Another dim idea from a Labour supporter, but given the source it's hardly surprising

A Norfolk Labour activist is suggesting that people buying a round of drinks be effectively abolished as people's alcohol consumption could be monitored on an "entitlement card". His suggestion would mean that if you bought a round the whole round would appear next to your name on your record of alcohol consumption. This would stop you buying rinks for your partner, it would stop people drinking if they had had too much. Presumably also creating a black market for people who don't drink to also sell their entitlement to someone else ?

And of course on top of all this it would essentially be another way of the big brother Labour state monitoring and controlling what people do in their private lives.

You have to remember though that the person who wrote this letter is someone many Lib Dems in Norfolk know. Before jumping ship from the Lib Dems, something that every Lib Dem I know gave a big cheer for when they heard (indeed, many would have wanted to give him a shove and encouragement many years before), the author, was the sort of person you avoided at conferences. Long on talk but short on anything interesting to say. And now, having been a Tory, then a Lib Dem, he finds himself in Labour.

Believe me, they are welcome to him.

Flaming Sambuca anyone ?

I think 95% of the population hangs its head in shamed ambarrassment at the way a small hardcore of British tourists behave abroad. So whilst it is, of course, terrible what happened to a British tourist in Crete, you do have to ask whether it will take THIS kind of treatment to get some British men to keep their shorts on and British women to keep their tops on in bars abroad.

In praise of the SNP

Which ever side of the argument you sit on over the thorny issue of raising alcohol prices with the aim of reducing excess alcohol use, you have to be impressed with the SNP's willingness to take the issue on, make unpopular decisions and not shirk the responsibilities that come with the trappings of office.

I heard a member of the alcoholics excuse group (also known as The Portman Group), an organisation funded by alcohol producers to ... erm ... well let's be clear, their job is simply to promote alcohol whilst pretending to want people to drink less or, as they say "drink responsibly". This is the same group that tells publicans to promote very alcoholic cider by "pouring it in a long class with ice". Anyway, I heard him wetting himself with fright on the radio this morning because the Portman Group will now be found out one way or the other.

If Scotland does see a fall in alcohol related illness, if alcohol consumption does drop north of the border and the SNP are proven to be right, then the credibility of the Portman group will be destroyed.

If, however, alcohol consumption does not change and the only result of the price increases is more people paying more and the SNP suffering a backlash the SNP can, in the short term, rely on the unpopularity of the Labour Party and can expect to retain much of their support for this simple reason.

So although it appears to be a gamble, the SNP really don't have much to lose and, more than anything else, it shows them to be willing to take risks and think the unthinkable.

So I raise my glass to them with cheap English bought Port. Cheers !

Anecdotes and Alcohol

Sir Liam Donaldson, the Chief Medical Officer, tried to explain his decision to advise that alcohol for for under 15s should be prohibited by parents, by using some of the most bizarre reasoning I have heard in recent years.

Firstly he tried to debunk the arguments that many people give that a little bit of alcohol for teenagers can make teens more responsible with alcohol later on by arguing that some people, some children, some adults, cannot differentiate between right and wrong so this blurs things, then he went on to state that some people do not know what a small amount is or they don't actually seek to control or limit children's alcohol intake. In effect he was saying that because a few, the ignorant and those who don't care, fail to control their children or have children that cannot be controlled, all parents should exercise prohibition of alcohol to children. A worrying argument in itself.

Then Sir Liam tried to make the medical point about alcohol. When pressed by Nicky Campbell as to what damage a small glass of alcohol for a 14 year old would cause, Sir Liam had no real answer other than to repeat his previous argument that those who drink to excess would damage their brains. So in effect small amounts do NOT cause damage, but as with anything, large amounts might. Again, this argument was weak and does not add up.

So Nicky Campbell made the point about millions of responsible parents who give their children small amounts of alcohol and have children who do not turn out to be binge drinkers. Sir Liam's response was that anecdotal evidence about "middle class parents" was not something that a real judgment could be made on, and instead he returned to his argument about people who don't apply rules or standards for their children.

Okay, anecdotes are no way to make policy, but I think we all know someone brought up around careful alcohol use who turned out not to be an alcoholic, but Sir Liam does not care for this.

So what did Sir Liam do next to justify himself ? He used a personal anecdote about his visit to France and having a meal with a French family to make a general assumption about British children compared to French ones because of one conversation.

For goodness sake Sir Liam, don't lecture us on anecdotes being no basis on which to make policy then use an anecdote to prove your arguments are correct.

I have to say Sir Liam's whole argument was full of holes and was basically all about stopping the majority doing something responsibly because a few do not follow good advice.

99p pints never did me any harm

When pubs are closing at the rate of nearly 5 a week in response to the low prices being charged by supermarkets for alcohol coupled with the recession, it seems rather ludicrous for health groups to moan about one pub chain offering a pint for 99p.

As I recall this was the price charged in my old student union from 1994-97 and I have to say it never did me any harm.

The problem with a lot of health campaigners is that they fail to understand that it is the rise of the supermarkets and the lack of control they have over who buys alcohol and the amount they consume that actually affects alcoholism much more than pubs, who an at least refuse service to someone who is incapable and they can, in theory face sanctions if they continue to allow people who are intoxicated to continue.

Indeed only last week there was a report of a pub landlord who reported two drunk parents to the police who turned up at his pub drunk with a child in a pram. Can you imagine Tesco doing that ?

How do teenagers get alcohol ? Tesco self service tills, that's how

Tesco have a policy in a number of their stores now of having self service tills, where you scan your own products in and you pay what it tells you to pay. You can pay with cash or a card, and in many stores, like my local convenience store, there are very often two self service tills, but only one manned by a human being, with the human till being the most popular till, but not with some teenagers.

Whilst I was in Tesco an hour ago I witnessed the self service till being very popular with teenage boys who were certainly not 18 years old, who were buying alcohol, a few cans each, from the self service till knowing that the very busy single member of staff on duty in the shop was never ever going to be able to challenge them on their age because he was too busy and the tills are organised in such a way as to prevent him seeing the items they are scanning.

We can get the police to do as much as possible about dealing with teenage binge drinking but when Tesco set up their shops so that teenagers are given a free hand to but as much alcohol as they want, the police may as well not bother.

Norwich's Pubs Set To Go ?

They used to say of Norwich that it is a city with a church for every week of the year and a pub for every day of the year, and in my youth I used to think it was true. Down every street there seemed to be a pub, both large and small, allowing for all tastes, all musical styles and drinkers and locals alike. But this bold claim may be put to the test in the next few years.

Norwich South Liberal Democrat candidate, Simon Wright, has conducted a survey in recent weeks of pub landlords with 40% of them saying that they do not expect to be running pubs in five years time.

I know a few people in "the trade", and they tell me that supermarkets are selling spirits for less than the price that the pubs can buy it, and in many cases for less than the cost to the supermarket themselves. Offers of £10 for a litre of Vodka actually fly in the face of the prices because with VAT, the price to the supermarket exceeds £10.

I don't have a solution, but something needs to be done if we are not to lose all our pubs, particularly those local rural pubs that so many villages rely on.

George Osborne eaten alive on Radio Five live

I've always thought of George Osborne as n over promoted rich boy who lacks any real credibility and gravitas, and this was shown in very great detail today on Radio Five this morning when he was talking about Tory plans to tax alcopops and premium beers at a higher rate.

George Osborne starting explaining how his plans were proven because of their success in other countries, with him naming Norway as one such example. Then he, he walked in to a trap of his own making. The BBC interviewer, obviously aware of Mr Osborne's tendency to mention Norway as had obviously done a bit of research in to Norway, in then listed to Mr Osborne exactly what they do in Norway to support efforts to reduce drinking on top of simply taxing premium beers at a higher rate. The things that Norway also does includes setting an age limit of 20 for people wanting to buy spirits and banning the sale wine, beers and spirits in convenience stores, garages and supermarkets. The interviewer want on listing all the other things Norway does, and in response George Osborne had no proper answer or response other than to again repeat the same points he had made at the beginning of the interview.

Very shallow and hopelessly out of his depth were the first thoughts that came in to my head.

Some surprises in review of 24 hour drinking

Despite what some may think, the government report in to 24 hour drinking did contain some surprises.

Of course, it should be of no surprise that the government's line has been supported by the report and that 24 hour drinking is regarded as an amazing success. But the surprise is in the notes at the back which also states that

Tories "so forgiving" of their own councillors

I noted a few months ago that a Tory Councillor who drove to a hospital whilst over the alcohol limit and then urinated in the grounds of the hospital, had resigned from the Conservative Group, but was , as the Tory leader of South Norfolk made clear, going to be allowed back in to the Tory group at the earliest opportunity. So in effect his "resignation" from the Tory group was a meaningless gesture.

Well if the South Norfolk District Council website is to be believed, Cllr Tilcock has already been let back in to the Tory group.

I wonder if the Tories would have been so forgiving of this sort of behaviour from a teenager or a non Conservative councillor ?

What is it about getting older and drinking that doesn't mix ?

I have never been a prolific or heavy drinker in the "binge drinking" sense, although I was always able to hold my alcohol well, indeed a little too well at University which annoyed me as I seemed to have to spend more to get drunk. At university a gentle night out would involve 8 pints of beer (£1 a pint back in 1996) and a heavy night out would mean having half a bottle of Vodka followed by several more pints. Yes, I know, it was not big or clever, but in my early to mid 20's (I was 26 when I left University), my body could cope with it. Indeed I had even been known to make it in for lectures at 9 am after some very heavy nights.

So why is this relevant ? Well last night I went out and had the equivalent of seven pints of beer over the course of about 5 hours. This accompanied a lovely meal with mr wife and six friends. I felt fine, was lucid, had no headache and didn't feel at all queasy or ill in the slightest. So why did I wake up this morning feeling so bad ? My head hurt so much, my throat felt like it had been sandpapered during the night and I seem to ache all over. What happens to your body when you pass 30 years of age that means you cannot cope with a few pints once a month ?

Is it is because I used to be made of much stronger stuff or perhaps my rose tinted spectacle view of my past drinking exploits mean that I fail to remember the days I couldn't get up to go to lectures or the throbbing headaches I used to have after a night out ? Indeed, I know I did sometimes feel really not great after a night out as a student but then given what I used to put my liver through, my body had earned the right to be in pain. But I come back to the point, I didn't even feel drunk and felt great last night, so why did I feel like I lost today to just lying in the sofa and feeling in pain ?

In truth it is probably one of the first signs of my body getting used to being much older. Having recently turned 37, I am usually the smug one who is pleased to receive the compliments of people who say "You're never 37". I have no real wrinkles yet and not a grey hair or bald patch in sight, and going to the gym three times a week means I am light on my feet and keeping the paunch at bay to. But, it appears that my body has ways of telling me "act your age".

So next time I go out (in a couple of weeks - so I will have to feed back), I'll take it even easier, act my age, and be back in time for Match of the Day. Perhaps I'll but some slippers too.

What chance do public health warnings have ?

When i was at the gym earlier watching MTV on one of the screens a song came on by someone called Mickey Modelle (yes, I am sure that is her real name) which to me showed to futility of government and drinks industry campaigns to ensure a policy of sensible drinking.

The whole video appears to centre around drinking lots and lots of alcohol at a bar, and the more you drink the better it gets. Indeed later on in the video there are several acts of wanton vandalism which don't bother anyone as well as a lot of anti social behaviour. But as they are drinking, it's all such a good laugh.

I am not suggesting for one single minute that videos like this be banned and I am not coming over all "nanny state", but it does show the battle health officials will have if they are ever to have any affect on alcohol consumption. Let's face it if all pubs were like this none of us would stay at home.

Forget caring about children, Wetherspoons are only worried about getting more binge drinkers in

The decision by J D Wetherspoons, the pub chain, to refuse to serve adults with children more than two alcoholic drinks has been painted by the company as an attempt to show responsibility and care for children, but reading all the statements from the company shows this is clearly a fallacy.

A spokesman for the company said it was "uncomfortable" with children being on the premises for long periods because of a lack of play facilities and added that parents visiting its pubs could even be refused soft drinks or coffee to curtail their stay.

So what is the message that Wetherspoons is sending out ? It appears that they don't want parents in drinking responsibly ? Why not, because parents with kids are less likely to get blind drink in the first place and are taking up valuable space at the bar that could be used by a binge drinker.

Whilst Wetherspoons might like to pretend they care about kids, lets not forget that if they cared that much they'd do more to protect binge drinkers. Their only care is their profits.

Brave or stupid ? Seven pence on a pint from the Tories

If I was being glib I would say that the Tory proposal to add seven pence to the price of a pint in order to curb binge drinking was a sure fire vote loser. However, to be fair, the policy surely has some merits as binge drinking is an issue that needs to be addressed and it needs some bold thinking.

So, let me shock some Tories by saying well done to Iain Duncan Smith for being prepared to be different and taking a risk.