Adding up the staggering cost of human misery brought on by drink... (From St Helens Star)

Adding up the staggering cost of human misery brought on by drink...

11:25am Thursday 9th August 2012 in Letters By Reader letter

A RECENT report shows crime, anti-social behaviour and illness caused by drink cost an annual £450 per head of population in St Helens, Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool, Sefton and Wirral compared with an England average of £387.

Leaving aside the huge financial cost , the cost in human misery to communities and families is staggering.

The Green Party welcomed the Government's decision to introduce a minimum price of at least 40p per unit of alcohol in England and Wales in order to tackle our harmful drinking culture.

Minimum pricing was one of a number of measures unveiled as part of a new national alcohol strategy, which also proposes greater powers for local authorities to deal with binge drinking.

This will help prevent irresponsible retailers from offering heavy discounts on alcohol and also reduce the pressure on the licensed trade, helping to protect our local pubs from closure.

I’m sure all St Helens residents can reel off a list of local pubs that have closed in recent years. However, we are disappointed the government had not gone with the higher rate of 50p per unit of alcohol recommended by Alcohol Concern - and had failed to propose controls on the advertising of alcohol.

This measure could and should be used to provide more funding to the National Health Service and to stop cuts in police numbers.

Brian Banawich, St Helens Green Party, Springfield , Rainford.

Comments(30)

mikeperry109 says...
12:43pm Thu 9 Aug 12

Unfortunately Brian, as the Americans discovered with prohibition, forcing up the price opens the doors for the criminals and smugglers to profit. Cigarette smuggling is apparently rife.

Report this post »

pitbullboxing says...
8:43pm Thu 9 Aug 12

Labours 24 hr drinking. Oh dear.

Report this post »

jumper says...
9:13am Fri 10 Aug 12

The authorities of this borough have chosen to ignore the problems for a very long time.

Report this post »

frankly says...
10:32am Fri 10 Aug 12

and jumper, if you want to open a bar in town you will get lots of council support, lets not bother what the empty property used to be eh.Do any on the council ever see the activities of some of our bingers on a weekend mostly..NO i guess not.

Report this post »

mikeperry109 says...
12:19pm Fri 10 Aug 12

How many of our senior officers live in St. Helens? The Chief Executive (£150.000 plus a year) allegedly lives in Wigan.

Report this post »

Everard Edbutt says...
12:42pm Fri 10 Aug 12

Ah yes putting additional tax on the amber nectar - nothing like punishing the majority of drinkers who drink responsibly because of the actions of a minority. Excellent politics.
That said 40p per unit means a bottle of white wine would have to cost a minimum of £3.60... Well that's definately going to save lives when currently you can't buy a bottle of white wine for that price anyway...

Either way - taxing the responsible for the actions of the few is a poor effort and an ill-conceived kneejerk reaction by those who want to be seen to be doing something even if what they're doing is never going to work.

Report this post »

PM says...
1:09pm Fri 10 Aug 12

mikeperry109 wrote:
Unfortunately Brian, as the Americans discovered with prohibition, forcing up the price opens the doors for the criminals and smugglers to profit. Cigarette smuggling is apparently rife.

I don't think anyone is talking about prohibition , but raising the ludicrously low price of a unit of alcohol must be a good thing when we have embarked on a binge drinking culture in the UK.When you can buy beer for less than bottled water or soft drinks you've got something wrong.

Report this post »

PM says...
1:14pm Fri 10 Aug 12

Everard Edbutt wrote:
Ah yes putting additional tax on the amber nectar - nothing like punishing the majority of drinkers who drink responsibly because of the actions of a minority. Excellent politics.
That said 40p per unit means a bottle of white wine would have to cost a minimum of £3.60... Well that's definately going to save lives when currently you can't buy a bottle of white wine for that price anyway...

Either way - taxing the responsible for the actions of the few is a poor effort and an ill-conceived kneejerk reaction by those who want to be seen to be doing something even if what they're doing is never going to work.

According to the figures in the letter you are already paying through the nose for the actions of the minority.As for the cost of alcohol, you can get a bottle of wine for £2.99 and 4 cans of beer for £1.99 in leading supermarkets, that's before you get to the issue of cheap super strength cider. The only reason the government havent acted is pressure from the supermarkets and drinks companies- the pubs want minimum pricing, the NHS want it. Seems sensible to me.

Report this post »

pitbullboxing says...
1:14pm Fri 10 Aug 12

Totally agree with PM there. It's bad times when you can buy booze cheaper than your fruit and veg.

Report this post »

PM says...
1:20pm Fri 10 Aug 12

jumper wrote:
The authorities of this borough have chosen to ignore the problems for a very long time.

To be fair I think all authorities and governments have ignored the problem for too long.I was in Leeds a few weeks ago and the city centre was a sight to behold on Friday night, people were lying on the pavements, young girls vomiting in shop doorways , small scuffles all over the place and the police and paramedics were out in force trying to ensure these idiots were safe. You go to europe and you just don't see these scenes, or at least I havent. I don't know if minimum pricing is the answer but it must be worth a try .

Report this post »

jumper says...
2:09pm Fri 10 Aug 12

As Brian writes,the start is not to apply the rules and promises that we get every election local or national.

Report this post »

Davos99 says...
4:13pm Fri 10 Aug 12

the majority always pay for the irresponsible majority.That is why we have a police force, that is why the cost of shoplifting is passed onto the the paying customers and uninsured drivers cost us all a fortune.As for irresponsible drinkers they are already costing us a packet whether you drink or not.I agree with the letter writer , something needs to be done to offset the massive cost of alcohol related crime and disorder.

Report this post »

Sankey says...
5:56pm Fri 10 Aug 12

I hink the pubs shuting is a very bad thing probably one of the reasons communities are decling and causing the increase in anti social behaviour and the could not give a stuff society. I also think it increases unemployment because it gives no one anything to aspire to e.g peers. If all you do if buy cheap booze from the supermarket and drink at home. Happy to add tax to supermarket alcohol provided the equivalent (or more) is off beer in pubs. Socially it would be better and health wise too because there is a control in pubs and none in your house. Just my humble opinion.

Report this post »

rosered1 says...
6:57pm Fri 10 Aug 12

Sankey, agree with your comment re "control in pubs" however the drunken idiots then come out of said pubs and throw back their alcohol all over the pavements and shop doorways. At least if they want to binge drink, and do so at home, they will not be out and about spoiling the landscape for everyone else with their foul behaviour. We always liked a night out and many a drink in the past but we did not act like the idiots you now have stumbling around town throwing up or looking for trouble. No one has any responsibility for their own actions anymore and there begins the trouble.

Report this post »

mikeperry109 says...
7:59pm Fri 10 Aug 12

PM wrote:

mikeperry109 wrote:
Unfortunately Brian, as the Americans discovered with prohibition, forcing up the price opens the doors for the criminals and smugglers to profit. Cigarette smuggling is apparently rife.
I don't think anyone is talking about prohibition , but raising the ludicrously low price of a unit of alcohol must be a good thing when we have embarked on a binge drinking culture in the UK.When you can buy beer for less than bottled water or soft drinks you've got something wrong.

The point I was making, PM, is that when you force up the price you force in the illegal trade.

Report this post »

jumper says...
8:16pm Fri 10 Aug 12

The powers that be have the responsibility and do not do anything about it ,which is the problem.

Report this post »

Everard Edbutt says...
7:32am Sat 11 Aug 12

Crikey! A bottle of wine for £2.99 PM? Wow - what grapes are going in that bottle - the ones Stu Francis has crushed I guess! Anyway adding 71pence to the cost of a bottle isn't going to deter folk from getting smashes out of their faces.
Added to the fact that a large percentage of this countries drink problem is caused by the middle classes (like me) who rarlet spend less than £8 a bottle on wine and won't be affected in any way by a negligble rise in alcohol price increases.
It's like with the fatty boom booms walking around and talk of a tax on fat food. If folk want it they'll find the money to pay for it, regardless of the cost.
If folk want to get drunk, eat burgers or drive their cars increasing tax wont make much difference. Those so poor to be affected will just not buy their kids that new pair of shoes or re-prioritise their spend in such a way to ensure their vices are not affected.
As I said before it's ill conceived and knee jerk and the NHS et al will be happy with any proposal that might have any positive impact no matter how tiny especially if a bit of this extra revenue generated by this tax may come their way...
Tackling the culture is the way forward and how to do that is a bigger, lengthier and more thought provoking project than simply whacking 71p of a extra tax on a bottle of rubbish wine....

Report this post »

PM says...
9:04am Sat 11 Aug 12

Everard Edbutt wrote:
Crikey! A bottle of wine for £2.99 PM? Wow - what grapes are going in that bottle - the ones Stu Francis has crushed I guess! Anyway adding 71pence to the cost of a bottle isn't going to deter folk from getting smashes out of their faces. Added to the fact that a large percentage of this countries drink problem is caused by the middle classes (like me) who rarlet spend less than £8 a bottle on wine and won't be affected in any way by a negligble rise in alcohol price increases. It's like with the fatty boom booms walking around and talk of a tax on fat food. If folk want it they'll find the money to pay for it, regardless of the cost. If folk want to get drunk, eat burgers or drive their cars increasing tax wont make much difference. Those so poor to be affected will just not buy their kids that new pair of shoes or re-prioritise their spend in such a way to ensure their vices are not affected. As I said before it's ill conceived and knee jerk and the NHS et al will be happy with any proposal that might have any positive impact no matter how tiny especially if a bit of this extra revenue generated by this tax may come their way... Tackling the culture is the way forward and how to do that is a bigger, lengthier and more thought provoking project than simply whacking 71p of a extra tax on a bottle of rubbish wine....

Actually the knee jerk reaction is to go way over the top in the reaction to a minimum price per unit for alcohol without researching who is campaigning for an increase and who isn't. Canada introduced a minimum price for alcohol over twenty years ago and it has led to a reduction in consumption among the young. The police- those on the front line dealing with the problems caused by irresponsible drinking are also in favour of an increase in the unit price of alcohol . You want to 'tackle the culture' but offer nothing as a way of doing that. The NHS, Alcohol related charities and the police want to do that and believe an increase in the price of a unit of alcohol is one measure that would help. It is, as the saying goes, a 'no-brainer' which side of the argument has more merit.

[quote][p][bold]Everard Edbutt[/bold] wrote: Crikey! A bottle of wine for £2.99 PM? Wow - what grapes are going in that bottle - the ones Stu Francis has crushed I guess! Anyway adding 71pence to the cost of a bottle isn't going to deter folk from getting smashes out of their faces. Added to the fact that a large percentage of this countries drink problem is caused by the middle classes (like me) who rarlet spend less than £8 a bottle on wine and won't be affected in any way by a negligble rise in alcohol price increases. It's like with the fatty boom booms walking around and talk of a tax on fat food. If folk want it they'll find the money to pay for it, regardless of the cost. If folk want to get drunk, eat burgers or drive their cars increasing tax wont make much difference. Those so poor to be affected will just not buy their kids that new pair of shoes or re-prioritise their spend in such a way to ensure their vices are not affected. As I said before it's ill conceived and knee jerk and the NHS et al will be happy with any proposal that might have any positive impact no matter how tiny especially if a bit of this extra revenue generated by this tax may come their way... Tackling the culture is the way forward and how to do that is a bigger, lengthier and more thought provoking project than simply whacking 71p of a extra tax on a bottle of rubbish wine....[/p][/quote]Actually the knee jerk reaction is to go way over the top in the reaction to a minimum price per unit for alcohol without researching who is campaigning for an increase and who isn't. Canada introduced a minimum price for alcohol over twenty years ago and it has led to a reduction in consumption among the young. The police- those on the front line dealing with the problems caused by irresponsible drinking are also in favour of an increase in the unit price of alcohol . You want to 'tackle the culture' but offer nothing as a way of doing that. The NHS, Alcohol related charities and the police want to do that and believe an increase in the price of a unit of alcohol is one measure that would help. It is, as the saying goes, a 'no-brainer' which side of the argument has more merit. PM

Report this post »

Sankey says...
10:42am Sat 11 Aug 12

What’s knee jerk PM is thinking there is a social engineering big brother answer to everything. Either Alcohol is safe or it is not, if it’s not safe it should be banned altogether. As others have said putting a tax rise here or there is for political headlines only or to keep quangocrats in jobs it will achieve nothing. People have to take responsibility for their behaviour and their health and move away from the current notion the state has responsibility for everything and the individual has responsibility for nothing. If I go into Warrington town centre at 4am drunk smashing windows that is not the fault of the state or alcohol or the retailer who sold it to me, it’s my fault.

Report this post »

jumper says...
11:44am Sat 11 Aug 12

Has Brian says about asb who takes responsibility when no drink is involved.

Report this post »

frankly says...
7:28pm Sat 11 Aug 12

jumper, you are right, its the individuals problem nobody elses, but outsiders i/e the police and nhs then have to take over the problem when they could be helping sane members of society.hit them with an asbo for 12 months during opening hours, ok they can still drink at home, but it would give decent drinkers the knowledge that these nerds are off the streets

Report this post »

jumper says...
8:30pm Sat 11 Aug 12

The powers are there but never implemented. We all need help.

Report this post »

BillMitch says...
1:17pm Mon 13 Aug 12

By my calculation a 50p minimum price per unit would ensure a bottle of wine cost over four quid and a four pack of beer would cost over three quid.Responsible drinkers probably already pay more than this for their wine and beer because it is about taste and not getting drunk as quickly as possible.

Report this post »

BillMitch says...
1:21pm Mon 13 Aug 12

Sankey wrote:
What’s knee jerk PM is thinking there is a social engineering big brother answer to everything. Either Alcohol is safe or it is not, if it’s not safe it should be banned altogether. As others have said putting a tax rise here or there is for political headlines only or to keep quangocrats in jobs it will achieve nothing. People have to take responsibility for their behaviour and their health and move away from the current notion the state has responsibility for everything and the individual has responsibility for nothing. If I go into Warrington town centre at 4am drunk smashing windows that is not the fault of the state or alcohol or the retailer who sold it to me, it’s my fault.

But tax on cigarettes has reduced smoking, the cost of alcohol has an effect on consumption.If you go into a supermarket and see a bottle of cola for the same price as a a four pack of beer the tax system obviously needs tweaking to ensure the alcohol costs more.I'd be surprised if any logical person could disagree with that premise.

Report this post »

papyt says...
5:54pm Mon 13 Aug 12

firstly i would have a borough wide ban on consuming alcohol in public places ( streets,parks etc etc) then i would tax the supermarkets to pay for the extra police needed,have strict licencing laws prohibiting the sale off alcohol,lets face it who needs to buy 6 bottles of strong cider at 8 in the morning,and lets get back to the closing times like before,let the cities have 24 hour drinking a small town like ours doesn't need it.

Report this post »

jumper says...
9:08pm Mon 13 Aug 12

If you check out the asb strategy for the borough you will find out that everything is covered,but does it get implemented does it h,,,

Report this post »

Sankey says...
10:55am Tue 14 Aug 12

Following that logic Bill Mitch then why not put a 1000% tax on drink that would reduce consumption no doubt. Typical socialist comment the state controls everything and people cannot or should not be expected to take responsibility for themselves. Any other rules / controls you would like to dream up?

Report this post »

PM says...
11:31am Tue 14 Aug 12

Sankey wrote:
Following that logic Bill Mitch then why not put a 1000% tax on drink that would reduce consumption no doubt. Typical socialist comment the state controls everything and people cannot or should not be expected to take responsibility for themselves. Any other rules / controls you would like to dream up?

Money and cost are prime motivations for human beings.Hence congestion charging to reduce gridlock, tobacco taxes to reduce smoking, taxes on waste to reduce pollution.And the minimum price per unit of alcohol has been brought in by a Tory led government, not a socialist one. Why? because it's the right thing to do, and in the long run totally cost effective. It is totally ludicrous to expect everyone to just be responsible because some people are as thick as planks and some people are vulnerable and not everyone has the same moral compass. I take it your libertarian stance stretches to the total legalisation of drugs on the basis everyone is responsible enough to make their own decsions then?

Report this post »

PM says...
11:37am Tue 14 Aug 12

Zero tolerance of public drunkeness has been talked about for ages but it all appears to be lip service. Shops caught selling alcohol to those under 18 should lose their license and that goes for the supermarkets as much as the corner shops.

Report this post »

kjd161 says...
11:38am Tue 14 Aug 12

papyt wrote:
firstly i would have a borough wide ban on consuming alcohol in public places ( streets,parks etc etc) then i would tax the supermarkets to pay for the extra police needed,have strict licencing laws prohibiting the sale off alcohol,lets face it who needs to buy 6 bottles of strong cider at 8 in the morning,and lets get back to the closing times like before,let the cities have 24 hour drinking a small town like ours doesn't need it.

27 comments on this subject, and I have to say some good ones. But this one is far and away the best and most sensible proposal yet. Nice one papyt.

Report this post »

@sthelensstar

St Helens Star

Adding up the staggering cost of human misery brought on by drink... (From St Helens Star)

Letters RSS Feed

Adding up the staggering cost of human misery brought on by drink...

click2find

Jobs

Dating

Homes

Cars

About cookies