This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/nov/28/drink-theresa-may-alcohol

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Drink, disorder and Theresa May's modest proposal Drink, disorder and Theresa May's modest proposal
(about 4 hours later)
It is a measure of Theresa May's confidence in office that she is able to announce the biggest public health intervention in England and Wales since the ban on smoking in public places – the 45p minimum price for alcohol – while she is out of the country on a trip to India.It is a measure of Theresa May's confidence in office that she is able to announce the biggest public health intervention in England and Wales since the ban on smoking in public places – the 45p minimum price for alcohol – while she is out of the country on a trip to India.
The decision to put the home secretary nominally in charge of the government's long-delayed alcohol strategy was taken back in March, when the then health secretary was deep in what was known in Whitehall as the "Lansley sulk". This was Andrew Lansley's 18-month opposition to setting a minimum price for alcohol, in the belief that "nudge" rather than "nannying" was still the best way to tackle Britain's binge-drinking culture.The decision to put the home secretary nominally in charge of the government's long-delayed alcohol strategy was taken back in March, when the then health secretary was deep in what was known in Whitehall as the "Lansley sulk". This was Andrew Lansley's 18-month opposition to setting a minimum price for alcohol, in the belief that "nudge" rather than "nannying" was still the best way to tackle Britain's binge-drinking culture.
Andrew Lansley has gone, and been replaced by Jeremy Hunt. But there is another strategic reason why it makes sense for the Home Office rather than the Department of Health to make the annnouncement. Andrew Lansley has been replaced by Jeremy Hunt. But there is another strategic reason why it makes sense for the Home Office rather than the Department of Health to make the announcement.
Whitehall lawyers are only too well aware that the drinks industry intends to follow the example of the tobacco companies and launch a legal challenge to the policy under EU competition law. For the government to repulse that challenge in the European court of justice, in the Hague, it will have to prove that any such disruption of the free market is justified by a public policy objective. Government lawyers advised earlier this year that the drinks industry was far more likely to be seen off in the courts if ministers were able to mount an argument about tackling crime and disorder rather than simply improving public health. Whitehall lawyers are only too well aware that the drinks industry intends to follow the example of the tobacco companies and launch a legal challenge to the policy under EU competition law. For the government to repulse that challenge in the European court of justice, in The Hague, it will have to prove that any such disruption of the free market is justified by a public policy objective. Government lawyers advised earlier this year that the drinks industry was far more likely to be seen off in the courts if ministers were able to mount an argument about tackling crime and disorder rather than simply improving public health.
This is why May put so much emphasis in her Commons written statement on Wednesday on Friday- and Saturday-night no-go areas and on the link between violent crime and alcohol. The Home Office says a 45p minimum price could lead to 5,240 fewer offences every year and 714 fewer alcohol-related deaths. What it fails to point out is that 5,240 fewer offences each year is unlikely to make that much impact when the crime rate is running at 4m recorded offences each year, and that those who drink themselves to death represent a health rather than a crime issue. This is why May put so much emphasis in her Commons written statement on Friday- and Saturday-night no-go areas and on the link between violent crime and alcohol. The Home Office says a 45p minimum price could lead to 5,240 fewer offences every year and 714 fewer alcohol-related deaths. What it fails to point out is that 5,240 fewer offences each year is unlikely to make that much impact when the crime rate is running at 4m recorded offences each year, and that those who drink themselves to death represent a health rather than a crime issue.
The drinks industry is optimistic because a Dutch proposal to set a minimum price for spirits back in 1978 was ruled illegal under EU competition. The issue is already being played out in the European court and could be settled by the time the 45p-a-unit price reaches the statute book in England and Wales. This is because the Scottish government is being challenged in the Scottish and European courts over its decision to set a 50p-a-unit minimum prince. Whitehall lawyers are already involved in the case.The drinks industry is optimistic because a Dutch proposal to set a minimum price for spirits back in 1978 was ruled illegal under EU competition. The issue is already being played out in the European court and could be settled by the time the 45p-a-unit price reaches the statute book in England and Wales. This is because the Scottish government is being challenged in the Scottish and European courts over its decision to set a 50p-a-unit minimum prince. Whitehall lawyers are already involved in the case.
Perhaps the reason May could feel relaxed enough about the statement to go to India was because there was little new in it. When she launched the alcohol strategy, back in March, she floated a minimum 40p-a-unit price floor for alcohol. With Lansley gone, this has now become 45p, even though doctors and health groups continued to press hard for a 50p minimum.Perhaps the reason May could feel relaxed enough about the statement to go to India was because there was little new in it. When she launched the alcohol strategy, back in March, she floated a minimum 40p-a-unit price floor for alcohol. With Lansley gone, this has now become 45p, even though doctors and health groups continued to press hard for a 50p minimum.
Many of the other measures announced in the consultation have been doing the rounds in Whitehall for several years. The police first warned that it was now possible to buy lager more cheaply than bottled water in supermarkets back in 2007. When Jacqui Smith was home secretary, she was inveighing against irresponsible drink promotions such as "50p shots until midnight" and "all you can drink for a tenner" nights.Many of the other measures announced in the consultation have been doing the rounds in Whitehall for several years. The police first warned that it was now possible to buy lager more cheaply than bottled water in supermarkets back in 2007. When Jacqui Smith was home secretary, she was inveighing against irresponsible drink promotions such as "50p shots until midnight" and "all you can drink for a tenner" nights.
Mandatory licensing conditions in 2010 banned drinking games such as the "dentist's chair", popularised by Paul Gascoigne, when he played for England, in which drink was poured straight down the mouths of customers. Ministers say they want to see if the ban on irresponsible promotions is working. Mandatory licensing conditions in 2010 banned drinking games such as the "dentist's chair", popularised by Paul Gascoigne when he played for England, in which drink was poured straight down the mouths of customers. Ministers say they want to see if the ban on irresponsible promotions is working.
The home secretary's cautious proposal stems directly from the knowledge that she is treading a fine line within a cabinet that is deeply divided over the issue and perhaps lacks the necessary political will to face down the drinks industry.The home secretary's cautious proposal stems directly from the knowledge that she is treading a fine line within a cabinet that is deeply divided over the issue and perhaps lacks the necessary political will to face down the drinks industry.