Ciarrai76 wrote: » Does anyone know what the situation is with an off-licence being very close to a school? How will advertising offers etc or window displays affect them if its not allowed near schools? We are a bit stumped as we don't know how it will apply to us!
(h) in or at a school, including the grounds of the school, or within 200 metres of the perimeter of the grounds,
“school” means a recognised school within the meaning of the Education Act 1998.
“school” means an establishment which— (a) provides primary education to its students and which may also provide early childhood education, or (b) provides post-primary education to its students and which may also provide courses in adult, continuing or vocational education or vocational training, but does not include a school or institution established in accordance with the Children Acts, 1908 to 1989, or a school or institution established or maintained by a health board in accordance with the Health Acts, 1947 to 1996, or the Child Care Act, 1991 ;
(i) in or at a place where an early years service is carried on or within 200 metres of the perimeter of a place where an early years service is carried on, or
Spanish Eyes wrote: » Why is none of this nonsense required in other Continental countries like France, Spain and Italy etc. I wonder. Now you could say that they have a healthy attitude to alcohol, but you can drink all day long from early morning till the wee hours in such countries) and I am sure there are more. Never seems to be an issue. The freedom to do what you wish at any time regarding alcohol, together with a culture that frowns upon violent messy drunkenness, and enforcement of the law if you do, is probably a factor. No wonder people in Med countries live till they are 105. Just being a bit lighthearted. But honestly the way we are being controlled about most enjoyable things because of the actions of the few is not really fair.
Brendan Bendar wrote: » Very simples, they don’t gannet down the dhrink like there was no tomorrow.
rubadub wrote: » I don't think creches are includedhttp://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1998/act/51/section/2/enacted/en/html#sec2
matrim wrote: » The journal article I was reading earlier mentioned that creches were included
elperello wrote: » I just heard Noel Rock TD on RTE saying no MUP until Stormont brings it in. Eunan McKinney still pushing for it in 3 months time.
youcancallmeal wrote: » It'll be interesting to see how the craft brewers approach this. I'd like to think prices should stay the same because if they increase unnecessarily it'll clearly be seen as a cash grab.
Brendan Bendar wrote: » Very simples, they don’t gannet down the dhrink like there was no tomorrow. They take their time and drink smaller quantities from smaller glasses from smaller bottles. You might laugh but that makes a difference and like most places they will have food with their beverage. Pat likes to belly up to the bar open his throat and gull the pints in two ‘swipes’. Then he doesn’t know when to stop in case anyone thinks he can’t hold his dhrink. It’s that simple
BeerNut wrote: » The brewers don't set retail prices, though. And the beer retail sector isn't usually shy about putting them up.
timmyntc wrote: » You'd think that for smaller breweries who have higher costs & have to retail for a higher price, would welcome the minimum being pushed up - because it makes their products look more competitive pricewise.
youcancallmeal wrote: » I would've thought the brewers work closely with craft beer pubs and independent off licenses to ensure their product is priced correctly to sell. I can't imagine a craft brewer would be happy if an off license is selling(or not as the case may be) their product at 25% over the rrp?
carq wrote: » ‘The data does not agree that alcohol will become more expensive for people on low incomes’ !??
rubadub wrote: » I don't know how they can say that with a straight face. The indirectly give the figures for the rise.https://www.rte.ie/documents/news/2021/04/alcohol-report.pdf "Currently, it is possible for a man to consume his weekly low-risk guideline limit for €7.48" The low risk is 17 units, so that will be €17, so a €9.52 weekly increase, or €495 per year. And that is for people on the low risk amount. The biggest issue I have is that it is not a tax. Only 19% of the increase gets taken as tax via VAT.
L1011 wrote: » Newry off licence owners will be booking their new yacht already
rubadub wrote: » The biggest issue I have is that it is not a tax. Only 19% of the increase gets taken as tax via VAT.
carq wrote: » Frank Feighen just on the radio getting a free ride. The man sounds like an idiot.
At what level should a MUP be set? A MUP needs to be set at a level the evidence indicates will reduce the burden of harm from alcohol use. A minimum price will need to be reviewed on a regular basis and adjusted when necessary to maintain its value in line with inflation. The Department of Health has announced that a MUP of €1 will be introduced as part of the Public Health (Alcohol) Bill. The University of Sheffield estimated that with a €1 MUP per standard drink (assuming that it’s updated annually in line with inflation): Across the whole population, mean weekly consumption would reduce by 8.8% Across the whole population, 37.5% of alcohol purchased would be affected In both income groups (those in poverty and not in poverty), absolute reductions in consumption are estimated to be small for low risk drinkers and much larger for high risk drinkers Across the whole population, spending increases by 1.3% or €15.70 per drinker per year (€0.30 per week) Effects on health are estimated to be substantial, with alcohol-attributable deaths estimated to reduce by approximately 197 per year after 20 years, by which time the full effects of the policy will be seen Similar patterns are observed amongst reductions in alcohol-related hospital admissions, with an estimated 5,878 fewer admissions per year across the population Direct healthcare costs are estimated to reduce by €7.4m in year 1 and €254.7m cumulatively over the first 20 years of the policy Crime is estimated to fall by 1,493 offences per year overall and the costs of crime and policing are estimated to reduce by €7m in year one and by €102.7 cumulatively over 20 years Workplace absence is estimated to be reduced by 115,600 per year. This is estimated to lead to an annual saving of €16.1m in year one and €236.6m over 20 years The total societal value of these reductions in health, crime and work place harms is estimated at €1.7bn over the 20 year period modelled. This includes direct healthcare costs (€255m), crime costs (€103m), workplace costs (€237m) and a financial valuation of the quality adjusted life year (QALY) gain (€1.1bn) Overall revenue to the Exchequer from duty and VAT receipts is estimated to reduce by 2.1% or €34.3 million Revenue to retailers is estimated to increase by €68.5million (18.1%) in the off-trade and €9.3million (0.7%) in the on-trade. This is as reduced sales volumes are more than offset by the increased value of remaining sales
