Minimum alcohol pricing is nigh

EddieN75 · 29-04-2021 12:14PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

5000+ posts in and some posters still haven't got a clue what MUP is.

I only read 3567 of them.

Regardless, they should have split the windfall between the suppliers and Revenue. All they have done is put more cash in Diageos pockets.

Odd kind of move. Great opportunity to claw back much needed funds

the beer revolu · 29-04-2021 12:17PM

listermint wrote: »

Well tbh your inferring that premium will be grand something to do with a tight margins etc etc etc it can be seen between your posts frankly.

The existing 3 euro beers from craft sectors will push up to 3.50 nice round number sure the customer can support it and obviously all of the spirits will go up too.

It's not rocket science and anyone saying this will occur just has to look at Scotland's increases as the most recent example.

Not alot of hoop talk required it's how business and premium products operate as they always have. Why do you think that's not true specific reasons.

You are forgetting about competition.

Can you provide evidence regarding Scotland?

VinLieger · 29-04-2021 12:19PM

EddieN75 wrote: »

I only read 3567 of them.

Regardless, they should have split the windfall between the suppliers and Revenue. All they have done is put more cash in Diageos pockets.

Odd kind of move. Great opportunity to claw back much needed funds

What you are talking about is an excise increase and the reasons they aren't doing that is firstly it would need to be announced in the budget where it would get lots of negative publicity, this way is more confusing for people and shields it via the ironclad pretend excuse of "health". Secondly it would also mean increasing prices and tax for the vintners too and this whole scheme is designed specifically to try to force people back into pubs by only making home drinking more expensive.

joeysoap · 29-04-2021 12:22PM

I disagree, the "drinking problems" are myths from the government.

Newry is in for another motherload. Actually you don’t have to go that far, unless of course you are going to do more shopping.

ohnonotgmail · 29-04-2021 12:37PM

EddieN75 wrote: »

I only read 3567 of them.

Regardless, they should have split the windfall between the suppliers and Revenue. All they have done is put more cash in Diageos pockets.

Odd kind of move. Great opportunity to claw back much needed funds

but that isn't what they are planning. what they are planning is well known. Why bother posting in a thread if you haven't got a clue what people are discussing?

EddieN75 · 29-04-2021 01:02PM

VinLieger wrote: »

What you are talking about is an excise increase and the reasons they aren't doing that is firstly it would need to be announced in the budget where it would get lots of negative publicity, this way is more confusing for people and shields it via the ironclad pretend excuse of "health". Secondly it would also mean increasing prices and tax for the vintners too and this whole scheme is designed specifically to try to force people back into pubs by only making home drinking more expensive.

I think you are right. Get them back into the pubs. Timed to perfection in the cusp of pub opening.

I wonder how many will instead choose to have friends over for a BBQ and still cheaper booze. No queues, no closing time and no listening to people you would rather not deal with!

Hotblack Desiato · 29-04-2021 02:20PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

50p minimum for a unit of alcohol. a unit is 10 millilitres (8g) of pure alcohol.

Whereas what's proposed here is a euro per 10g. Rip-off even if you agree with MUP (and I absolutely don't!)

tjhook · 29-04-2021 02:51PM

For all the huffing and puffing (on both sides), I bet this MUP will have little effect - either on people's behaviour or on health generally.

Alcoholics will still find a way to buy what they need.
People who prefer drinking in pubs will be unaffected and continue to do so (post-Covid).
People who prefer a drink at home won't suddenly become teetotalers or flock to the pubs.

Of course lack of any real impact will be assumed to mean even more MUP is needed - those pushing for this measure are hardly likely to accept any alternative explanation/viewpoint.

firemansam4 · 29-04-2021 03:00PM

tjhook wrote: »

For all the huffing and puffing (on both sides), I bet this MUP will have little effect - either on people's behaviour or on health generally.
Alcoholics will still find a way to buy what they need.

People who prefer drinking in pubs will be unaffected and continue to do so (post-Covid).

People who prefer a drink at home won't suddenly become teetotalers or flock to the pubs.

Of course lack of any real impact will be assumed to mean even more MUP is needed - those pushing for this measure are hardly likely to accept any alternative explanation/viewpoint.

I think there will be groups pushing for more extreme measures for sure, and who knows how far this will go.
The worrying thing is how much influence lobby groups seem to have on the government regardless of what the actual public opinion is on this.

Could a push for full prohibition be such an outlandish thought in the future? Im not saying this is in any way likely any time soon but the more measures are drip fed to us, it may become a more realistic scenario in decades to come.

the beer revolu · 29-04-2021 03:35PM

tjhook wrote: »

For all the huffing and puffing (on both sides), I bet this MUP will have little effect - either on people's behaviour or on health generally.
Alcoholics will still find a way to buy what they need.

People who prefer drinking in pubs will be unaffected and continue to do so (post-Covid).

People who prefer a drink at home won't suddenly become teetotalers or flock to the pubs.

Of course lack of any real impact will be assumed to mean even more MUP is needed - those pushing for this measure are hardly likely to accept any alternative explanation/viewpoint.

I think you're right.

If there is a drop in consumption (as per current trends) after/if it's introduced, the narrative, no doubt will be - it's working, let's do it more.

And if there's no drop or an insufficient drop the narrative, no doubt will be - it isn't working, we need to do it more.

Hotblack Desiato · 29-04-2021 04:05PM

tjhook wrote: »

People who prefer a drink at home won't suddenly become teetotalers or flock to the pubs.

You forgot to mention that these people whose drinking causes no issues for themselves or anyone else will be forced to pay substantially more, and it's not even a tax they're paying.

firemansam4 wrote: »

Could a push for full prohibition be such an outlandish thought in the future?

I fully expect to see rationing in my lifetime, I don't think that's an outlandish thought at all given where we are and what the unaccountable lobby groups want, which is frightening really.

PunkIPA · 29-04-2021 04:18PM

tjhook wrote: »

For all the huffing and puffing (on both sides), I bet this MUP will have little effect - either on people's behaviour or on health generally.
Alcoholics will still find a way to buy what they need.

People who prefer drinking in pubs will be unaffected and continue to do so (post-Covid).

People who prefer a drink at home won't suddenly become teetotalers or flock to the pubs.

I agree with all of this, but I think it will have a very real effect on the behaviour of a certain type of retail consumer. If it's brought in without similar measures in NI, I think it will 100% result in significant cross-border shopping.

Particularly at Christmas I could see people doing big day trips to Newry/Belfast to stock up on a year's supply, and possibly do a big Christmas shop at the same time.

For an average couple who are drinkers of a certain type there will be literally hundreds of euro a year to be saved by a day trip to do something they would be doing anyway.

I agree it will have no effect on overall consumption, let alone the consumption of addicts.

Tony EH · 29-04-2021 06:22PM

PunkIPA wrote: »

I agree with all of this, but I think it will have a very real effect on the behaviour of a certain type of retail consumer. If it's brought in without similar measures in NI, I think it will 100% result in significant cross-border shopping.

Particularly at Christmas I could see people doing big day trips to Newry/Belfast to stock up on a year's supply, and possibly do a big Christmas shop at the same time.

For an average couple who are drinkers of a certain type there will be literally hundreds of euro a year to be saved by a day trip to do something they would be doing anyway.

I agree it will have no effect on overall consumption, let alone the consumption of addicts.

I'm old enough to remember shopping trips to Newry. In fact there were coaches put on for shoppers to do the run in the 80's. I remember my mum being quite surprised at the savings to be had and I ended up with Star Wars figures for half the price they were in the south.

I can easily see booze runs to Newry being a thing if this comes in and there's a significant jump in cost.

I don't imagine that it will last too long however for people who will have to do longer journeys. But people close to the border will carry on buying their plonk in the north and I wouldn't blame them. If I lived in Dundalk or Sligo, that's what I'd be doing.

However, when you take the bullshit "heath" excuse out of the equation, and the fact that impact on revenue will be relatively insignificant, one has to ask oneself WHY this is being done?

Is it to try and force people back into pubs at the vintners behest? Is it to up prices, to be then followed by a tax increase later? Because there's no doubt in my mind that this is money orientated and nothing to do with the stated aim of national health.

patrickbrophy18 · 29-04-2021 06:37PM

This is precisely why I didn't vote for any of the Fine Gael, Fianna Fail or Green parties. They spend our taxes on NGOs which we didn't even ask for. They formed a coalition against our wishes when the pandemic hit, an unvoted move. Any change to law or government to do with the people should be put to vote and not forced on us.

The reason why many people are probably drinking more currently is because of the abject misery of lockdown measures which our government continue to enforce. Seriously, the amount of debt and unemployment being forced on the average Joe against their will would drive them to drink and even worse.

This is like kicking someone when they are down. Any escape from the numbing effects of lockdown is being eroded by those in the Dail possibly, while drinking in the Dail bar.

Oh, the irony!

Thankfully, an end to these misery inducing lockdowns is in sight. However, even before the pandemic this was mooted and passed. So...

Reputable Rog · 29-04-2021 06:42PM

I can remember a time when if you asked any Publican they’d tell you how they loved Good Friday as they could paint or do a bit of maintenance.
Then they saw the roaring trade done by off licences on the Thursday before and the clamour to be allowed open began.
There maybe some trouble ahead with the EU though, it was different for Scotland and Wales as they were leaving and the EU couldn’t be arsed dealing with internal UK matters at the juncture in time.

VinLieger · 29-04-2021 06:50PM

Reputable Rog wrote: »

I can remember a time when if you asked any Publican they’d tell you how they loved Good Friday as they could paint or do a bit of maintenance.
Then they saw the roaring trade done by off licences on the Thursday before and the clamour to be allowed open began.
There maybe some trouble ahead with the EU though, it was different for Scotland and Wales as they were leaving and the EU couldn’t be arsed dealing with internal UK matters at the juncture in time.

If it is against EU law its up to someone to take a case on it like the scottish whiskey industry did, the EU aren't gonna come calling by themselves.

Wilmol · 29-04-2021 08:36PM

firemansam4 wrote: »

I think there will be groups pushing for more extreme measures for sure, and who knows how far this will go.
The worrying thing is how much influence lobby groups seem to have on the government regardless of what the actual public opinion is on this.

Could a push for full prohibition be such an outlandish thought in the future? Im not saying this is in any way likely any time soon but the more measures are drip fed to us, it may become a more realistic scenario in decades to come.

I think they might follow the New Zealand principle. People born after certain year will no longer be able to purchase alcohol and cigarettes.

HBC08 · 29-04-2021 08:47PM

Tony EH wrote: »

I'm old enough to remember shopping trips to Newry. In fact there were coaches put on for shoppers to do the run in the 80's. I remember my mum being quite surprised at the savings to be had and I ended up with Star Wars figures for half the price they were in the south.

I can easily see booze runs to Newry being a thing if this comes in and there's a significant jump in cost.

I don't imagine that it will last too long however for people who will have to do longer journeys. But people close to the border will carry on buying their plonk in the north and I wouldn't blame them. If I lived in Dundalk or Sligo, that's what I'd be doing.

However, when you take the bullshit "heath" excuse out of the equation, and the fact that impact on revenue will be relatively insignificant, one has to ask oneself WHY this is being done?

Is it to try and force people back into pubs at the vintners behest? Is it to up prices, to be then followed by a tax increase later? Because there's no doubt in my mind that this is money orientated and nothing to do with the stated aim of national health.

I wish it was a plan to up prices with a view to a tax hike later as you say,theyre not even smart enough to manage something like that.
Whats happened here is lobby groups and a few puratanical wing nuts have gotten further than they thought,nobody shouted stop and here we are.

Suckit · 29-04-2021 10:50PM

Tony EH wrote: »

Is it to try and force people back into pubs at the vintners behest? Is it to up prices, to be then followed by a tax increase later? Because there's no doubt in my mind that this is money orientated and nothing to do with the stated aim of national health.

Quote from Fine Gael 2011 Manifesto:

5.3 Keeping Communities Vibrant
Supporting Irish Pubs: Fine Gael recognises the importance of the Irish pub for tourism, rural jobs and as a social outlet in communities across the country. We will support the local pub by banning the practice of below cost selling on alcohol, particularly by large supermarkets and the impact this has had on alcohol consumption and the viability of pubs.

It appears in section 5 - Community and Rural Affairs.
The Health and Mental Health section appears much further down the manifesto, in section 13, and there is no mention of alcohol in that.

HBC08 wrote: »

I wish it was a plan to up prices with a view to a tax hike later as you say,theyre not even smart enough to manage something like that.
Whats happened here is lobby groups and a few puratanical wing nuts have gotten further than they thought,nobody shouted stop and here we are.

The whole point of MUP is that 'in theory' the price of alcohol does not go up on every item, it needs to only effect the bottom tier. Which in practice hasn't happened.

kenmc · 29-04-2021 11:04PM

Suckit wrote: »

Quote from Fine Gael 2011 Manifesto:

It appears in section 5 - Community and Rural Affairs.
The Health and Mental Health section appears much further down the manifesto, in section 13, and there is no mention of alcohol in that.

The whole point of MUP is that 'in theory' the price of alcohol does not go up on every item, it needs to only effect the bottom tier. Which in practice hasn't happened.

And that's exactly why it's an absolute joke. It doesn't just affect the "bottom of the barrel" it has repercussions right through the sector

kenmc · 29-04-2021 11:07PM

If they were really serious about health, they would permit the increasing number of nonalcoholic beers be sold any time of day. My local Aldi have these outside the naughty section, clearly cos they're not naughty. Yet try buy one before 10.30..... later on Sunday

Tony EH · 29-04-2021 11:21PM

Suckit wrote: »

Quote from Fine Gael 2011 Manifesto:

It appears in section 5 - Community and Rural Affairs.
The Health and Mental Health section appears much further down the manifesto, in section 13, and there is no mention of alcohol in that.

The whole point of MUP is that 'in theory' the price of alcohol does not go up on every item, it needs to only effect the bottom tier. Which in practice hasn't happened.

That's an FG manifesto from ten years ago and I know this has been shuffled around fro a good while. But why are other parties so eager for it now?

In addition, the "theory", like so many of FG's smoke screens is bollocks.

Timmyr · 30-04-2021 01:31AM

Wilmol wrote: »

I think they might follow the New Zealand principle. People born after certain year will no longer be able to purchase alcohol and cigarettes.

New Zealand are not doing that?

VinLieger · 30-04-2021 07:19AM

kenmc wrote: »

If they were really serious about health, they would permit the increasing number of nonalcoholic beers be sold any time of day. My local Aldi have these outside the naughty section, clearly cos they're not naughty. Yet try buy one before 10.30..... later on Sunday

The supreme irony being a litre of orange juice has about as much alcohol in it as any non alcoholic beverage.

cj maxx · 30-04-2021 08:16AM

I disagree, the "drinking problems" are myths from the government.

kenmc wrote: »

If they were really serious about health, they would permit the increasing number of nonalcoholic beers be sold any time of day. My local Aldi have these outside the naughty section, clearly cos they're not naughty. Yet try buy one before 10.30..... later on Sunday

And stop the price gouging around 0% beers

the beer revolu · 30-04-2021 09:29AM

kenmc wrote: »

If they were really serious about health, they would permit the increasing number of nonalcoholic beers be sold any time of day. My local Aldi have these outside the naughty section, clearly cos they're not naughty. Yet try buy one before 10.30..... later on Sunday

I'm open to correction here, but I don't think there is anything in law restricting the sale of low/no alcohol beers (<. 5%).
As far as I can make out, it's the supermarkets doing this.

the beer revolu · 30-04-2021 09:31AM

cj maxx wrote: »

And stop the price gouging around 0% beers

The government don't set the price of beers (or much else).
There is 0 duty on 0% beers.

How do you suggest that the price is fixed?

Antares35 · 30-04-2021 10:29AM

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

This is precisely why I didn't vote for any of the Fine Gael, Fianna Fail or Green parties. They spend our taxes on NGOs which we didn't even ask for. They formed a coalition against our wishes when the pandemic hit, an unvoted move. Any change to law or government to do with the people should be put to vote and not forced on us.

The reason why many people are probably drinking more currently is because of the abject misery of lockdown measures which our government continue to enforce. Seriously, the amount of debt and unemployment being forced on the average Joe against their will would drive them to drink and even worse.

This is like kicking someone when they are down. Any escape from the numbing effects of lockdown is being eroded by those in the Dail possibly, while drinking in the Dail bar.

Oh, the irony!

Thankfully, an end to these misery inducing lockdowns is in sight. However, even before the pandemic this was mooted and passed. So...

So true on every point unfortunately. I mean what the hell harm is some poor fecker doing buying a six pack of cheap beers on a Friday evening, or a couple who can't afford to get a babysitter on a Saturday night (or simply don't want to) cooking a meal in at home and having a bottle of wine when the kids go to bed. These people are being made to feel like alcoholics. That barrier entry into alcohol sections in shops is ridiculous. Though I do love giving the barrier a good, loud and proud thwack with the trolley as I go in

odyssey06 · 30-04-2021 10:31AM

the beer revolu wrote: »

The government don't set the price of beers (or much else).
There is 0 duty on 0% beers.

How do you suggest that the price is fixed?

Is there not a certain element of price co-ordination going on in pubs... with stocking Heineken Zero at same price at full Heineken, even though zero attracts no excise?

Antares35 · 30-04-2021 10:33AM

odyssey06 wrote: »

Is there not a certain element of price co-ordination going on in pubs... with stocking Heineken Zero at same price at full Heineken, even though zero attracts no excise?

Didn't they come up with some bull**** excuse before that it costs extra to remove the alcohol and that's why the prices are on par. We've come a long way from the "here's a free club orange for the designated driver"!

Minimum alcohol pricing is nigh

Comments