Thursday, 11 March 2010

MPs Agreed On Denormalising Beer, Wine, And Spirits

While Old Holborn was delivering the public response to the consequences of previous dictatorial legislation, MPs were engaged in nearly four fucking hours of discussion on how to bring us all further under authoritarian control.

If you have time, read the whole debate, but this shit should come with a health warning. They really are, with but a few honourable exceptions, hideous bastards.

David Cameron has stated that, however much he opposed legislation in the past, he isn't going to do anything about it once enacted.

“I don’t like bans. I don’t like the hunting ban, I don’t like smacking bans and I don’t like smoking bans.

"I’m just not a banner. But you know, I think the country has moved on, and people have accepted the smoking ban.”
So, on reading this, there should be some very scared drinks industry execs and beer lovers. The operative word there is 'should'.

They have moved on all right, the devastation they have caused is set in stone. They don't give a shit anymore as, like spoilt (overpaid) brats, they are used to getting their own way.

It's time for the next target, as I always said would happen, and the cross hair is firmly targeted on alcohol.

Here are the highlights of yesterday's commons debate, as MP after MP jumped up to enthusiastically treat us all like naughty little kids.

Disgusting bansturbator, Kevin Barron (a cunt of the first water who believes in making laws without reference to voters), kicked off proceedings by suggesting our life choices are wrong because they don't reflect those of 1947 when the country was still being rationed.

In 1947, the nation consumed approximately 3.5 litres of pure alcohol per head; the current figure is 9.5 litres.
Kev says we are drinking more than he dictates we should be.

General Household Survey data from 2006 show that 31 per cent. of men are drinking hazardously, consuming more than 21 units per week
So, drink more than 8 cans of Stella per week, for example, and you must be tackled. You're hazardous.

As you can imagine, with such a low bar to prove to each other that 'something must be done', the scope for wild exaggeration and mutual panic was huge.

Barron, incredibly, has decided that your bottle of spirits should cost more. A fucking hell of a lot more, in fact.

According to calculations undertaken by the Treasury at the Committee's request, for our report, if the duty on a bottle of spirits had increased since the early 1980s at the same rate as earnings, it would now be £62.
Now, I've mentioned before that Labour keep pointing to the difference in affordability of alcohol between the past and now. And that 1980 tends to be their chosen benchmark.

£62 for a bottle of gin? Can they seriously be suggesting that? Well, Nicola Sturgeon (she of the minimum alcohol pricing legislation) talks quite a bit about affordability in 1980 too, and we tend to follow where the thistle-munchers lead. No?

And may I just take this moment to remind you of this from last month.

Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, is under strong pressure from 10 Downing Street to "make an example" of whisky, gin and vodka drinkers when he makes his Commons statement next month.

A bottle of Bells whisky could rise from £14.79 to £23.73 while Gordon's gin, another favourite of middle-class drinkers, would increase from £12.79 to £21.17.
I think we are more clear where this is going now, aren't we?

Luton Labour MP, Kelvin Hopkins, is so enraged that he is quite happy to flout EU regulations to stop you benefitting from their favourable tax rates.

We should restore the former limits on alcohol imports that we used to have and rigidly enforce them.

Some people might say, "Well, it would upset the European Union," but I am not terribly worried about upsetting the European Union if it means protecting the health and lives of our citizens. If the same people said, "I'm sorry, but it's all about the free market. You've got to allow cheap alcohol to come in," I would say, "Well, tough. We're not going to." We could have a derogation from the legislation or whatever we needed.
He hasn't the balls to stand up to the EU on Lisbon, but when it comes to your freedoms, he is right there at the front of the queue.

John Grogan, yet another Labour wanker, recommends exempting alcohol from competition legislation to facilitate minimum pricing.

It is within the Government's power to pass an order under one of the Competition Acts, in this House and the other place, exempting the alcohol sector from those restrictions.

[...] in terms of competition law, only this House-as I understand it-could exempt the Scottish Government or, indeed the UK Government, from that law in a way that would make the position legally watertight. I hope that will happen.
The unintended consquences should be evident. But this matter is so mouth-frothingly urgent for these quite astoundingly stupid fucknuckles, that I'm not sure it has even lit up (dimly, of course, they are MPs) on their highly-paid and numerously-staffed radar.

Oh. Sorry. Did my preponderance in highlighting Labour MPs give you the impression that the Tories and Lib Dems will somehow be different?

Silly me.

Here's Lib Dem Greg Mulholland on the matter.

I agree fundamentally with the main conclusion of the Committee's report, which is that we should introduce a minimum price for alcohol.
And the Tories seem to be falling over themselves too, according to Wirral West authoritarian prick, Stephen Hesford.

In a recent Statutory Instrument Committee, we considered the five new tests mentioned today by Dr. Taylor. The Tory Front-Bench spokesperson on that Committee said that it was absolutely the Conservative policy to support minimum pricing.
The only problem with minimum pricing that Kevin Barron can see is that the evil drinks industry will do quite well out of it.

Of course, without an increase in duty, minimum pricing would lead to an increase in the profits of supermarkets and the drinks industry.

To increase profits in that way would not be helpful.
Those nasty drinks companies, eh? Kev wants the price increased but not if it profits the newly-anointed demon now the tobacco version has been righteously slain. Only the state must profit from telling you what to do in your life. It is decreed.

This is a steamrollering beast to the drinks industry. It is gaining momentum exponentially by the day. So are they taking it seriously yet? Of course not, they are still in the appeasement stage.

No chance. Appeasing these weapons grade cock sockets only gives them more ammunition. No, seriously.

Step forward Dartford MP, Howard Stoate (Labour, natch), to explain how.

In choosing voluntarily to remove its logo from child-size replica Rangers and Celtic shirts two years ago, Carling more or less admitted that the association between the clubs and the brand had a direct and positive influence upon young people's attitudes towards the Carling brand. Mark Hunter, the chief executive of Coors, Carling's parent company, said at the time:

"Coors and the Old Firm clubs have a long track-record in working together to champion responsible drinking. This means ensuring that sponsorship is not improperly targeted at people under the legal drinking age and using the combination of one of the UK's leading brands and football to promote responsible consumption by adults."
Carling is perfectly content, however, for that same group of young people to watch Rangers and Celtic on TV or in person at Ibrox or Parkhead, with every player's shirt in the whole stadium festooned with the Carling logo. That apparently does not constitute "improper targeting" in the eyes of either Carling, the clubs or the football authorities. If there is logic there, I am afraid I cannot spot it.
Well done, Coors. You tried doing as you felt appropriate to ingratiate yourselves with parliament, and their response is to treat it as an admission of guilt.

Don't give the bastards an inch. You're already considered evil and there is nothing you can do to convince these people otherwise. They have read the anti-tobacco manual, you see (Stoate again).

We have been there before with the tobacco industry, which claimed that it could behave, advertise and promote responsibly-but that simply did not work. It flew in the face of common sense to think that it would, because what it was really interested in was making profits.

This fond belief that the industry can promote itself does not bear much examination.
The drinks equivalent of the Master Settlement Agreement can't be far away at this rate. Don't say you haven't been warned. Voluntary never stays that way, compulsory always ensues.

We've seen this all before. You're not an industry supplying consumers anymore, merely heartless killers peddling death. Got that?

The only thing the drinks industry can do is to fight back. Not by appeasing, not by appealing, but by objecting in the strongest terms.

The war has already been declared. The only option is to match every pound spent by government on anti-alcohol advertising with two that highlight how the state is seeking to denormalise another legal, and popular, product.

Hit the MPs hard now. After the expenses debacle there is no better time. The iron has never been hotter. DARE them to ban your highly visible rebuttal. There isn't much time. Spend your advertising budget, and that of future years, now or you may never have one again.

But will the drinks industry even countenance such an approach? I think we know the answer, don't we?

I see Wilkinson's are doing a nice line in home brew.

I'll leave the last word on this astonishing debate to the appalling Kevin Barron.

I cannot tell my children what to do now: they are all grown up and two have children themselves.
But he feels quite within his rights to tell all other adults in this country what to do.

His own kids are able to make their own choices, but not you.

One rule etc.


banned said...

With a bottle of vodka coming in at £23 I should have listened to me old old ma and become a drugs dealer.

Anonymous said...

We've been making our own booze for years (distilling and wine/beer making) plus growing and curing our own tobacco.
Maybe not as good as the 'real thing' but a lot fucking cheaper.

BTS said...

Love the disgust. Perfectly justified. And you know how very close this subject is to my heart.

May I just add to these comments (contained in the links) from Mr. Barron:

"You will be aware that we published a report on alcohol in January."

So you'll be willing to offer some hard evidence then, as opposed to mere puritanical conjecture..?

"I do not want to go into too much detail today.."

Oh. Okay. But you've obviously got loads and are really up for sharing the wisdom with us less enlightened folk? So that we know we can trust you and stuff? What with battering that politicians have been getting, not to mention AGW promoting scientists, of late?

"I do not intend to discuss that this afternoon.."

No, sorry, my fault. I was merely trying to point out that you politicians, alongside our supposed arbiters of truth and honesty (y'know, scientists and their principles and whatnot?), have been really copping some flak for.. well, lying.

So you might be able to see why we'd be so much happier to hear about some of this evidence upon which you base your report, capiche?

"I do not have the statistics in front of me, but it is a well known fact that.."

I'm afraid I have to stop you there Mr. Barron for being an egregious cunt of the first water and to inform you that I'm sending a bunch of dwarves to your house posthaste armed with nothing more than pointy sticks.

And when I say nothing, I fucking well mean it. Not even their loincloths.

Try them pissed off bastards at five am on for size..


Spartan said...

Going to start to put together fleet of white vans as obviously just one won't do. Looks like a profitable time ahead for this venture. :)

Uncle Marvo said...

8 cans of Stella a week? Did you mean "week"?

Anonymous said...

Their usual multi-pronged attack: at the beginning of this year they quietly re-defined the measurement of a unit (again?) with a standard bottle of wine now containing 10 rather than the six units it's been for years.

If they want to denormalise alcohol they could lead by example and end the subsidised bars in the HOC. Yeah, right...


Dick Puddlecote said...

Marvo: Yes, a week.

Eight 500ml cans of Stella at 5.2% ABV adds up to 20.8 units. Any more and you are classed as a hazardous drinker.

Anonymous said...

It just won't work. Making your own alcohol is easy and uses ingredients which are used for many other purposes and so can't be controlled, taxed or banned.

Anonymous said...

Isn't Cameron going to reverse the hunting ban?

Anonymous said...

As the vast majority of alcohol
fans have been quite willing to stand by and watch the smokers
freeze their nuts off,I and many
others look forward to the drinkers
getting a good leg slapping.
After consulting my temperance,
Wesleyan and Muslim friends we have
the following proposal to put to
the Commons Select Committee.

Beer<3.8%........£5.20 pint
Beer>3.8%........£6.40 pint

Wine.(Red).......£14 per 70ctl
Wine.(White).....£18 per 70ctl

Spirit. (all).....£37 per 70 ctl

To anyone finding the above proposals, draconian,may we
suggest they shove their alky
heads as far up their butts as
physically possible.

Best Bitter
Ever Twisted

lenko said...

"Thistle munchers?" "Cock sockets?" What awful description. Wish I'd thought of it.

But what we have here is the New Puritans. I'm already seeing past the drinks furore to the next one -- the theatre. And indeed, all forms of enjoyment. Lets have a sex inspector in every bedroom, to ensure everyone does it missionary style.

I think maybe the French had it right -- time to bring back Madame Guillotine.

watching said...

Kevin Barron (WANKER)
Voting record (from PublicWhip)

How Kevin Barron voted on key issues since 2001:

* Voted a mixture of for and against a transparent Parliament.
* Voted strongly for introducing a smoking ban.
* Voted very strongly for introducing ID cards.
* Voted very strongly for introducing foundation hospitals.
* Voted strongly for introducing student top-up fees.
* Voted very strongly for Labour's anti-terrorism laws. votes, speeches
* Voted very strongly for the Iraq war.
* Voted very strongly against an investigation into the Iraq war.
* Voted very strongly for replacing Trident.
* Voted moderately for the hunting ban.
* Voted very strongly for equal gay rights.
* Voted moderately against laws to stop climate change.

Obviously fancies a shot at number 10!

Fausty said...

Fab rant, Dick!

Cameron is adept at saying one thing while meaning another. He can't be trusted, in my view. He's an Obama clone.

The answer, of course is to brew your own. It's dead easy. Not only would it be cheaper for you, but you would be doing the country a favour by depriving the Treasury of funds. Something of an own goal for the despots, yes?

Evidently, we pay MPs too much. They can afford the increase in alcohol, while most of us cannot. Not forgetting, of course, that they get their alcohol and fags pretty darned cheap in the Palace of Westminster - which we subsidise.

Bomb them, I say!

Anonymous said...


"I think maybe the French had it right -- time to bring back Madame Guillotine."
I disagree and think it would be best to stick with hangmen. They were good enough for the Nuremburg Doctors.
Bear in mind that:
"The transformations in public health philosophy in revolutionary France were founded on the ideology that instruction in diet and lifestyle were the keys to ensuring the eventual compliance of the French people. It was, therefore, perhaps no accident that the head of the first ever government public health department in Europe, established in 1798 – the year of the Revolution itself – was none other than one Dr. Guillotin – more familiarly known as the inventor of an efficient decapitation device – the guillotine."

In praise of Bad Habits

Well worth reading the whole article.


paulo said...

They won't forgive us for the slapping they got over expenses. This is pay-back time as far as MP's are concerned.

Until the whole kit and caboodle is dismantled this mindless war against the citizens of this country will continue.

And I' not in favour of Mdme guillotine - it's too quick. A slow rope would be better circa 1700.

This is the so called democracy we are (forcibly) exporting to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Bastards. Iwant to see 'em swing!


Treason equals Death said...

I would dearly love to see these grubby little shits swing as well. Turned off the back of a cart, as in the middle ages, preferably (even better than the 1700 short drop).

Old lags know how to make a very decent tipple from just oranges and sugar. Not even any yeast required. Anyone who takes exception to being fleeced over the price of drink only needs to make their own for next to nothing. Google is your friend.

Uncle Marvo said...

I am a hazardous drinker. Better than being a lightweight.

It is entirely up to me if I want to increase my Gamma GT output.

Whilst I am grateful for their pointing out to me the danger in which I put myself, I reserve the right to do what the fuck I like.

g1lgam3sh said...

You've obviously caught me on a bad day Dick, before I was merely enraged but now...this cunt is getting it...he obviously has no idea of how much utter fucking mayhem one person can cause another quite legally.

This piece of mendacious shit is now a project.

w/v peakey...he fucking will be.