TOPIC:

By a freeze on alcohol duty do you mean just not raising it? I think a statutory freeze would be a problem. Having better scales of duty to encourage lower strengths is a top idea.

The gradual extension of opening hours sounds unwieldy. I'd follow the UK model of all-at-once, data from which[/url:16ragelt] are showing that it isn't causing problems.

The licence amendments are good, but would be a problem politically because they would be seen as devaluing the price of a pub licence. It'd be the taxis all over again. That's not to say it shouldn't be done.

And definitely, capping the price of soft drinks is great, though it could be difficult to administrate and police. The drinks industry would need to provide some kind of voluntary mathematical guidance, and [i:16ragelt]they[/i:16ragelt] don't like reminding punters of just how small bar mixers are.

"sbillings":2iomw5mg wrote: without completely eliminating the de facto competitive advantage of the holder of a pub license, over night.[/quote:2iomw5mg]

Why shouldn't the competitive advantage be eliminated overnight? They've had the licencing system weighted in their favour for over 100 years. Let them take their oil.

"Poc":12rlvwmx wrote: Why shouldn't the competitive advantage be eliminated overnight?[/quote:12rlvwmx]Let me guess: you're not a member of either of Ireland's big political parties.

"TheBeerNut":2pzwkuhm wrote: I'd follow the UK model of all-at-once, data from which are showing that it isn't causing problems.[/quote:2pzwkuhm]
Depends on who you listen to thought, doesn't it?

24-Hour drinking casualties 'trebled'[/url:2pzwkuhm]

24-Hour drinking has cut violence.[/url:2pzwkuhm]

"Poc":2pzwkuhm wrote: Why shouldn't the competitive advantage be eliminated overnight? They've had the licencing system weighted in their favour for over 100 years. Let them take their oil.[/quote:2pzwkuhm]

I feel dirty saying this but I am trying to be politically realistic. I think the café bar idea was a great one, but it was killed stone dead by the publicans. The idea here is that the publicans would be the only ones with the license to sell spirits and they don't have to sell food if they don't want to, so they still have an advantage, even if it is a smaller one than they are used to.

Actually, I think giving them one more advantage would be a good idea: seating.
Make the beer and wine on-license all seated, similar to the special restaurant license. They cannot allow people into the place unless they can seat them. This would mean that the new places cannot become high pressure drinking environments, but the publicans could still pack 'em in, if they want.

With a due nod in the direction of political realism; they're going to object outright either way. You've suggested that it'd be a first step on the road to a sensible licencing regime, that's exactly what they're afraid of. They've had a cartel enshrined in legislation and even the most modest erosion of that is cause for serious alarm with the publican's lobby, blocking such proposals is the raison d'etre of the IVA and the LVA, anything else they engage in is just window dressing to their main function.

I'm not being cynical just for the sake of it, you've clearly given the issue a lot of thought, but I'm very much of the opinion that rather than build another level of byzantine legislation that creates more categories of licence holder, that the benefits of deregulation and application of the simple "on" and "off" licence holder types system that you suggest should be emphasised.

Today's dipshit idea is brought to you by the Irish Medical Organisation: ban the sale of alcohol[/url:1vq0hlig] in supermarkets, petrol stations and "small shops". They want every possible step taken to stop people drinking at home.

I mean, it's not like they'll go bingeing in the pub or anything, is it?