Minimum Drinks Prices

[Guest onlynik]

There are plans afoot chanlenging the prices.

http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=149485&command=displayContent&sourceNode=149233&home=yes&contentPK=11113189

[Snakebite]

Pub Chains challenging minimum prices

Read today that 2 pub chains have taken the licensing boards to court

Quote from Fridays P & J

"The legal challenge by two pub chains to Aberdeen Licensing Board's proposed imposition of minimum drinks prices in the city's bars is hardly unexpected and, if commonsense is applied, will probably succeed.

The chains argue, quite reasonably, that fixing minimum drinks prices is beyond the remit of the licensing board, an argument which is difficult to rebut.

There is, also, the irony that the very body which is trying to dictate how much people have to pay for their drinks is the same body which has, largely, created the environment in which the cheap drinks promotions and "happy hours" flourished.

Shopkeepers, police and anyone unfortunate enough to live within a bottle's throw of Justice Mill Lane, around which much of these promotions take place, have long complained about the proliferation of pubs and clubs.

Any shop, office or even church which became vacant was converted into a bar, nodded through by a licensing board seemingly unconcerned about the monster it was helping to create. Then, woken like Sleeping Beauty from its slumbers, the board resorted to panic measures to try to return the genie to the bottle while simultaneously keeping everyone else away from it.

The words "stable door", "horse" and "bolted" spring to mind. "

To be honest the Licencing board needs to taken down a peg or two from their high horse in order to see sense.

By all means binge drinking it not good for one's health but i think they could have tackled it a bit differently since they have created the problem in the first place by allowing too many drinks licences, therefore too much competition which in a capitalist economy will always force cheap prices to stay in business.

If this does happen irresepective of the court challenge I think it will put a certain amount of pubs out of business since everyone will get drunk before going out.

The only people that will benefit out of this are the off licences

It needs a huge cultcural change for people to stop binge drinking and I dont see it happening any time soon.

[Val]

I totally agree. Minimum drinks prices seem to be a ridiculous idea. The fact of the matter is that the city centre is still full of pubs, bars and clubs; binge drinking will still be a way of life in British society today, whatever the price of alcohol. Aberdeen City Council cannot change the choice of a nation. Increasing prices by a pound is not going to stop people coming into town with an intention of getting drunk. All that will happen is people will drink far more before even setting out thus causing more trouble on Union Street for a longer period of time, making the police, who are pushing for the raise, left with more disturbances to sort out. It appears to be a mere publicity stunt. The council look like they are 'doing something' to please those who constantly write into the Evening Express complaining about 'the youth of today' but it really is not going to miraculously make the Saturday and Sunday morning scenes on Union Street disappear.

" Dr Laurence Gruer, who advises NHS Health Scotland on public health issues, argued it(increases and restrictions on the sale of alcohol)was the only way to reverse the death rate. "

BBC News Scotland

To be honest, I really don't think that paying 1.75 for a pint of beer will rise life expectancy. Perhaps if the Scottish Executive put more money into alcohol education in the first place, then we would not have this problem. I still can't understand why there are no mandatory health warnings on alcohol advertisments, like there are on cigarettes. The council really are barking up the wrong tree on this one. They created the problem. They put dozens of licenced venues in a concentrated area. And funnily enough, they're the ones who cannot deal with the consequences.

[Flash@TMB]

An increase in the number of bars and clubs does not increase the number of drinkers. Instead it brings market forces to bear, causing the bars and clubs to either improve their offering, or failing that... cheapen it.

Ultimately you end up with 2 markets, one that offers an improved drinking experience and one that offers a cheaper drinking experience, and the customer decides which to opt for.

Unfortunately if margins are reduced then throughput must be increased. So the cheap drinks market has been offering promotions that encourage people to drink greater quantities of alcohol in less time.

It is the responsibility of the bar or club to ensure that it's customers do not drink to a dangerous level. Should someone drink a large quantity of alcohol in one sitting and die, the bar that served them is held responsible for their death.

Here a conflict has arisen between making money and social responsibility. The cheap drinks market has been actively encouraging people to drink to unsafe levels in order to maximise it's revenues. They do this by means of 2 for 1 deals, drink all you can for x, discounting certain products down to ridiculously low levels, and generally facilitating the potential to drink a fatal quantity of alcohol for under 10.

IMHO most of us have a better time consuming substantially less than the LD50 of ethanol! I prefer drinks that feel stronger than they are, drinks that create a better buzz, and lift me up... without poisoning me - it's meant to be about having a good time!!!

10-15 years ago we still necked a bottle of wine, or ripped into a bottle of spirits before going out. Often we were well minging before we got to the pub. We did this because we were skint. But we still went out because we WANTED to go to the pub. So it doesn't really matter how cheaply the off-license is permitted to sell booze... people will still WANT to go to the pub at some point. Yes this will have a hugely negative effect on the mega discount bars - GREAT, make them think up other reasons for people to visit their establishment.

10-15 years ago, you could walk the length of union street and almost never encounter a fight, let alone become unwillingly involved in one. In fact it used to be a good vibe - honest! And there were just as many people going about back then. The only difference was that more bars were either run by breweries or independants. The mega discounting culture has risen up with the pubco. Historically pubs were just an outlet for beer, now they are BIG BUSINESS. And BIG BUSINESS will do whatever it can get away with in pursuit of money... until such time as it's activities are REGULATED.

Whether this is fair doesn't come into it - very few things are fair. The question is "Will it work?", and so far it does seem to be working in other areas.

Anyway how many people on this forum regularily pay less than 1.75 for a pint???

[Flash@TMB]

It's a ridiculous' date=' knee jerk reaction to a problem of the council's own making.[/quote']

Almost every large town and city in this country is currently affected by this problem. The breweries made money by selling their beer. 10-15 years ago prices were fixed, and the government deemed that unfair. They introduced regulations that created a strong middleman - the pubco. Companies that make their money from RESELLING alcohol. This has achieved the desired effect, in fact it's served it's purpose a little too well.

Firstly it's put pressure on the breweries to drop their prices, this has brought about consolidation of the breweries (not necessarily a good thing) and thus caused the breweries to put the squeeze on small independants in order to subsidise their loss leader sales to the pubcos.

So at present the pubco is king... king of the piranhas, and when times are lean they eat each other.

What we require now is some additional regulations to stabilise the market. The government isn't getting off it's arse, and it's the councils that have the greater incentive to sort things out... since they're getting the blame for it all. Unfairly.

[MattJimF]

the new pricing policy has been put on hold until at least November

http://www.thisisaberdeen.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=148331&command=displayContent&sourceNode=148314&contentPK=11126602&moduleName=InternalSearch

[Lawy Lawson:Attorney]

I think it might be possible to actually cut down on binge drinking culture, to be honest. Think about the cardinal sin that drink-driving has become, for example. And I don't blame alcohol for the behaviour of assclowns. That's like blaming Gibson or Fender for Good Charlotte sucking. I know some cities are testing a "finger-print entry" scheme for some pubs and clubs by which trouble makers would be banned from pubs and clubs on that network, which sounds pretty awesome but probably really expensive and other problems I'm too lazy to think about.

[Metarie]

Something my dad pointed out (and I'm not sure if it's 100% accurate, so i apologise if I'm speaking shit) is that if a bar is a private club, say, the students union, then the council has no say on what goes on there. If this is the case, then surely every bar in town could become members only and therefore charge as little as they want. All they'd have to do is charge people 1 to become a member and that'd be it.

[Snakebite]

I think it might be possible to actually cut down on binge drinking culture' date=' to be honest. Think about the cardinal sin that drink-driving has become, for example. And I don't blame alcohol for the behaviour of assclowns. That's like blaming Gibson or Fender for Good Charlotte sucking. I know some cities are testing a "finger-print entry" scheme for some pubs and clubs by which trouble makers would be banned from pubs and clubs on that network, which sounds pretty awesome but probably really expensive and other problems I'm too lazy to think about.[/quote']

Only thing with fingerprint scanning in pubs is that the we would end up having to give up our civil liberties since it would have to be policed to stop it being abused otherwise you could find yourself being banned just because the bouncer dont like the look of you.

Who would control the information, the police? and what else would they have on file.

Fair enough the innocent should have nothing to fear but mistakes can be made.

It could just lead to more aggrevation in the streets. Which means more trouble that the police have to deal with.

[MattJimF]

Something my dad pointed out (and I'm not sure if it's 100% accurate' date=' so i apologise if I'm speaking shit) is that if a bar is a private club, say, the students union, then the council has no say on what goes on there. If this is the case, then surely every bar in town could become members only and therefore charge as little as they want. All they'd have to do is charge people 1 to become a member and that'd be it.[/quote']

the only problem with that is, a bingo club is classed as a social club under licencing laws, due to only allowing members, or people over 18 that are friends/relatives of members, but to become a member reqiures no hand over of cash, just a 24 hour waiting period as per gambling licence rules.

[jonty84]

Its a fuckin stupid idea. People are just gonna buy loads of booze and get fuckfaced at home before going straight to the club, which will just mean that the bars do bad business. Yet again the government comes up with a shit solution to a minor problem. lets be honest - the only reason binge drinking is a problem is when idiots go out and vandalise shit and start fights. most of us are only out for a good nite.

jonty