the major retailers.
I think most of the English drunks are on the Paris Metro.
Hey they shouldn't be complaining until they reach BC [Canada] tax rate of 117%, a 6 pack of beer here cost about 11$ Canadian [1.6 to the pound]
Anon – Not in a position to comment about English drunks on the Paris metro, although it may account for its very particular smell.
Weston. We have to complain otherwise we will have the same level as tax as BC!
hah true dat Jim, but with all these Socialistic Spending by the G8 taxes going up everywhere not down [Gas Tax just went up here 10c a litre, now its about $1.10 per litre! doesn't help I drive a 92 Jeep Cherookee with a 4.0L engine hah
Weston. I think our fuel tax is 56p per litre, so in Canadian dollars around $0.98
Just back from sunny England, Jim...
There is already a minimum price per unit - it's called duty and it's based on the alcohol content of different types of drink.
combined with VAT, duty means there is already 48% tax on a £5.00 bottle of wine - compared with 18% on a £50 bottle.
given an importer's normal margin and bottling costs of 50 cts, that leaves something like 20 cts for the wine...
... yum!
Hi Charles. Well yes there is a minimum likely price level due to duty but it is not as fixed as it would be under the new proposals. As you know supermarkets have often required their suppliers to absorb the cost of duty rises rather than pass the increase onto their customers.
20cts for the wine underlines the sense of trading up a little to get a better wine. Long term 20cts is not sustainable.
Post a Comment