Tuesday, 27 March 2012

Plain Packaging For Alcohol, Here We Come

I've written before (here, here, and here) that this piece of plain packaging propaganda is pretty farcical.
Myth #7: It may be tobacco today but other consumer products will follow

FACT: Tobacco is not like any other product, it is the only legal consumer product on the market which is lethal when used as intended. That is why the UK and over 170 other governments have signed up to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control which places legal obligations on governments to strictly regulate tobacco products. Plain packs for tobacco will not therefore set a precedent for other consumer products.
Now, it would seem, the government agree with me. They have put it to bed quite soundly in their alcohol strategy, released just yesterday.
Following the publication of the Government’s Alcohol Strategy, the Health Committee is to hold an inquiry examining the Government’s proposals so far as they relate to health issues, and in particular will look at:
Scroll to the bottom and what do we see is one of the proposals being 'looked at'?
Plain packaging and marketing bans.
I think we can call that 'myth' comprehensively proven as fact now, don't you?

My! Prohibitionists are fizzing along at a cracking pace, so they are.


Curmudgeon said...

Yes, and display bans too, so you have to buy drink in an Argos-type store like the Swedish Systembolaget used to be. There's a lovely picture on this page:


It's all coming thick and fast now.

Jay said...

I really love that tag "There's something very wrong with this country."  Very apt.

Suggestions, people?  What can we do to stop these fuckers?

Eric Crampton said...

Check out this latest bit of NZ U Otago healthist lunacy: Nick Wilson reckons that we should ban the export of cigarettes. Because we ban landmine exports. And they're kinda the same thing. I shit you not.


c777 said...

They are not our government I reckon this has come from our real governments the EU and the UN.

brainwaive711 said...

i saw figs the other day that says that OBESITY is responsible for more deaths than smoking, alcohol, and illegal drugs combined... so why isnt OBESITY at the TOP of their agenda in this roll out of 'you will do what is good for you like it or not' steps towards social engineering a compliant society... as (BY THIER OWN STATED FIGURES) it is the BIGGEST killer... i have no doubt that if you add up ALL the figures for obesity, smoking, alcohol, and illegal drugs, it is an HORRENDOUS figure... but you know what, just being ALIVE and breathing in gods sweet air.. will eventually kill EVERYONE... perhaps thats what should be banned.. just being ALIVE!!!. after all, living is the biggest cause of death!!!

Sam Duncan said...

 Fascinating link. I knew about the Scandinavian monopolies, but I didn't know much.

Get this, from the WP article about Norway's Vinmonopolet:

Robert Lie, then sommelier of Bagatelle,
has stated, "I am among the supporters. In recent years Vinmonopolet
has had great impact on the wine interest of the average Norwegian. To
my knowledge there are no wine stores in the world with an equal
selection. There are also fairly good prices for more expensive wines.
For highly coveted wines one must pay much more in London." Torkjell Berulfsen,
presenter of considerable TV programming with focus on alcoholic goods,
has stated, "These days I praise Vimonopolet into the clouds. I bless
it! I don't dare imagine some zitty, unmotivated 25-year old 'red wine
supervisor' at Rimi!"

It's exactly the same, snobbish, we-know-what's-good-for-the-plebs attitude you get at the BBC, isn't it?

Dick_Puddlecote said...

In Norway, it was indeed a government policy to cultivate a wine culture as it was seen as more salubrious than beer and spirits. There's a good (longish) article about it here.


Mark Wadsworth said...

Can we have plain packaging for political parties as well, so that the ballot slip just has three boxes without descriptions, and you just put your X in one of them at random?

Dick_Puddlecote said...

Good grief. You could cut the hyperbole in that article with a knife.

Curmudgeon said...

I heard some Scottish prohibitionist harridan going on just now on the radio about how there is no "risk-free drinking", only "lower-risk drinking". The official message of "no safe level" is on its way...

Lyn Ladds said...

I wonder if anyone has yet connected the fact that most people who give up smoking put on weight?  Just has to add to the obesity figures, doesn't it?

Then again, stress can cause weight gain, as can many prescription drugs that help to alleviate stress and depression!

On that basis, isn't the government driving many, previously healthy people, into health problems associated with obesity?

Own goal, maybe?

…Zaph said...

I see no reason why not. We'd end up with the same result anyway, wouldn't we?

Carpe Zytha said...

Tax revenue is as important a factor as any. Plain packaging may be talked about but will not be implemented as it helps counterfeiters and smugglers.

When plain packaging is mentioned the question to ask is, what are they deflecting attention from? Usually it is the implementation of bad measure that is less worse than the one being muted.

Lyn Ladds said...

The trouble is, Carpe Zutha, our government are too thick or stupid (or both) to accept the fact that there is or will be a problem with counterfeiters and smugglers!

In fact, some woman from Smoke Free 'Somewhere' stated that countries like Spain and Greece have more problems with counterfeiters and smugglers than we do, yet their tobacco prices are much less than ours!  My answer to that was that with what the Spanish and Greeks earn, to them their tobacco products are as expensive as ours, at least, if is that for us they are much cheaper.

Trouble is, even with a pneumatic drill you would be hard pushed to crack the skull of these idiots!

Carpe Zytha said...

Maybe, but I still doubt plain packaging is being seriously considered. It is useful to put out stories to lazy journalists just after an RPI + 5% duty rise, though. Has you lot banging on about what might come and not what has come.

Dim Δημητρης Karagiannis said...

The next logical step on the slippery slope ladder Dick

Let's not forget what they r saying:

'Passive drinking worse than passive smoking'


'There's no guaranteed safe level of drinking'


Brewlady said...

 As an advocate for tobacco harm reduction products, I recently struck up a conversation with one of the visiting professors where I work.  She was outside smoking, and I was using my electronic cigarette.  We were talking about how expensive cigarettes have gotten, about $8.50 a pack in Massachusetts.  She mentioned that she is from NYC, where everyone who resides there buys their cigarettes off the back of a truck.  She recently bought a pack at an NYC drugstore, and she said the cashier gave her a strange look and told her that she didn't look like a tourist.  There already is a black market for tobacco cigarettes, thanks to the outrageous taxes imposed in some cities.

I've been smoke free since August 2010, but thanks to the board of health in the town I work in, I can't vape indoors.  Cigarette smoke was banned because it's been proven to cause harm, but the vapor from an electronic cigarette has never been shown to cause harm to bystanders.  That still hasn't stopped cities like Boston from banning their use in workplaces, simply because they don't want to "normalize" smoking.  Next thing you know they will be banning the sale of root beer, because the children may get confused.

George Speller said...

 Didn't the BMA already say that?

George Speller said...

 to crack the skull of these idiots - worth trying, tho'

Thomas said...

" Cigarette smoke was banned because it's been proven to cause harm, but the vapor from an electronic cigarette has never been shown to cause harm to bystanders. "

Secondary smoke from cigarettes has never been proven to be harmful. It's not even been proven to have a cause and effect nor even a correlation with any harm supposedly produced. Second Hand Smoke Harm is the biggest fraud of the 20th and 21st centuries.

subrosa said...

Curmudgeon, we have more than our fair share of social engineers here. Scotland used to be famed for a better class of engineer but alas it's the lefties who are attempting to bring the country into a nanny state.

Dick, just the other day I suggested the anti-alcoholers would be putting notices on bottles shortly.  (I can't do links).  It seems as if it will really come to pass.

Dick_Puddlecote said...

Think I read somewhere that Thailand (IIRC) have passed a law requiring graphic picture warnings on alcohol, so that's the way it's heading. Australia (natch) are in the throes of making it mandatory to have warnings for pregnant women on wine etc.

tinks said...

Wow! It's getting very silly now. Most have no idea what is going on. What minimum pricing means, how the smoking ban serves for other righteous campaign. To a man the prohibition pushers will all be very comfortable and on the tax-payer titty. Looks like they will chip away and push, and keep up their micro-management of our private lives, probably until it goes pop. The only solution it seems it to stop giving them the power to do such things.

fucked off said...

It's all Agenda21 related,i just want to live my life how i want,not be dictated to by some faceless buffonocrat.