Sunday, November 28, 2010

Be careful what you wish for...

I didn't think I'd have a problem with minimum pricing, and we read that it's really on the cards this time. Actually, I don't read the Torygraph, but in fairness, I believe they broke this one (i.e. were fed this) so they get the link.

I reckon that I can live with this:
Under the plans, the minimum price for a litre bottle of spirits would be £10.50, while a 20-pack of beer would have to cost at least £8.50, and a bottle of normal-strength wine at least £2.

But hello, what's this?
Ministers are also to review the duty paid on beer, with a view to creating a new higher tax "bracket" for super-strength brews.

I'm not sure I like the look of that - at all.


Ed said...

That's worrying news.

Tom Mann said...

Any minimum price is worrying. Setting it that low would not effect anything, I work for Sainsburys and the cheapest offers on the spirits we've had for Xmas is £12. Even the basics wine is over 2 quid. But, just like all other taxes and restrictions on smoking, once the foot is in the door, it will rise and rise each year. This should be stopped now and never be made law.

StringersBeer said...

Tom, I suspect there's a lot in what you say. But to be fair, both the Tories and the LibDs had manifesto points favouring control of below-cost selling. That's democracy for you.

Cooking Lager said...

It doesn't matter that you are not interested in the cheap Carling. Minimum pricing isn't about saving pubs, it's about alcohol prohibition, restricting drinking and it starts with the poor.

Within a year, when it fails to solve binge drink Britain, you can expect the guns targeted at the on trade.

With on and off trade split, with rich and poor drinkers split, welcome to the start of prohibition.

StringersBeer said...

Hmm. What I do or do not think about cheap lout isn't really important (but where can I get 20 tinnies of anything drinkable for less than £8.50?). Minimum pricing is a no-cost gesture by a government wanting to be seen to do something about a "problem" that engages Mail and Telegraph (and Guardian) readers. As it happens, I didn't vote for anyone in favour of state control of booze pricing. But enough of y'all did, and since I'm broadly in favour of democracy, I'll have to put up with that. My main worry is expensive strong pong becoming too expensive.

The "poor" Cookie? Bless 'em. And bless you for your concern. I fear you might be right about a gap between the Rich and the Poor, but you know, I think it might be down to something a bit more fundamental than the price of Victory Gin.