Minimum Alcohol Pricing

[Billy Jean King]

1 hour ago, Todd_is_God said:

I disagree entirely.

I bought 4 x 10 packs of Heineken in an Asda in England last week. They were on offer, to the point that those 4 packs cost me £30

Under the current MUP and barring of drinks promos up here, the same purchase would have cost me at least £44

The latest figures show that the current measures do little other than increase revenue for bars and retailers in Scotland.

There are ways round the drink promo ban in Scotland. Majestic wine is one example. MUP alone wasn't the cause of the difference but it's a valid point in what is an extreme example given that's a right good offer. 

[vikingTON]

The public health fruit loops calling for MOAR URGENT ACTION are proposing such stunning changes like, err, putting alcohol in a separate section of supermarkets 'to show that it's not part of a normal shopping trip'. Because that's definitely the key to having the healthier relationship that Portugal, Spain, Italy etc. have with alcohol consumption.

All of these behavioural science obsessed weirdos need to be cut off from the oxygen of either media coverage or policy. 

Edited August 30, 2023 by vikingTON

[O'Kelly Isley III]

2 hours ago, Crùbag said:

 

Most of the cost of booze is tax that goes straight to UK gov. I like my malt whiskies and they aren't affected that much by MUP - they're 'dear' aleady but with something like 70% or more of the cost of a bottle going to Uk gov.

MUP is just one part of the approach to change our drinking habits. Scotland has issues with various addictions or harmful behaviours. The roots of it all go way back and equally the problems won't be solved any time soon.

MUP is a crude instrument which has all the hallmarks of an ill-conceived policy to demonstrate that 'something is being done'.  It is unlikely to seriously address the problem.

Where I slightly disagree with you however is your rather defeatist timescale.  In my fifty year association with, and enjoyment of, alcohol to various degrees but never OTT there has been one constant, and that is the virtual fetishisation of drink by a considerable number of Scots.  And that is a huge part of the problem.

What is it about too many of us that alcohol becomes a key component of our everyday lives ?  Is it psychological ?  Cultural ?  Physiological ?  Or perhaps a combination of all three ? 

I don't know but it seems deeply embedded.  Drink-related jokes flow freely thro the national conversation and that extends to many social events and television output like Still Game and Two Doors Down.  All designed of course for those of us who know how to handle our bevvy, but it's funny how we never hear jokes or watch sitcoms about surgeons stitching some poor b****** in the Glasgow Royal of a Saturday night.

So what is my solution ?  Well for a start we could collectively show less tolerance for the culture of drink and drunkenness itself, and especially the public variety.  And yes, on a few occasions that would have included me.

It would also help if pubs and clubs were seriously 'discouraged' from serving drink to people who want but don't need any more.  Ditto the shopkeepers who happily sell to under-agers as they embark on the time-honoured path.

Of course this would only be dealing with a relatively small part of the problem, but anyone who goes about Scottish city or town centres or rail or bus services on a weekend night would surely recognise that there IS a problem.

I can't however offer any quick fixes for the large number of people in Scotland for whom alcohol is an everyday anaesthetic; some of them will have developed issues from youth but an increasing number will be literal casualties of the shitshow that our society is becoming.  These people deserve better than MUP. 

It will be a genius who will be able to convince us that drink is a brilliant social lubricant but is seldom a panacea for anything.  Never mind give folk cause for genuine economic hope.

 

[ICTChris]

The ammount of alcohol drunk in Scotland is actually reducing and has been for a while. This is from a Public Health Scotland document.

 

The poorest groups of society are the least likely to exceed alcohol guidelines but those in the poorest group that do exceed them *REALLY* exceed them

[alta-pete]

Alcoholism is a hugely complex and serious issue.

The trivial issue at hand just now is that the SG - as seems their usual MO (and they all do, before the anti-SNPbaad troops arrive) - have sexed up the numbers to try and make themselves look good. And look like they are doing something.

But they’ve actually been found out as achieving nothing other than improving alcohol retailers’ margins. 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

From the Scottish Government's own website:

"Minimum unit pricing

We implemented a minimum price of 50 pence per unit of alcohol on 1 May 2018. This will save lives, reduce hospital admissions and, ultimately, have positive impacts across the whole health system in Scotland and for wider society."

If you don't reduce consumption within the group that has the most alcohol-related illness then you certainly won't achieve that aim.

A lot was made out of a study published in May 2021 that found that alcohol sales in Scotland fell by 7.7% after minimum pricing was brought in, when compared with the north east of England.  

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57293223

However, many missed in that the same study that "the exception to this was those in high-purchasing, low-income homes, who did not seem to change their habits."

PHS have also found that deprivation was linked to drinking-related illness, with the rates for both alcohol-related hospital stays and deaths eight times higher in the most deprived parts of Scotland compared to the least deprived areas.

Even looking at an overall drop across the country was misleading - sales in England (which doesn’t have MUP) and the UK in general have been dropping since 2005. There were more complex reasons for the drop in alcohol sales - changing drinking habits, the growth of homebrewing (up 500% during lockdown) and the ongoing trend of consumers switching from spirits to drinks with lower alcohol content.

It was also incredibly naive to take just over 2 and a bit years of figures and state it as "a lasting impact" - it was not a trend - it was a snapshot.

And you also have to remember that the price per unit of a majority of alcohol sold in Scotland was unaffected by MUP - the drinks most affected were the lower end strong ciders not the beers and spirits. If you are going down the MUP route then you need a higher MUP to increase the price of those products and reduce consumption. I'm just not convinced that it is the best tool to deal with our more hardened drinkers.

There have been several studies that have found that trying to increase prices to reduce the demand for some products (like sugar, tobacco and alcohol) doesn't work because they are price inelastic.

Other academic studies have attempted to estimate the price elasticity of demand for alcohol. While these have produced a range of estimates, the majority agree that alcohol conforms to the law of demand, but that it is relatively inelastic. In other words, raising alcohol prices reduces alcohol consumption, but typically the fall in consumption is proportionately a lot smaller than the increase in prices.

Research has also shown that amongst heavy drinkers a 1% increase in prices only leads to a 0.28% drop in alcohol consumption.

As any economist will tell you, trying to use price to reduce consumption when demand is inelastic is almost a futile policy.

The Scottish Government really does need to think again.

Edited September 2, 2023 by DeeTillEhDeh

[ICTChris]

MUP to go up to 65p?

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/cost-alcohol-rise-scottish-government-30978355
 

 

[scottsdad]

Policy has failed on its own terms...time to double down.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

18 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

MUP to go up to 65p?

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/cost-alcohol-rise-scottish-government-30978355
 

 

That article says it would happen next year

Which depending on the timing means that, adjusted for inflation, it's either going to be slightly lower than the initial 50p or slightly higher

 

[Soapy FFC]

11 hours ago, ICTChris said:

MUP to go up to 65p?

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/cost-alcohol-rise-scottish-government-30978355
 

 

Quote

A bottle of Baileys (70cl): from £6 to £7.70

Can someone please point me in the direction of the shop that sells a bottle of Baileys for £6??

[DeeTillEhDeh]

A 15p increase is going to do diddly squat to deal with chronic alcoholism.

[scottsdad]

9 hours ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

A 15p increase is going to do diddly squat to deal with chronic alcoholism.

The studies they point to show that MUP is very harmful to the most hardcore of alcoholics. They spend more money on alcohol, leaving less for food, heating, etc. 

[topcat(The most tip top)]

17 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

The studies they point to show that MUP is very harmful to the most hardcore of alcoholics. They spend more money on alcohol, leaving less for food, heating, etc. 

But reduce overall consumption, which should lead less people becoming "the most hardcore of alcoholics" in the future

Which goal should be prioritised is one of the more complex moral questions in this whole area and whichever way you fall the dead will have names but those saved will be anonymous.
 

 

[vikingTON]

1 minute ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

But reduce overall consumption, which should lead less people becoming "the most hardcore of alcoholics" in the future

What on earth led you to that conclusion?

[scottsdad]

Just now, topcat(The most tip top) said:

But reduce overall consumption, which should lead less people becoming "the most hardcore of alcoholics" in the future

Which goal should be prioritised is one of the more complex moral questions in this whole area and whichever way you fall the dead will have names but those saved will be anonymous.
 

 

In theory, I guess. That's no comfort to the families of hardcore alcoholics, for whom deaths have risen since MUP was introduced. 

In the 5 years since MUP was introduced deaths have risen. They're at the highest levels since 2008. The spin around this "life saving" measure is overwhelming

[topcat(The most tip top)]

13 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

In theory, I guess. That's no comfort to the families of hardcore alcoholics, for whom deaths have risen since MUP was introduced. 

Precisely.

Whichever policy you choose the dead have names and the saved are anonymous

However

It seems reasonable to assume is that if anybody got to the point where they were starving and freezing themselves to death to pay for vodka  in 2022 then the roots of their problem probably go back further than May 2018 

And it also seem fairly reasonable to suppose that if Vodka being £12 a bottle was the only way 31 people could have survived 2022 then their chances of seeing 2024 weren't great regardless

Trying to dress MUP, as implemented, up either as a disaster or a triumph by grabbing whichever stats you prefer is ill-advised because the positive and negative effects are so marginal and there's so much noise

 

[sparky88]

MUP is just virtue signalling nonsense. Raising is just another extension of this.

Its effects are probably too difficult to divorce from societal shifts that are happening  anyway- particularly younger people drinking less. 

It does, however, help to scratch the itch of a particularly puritanical way of thinking that runs through Scottish politics that doesn't exist in rUK and is irrespective of party.

Edited September 21, 2023 by sparky88

[Todd_is_God]

More Scottish Nanny Party pish.

Why can they never acknowledge they got something wrong?

"This will save lives" appears to be a cliché that can be used to justify any action, irrespective of what any evidence says.

The only winners from an increase in MUP are shopkeepers.

Edited September 21, 2023 by Todd_is_God

[Aufc]

I genuinely wonder what has happened to the SNP. Used to think they were great and came out with some positive ideas. Now completely hopeless

[blackislekillie]

On 30/08/2023 at 17:56, Bairnardo said:

I just find this whole policy to have a real air of snide and snobbery about it. Probably a large majority of people affected by it are ones who drink responsibly. But if you are one of those people who enjoy drink without inflicting health issues upon yourself, but happen to live close enough to the breadline that you do actively count the pennies, then this is one of lifes pleasures that you are being told isn't for you anymore. Primarily by people who probably also enjoy a drink, but drink stuff expensive enough not to be affected, or similarly, don't have to worry about their tipple going up to the same extent as less well off folk. Theres a sort of offshoot of "rules for thee but not for me" element to this. 

This snobbery runs right through society ironically, every bit as much as drinking does. Look at whenever the subject of getting beer at the football comes up. Guaranteed everytime someone hits out with "Aye well if you can't go 90 minutes without a drink you must have a problem" type bullshit. 

It's not well thought out, it's not beneficial to the public purse and for it to not even be demonstrably working is a pile of shite. 

They obviously haven't watched Falkirk.