This article was originally posted on Drinkuary.org
I do apologise for mixing my metaphors (or possibly even my metafives, amongst friends who’s counting) and I would observe that my beer as you can see is wearing it’s finest tin foil hat (There are bonus points if you can identify what I’m drinking behind the fantastic photo editing*). However I would like to suggest an idea which may well be deserving of a tin foil hat, though I suspect those that have looked at how tobacco control has gone won’t think so. Currently there is much rejoicing in the land as it would appear via the usual reliable sources leaking to the press that minimum pricing is dead, that it’s just a question as to how to back down without losing too much face. “Hoorah!” we all say let’s go down the pub have a drink and forget about it all and enjoy Christmas. Now I’m very much up for those last two ideas and intend to do both, but I’m not saying Hoorah. I’m not saying hoorah because I don’t trust the little bleeders, despite popular opinion Cameron isn’t an idiot, so why propose and fight for legislation that’s already under serious legal challenge and is going to be deeply unpopular? Because 956 people have signed a petiton? Nah they’ve ignored far bigger petitions than that. Because it’s unpopular? They knew it would be before hand. May I suggest instead that it’s being abandoned because it was never meant to go through, it was a huge headline grabbing feint. We’ve all go jolly excited about minimum pricing and lots of people have made lots of noise and look they’ve caved in, everyone relax and go about our business battles won? Not so fast says I look at the Alcohol Strategy that minimum pricing was part of, there were three other parts to that:
- consult on a ban on the sale of multi-buy alcohol discounting
- introduce stronger powers for local areas to control the density of licensed premises including making the impact on health a consideration for this
- pilot innovative sobriety schemes to challenge alcohol-related offending
so no more two-for’s, what exactly would a “health impact assessment” for a pub consist of? Innovative sobriety schemes – at very least I’d bet on that being more of our money off to Alcohol concern and other like minded groups to spend on telling us what to do.
Beyond that, though annoyingly I can’t find it now, they did say that they had looked at increasing taxes and making it illegal to sell below that tax rate – but went for minimum pricing instead. Want to bet that they’ll now have to reconsider that decision?
So I may have my tin foil hat on too tight, and seeing the back of minimum pricing (if true) is a good thing – but the puritans aren’t in retreat yet, they’re not even considering moving onto their back foot Let’s not be distracted by what I can but consider to be an obvious feint as it’s the sort of tactic that has been used time and time again.
“We were going to cut both your legs off with a chain saw, but that was unpopular so we’re not going to now”
“Hoorah!”
“Nope we’re going to cut your foot off with a rusty hacksaw instead, still at least it’s not your legs hey!”
* Name fairly stolen from Legiron via the PubCurmugdeon.
