Monday 9 July 2012

More Pubs Are About To Get More Expensive

Never let it be said that this government doesn't act on the comments of Daily Mail readers.
Draft legislation has been laid in parliament so that later this year local councils will be able to:

- use early morning alcohol restriction orders (EMROs) to restrict the sale of alcohol in all or part of their areas between midnight and 6am
- charge a levy for late-night licences to contribute to the cost of extra policing, and other costs linked to late-night drinking like street cleaning
You will note that these powers are being given to 'local councils'. You know, the kind of entity sometimes run by utter maniacs.

Now, what do you think they will do with such powers? Use them in only the most excessive of cases, or whenever they are able to play with their new toy? Whaddya think?

The detail is even more depressing, as detailed in the government's consultation response document.

On the restricting of sales between midnight and 6am ...
2.14 Suggestions for types of premises that should be considered for an exemption from EMROs included charity events; art galleries; best practice schemes; Community Amateur Sports Clubs (CASCs); private member’s clubs; restaurants and community or country pubs. Other comments suggested that responsible premises should be exempt from every EMRO; that licensing authorities should have the discretion to introduce their own exemptions; and that there should be no exemptions from EMROs.
Sounds fair.
2.17 We have decided that there will be no exemptions from EMROs. The intention is that an EMRO should be a simple, pre-packaged tool for licensing authorities to use to readjust the focus of their night-time economy away from problem drinking, when it is found not to promote the licensing objectives. Exemptions would dilute the impact of an EMRO
Oh yeah, silly me. It matters not how responsible you or your customers are, or whether you contribute to late night problems or not. It's just too difficult to distinguish from those who cause problems and those who don't, so everyone must suffer a collective punishment.

They're kind enough to allow you a drink after midnight on New Year's Eve, though. Small mercies, and all that.

And on the late night levy?
3.04 Local residents can use their existing rights to make representations and other channels of communication to call for the implementation of the levy in their area. The 2011 Act has provided residents with new opportunities to be involved in licensing decisions by removing the requirement that they must demonstrate vicinity to premises before making a representation.
Don't live anywhere near the noisy bars and late night revellers? It doesn't affect you until you open the Mail and read the hysteria? That's not a problem, you can inflict extra charges on the premises regardless. Just pick up the phone and whine to your heart's content about the youth of today, how it wasn't like that in your day, and that national service would sort 'em out. Job done.
3.11 Restaurants will not be exempt from the levy. We believe that restaurants which operate between midnight and 6am are usually part of and profiting from the night-time economy.
Not only will you not be able to enjoy a Cobra with your Chicken Bhuna, you're also likely to pay more for it thanks to Mr Angry of a town miles away.

But surely, Dick, this is only something which will affect city centre hell-holes, why should we care? Well, if that were the case, why would there be a need for this exemption?
3.18 Country village pubs will be included as a discretionary exemption from the levy, subject to specific definitions. In England, this exemption is applicable to those premises which are within designated rural settlements with a population of less than 3,000
So, I take it that the daft idea of minimum alcohol pricing can be shelved now late night carnage - urban or rural - has been tackled by our brave and benevolent government?

Course not, that's not the way the ratchet is set. It only ever goes one way, remember?


14 comments:

Jay said...

Fuckers.

Bucko said...

Bloody fuckers

Simple Simon says said...

When the day comes where the good old English was a thing of the past, some idiot may just look back and ask-WHY DID WE DO THAT?

30/06/07 MOVEMENT said...

lets get some reality about the remaining pubs and their loyal clientle
The Puritanical weasels in Westminster know they can do anything they so desire with this section of Society,the smoking ban has proved that
beyond doubt. The pubs have become the last chance saloons ,run by
whimpering ,chiken livered,stooping,spittle licking,cringing butty makers,
serving loners,hand wafters,shoulder shruggers,whiskered real ale wassocks,
weekend wearies,after work po faced clerks,child benefit spendthrifts,
friendless mind sagging bores,desperate divorcees,sad partner seekers,
and circles of half baked of duty jobsworths.
Must'nt forget the champions of freedom who sqwauk their protest and
yet patronise the guilty
Boycott the trade ,hit them hard untill they sprout some bollocks and
stand up to fight.

The 300

Jay said...

I've been to a pub precisely once this year. We had guests -- it was a special occasion. Before the ban, we went out to pubs and restaurants 3 to 4 times per week.  I wouldn't call it a boycott, even though it pretty much is one.

Martinezantonio said...

Meanwhile, in Australia (where the plain packaging ban has been passed, but not even come into effect), we see the next example of there being no slippery-slope at all - ASH calls for a permanent ban on the sale of cigarettes to anyone born after the year 2000.
https://twitter.com/ABC_NewsRadio/statuses/222456052296327168

Stuart H. said...

Look a little closer at your local examples and you may find, rather than more officers on the beat, the levy on late night businesses being sidelined into things like 'street pastors'. Certainly the case over here in Isle of Man, where - helpfully - the evangelical wowsers who created a Chief Minister's Task Force on Alcohol and Drugs a few years back also run the 'alcohol advisory' groups and have just started such a scheme - based on various ones in the UK.
I've noticed theUK ones tend to be in quieter towns with no real late night trouble previously. Ironically, the late night disturbances only started with the 'street pastors'. I suspect coming out of a pub you've gone to on Friday night to forget that prod-nose at work, only to find said prod-nose bearing down at you in a dayglo vest, armed with a big bible and intent on saving your soul, might have a little to do with that!

truckerlyn said...

"You will note that these powers are being given to 'local councils'. You know, the kind of entity sometimes run by utter maniacs."

Err, Sometimes?  Don't you mean only ever run by utter maniacs?

truckerlyn said...

Or wonder what made us such spineless, self destructing idiots!

General Pyston Broak said...

"
2.17 We have decided that there will be no exemptions from EMROs. The intention is that an EMRO should be a simple, pre-packaged tool for licensing authorities to use to readjust the focus of their night-time economy away from problem drinking, when it is found not to promote the licensing objectives. Exemptions would dilute the impact of an EMRO  " 
I bet the House of Commons bars will be exempted. Even though it's kicked off in there before.

SadButMadLad said...

And Angry Exile has laid in it and ripped it to shreds. Cameron Nolan (@camnolan) is still a bit wet round the ears.

http://angryexile.wordpress.com/2012/07/10/the-bansturbators-latest-attack-on-liberty/ 

Jax said...

“ASH calls for a permanent ban on the sale of cigarettes to anyone born after the year 2000.”
 
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.  I know this is in Oz – that Mecca of All Things Anti-smoking – but it’s heartening to see that even there the anti-smoking industry are showing signs of the stresses of a movement which has had its day and is falling from favour.  With third-hand smoke failing to hit the headlines, outside and private car bans proving to be less enthusiastically-received than expected and with comments sections now liberally peppered with non-smokers openly stating their concerns that anti-smoking is now taking things to silly limits, the desperation continues, as ASH fumble frantically around for some new campaign tactic which will shoot them back into the limelight and the politicians’ attention. 
 
So, this is the latest one, is it?  Things must be getting truly desperate in the anti-smoking camp if they are now openly advocating a policy which would run the very real risk of putting themselves out of business completely within the next 10 years.  I guess they’re just trying to “buy some time” and hoping that in the unlikely event that this policy is adopted - while sales of legal cigarettes plummet, their “target base” shrinks year on year, and their cries against the tiny number of remaining smokers starts to look more and more like abject hysteria and/or outright persecution – that a miracle will come along to save their skins.
 
I never thought I’d see the day when the anti-smoking industry was forced into such a hand-to-mouth existence, but it’s always good to see the mighty tumbling from their once seemingly-unreachable pedestals, isn’t it?  Particularly when those same pedestals are entirely of their own making.

Mag01 said...

The “tobacco-free generation” idea was floated by Singapore
in a prelude to the recent World Conference on Tobacco or Health:


 


http://www.tobaccofreesingapore.info/2012/03/tobacco-free-generation-proposal-receives-praise/


 

Mudplugger said...

We already have, and have had for decades, perfectly adequate laws to deal with those causing disturbances by being drunk in public and, more crucially, to deal with those irresponsible alcohol retailers who sell drink to those already inebriated.
For some strange reason, no-one ever seems to apply these established laws, but the authorities would rather seek out new powers, restrictions and levy-raising opportunities.  Wonder why ?