I'm getting cross, and I don't like getting cross, especially at Christmas, and especially when it's a government that includes my own party that's making me cross.
It's this 'minimum alcohol pricing' thing. I thought as a party the Liberal Democrats had a grown-up, intelligent approach to substance abuse, as evidenced by its forward thinking on, for example, drugs policy. But it appears that every argument put forward in that area - that criminalisation doesn't help break addiction, that driving substances underground merely puts them and their users into the hands of the criminal fraternity, that prohibition doesn't stop use of substances but just makes illegal and dangerous versions of them more commonplace - seems to have been thrown out of the window when it comes to these daft proposals on alcohol pricing.
Has anyone conclusively shown that forcing up the price of alcoholic drink in supermarkets is a good and effective way of curing people of alcohol addiction? Has it been shown that making people pay more for beer, wines and spirits will reduce levels of consumption or make binge drinkers start drinking responsibly? No? I didn't think so. Then what is this government doing making this meaningless gesture?
As a liberal, I start from the basis that adults are grown-ups and should be treated as such; and that the state should butt out of people's private lives unless absolutely necessary. The stupid proposal to force up alcohol prices for no proven benefit, on the spurious grounds that people will then behave as the government wants them to, fails on both counts. It's nanny-statism of the first order, and I want none of it.
I don't like starting a new year in a grumpy mood with my own party, so will the sensible people on the Lib Dem benches - and I know you're there, I've met you! - please start doing something about it? Kthanxbai.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with you - and indeed blogged about it back in 2009 when the Scottish were proposing it. But good luck getting your fellow Lib Dems to agree. Most of those I speak to on Twitter are firmly on the "nanny state" side on this issue.
ReplyDeleteHmm. Most of the ones I speak to on Facebook aren't! You're clearly speaking to the wrong ones ... Unfortunately both parties' manifestos in 2010 proposed a minimum pricing ban.
ReplyDeleteThere is some recent research from British Columbia which appears to show that minimum pricing works. TBH it surprised me. I'll see if I can find a reference.
ReplyDeleteFound it: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/raising-cost-of-drink-shown-to-cut-abuse-and-illness-6281261.html?origin=internalSearch. I only wonder whether some other factor was at work.
ReplyDeleteWhy would anyone take an obscure study from British Columbia and then seek to extrapolate its results in order to claim they are equally applicable to the UK. If the rest of the Canadians are ignoring this study then it probably is best left ignored. If you are surprised by a result it is probably because it defies rational analysis, common sense, and personal experience.
ReplyDeleteIs the argument that clear cut? The pro-minimum pricing side of the argument includes the health groups you'd expect to see but also others such as CAMRA that you might not expect.
ReplyDeleteWhilst minimum pricing would be hit cheap alcohol sold in supermarkets below cost price and super-strength ‘white lightning’-style drinks, it wouldn't have any impact on 'the price of a pint' for most wine, beer or spirits drinks.
And when it comes to research, in addition to the British Columbia research, there is other relevant research such as 'Changes in Alcohol-Related Mortality and its Socioeconomic Differences After a Large Reduction in Alcohol Prices: A Natural Experiment Based on Register Data' by Kimmo Herttua, Pia Mäkelä and Pekka Martikainen published in the American Journal of Epidemiology in 2008.
I agree we should always be careful of nanny-statism, but we should also be open to properly considering the arguments and supporting evidence.
Or try Wagenaar A. C., Salois M. J., Komro K. A. Effects of Beverage Alcohol Price and Tax Levels on Drinking: A Meta-analysis of 1003 Estimates from 112 Studies from 2009
ReplyDeleteSorry not to come back to this, Mark - I got sidetracked by work. I would so expect an organisation like CAMRA to support minimum pricing of alcohol! And clearly if there were a minimum price for cheap booze, all the other brands would price up to maintain a differential.
ReplyDelete