Archive for Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites.
 


       Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Forum Index -> Scottish Politics and Independence
Reluctant Hero

MacAskill - Increase tax on alcohol

Don't think this is the answer.  It may reduce consumption a little, but it will just mean that most people go into greater debt, or make choices about what they want to sacrifice.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7262318.stm

MacAskill wants alcohol tax rise

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has called for a big increase in the cost of alcoholic drinks.
Mr MacAskill told a BBC Scotland debate that consumers should pay more for beer, wine and spirits to help reduce violence and drink-related problems.

He said Scots had an unhealthy relationship with alcohol.

On the BBC's Wasted Nation programme, Mr MacAskill said he was "constrained" from doubling the cost of alcohol because the UK Government set taxation.

The justice secretary said alcohol was too easily available and too affordable.

He said it was time to "turn off the cheap drink tap".

 Simply sticking the price up throughout the whole trade will not actually stop the problem

Paul Waterson
Scottish Licensed Trade Association

Asked if he would like to have the power to raise the tax on alcohol, Mr MacAskill said "yes".

He said the best tax rate would have to be worked out but even a 10% increase in cost would lead to a decrease in alcohol consumption.

The chief executive of the Scottish Licensed Trade Association, Paul Waterson, said putting up prices across the board was not the answer.

He said: "If you go into supermarkets and so on, you will see ridiculously low prices being charged, discounted prices, irresponsible promotional activity.

"It is that we have got to stop.

"Simply sticking the price up throughout the whole trade will not actually stop the problem."
Cymro

I think it's a huge mistake to just tax alcohol like hell. Alcohol isn't a bad thing, it's misuse of alcohol that's bad. Would they be putting an extra tax on hoodies next because some people wear them to attack people?

All taxing it will do is make people who want to get it do that by other means - bootleg, homebrew etc. Those who beat the crap out of eachother on a Saturday night, assault their wives etc will keep on doing that whether they've payed £2.10 for a pint or £4.20. Those of us who like a drink but don't do anyone but ourselves any harm will be the ones that are punished.

Yes in the UK we might like alcohol too much but taxing it isn't going to change that. I'd argue liberalising the alcohol laws is more likely to do that than clamping down on it further.
Lewis

You can raise tax all you like, win;t make a blind bit of difference. Just gives you more to spend as a Government.

Look at how much you see these programmes portray heroin as costing. I don't know any figures, but I would think heroin would cost a good bit more than a bottle of buckie.

You need to undo something here we made a grave mistake on. We had this thinking that we could change our habits by copying the French and the Spanish, that's not going to work as alcohol is a drink there, not a drug. They don't drink to get hammered, they drink because it;s sociable and nice tasting.

If you want to change the habit of youth, try getting parents to set an example and let their children drink small sips from an early age. I love alcohol myself even though I'm too young to buy it, but I've never been drunk. I personally have only ever drank fine wine and Ale. I'm not asking those on the doll to give their children fine wine and ale, but I'm asking them to take responsibility.

That's the key word here. Alcohol is an excuse for bad behaviour. The "but I was drunk" is far too often used. Alcohol is just one of the things that shows people as not being responsible enough.
Lochaber

Cymro wrote:
I think it's a huge mistake to just tax alcohol like hell.

I suspect that Kenny MacAskill would agree that taxation policy is not  enough. The British Medical Association report Alcohol misuse: tackling the UK epidemic (February 2008) outlines a range of policies in the areas:
Quote:
Effective policies to reduce alcohol-related harm in the UK
    Access to alcohol – controlling price and availability
    Taxation and traveller’s allowances
    Licensing reforms
    Legal age of consumption and age of purchase
Responsible retailing and industry practices
    Enforcing responsible serving practices
    Marketing and advertising
Measures to reduce drink -driving
    Education and health promotion
    Educational programmes
    Understanding recommended drinking guidelines
    Health promotion and advice from healthcare professionals
Early intervention and treatment of alcohol misuse
    Screening and brief interventions for alcohol misuse
    Specialist alcohol treatment services
International cooperation on alcohol control

The BMA makes a powerful case. In moderation alcohol is a benefit but we must stop turning a blind eye to the very serious levels and consequences of its abuse in our society.
Aventinian

Lochaber wrote:
I suspect that Kenny MacAskill would agree that taxation policy is not  enough. The British Medical Association report Alcohol misuse: tackling the UK epidemic (February 2008) outlines a range of policies in the areas


To be frank, I'm sick of particular interest groups being given the time of day. Yes, we'd all be healthier if we drank less, ate well and so forth - but quite simply that is the business of the individual.

Anyone who believes that the British problem with alcohol is related to the alcohol itself is quite simply an idiot. Perhaps they should address why so many people want to drink themselves silly on Friday and Saturday nights. There are many answers there, and none of them will be addressed by the likes of Kenny MacAskill.
azzuri

Aventinian wrote:
Lochaber wrote:
I suspect that Kenny MacAskill would agree that taxation policy is not  enough. The British Medical Association report Alcohol misuse: tackling the UK epidemic (February 2008) outlines a range of policies in the areas


To be frank, I'm sick of particular interest groups being given the time of day. Yes, we'd all be healthier if we drank less, ate well and so forth - but quite simply that is the business of the individual.

Anyone who believes that the British problem with alcohol is related to the alcohol itself is quite simply an idiot. Perhaps they should address why so many people want to drink themselves silly on Friday and Saturday nights. There are many answers there, and none of them will be addressed by the likes of Kenny MacAskill.


What do you think the British problem with alcohol is Av?
Lochaber

Aventinian wrote:
To be frank, I'm sick of particular interest groups being given the time of day. Yes, we'd all be healthier if we drank less, ate well and so forth - but quite simply that is the business of the individual.

Surely the nature of the interest shown by a particular group would be an issue? For example, the distillers and brewers have a clear financial interest in reducing taxation on their products. The British Medical Association, however, display a different set of values - which disdain pecuniary interest in favour of the greater social good.
BMA wrote:
Alcohol is an addictive drug and its misuse is associated with a wide range of dose-related adverse consequences that can lead to significant harm to the individual and society.

If it were only a matter of an individual harming themselves then perhaps you would have a case - but that is not the only serious issue when considering the social impact of a behaviour-affecting drug:

Home Office wrote:
Alcohol-related crime
The links between alcohol and violence are well established. But we are determined to rid our streets of this growing problem.
Facts & figures
      * in nearly half (46%) of all violent incidents, victims believed offenders to be under the influence of alcohol
       * this figure rose to 58% in cases of attacks by people they did not know
       * 39% of domestic violence cases involve alcohol
       * in more than a million violent attacks the aggressors were believed to be drunk
       * the offender was least likely to be perceived to be under the influence of alcohol in the case of muggings (17%)

(Source: British Crime Survey 2006/07)
See http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crim...cing-crime/alcohol-related-crime/
Lochaber

There is a report today on the BBC website
BBC wrote:
Babies get treatment for alcohol
Infants under the age of one in Grampian have been admitted to hospital with alcohol-related illness...

See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/7264462.stm
Reluctant Hero

Ironically, some sections of the football fraternity are canvassing for alcohol to be re-introduced to football grounds.

Think this is a win-win situation.  The spectators get to drink a few pints at the game and the clubs get extra income.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/7265902.stm
RadgeJougal

There's already too much tax on this.

Doesn't he know that alcohol provides Scotland with jobs as well as drunks?
Aventinian

azzuri wrote:
What do you think the British problem with alcohol is Av?


I think alcohol abuse is more a symptom than an independent problem. I'd attribute it to community and family collapse more than anything. There simply aren't the same social structures any more, and thus it ends up in the hands of government - the last resort of the hopeless.
Aventinian

Lochaber wrote:
Surely the nature of the interest shown by a particular group would be an issue? For example, the distillers and brewers have a clear financial interest in reducing taxation on their products. The British Medical Association, however, display a different set of values - which disdain pecuniary interest in favour of the greater social good.


Indeed, and I don't have a problem with the BMA addressing such matters within their remit as a medical organisation. However, when they start making recommendations or presenting options of this type, they cross over into quite separate territory.

Taxation, social trends, crime and punishment, the acceptable remit of the government over health - that is not their ground to tread. The unfortunate end result is usually the publication of deeply biased judgements by a semi-public organisation which completely fail to consider any interests other than their own.

Quote:
If it were only a matter of an individual harming themselves then perhaps you would have a case - but that is not the only serious issue when considering the social impact of a behaviour-affecting drug


Anything can be shown to affect behaviour. However, ultimately I believe that it is the ultimate judgement of a criminal, rather than influences, which we should address. Obviously within reason, however.

To be fair, if the police were more willing to pick up drunks, throw them in a cell for the night and slap them with a £60 fine in the morning, a great deal of the most evident forms of criminality would disappear.
kevin04

I agree with most of the posters on this, It's not going to make any difference to Scotland & the UK's binge culture, I spent some time in Iceland who are just as bad even worse binge drinkers than us although the majority of them leave their drinking until the weekend, a saturday evening in Reykjavík can look quite ugly at 4am with everyone staggering around.

We are North Europeans so are the Finns, Irish, Swedes, Icelanders who all have the highest rates of binge drinking records in the European community. How many folk do we know that can't wait til Saturday comes so they can get hammered.

Taxing alcohol like they do in Iceland will just leave the poorer folk more vulnerable to anti social methods to get alcohol. I don't know what to do but i don't think the Icelanders, Finns, Irish know either
Lochaber

kevin04 wrote:
How many folk do we know that can't wait til Saturday comes so they can get hammered.
The Home Office says that 44% of young adults (18- to 24-year-olds) are binge drinkers (i.e. they felt very drunk at least once a month) and that his group was more likely to binge drink than any other age group. Young males were more likely to binge drink (49%) than young females (39%). Binge drinkers are more likely to offend than other regular drinkers.
    * Among 18 - to 24 - year-olds, 27% of binge drinkers admitted they had committed an offence in the past 12 months compared with 13% of other regular drinkers.
    * Young male binge drinkers are more than twice as likely to commit a violent offence (16%) than other young male regular drinkers (7%).
    * Young adult binge drinkers committed 30% of all crimes reported by adults in the past 12 months, and 24% of all violent incidents.
    * Young male binge drinkers were much more likely to get into a fight (25% vs. 12%) and damage something (14% vs. 4%) during or after drinking than young female binge drinkers.
Who is to pay for the consequences of this behaviour? (I.e. the provision of the  police, justice, health, ambulance, social services, ... required). The collection of taxes from alcohol is simply the analogue of the Polluter Pays principle.
Aventinian

Lochaber wrote:
Who is to pay for the consequences of this behaviour? (I.e. the provision of the  police, justice, health, ambulance, social services, ... required). The collection of taxes from alcohol is simply the analogue of the Polluter Pays principle.


How about a 'being male' tax? Or one for being working class? After all, people in these groups are likely to have poorer health and commit more crime.

Or how about we accept that we are supposed to have a health service funded not by behaviour or medical cost, but out of graduated taxation based on ability to contribute?

As for police, a tiny fraction of those masses of people who 'binge drink' cause any problems for the police.
Lochaber

It needs to be recognised by those who drink alcohol that we are consuming a psychoactive drug with many unpleasant side effects.
Quote:
"We in Scotland have a cultural problem with alcohol. Too many Scots think it acceptable to drink to get drunk. Abused partners. Random assaults. Stabbings. Vandalism. The impact is there for all to see - on the streets, in police stations, in hospital emergency departments, and in the courts.  ...The Scottish government is developing a long-term strategic approach to shifting attitudes and changing behaviour towards alcohol. The misuse of alcohol does much more harm to our society than violence and crime alone - it is a significant factor holding back the overall health of the nation.
Kenny MacAskill, Scottish Justice Minister
The Justice Secretary has set out his determination to take swift and tough action in the areas of underage sales and irresponsible promotions - with plans to hit hard licencees that sell to under 18s - a sale may result in the loss of the premises licence. There will also be a crackdown on irresponsible promotions and discounts of alcohol. The new Licensing Act bans certain types of promotions in pubs and clubs and some in shops. He is also looking at what other types of promotion should be restricted - for example, those which can encourage people to buy, and drink, more than they intended such as buy one get one free or multi-pack deals.

Well done, Kenny. Let's drink to that! Wink
Morph

this is just another stealth tax, im sick of the government taxing petrol to stop us driving, alcohol to stop us drinking and cigarettes to stop us  smoking (i dont smoke personally)

No one will stop you will only create further poverty and debt problems for certain areas people in the country.
Aventinian

Lochaber wrote:
"We in Scotland have a cultural problem with alcohol. Too many Scots think it acceptable to drink to get drunk.  Abused partners. Random assaults. Stabbings. Vandalism.


That just prudish, antiquated nonsense!

I've got terrifically drunk in my time, I've taken illegal substances - and yes, I've been sick a few times. And yes, I have drank to get drunk on many occasions, as have many people I know.

So. Bloody. What. I have never stabbed anyone, vandalised anything, assaulted anyone or abused my partner. As I think is clear to anyone, the vast majority of people do not do such things - no matter how pissed they get. Perhaps even more obviously, the sort of people who would do such things are the sorts that don't need to get particularly drunk in order to do so.

Perhaps if the police dedicated a little bit more of their time to eradicating 'petty' violent crime and anti-social behaviour then we wouldn't be in this mess. As has been observed in relation to random assaults by gangs in London, you basically have to kill (or come very close) someone in order to attract any significant penalty from the police. You'll probably receive a harsher punishment for not buying a TV licence than you would for randomly beating someone up in the street.

The cultural problem is the same as it has always been: violence is seen as acceptable, and there is less of a community spirit to prevent it.

Quote:
it is a significant factor holding back the overall health of the nation.


The nation don't want to be healthy. They want to be free and enjoy life. If the price of that is a few years off a life expectancy then so be it. Better dead than to have never lived at all.

Quote:
with plans to hit hard licencees that sell to under 18s


Why? I drank before I was 18, as did most people. It is a normal part of growing up in this country.

Moreover, if alcohol is to be normalised and a more relaxed culture to it fostered, exactly the opposite should be done. If you're worried about the safety of younger people, let 16 and 17 year olds buy beer and other drinks with a reasonably low ABV in pubs - at least then they are in a protected and civilised environment.
Aventinian

Morph wrote:
this is just another stealth tax, im sick of the government taxing petrol to stop us driving, alcohol to stop us drinking and cigarettes to stop us  smoking (i dont smoke personally)

No one will stop you will only create further poverty and debt problems for certain areas people in the country.


Indeed, it hits those least able to afford it. And what does it say about the state of this country: if you're poor, your liberty is at the whim of the state, while the rich can continue to go about their business unmolested?
Lochaber

Aventinian wrote:
I've got terrifically drunk in my time, I've taken illegal substances - and yes, I've been sick a few times. And yes, I have drank to get drunk on many occasions, as have many people I know. So. Bloody. What. I have never stabbed anyone, vandalised anything, assaulted anyone or abused my partner. As I think is clear to anyone, the vast majority of people do not do such things - no matter how pissed they get.

This used to be the type of argument advanced by some motorists who objected to their alcohol consumption being restricted. It takes time to change opinion. (I remember sitting at the wheel of my car, during a wine festival in the Loire, with the local gendarme (!) plying me with glasses of wine and insisting that I drink up. This was before France changed its drink-driving laws - now stricter than the UK).

I accept that the state should refrain from being puritanical in its approach to alcohol consumption (as it has tended to be, I believe, with respect to tobacco consumption). But by the same token, the community of alcohol consumers should not be allowed to ignore the serious adverse consequences - many visited on innocent third parties - when alcohol is manufactured and sold on an industrial scale. To demand an unfettered right to be intoxicated and damn the consequences is tyrranical. There is not a country in the world where this will go unchallenged.
kevin04

Scientists should look to do a study of North Europeans, I know a few folk back home and I have to include myself in this that enjoy drinking to get drunk. I don't do it all the time but once every couple of months when I get a chance to meet up with some old school pals, we let our hair down and usually have a good blether, night and a chat with drink.

Aven - you certainly have a point that not all people who drink are aggressive scum bags although there are a few, I certainly have never started a fight with someone due to alcohol if anything I go the other way and  love chatting to randoms,

I think it has something to do with the long winters, all the countries in Europe with terrible binge drinking patterns e.g Ireland,us, Finland,Iceland etc have very long dark winters and it might give the punters some relief from the dark, of course as you may tell I'm no scientist  Very Happy
Lochaber

kevin04 wrote:
Scientists should look to do a study of North Europeans...

For one study see Alcohol as a causal criminogenic factor: The Scandinavian experience.
Quote:
The link between alcohol and crime has been amply documented at least since the 19th century. This raises the question whether efforts to limit the availability of alcohol would reduce the rate of violent crimes. In this presentation we will briefly review the evidence about a connection between alcohol and violent crimes. Secondly we will mention some of the major theories to explain this connection. Thirdly, we will in some detail review the evidence from Scandinavian experiences of alcohol control measures and their effect on the rate of violent crime.
kevin04

Hi Lochaber

Cheers for your links  Very Happy
doodells

I remember a Swedish lass telling me about the problems her Government have with the EU regarding alcohol. Whilst the Swedes love to get smashed (and you can tell this is true by all the puddles of spew peppered around the pavements on a Sat/Sun morning), they have gernerally got it under control compared to the Scots. You can only buy booze in Systembolagets which are state-run, have crap opening hours and all the booze is deliberately priced high to discourage bulk buying. They inroduced the systembolagets system at the beginning of the 20th century because too many people were wasting away with alcohol problems. Nowadays they have much lower levels of alcohol related diseases compared to many other EU countries. However, the EU are trying to end the systembolagets because they are 'unfair' business-wise. Competition rules in the EU are being breached in Sweden by the state-run monopoly on alcohol. So the Government put together a film explaining their motivres behind it and sent it out to all the EU politcians involved in the debate.

Whilst I dont know what the outcome will be, I hope the EU allow them to carry on their monopoly. Private profit would come at the expense of the nations health. And apart from alcohol, Sweden have an extremly open and liberal market economy.
Aventinian

Lochaber wrote:
This used to be the type of argument advanced by some motorists who objected to their alcohol consumption being restricted.


Alcohol restricts the ability to operate a motorcar. It does not turn people into amoral hooligans.

Quote:
the community of alcohol consumers


There is no such thing.
Morph

I agree it is the reaction times and perception which is affected by alcohol not the drivers moral functions
Holebender

Well... when you're sober you may well abhor drink driving and yet, after a few bevvies you might think it worth the risk of getting behind the wheel. I think the drink does affect our moral judgements to some extent.

Just as people may engage in sexual activity when drunk that they would consider immoral when sober.
Morph

I have had a fewdrinks before and would never dream of getting behind the wheel of a car. I think that would be the same for most people.

This arguement is the same as computer games and violence. I have an xbox and play online shooting games this doesnt mean i am going to feel tehneed to kill someone in the future
Lochaber

From yesterday's Financial Times:

Quote:
Scotland eyes tough rules on alcohol

By Andrew Bolger in Edinburgh

Published: March 5 2008

With Britain in the grip of a crisis over how to stem underage drinking, the ­Scottish government is ­considering a radical package of measures that could set the pace for policymakers in the rest of the UK.

A ban on irresponsible promotions in outlets such as supermarkets and the introduction of a “polluter pays” levy on those who sell alcohol – to fund measures such as marshals at taxi ranks and additional police on the streets at night – are among proposals drawn up by the ruling Scottish National party.

Kenny MacAskill, justice secretary, told a recent Alcohol Focus Scotland conference that he was determined to tackle the destructive drinking culture by “turning off the tap” of cheap drink. “From young people rampaging through the streets shouting abuse at passers-by to people dying in our hospitals of alcoholic liver disease – alcohol misuse has a lot to answer for,” he said. “The facts are stark – over 60 per cent of prisoners admit they were drunk when they offended, and six people die every day from alcohol-related illness.”

The initiative comes amid rising public concern about excessive alcohol consumption, particularly by young people. Against a backdrop of intense media coverage of “binge drinking”, the UK government of Gordon Brown, prime minister, has been under pressure to reverse the recent liberalisation of drinking laws.

There have also been calls for greater restrictions on the sale of alcohol and to use taxes to make alcohol more expensive.

In Scotland, the regional government has pressed ahead with changes to licensing regulations that will, from next year, confine alcohol sales to separate ­display areas – in spite of supermarkets’ protests that such measures will restrict consumer choice and place a burden on those filling shelves.

The SNP faces a bigger challenge over its determination to outlaw drink promotions such as “two-for-one” deals. The Scottish Grocers’ Federation said ending multi-pack promotions could lead to shops competing purely on unit price, which could have the effect of lowering rather than raising the price of alcohol.

The regional government is also seeking to curb the number of underage drinkers by rolling out a “test purchasing scheme” in which 16-year-olds attempt to buy alcohol, allowing police to target premises believed to sell to youngsters.

Mr MacAskill said: “Responsible licensees have nothing to fear from this. But those who flout the law will face swift and tough action. Losing their licence and substantial fines are both options.”

To date, 31 councils across Scotland have by-laws banning the public consumption of alcohol. These cover more than 480 towns and villages as well as areas within the city of Glasgow.

Mr MacAskill said: “The 31 councils that have such by-laws in force have paid testimony to their effectiveness in reducing the nuisance and disorder commonly associated with public drinking.”

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008

       Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Forum Index -> Scottish Politics and Independence
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum