Originally Posted by Mick (Post 34753492)

The other solution - get rid of 24 hour opening hours, it really is laughable when they raise concerns about there being a binge drinking problem with the younger generation, yet 24 hour opening hours was introduced not that long ago ...

It is Double standards. Just like the government forcing the issue of a more Greener environment and then go champion plans to for a new runway at one the UK's main airports.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 34753759)

i agree, 24hr drinking has never really took off were i live,i think most places that applied for it were refused permision,not really surprised given the state of the bigg market on a saturday night

Also wasn't Sir Liam Donaldson involved in the ban smoking legislation,cos if he was then this new proposal is bound to go through

and can any one tell me what a "unit" is,how much alchohol is in a "unit"
sorry to be ignorant but i only drink friday/saturday night and i only drink pint's so how does a "unit" equate to a pint of john smiths (which by the way has just gone up 30p to £2.50) in my local

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34753766)

Strength (ABV) x Volume (ml) ÷ 1000 = No. of units

E.g. Pint of Stella - 5.2 x 568 ÷ 1000 = 2.95

Taken from

http://www.drinkaware.co.uk/tips-and-tools/drink-diary/

which is useful, but may surprise some people when they see how low the recommended units of alcohol are per day

Originally Posted by rogermevans (Post 34753775)

cant see this ever being successful as a minimum price under competition laws especialy if there were differences between supermarkets and clubs

as a tax it may be doable

but in either case i cant see it stopping the problem drinkers

they take hospital hand sanitizer for goodness sake to sake thier desires

see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7920576.stm

as to clubbers you more than likely just see an increase in people taking in pre bought imported drink or just using drugs to increase the effect

better would be enforcing the laws we have that are mostly ignored

• It is illegal to serve alcohol to someone who is drunk
• It is illegal to allow a customer to become intoxicated on your premises
• It is illegal to serve customers under the legal drinking age of 18.

there should be at busy premises 1 drink per person at bar rule, it may cause cues ;) give them longer to sober up though lol

Originally Posted by rogermevans (Post 34753775)

better would be enforcing the laws we have that are mostly ignored

• It is illegal to serve alcohol to someone who is drunk
• It is illegal to allow a customer to become intoxicated on your premises
• It is illegal to serve customers under the legal drinking age of 18.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 34753780)

excellant point with one addition
taking drinks out of a bar to drink in the street whilst wating in cue for the next bar should be outlawed or enforced if it is already outlawed

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 34753492)

The other solution - get rid of 24 hour opening hours, it really is laughable when they raise concerns about there being a binge drinking problem with the younger generation, yet 24 hour opening hours was introduced not that long ago ...

It is Double standards. Just like the government forcing the issue of a more Greener environment and then go champion plans to for a new runway at one the UK's main airports.

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 34753908)

:tu:

This 'government's answer to everything seems to be 'tax it'.

Originally Posted by Ramrod (Post 34753912)

Time to start up my beer brewing again......:)

---------- Post added at 20:45 ---------- Previous post was at 20:41 ----------

Thats simply because they are after our money, they are a tax and spend govt...:(

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 34753927)

So Bliar's claim that 'we have no plans to raise taxes' was just a cynical lie to buy votes???.... Surely not.... :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 34753927)

So Bliar's claim that 'we have no plans to raise taxes' was just a cynical lie to buy votes???.... Surely not.... :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34753957)

It was more like a strategy, than a plan ;)

Originally Posted by Derek S (Post 34753436)

The majority of young people get tanked up before they go into pubs/clubs in my experience, making off-licence booze more expensive would get them into pubs sooner rather than trying to cram all their drinking into a short space of time. Coupled with more effective enforcement of licensing laws (It's an offence to serve alcohol to drunk people in Scotland, I'd imagine England/Wales has a similar law) I think its the most effective way of dealing with the problem.



Its not overly penalising the person who wants to have a few quiet drinks in the house (at least the Scottish plans aren't, I haven't read the full proposals for England yet).
Its targetting the people who go out and get the cheapest drink possible, get off their faces on it and repeat that cycle day-in, day-out.
Under the proposals the minimum price for some drinks would be less than they are sold for already.

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 34753969)

What you mean like lie, lie again, keep lying, then lie a bit more and hope the electorate don't notice too soon ?....

Originally Posted by JethroUK (Post 34753366)

I've always felt that tax collect from 'specific' area should be spent in that 'specific' area (not just lumped into the coffers)

So it could be used for:

Extra policing/survellance Sat nights
Clearing up the street on Sun morning
(arresting the drunk & disorderly and getting them to clear the streets on Sun morn)
Investing in non-alchohol rellated activities (free health centre / swimming pool etc on Saturday nights?)

Governments have never felt any obligation to justify taxes - probably because they wont do any of those and just give themselves a jolly good pay rise instead

.