Well to be fair I’ve not been off the booze, but I am I’m afraid going to go on about the increasing anti-drink agenda. I begin to sympathise with stuck records the world over. They are as Leg Iron has often observed using exactly the same tactics as they did with smoking. Camra and the pub trade are once more, as again LegIron observed, putting up no resistance but just hoping they’ll somehow be spared. The puritans are so blatant and unimaginative in their tactics that even the mainstream media is starting to pick up on it. But then again when they’re talking about “passive drinking” the similarities really do get hard to ignore. I can just assume that in the game of puritan top trumps they have to use the same criteria to know who’s ahead so hence the claim that “alcohol affects thousands more innocent victims than passive smoking.”
So despite the levels of drinking falling over the last 10 years and bringing in more tax than it “costs” the NHS we suddenly have a problem. Once more following the same script as used for smokers, prohibition didn’t work so chip away instead. So we have the suggestion that they’ll water down our beer and yet again introduce minimum pricing. Though they have finally realised that may be a problem legally so instead they’ve hit on that perennial favourite of politicians – higher taxes, despite the fact that the cost of beer is already over 30% of the cost. This is probably why they need to subsidise their own drinking. As we’re all in it together and if this really was a health issue surely our politicians could lead by example and ban booze from all state premises and functions, and as it’s so terrible Mr Cameron will surely be announcing he’s on the wagon any day now? Or maybe it’s just dangerous for us? For added hypocrisy the Lib Dems it seems don’t want to put up the price of cider and Whiskey as their voters like to drink that.
However the thing that actually caught my eye this week which doesn’t seem to have got much publicity was a small article in the Metro (page 31 Mon 13th) which said that Mr Lansley was going to announce restrictions on the supply of alcohol into shops as part of his wider attack on drinking. Of course if they’re rationing booze, they’ll have to put the tax up on it as well lest they lose money.
“1billion fewer drinks in shops to cut bingeing
A BILLION fewer units of alcohol will make it into shops to cut binge-drinking, a report out yesterday revealed. The target is expected to be set by health secretary Andrew Lansley next month as part of a wider alcohol strategy”
So while the country is still struggling to find growth they think it’s a good plan to reduce stock in shops, and all the related trade in producing and selling those goods to us mere peons – all to solve a non existent problem. But then they’re not going to be the brightest given they don’t like to drink. They do seem to be still immune to the lesson of the smoking ban that people will just stop spending.
So beware the water drinkers and in the meantime nip over to the Telegraph to help with their current polls, as they seem to be asking the same question twice to try and get the “right” answer:
How should Britain’s drinking culture be tackled?
How should the Government combat Britain’s problems with alcohol?
So far the option of “fuck off and leave us alone” is attracting far too few votes.