It's ten to five in the afternoon, and in 24 hours time we will know just what the Budget will bring. Will alcohol duty be lifted by a large degree to 'tackle binge drinking'? Will Spirits be left alone, as usual, with other forms of alcohol going up by inflation? And just what is inflation? Does it really include the spiralling costs of anything involving road transport (ie everything), grain (ie most things edible and therefore a neccessity), or any of the real rip-off's of modern life.
Does anyone even care? And where does all this extra money go?
Back to the point. It is almost ineviatable (and some would say vital) that alcohol duty will increase. The smart predictions across the web suggest 5p a pint on beer - although many are calling for more, even double that. At the very least it will be a penny based on recent years.
But will increased duty fix Binge Drinking. No. To be fair, I don't think anyone believes increased taxes on their own fix anything, but lets have a closer look, shall we? Ahhh yes, through the Round Window....
1. The Increased Revenue Will Recover The Social Cost Of Drinking.
Well, maybe - but only if alcohol consumption continues at current rates. A fact which defeats all the arguments about cutting consumption. After all, less drinking equals less duty income, so more has to be raised pro-rata. And so overall income doesn't really go up. So how can it then pay for extra 'services'.
2. Increased Tax Will Reduce Consumption/Illness/Death etc etc
How much is a pint of strong lager in the pub? Approaching £3 a pint, maybe more in places. And in the supermarkets/high street shops? A lot less, certainly under a pound, well under when you factor in special offers. So firstly, a rise in cost will drive trade away from the pubs, and into the arms of those retailers already selling either below or just above cost prices. Now maybe these retailers will pass the rise on in full, but it will still leave the price a long way below that at which people will pay in the pub. So just how much will it reduce consumption? How many of us can honestly say that they don't find it easier to drink more at home than they would on a night out? Do we serve pub measures at home when drinking wine or spirits? I am not convinced that driving drinkers into their front rooms is for the best. More importantly, assuming that increasing the price will decrease the consumption relies heavily on a belief that people drink solely because the alcohol is cheap. In which case France must be full of sozzled medically wrecked folk. Well, it wasn't the last time I looked. France is full of places selling alcohol cheaper than in the UK. Do they have trouble at 2am every Friday night in Lyon? Do they have gangs of teenagers drunkenly loitering on street corners? No. But then do we? Oh yeah, we see the press coverage, but when did we last see it for real. Sure, some places have a problem, but not the whole country. But yet it is deemed OK to penalise the whole country.
3. Under Age Drinking Is Out Of Control, And Needs To Be Stopped.
Yes, yes and thrice yes. But just how bad really is it? Evidence seems to be out there certainly, and there is no denying the problem. But think back to your childhood. You are asked questions about your lifestyle. What is the overriding aim to your answers? The truth, which may be sad & pathetic compared to what society says is the norm? Or do you flower it up a little bit, to fit in with what is perceived to be the social norm. Point is, just how reliable are the surveys that suggest kids are binge drinking at 12/13/14/16 etc (if we asked a teenager to name the worlds best song, we wouldn't accept there answer, so why accept any other. That said, they may well be right of course, on all counts). And what percentage is this of the total number in that age group. What I am saying is do we know just how much spin there is here - all the drinking data floating around seems to come solely from parties with an axe to grind, be they at the prohibitionist end (and they are out there), or from the denial end. Personally I believe it is growing problem, I believe that nearly all adults out here of all ages have been guilty of drinking, maybe heavily (if only once), before they were 18. So with that element of sanctimonious hypocrisy out of the way, there is one question that should be asked above all others. Why do you drink? I suspect that 'It's Cheap' will not always be the main reason. Whilst I can't deny cost is not a factor at all, it is surely more important to sort out the problem - otherwise the focus will move from getting drunk to something else, and I doubt that'll be a sudden uptake of tapestry and community projects. Why didn't previous generations binge drink? Or did we, but because of a perceived social framework we maybe all behaved a lot better. Are kids behaving anti-socially because they are drunk, is getting drunk just one of the ways of behaving anti-socially. When we see a group of teenagers, what is the first thought that comes into our heads? Do we see yobs, or do we see a group of friends just 'hanging out', just as we did in our day (probably hating it when we were told what to do, when to do it...).
I'm afraid society has a raft of problems - none of them caused by drugs, guns or alcohol, but all lead into an interest of those three. And no amount of tax will cure us.
4. The Health Service Is Creaking Under The Weight Of Alcohol-Related Disorders.
Let's face it, the NHS is just creaking. This is the result of many things - medical science can do new things every day, and they all need to be paid for. When the NHS was created, no-one really imagined being able to replace organs, repair eyes, add robotic limbs. Heck, they never even saw the need for acres of managers and all the seminars that they need in order to survive. Not even the endless oppurtunities for White Papers, Policy Documents, etc etc. The NHS is badly underfunded, heavily over managed, and subjected, on top of all this, to constantly costly fiddling from politicians more interested in leaving their mark than benefitting the country. But all that aside, should the NHS have to treat self inflicted illness. If you ignore all the advice, and give yourself a knackered liver, should everyone else be liable? The argument that suggests we shouldn't is very strong. But what about a broken limb sustained while playing football down the park? I don't see the point in football, so why should I pay to pick up the pieces? What about fat people? And those in car accidents? Point is, where do you draw the line? Food poisoning whilst on holiday in Tunisia? Not my problem mate. So yes, alcohol-related health problems may well be a drain on resources, but then so are many other self inflicted illnesses that the NHS has to treat. The answer? Stop people drinking to excess is the obvious one, but ask why they do so in the first place. Why is alcohol so damned important to them. And what will they replace it with if they can't afford it?
It's all very difficult. Alcohol is a drug. It has adverse effects in large doses. But in small doses it can be beneficial. Of course there are some who would argue this way for certain illegal drugs, and in many ways alcohol is just as dangerous as class A drugs. But the overriding thought in my mind is society has many ills, and just raising taxes won't solve this one. By all means restrict access to it - reduce the number of off licences, control the minimum price in those that are left in you have to. But a blanket raise of taxes will only serve to further reduce the viability of controlled drinking establishments (ie responsible pubs), increase the viability of those more interested in attracting customers (ie shops using drink as a loss leader), and drive the vulnerable onto the streets/into their homes, where they really can consume alcohol 24 hours a day (unlike 99% of all licenced premises...). And if you think alcohol causes crime now, just wait until these criminals have to steal even more before they can have a drink...
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment