When being persuaded to do something for little monetary cost, such as seeing a free film or buying a beloved but rare album for just £3, have you ever heard the joking phrase, “Oh, come on – you can’t afford not to”? I have – usually emanating from my own mouth. It’s a stupid thing to say, of course. It actually makes no sense. And yet when it comes to buying booze down your local offie, it suddenly does.
Too much sense, perhaps. There have been fresh calls for the Government to restrict the sale of cheap alcohol. A report by the British Medical Association highlights promotional offers in shops as the main source of Britain’s alleged drinking problem, and recommends that the Government put a stop to them.
Hey, hey, come on now, there’s no need for that. Get down off that ledge. We’ll just go to the pub a little earlier in future, and save those now-so-expensive tinnies for when we really need them. See, look, there’s a happy hour starting soon, lasting from 3 until 7. That’s four hours of happy hour. It’s OK. We’re OK.
The BMA report also urges the Government to ban happy hours in pubs – and raise alcohol tax.
Oh Lordy. This is the end. Goodbye, cruel world…
OK, so clearly that’s not your immediate reaction. After all, we’re now having to take out second mortgages to pay for half a gallon of petrol, so we as a nation can deal with a small tax hike on alcohol (if it happens). But as students, we will be most affected by a crackdown on cheap booze – not because we spend a lot of money on it, but because we don’t. We’re cheapskates.
As Chief Perennial Cheapskate, I resent any suggestion of an increase in alcohol prices. I like being able to buy eight cans of Carlsberg for £4.50, not because I’m an alcoholic and “can’t afford not to” but because I’ll be buying them anyway and it’s nice to know I’ll have enough change for a Twix.
Sadly, as a supposed grown-up and occasional Viewer Of The Big Picture, I realise it may be more complicated than this. Don Shenker of Alcohol Concern commented “Price is a crucial determinant of how much we drink”, and he’s completely right. Obviously it’s not the only factor, nor even the most important one, but it’s about more than an extra pint; it can mean the difference between drinking and not drinking. Students go to certain places on a certain night because they have cheap drinks offers. Would they go out otherwise that weeknight? Probably not.
But it’s shops and not bars that are the real ‘culprits’. The price of beer in a pub actually rose 14% between 2001 and 2006, while the price of beer from a supermarket or off-licence dropped 9%. If we are going to address the price issue – and sadly, we probably should – it is the latter statistic we must tackle, through either a tax hike or an increase in the minimum price per alcoholic unit. This would reduce excess drinking in students and in teenagers.
A study last year claimed teenagers who get away with underage drinking can afford too much. But then that may be because the average 12 to 16-year-old’s weekly allowance is £9.53. How much? When I was a boy it was called pocket money and you got 50p a week to spend on penny sweets and PCP. But the report blamed lavish supermarkets, not lavish parents. Eight bottles of Carling costs only £9 in Sainsbury’s, it gasped. There’s only one thing you can say to that. Don’t go to Sainsbury’s. (Even better, don’t drink Carling.)
What I resent about a price hike in alcohol is not that I’d have to pay more – well, all right, it’s partly that – but the effect it could have on shops and pubs. They aren’t forcing people to drink too much, and don’t deserve less custom as a result of it happening. You have to trust people to drink sensibly. Just the other day I embraced the Taf’s pound a pint offer too eagerly and drank to a debilitating extent – but I wouldn’t call that the Taf’s fault. I wasn’t a victim. I was an idiot.
But at the end of the day, when all has been said and drunk and there’s only warm Oranjeboom left, the BMA report claims a 10% rise in alcohol tax could reduce alcohol-related deaths by nearly 30%. If that’s true, I can’t argue with it.
Damn it.
