Debate: Should we introduce minimum pricing of alcohol to limit sales of cheap booze and curb anti-social behaviour?

 

Independent Voices
Monday 26 November 2012 08:49 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

What's going on?

Update: 13/03/13

Plans to ban cheap beers and spirits by imposing a minimum price on units of alcohol are set to be shelved by David Cameron following a Cabinet row over the moves.

Under the proposals, which are strongly supported by David Cameron and Jeremy Hunt, the Health Secretary, a minimum price of 45p per unit would be set in England and Wales in an attempt to reduce binge-drinking and curb alcohol-fuelled crime.

However, the plans have been opposed by the Home Secretary, Theresa May, and her Liberal Democrat deputy Jeremy Browne

Case for: "Drunk" isn't "free"

Keeping booze prices low doesn't protect the poor, it protects the profits of the drinks industry and, as the history of prohibition should demonstrate, this is an industry that's more than capable of looking after itself. While less harmful drugs like cannabis have been outlawed, alcohol remains legal and freely available despite abundant evidence of the damage it causes to individuals and society. If you're worried about protecting the freedom to get drunk on the cheap, worry about this instead: the freedom to move about public spaces without fear of drink-related violence and the freedom to use an NHS unburdened by drink-related injury and illness. Minimum pricing is a simple, efficient measure that will do a lot of good.

Case against: Punishing the poor

This is a tax on the poor, pure and simple. Any policy that introduces a minimum price is a blatant mechanism for pricing the poor out of the market. And here, as ever, the poor are taking the blame for much wider social ills. Instead of blaming the poor for binge drinking, and so stigmatising them further, we should apply the liberal principle that the state does not know best what is good for individuals, and if poor people wish to drink until they're drunk - just like those pesky middle class types who prefer Chardonnay - they should be free to.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in