But you will never take our Buckfast!

#1
I expected you chaps to be on this like a scotsman on a free buffet.

Those chaps north of the border are looking at imposing a minimum price tariff. 45p per unit. Pushes up the price of the high-strength low-cost brands (See also: White Lightning).

The arguments against it? Well, it will unfairly affect the old and the poor.

Surely it will only affect them if they decide to keep drinking, in which case it is hardly the government's fault....


BBC News - Ministers propose Scottish minimum drink price of 45p
 
#2
Does anyone know what the legal justification, if that's the word, for this is?

Like, can the Gubmint announce tomorrow morning that tins of beans must be at least 50p in order to reduce public farting?
 

Ciggie

On ROPS
On ROPs
#3
I believe the technical definition of a responsible drinker is one who can pay legal and medical fees out of pocket in order to avoid embarrassment, plus a donation to the Constabulary Christmas box. No wonder they're getting hard up North.
 
#4
Does anyone know what the legal justification, if that's the word, for this is?

Like, can the Gubmint announce tomorrow morning that tins of beans must be at least 50p in order to reduce public farting?
Yes. They are the government in a representative democracy. We elect them so that they can institute laws that will overall improve our lives by reducing social harm.

Come on now. Stop laughing.
 
#6
Nothing to do with getting some extra cash in then?

[/cynic]
It would be, if this was a levy - which I don't believe it is. I believe it is a minimum price. Which I guess in the long run will lead to higher profit margins and more corporation tax which will go to, erm HMRC.

So I don't think so.
 
#7
Nothing to do with getting some extra cash in then?

[/cynic]
Well no, because it's not a tax increase per se... Although I suppose it ensures a certain revenue level is met.

I just seriously wonder how a government can tell a retailer how much they must charge for a product and whether there's space for a legal challenge.
 
#9
What if i had some mates (i dont but thats not the point) and they came around mine for a drink. Would i have to ask them for 45p before i could give them a can? And if i dont why is this any different to a supermarket selling it cheap/at a loss.
 
#10
Well no, because it's not a tax increase per se... Although I suppose it ensures a certain revenue level is met.

I just seriously wonder how a government can tell a retailer how much they must charge for a product and whether there's space for a legal challenge.
From reading the story the whisky trade association are already saying they will try an EU court to get it quashed.

Personally, I am struggling to see the bad side of this - for businesses that are responsible, anyway
 
#11
What if i had some mates (i dont but thats not the point) and they came around mine for a drink. Would i have to ask them for 45p before i could give them a can? And if i dont why is this any different to a supermarket selling it cheap/at a loss.
Because one is a SALE and one is a GIFT.

The difference is quite clearly marked out in law (or it is this side of the border). Unless you are the kind of tight cnut who normally charges his mates for a drink. In which case, you are probably scottish anyway.
 
#12
What if i had some mates (i dont but thats not the point) and they came around mine for a drink. Would i have to ask them for 45p before i could give them a can? And if i dont why is this any different to a supermarket selling it cheap/at a loss.
Probably need to ask them for 90p unless you buy really small cans ;)
 
#14
From reading the story the whisky trade association are already saying they will try an EU court to get it quashed.

Personally, I am struggling to see the bad side of this - for businesses that are responsible, anyway
Umm... Drink will cost more?
Evil, if you ask me.

Struggling to get by on a bursary me. (Thankfully not in Scotchland)
 
#15
First of all it is NOT a tax, tt is only a proposal from the so called Scottish Government and there is thinking that it will be illegal to do it. It is supposed to stop those who are on lower income/doleys from spending all their money on ilkihal and all it is going to do is produce around £140 million in profits to the supermarkets and drinks producers.

And before everyone in the sunshoite state of Ingerland think it isn't going to happen there wait and see it has already been mentioned down there many a time in the last 6 months or so.

Of course you don't have the so called drink problem do you? Where was that report?

BBC News - Problem drinking shows up north-south England divisions

Male alcohol-related deaths 'among highest' - Hounslow Chronicle
 
#18
Nothing to do with getting some extra cash in then?

[/cynic]
Any extra revenue would go to the UK government and not the SNP-led Scottish government. So no, I doubt that it is as I can't see Eck and the Gang being deluded enough to believe a Conservative-led UK government would hand any of it back.
 
#19
The Guardian said:
Last month, David Cameron said the government would look "very sympathetically" at proposals from 12 councils in the Manchester area for minimum pricing, to combat the binge drinking that led many town centres to look like the "wild west" at weekends.
Liam Donaldson, England's chief medical officer, has repeatedly endorsed the proposal and has been pressing for a 50p minimum price. But the Department of Health in London quashed hopes that it would be adopted across England too.
A spokeswoman said ministers were committed to "tough action" on problem drinking. The Home Office was consulting on proposals to ban shops from selling alcohol below cost price, and ministers were reviewing taxation. But more work was needed to understand binge drinkers. "No legislation or initiative will work unless we have a better understanding of what drives people's decisions. It is not clear that national minimum unit pricing is the best way to reduce harm, so we need to look at other options in England."

The BMA in London said it too supported the measure across the UK.
"There is strong scientific evidence that increasing price reduces rates of alcohol-related problems, particularly among young people," a BMA spokesman said.
"We have consistently called for a minimum price per unit as part of a raft of measures to tackle alcohol abuse and would urge the other UK governments to follow the example set by Scotland."

.
Looks like everyone will be getting hammered with increases one way or another
 
#20
A legal type tells me that this is all about the pathetic world of Scottish "Yes we can do it by ooorselves ye sassenach barstewards!" politics.

There is a view that fixing the minimum price for a unit of alcohol is a power reserved to Westminster and outside the devolved powers of Holyrood because it deals with the sale of goods to consumers.
 

Latest Threads