Pub owners face extra charge to pay for policing
Pub and club owners should be made to pay for the policing of antisocial behaviour caused by alcohol, Scotland's Justice Secretary said yesterday.
Kenny MacAskill's proposal prompted Scotland's licensed trade to accuse the SNP of performing a U-turn on the stance it took while in opposition and failing to consult the industry on its recommendations.
The Justice Secretary suggested his "polluter pays" approach at a conference organised by the Association of Chief Police Officers Scotland to discuss the incoming new licensing legislation.
He said he wanted their views on how high the fees should be and who should
pay as part of the executive's current consultation on fee levels.
The scheme would result in late-opening premises charged an additional fee to the annual £87 they pay to open beyond 11pm, with the money used to help with policing costs in antisocial behaviour hotspots.
Given the closing time of most pubs the additional levy would be aimed primarily at nightclubs.
But licensed trade officials point out that while in opposition the SNP opposed the policy, with Fergus Ewing, now Mr MacAskill's Community Safety Minister, claiming it was "impossible to interpret and implement" and would amount to a "punitive measure" on an already over-burdened industry.
It had been recommended by Glasgow Labour MSP Paul Martin when the incoming licensing bill was debated, but was ditched.
In his speech at the Scottish Police College at Tulliallan, Fife, Mr MacAskill said those permitted to sell alcohol must bear the responsibility for the social and economic costs.
"The effects of alcohol on our city and town centres is not cost-free and those who profit from it must contribute to addressing it. It's not right that taxpayers pick up the whole of the bill. Licensees should pay their way too."
He added: "These fees could be used to create a fund to help off-set the costs of additional policing in areas with a large number of late-opening premises, areas that are considered antisocial behaviour hotspots, such as Lothian Road and Sauchiehall Street on a Friday or Saturday night."
Eddie Tobin, head of nightclub lobbying group the British Entertainment and Discotheque Association and chairman of the Glasgow Licensing Forum, said: "I'm horrified by this total U-turn.
"It also runs against what the leader of his party has told the trade and punishes innocent rates payers.
"Mr MacAskill needs to remember that those causing the antisocial behaviour caused by alcohol either haven't got into clubs or do so near their own homes."
Paul Waterson, of the Scottish Licensed Trade Association, added: "Scotland is a nation now which buys drink from the off-trade, mainly supermarkets. How can Mr MacAskill determine where the person became drunk?"
But the suggestion received strong support from Acpos, which also backed it when the bill was going through Parliament.
Assistant Chief Constable Ian Dickinson, chair of the Acpos licensing sub-group, said: "Mr MacAskill was clear, and Acpos strongly agrees, that Scotland needs to work vigorously and energetically together to address the worst effects of alcohol abuse.
"Problem premises, which are badly managed, have a direct and detrimental impact on their communities or their customers and staff, should contribute to the consequences of their actions."
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: mairead, Argyll on 9:50pm Wed 29 Aug 07
Another **** stealth tax. We already pay for the police and why should premisies who are peacfully run have to pay for the rowdy establishments. Anyway, most trouble from drunks occurs out in the streets, not in pubs and clubs.
Another **** stealth tax. We already pay for the police and why should premisies who are peacfully run have to pay for the rowdy establishments. Anyway, most trouble from drunks occurs out in the streets, not in pubs and clubs.
Posted by: Kinghob on 10:15pm Wed 29 Aug 07
[quote]"Problem premises, which are badly managed, have a direct and detrimental impact on their communities or their customers and staff, should contribute to the consequences of their actions."[/quote]
Not so sure that £87 per year is going to go far if it is all a night club pays towards policing, I don't believe for a second that folk get buckied up in Wester Hailes or Corstorphine, and then get a bus at 3 in the morning to cause mayhem in Lothian Road in the centre of Edinburgh.
I also find it hard to accept that **** up folk don't get into nightclubs, or that they don't get wasted once they get in.
This idea isn't as new as people might think. When raves were on the go, there were so many people becoming seriously ill through drug misuse in a large venue, that it stretched the ambulance services and had the potential to divert ambulances from their usual busy saturday night.
So the organisers had to pay for an extra ambulance and staff.
if paying more than £87 a year to stay open after 11 (if that is actually true it is absolute mickey mouse money for a place that will get that fee back in about one minute on any weekend) is considered a 'penalty' or the proposed sum would genuinely ruin the clubs, then it
is a non starter of course.
Mairead is dead right that 'peacefully run clubs' shouldn't be penalised, but the quote was about [quote]"Problem premises, which are badly managed, have a direct and detrimental impact on their communities or their customers and staff, should contribute to the consequences of their actions"[/quote]
There are problem areas, there are problem licensees and premises, the general public aren't as safe as they should be.
The centre of cities and towns are pretty dodgy places at the weekend and something needs to be done about it so folk don't need to wear a flak jacket to go out for a beer.
"Problem premises, which are badly managed, have a direct and detrimental impact on their communities or their customers and staff, should contribute to the consequences of their actions."
Not so sure that £87 per year is going to go far if it is all a night club pays towards policing, I don't believe for a second that folk get buckied up in Wester Hailes or Corstorphine, and then get a bus at 3 in the morning to cause mayhem in Lothian Road in the centre of Edinburgh.
I also find it hard to accept that **** up folk don't get into nightclubs, or that they don't get wasted once they get in.
This idea isn't as new as people might think. When raves were on the go, there were so many people becoming seriously ill through drug misuse in a large venue, that it stretched the ambulance services and had the potential to divert ambulances from their usual busy saturday night.
So the organisers had to pay for an extra ambulance and staff.
if paying more than £87 a year to stay open after 11 (if that is actually true it is absolute mickey mouse money for a place that will get that fee back in about one minute on any weekend) is considered a 'penalty' or the proposed sum would genuinely ruin the clubs, then it
is a non starter of course.
Mairead is dead right that 'peacefully run clubs' shouldn't be penalised, but the quote was about
"Problem premises, which are badly managed, have a direct and detrimental impact on their communities or their customers and staff, should contribute to the consequences of their actions"
There are problem areas, there are problem licensees and premises, the general public aren't as safe as they should be.
The centre of cities and towns are pretty dodgy places at the weekend and something needs to be done about it so folk don't need to wear a flak jacket to go out for a beer.
Posted by: dark hours, inverclyde on 10:37pm Wed 29 Aug 07
As somone who works for the NHS i think this is a good idea. The number of people who end up in hospital because of alcohol is phenomenal and thats also people who havent been drinking but get caught up in fights etc. add to that the cost of sending out abulances, treatment, policing and cleaning up the morning after are all affecting you the taxpayer. Also there are court costs for people who end up in trouble when drunk. I say go further start taxing alcohol more. Put warning labels on bottles they way cigarettes are just now.
As somone who works for the NHS i think this is a good idea. The number of people who end up in hospital because of alcohol is phenomenal and thats also people who havent been drinking but get caught up in fights etc. add to that the cost of sending out abulances, treatment, policing and cleaning up the morning after are all affecting you the taxpayer. Also there are court costs for people who end up in trouble when drunk. I say go further start taxing alcohol more. Put warning labels on bottles they way cigarettes are just now.
Posted by: Juan, edimbra.......... on 11:37pm Wed 29 Aug 07
EXCELLENT IDEA!
How much money is spent policing city and town centres?
A reasonable appraoch would be too make the charge perhaps applicable to clubs of a certain size.
I would even appreciate a 1p on a pint measure to try to get us a decent health service and legal system which both get sorely abused through alchohol misuse. Kind off a directed taxation.
It may even have an effect on the lifestyle if some also is funneled to additional sports facilities or community programs.
How many community centres could get built from all the millions of pennies every week?[bold] And at the end of the day in a nightclub a pennies nothing.[/bold]
EXCELLENT IDEA!
How much money is spent policing city and town centres?
A reasonable appraoch would be too make the charge perhaps applicable to clubs of a certain size.
I would even appreciate a 1p on a pint measure to try to get us a decent health service and legal system which both get sorely abused through alchohol misuse. Kind off a directed taxation.
It may even have an effect on the lifestyle if some also is funneled to additional sports facilities or community programs.
How many community centres could get built from all the millions of pennies every week?
And at the end of the day in a nightclub a pennies nothing. Posted by: juan, edimbra..... on 11:39pm Wed 29 Aug 07
And a miracle hath happened! An idea with commonsense has sprung forth from the parly!!!! PRAISE PRAISE PRAISE!!!!! And hallo julia
And a miracle hath happened! An idea with commonsense has sprung forth from the parly!!!! PRAISE PRAISE PRAISE!!!!! And hallo julia
Posted by: ADDISON DE WITT, At my Yacht, moored at Monte Carlo, The French Riviera on 6:42am Thu 30 Aug 07
90% of Glaswegians are intoxicated most of the time.
Its very depressing.
Friday and Saturday night in Glasgow City Centre looks like
downtown Bagdad.
Its a little bit upsetting when one is going to the Opera you have
the misfortune to encounter these drunken creatures in the gutter
throwing up.
These drunken wretched Zombies are filling up Accident and
Emergency wards of hospitals, wasting the doctors and nurses
valuable time.
.
90% of Glaswegians are intoxicated most of the time.
Its very depressing.
Friday and Saturday night in Glasgow City Centre looks like
downtown Bagdad.
Its a little bit upsetting when one is going to the Opera you have
the misfortune to encounter these drunken creatures in the gutter
throwing up.
These drunken wretched Zombies are filling up Accident and
Emergency wards of hospitals, wasting the doctors and nurses
valuable time.
.
Posted by: Rab The Man, WAS MY UNCLE on 8:50am Thu 30 Aug 07
[quote][bold]mairead[/bold] wrote:
Another **** stealth tax. We already pay for the police and why should premisies who are peacfully run have to pay for the rowdy establishments. Anyway, most trouble from drunks occurs out in the streets, not in pubs and clubs.[/quote] MAIREAD
Total dross.
If the publicans want to open late and make money from drunks then fair enough.......but they do need to accept responsibility for the social disturbances, vomiting, noise, fighting etc etc................a
nd I'm frankly HORRIFIED to see how cheap this fee is presently......and they'll pass any new charges onto the drinkers anyway. Are you REALLY saying that the pub's responsibility stops at the pub door...........DUH !!
Nobody FORCES the publican to have a late licence !!!
Here's tae a better nights kip.and cleaner quieter, safer streets !!
mairead wrote:
Another **** stealth tax. We already pay for the police and why should premisies who are peacfully run have to pay for the rowdy establishments. Anyway, most trouble from drunks occurs out in the streets, not in pubs and clubs.
MAIREAD
Total dross.
If the publicans want to open late and make money from drunks then fair enough.......but they do need to accept responsibility for the social disturbances, vomiting, noise, fighting etc etc................a
nd I'm frankly HORRIFIED to see how cheap this fee is presently......and they'll pass any new charges onto the drinkers anyway. Are you REALLY saying that the pub's responsibility stops at the pub door...........DUH !!
Nobody FORCES the publican to have a late licence !!!
Here's tae a better nights kip.and cleaner quieter, safer streets !!
Posted by: BM, Glasgow on 9:51am Thu 30 Aug 07
Oh, what a shame the poor publicans will have to forego a tiny bit of the huge profits they make out of opening a late and inconveniencing decent people in the process. The principle of "polluter pays" is well known, and if the drunken, vomiting , swearing and fighting scum that their pubs disgorge in the early hours of the morning is not pollution, I don't know what is.
Oh, what a shame the poor publicans will have to forego a tiny bit of the huge profits they make out of opening a late and inconveniencing decent people in the process. The principle of "polluter pays" is well known, and if the drunken, vomiting , swearing and fighting scum that their pubs disgorge in the early hours of the morning is not pollution, I don't know what is.
Posted by: george alexander, north lanarshire on 10:25am Thu 30 Aug 07
When police arrest these people or they end up in casualty they should be asked where they had been drinking. After a while the offending premises would appear on the radar. The premises would then be billed annually based on their place in the league of shame'.
One positive result of this would be availability of officers to attend youth disturbances on Friday/Saturday nights. A time when they cannot due to the amount of 'town centre pub related' calls, if pubs are being charged for officers time then there are bound to be extra resources available for extra police.
When police arrest these people or they end up in casualty they should be asked where they had been drinking. After a while the offending premises would appear on the radar. The premises would then be billed annually based on their place in the league of shame'.
One positive result of this would be availability of officers to attend youth disturbances on Friday/Saturday nights. A time when they cannot due to the amount of 'town centre pub related' calls, if pubs are being charged for officers time then there are bound to be extra resources available for extra police.
Posted by: G Brownlee on 11:33am Thu 30 Aug 07
Once again the authorities (government, police) want to deny their own responsibilities and impose them onto others (pub/club owners).
The problem is not enough police on the street (becauser the police are misdirected by fat-cat Chief Constables and government oficials).
Publicans are not responsible for how much peolple drink; they are not brteaking any law by selling alcohol to individuals over 18.. The individuals themselves and their parents must take primary responsibility.
A visible police presence on the street is a proven deterent (for all crime, not just alcohol related). So, policemen, get off your well-paid fat backsides and do some real policing; and politicians, don't take the easy option by blaming the private sector. Get to the root of the problem - lack of education, discipline and parenting.
Once again the authorities (government, police) want to deny their own responsibilities and impose them onto others (pub/club owners).
The problem is not enough police on the street (becauser the police are misdirected by fat-cat Chief Constables and government oficials).
Publicans are not responsible for how much peolple drink; they are not brteaking any law by selling alcohol to individuals over 18.. The individuals themselves and their parents must take primary responsibility.
A visible police presence on the street is a proven deterent (for all crime, not just alcohol related). So, policemen, get off your well-paid fat backsides and do some real policing; and politicians, don't take the easy option by blaming the private sector. Get to the root of the problem - lack of education, discipline and parenting.
Posted by: BM, Glasgow on 12:26pm Thu 30 Aug 07
G Brownlee - please check your facts before making ridiculous assertions. "Publicans are not responsible for how much people drink" Yes they are - the law says so. It is illegal for a publican to serve a drunk. If they do so, they are breaking the law. If there is a drunk in the streets who has got into this condition in a bar, the publican has broken the law and should be held accountable. However some see taking money of drunks as too easy a source of profit.
G Brownlee - please check your facts before making ridiculous assertions. "Publicans are not responsible for how much people drink" Yes they are - the law says so. It is illegal for a publican to serve a drunk. If they do so, they are breaking the law. If there is a drunk in the streets who has got into this condition in a bar, the publican has broken the law and should be held accountable. However some see taking money of drunks as too easy a source of profit.
Posted by: D. Pearson, Edinburgh on 12:57pm Thu 30 Aug 07
I think G,. Brownlee needs to brush up a bit on some of the current Licensing Laws before spouting rubbish. Publicans ARE responsible for what people drink on their premises; for many years it has been an offence for serve a drunk person alcohol in licensed premises.Its also an offence for anyone to buy alhohol for a drunk in licensed premises. Whilst some bar staff may refuse service there are many who are quite happy to pour drink irrespective of the state of their customer, and licencees are more than happy to take the money with no thought for the outcome of serving excess alcohol to people who can barely function.
There's always someone elso to pick up the pieces once the drunk falls out into the street, whether thats the police, ambulance service or medical staff- who could ever dream that the licensed trade had any responsibility to bear, that would just get in the way of profit!
We should also not always assume that teenagers are the main problem. When it's 30 year olds lying in their own excrement, out their face on drink its hard to find a rational agruement for blaming education and poor parenting!
The Licensing Trade do bear some of the responsibility for this issue, we should not let their hollow complaints influence us to think otherwise.
I think G,. Brownlee needs to brush up a bit on some of the current Licensing Laws before spouting rubbish. Publicans ARE responsible for what people drink on their premises; for many years it has been an offence for serve a drunk person alcohol in licensed premises.Its also an offence for anyone to buy alhohol for a drunk in licensed premises. Whilst some bar staff may refuse service there are many who are quite happy to pour drink irrespective of the state of their customer, and licencees are more than happy to take the money with no thought for the outcome of serving excess alcohol to people who can barely function.
There's always someone elso to pick up the pieces once the drunk falls out into the street, whether thats the police, ambulance service or medical staff- who could ever dream that the licensed trade had any responsibility to bear, that would just get in the way of profit!
We should also not always assume that teenagers are the main problem. When it's 30 year olds lying in their own excrement, out their face on drink its hard to find a rational agruement for blaming education and poor parenting!
The Licensing Trade do bear some of the responsibility for this issue, we should not let their hollow complaints influence us to think otherwise.
Posted by: Charlie, Glasgo on 1:12pm Thu 30 Aug 07
The publican really has become a pariah in this country and they are being made to pay for a larger problem within society. Licensed premises already pay tax and rates. Then they were hit with a downturn in profts from the smoking ban and had to shell out for external areas; now they having to pay to convert their licence to the new system which itself incurrs legal and architecural fees; and on top of all that Mr MacAskill, whose party opposed such a move whilst in oppostion, wants them to pay more. Margaret Thatcher famously said "there is no such thing as society", pubs are a positive, vibrant part of our society won't be very soon because I wouldn't be surprised if all the publicans gave it to become plumbers. We'll all be sitting at home, drinking our supermarket alcohol which costs less than water. Winston Smith might have recognised this landscape.
The publican really has become a pariah in this country and they are being made to pay for a larger problem within society. Licensed premises already pay tax and rates. Then they were hit with a downturn in profts from the smoking ban and had to shell out for external areas; now they having to pay to convert their licence to the new system which itself incurrs legal and architecural fees; and on top of all that Mr MacAskill, whose party opposed such a move whilst in oppostion, wants them to pay more. Margaret Thatcher famously said "there is no such thing as society", pubs are a positive, vibrant part of our society won't be very soon because I wouldn't be surprised if all the publicans gave it to become plumbers. We'll all be sitting at home, drinking our supermarket alcohol which costs less than water. Winston Smith might have recognised this landscape.
Posted by: doubler, glasgow on 1:26pm Thu 30 Aug 07
bit complicated for publicans though..
which set of books do they put the extra costs through on the books in the office or the ones under the floorboards?
bit complicated for publicans though..
which set of books do they put the extra costs through on the books in the office or the ones under the floorboards?
Posted by: Thomas K Donnelly, Brooklyn New York USA on 2:10pm Thu 30 Aug 07
Why does,nt the Chief Constable and the the rest of his police get of there big fat "BUTS" and also out of there petrol cars and start petroling the city street on feet the way it was in the old days, why put a tax on publicians, why not the fat cats who own the liquor and brewing industries who are making very large profits out of selling it to the public, they dont even support our number one sport football, but they put plenty into "GOLF TENNIS RUGBY POLO & HORSE RACING"
someone should tell them that "FOOTBALL" is the number one sport of the working class.
Why does,nt the Chief Constable and the the rest of his police get of there big fat "BUTS" and also out of there petrol cars and start petroling the city street on feet the way it was in the old days, why put a tax on publicians, why not the fat cats who own the liquor and brewing industries who are making very large profits out of selling it to the public, they dont even support our number one sport football, but they put plenty into "GOLF TENNIS RUGBY POLO & HORSE RACING"
someone should tell them that "FOOTBALL" is the number one sport of the working class.
Posted by: George Laird, Glasgow on 6:00pm Thu 30 Aug 07
I have to agree that this idea is a good one, anything that puts more Police in the city centre to secure the safety of the general public must be a good move.
Eddie Tobin states; "Mr MacAskill needs to remember that those causing the antisocial behaviour caused by alcohol either haven't got into clubs or do so near their own homes."
Did they get into pubs before hand? Also what difference does it make where these drunks are causing trouble?
"Paul Waterson, of the Scottish Licensed Trade Association, added: "Scotland is a nation now which buys drink from the off-trade, mainly supermarkets. How can Mr MacAskill determine where the person became drunk?"
This is a feeble excuse, who cares where these people got drunk, the fact is that this is a problem that needs to be Policed!
Is Waterson asking that all drunks wear a badge to show where they got drunk?
There are some bams out there who haven't got a clue!
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
I have to agree that this idea is a good one, anything that puts more Police in the city centre to secure the safety of the general public must be a good move.
Eddie Tobin states; "Mr MacAskill needs to remember that those causing the antisocial behaviour caused by alcohol either haven't got into clubs or do so near their own homes."
Did they get into pubs before hand? Also what difference does it make where these drunks are causing trouble?
"Paul Waterson, of the Scottish Licensed Trade Association, added: "Scotland is a nation now which buys drink from the off-trade, mainly supermarkets. How can Mr MacAskill determine where the person became drunk?"
This is a feeble excuse, who cares where these people got drunk, the fact is that this is a problem that needs to be Policed!
Is Waterson asking that all drunks wear a badge to show where they got drunk?
There are some bams out there who haven't got a clue!
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
Posted by: jonny bond, glasgow on 6:38pm Thu 30 Aug 07
Does anybody else think that charging pubs for something the govt already heavily taxes ie alcohol is just double taxing. Why not take just a portion of the cash raised through alcahol sales and divert it where its needed most. Policing and hospitals. We already tax the sh1t out of alcohol so lets tax city centre business into closure brilliant idea chaps.
Does anybody else think that charging pubs for something the govt already heavily taxes ie alcohol is just double taxing. Why not take just a portion of the cash raised through alcahol sales and divert it where its needed most. Policing and hospitals. We already tax the sh1t out of alcohol so lets tax city centre business into closure brilliant idea chaps.
Posted by: ADDISON DE WITT, On my Yacht, moored at Monte Carlo The French Riviera on 6:52pm Thu 30 Aug 07
[quote][bold]Thomas K Donnelly[/bold] wrote:
Why does,nt the Chief Constable and the the rest of his police get of there big fat "BUTS" and also out of there petrol cars and start petroling the city street on feet the way it was in the old days, why put a tax on publicians, why not the fat cats who own the liquor and brewing industries who are making very large profits out of selling it to the public, they dont even support our number one sport football, but they put plenty into "GOLF TENNIS RUGBY POLO & HORSE RACING"
someone should tell them that "FOOTBALL" is the number one sport of the working class.
[/quote]
Whats wrong with POLO.
.
Thomas K Donnelly wrote:
Why does,nt the Chief Constable and the the rest of his police get of there big fat "BUTS" and also out of there petrol cars and start petroling the city street on feet the way it was in the old days, why put a tax on publicians, why not the fat cats who own the liquor and brewing industries who are making very large profits out of selling it to the public, they dont even support our number one sport football, but they put plenty into "GOLF TENNIS RUGBY POLO & HORSE RACING"
someone should tell them that "FOOTBALL" is the number one sport of the working class.
Whats wrong with POLO.
.
Posted by: jim bee on 7:56pm Thu 30 Aug 07
this will be the numpty mckaskill who has a record for being a nuisance when drunk.if the fat cat politicians and police chiefs cut back on there expenses we could have a full corps of bobbies on the street which is the correct way to police.whats next fine the kebab and fish shops for giving food to drunks so they can vomit.anyone backing this stolen idea is living in a different world.
this will be the numpty mckaskill who has a record for being a nuisance when drunk.if the fat cat politicians and police chiefs cut back on there expenses we could have a full corps of bobbies on the street which is the correct way to police.whats next fine the kebab and fish shops for giving food to drunks so they can vomit.anyone backing this stolen idea is living in a different world.
Posted by: Disgruntled, Edinburgh on 8:26pm Thu 30 Aug 07
What MacAskill really wants to do is raise the tax on alcohol, but alas the power for that resides South of the Border. This is the next best thing: taxing the public houses that serve it. And lest any complain about paying extra -- you already are.
What MacAskill really wants to do is raise the tax on alcohol, but alas the power for that resides South of the Border. This is the next best thing: taxing the public houses that serve it. And lest any complain about paying extra -- you already are.
Posted by: jim bee on 8:39pm Thu 30 Aug 07
to disgruntled.do you want to stop everybody from enjoying the w/end,are we not to unwind?it is a small minority of people who are causing the trouble and this is easily controlled with police being highly visible.and dont blame bar staff for serving drunks in a busy club with thumping music and bad lighting as people can appear sober and only require one more drink to get drunk.have you also heard of the saying it was only when the air hit me i realised i had too much to drink
to disgruntled.do you want to stop everybody from enjoying the w/end,are we not to unwind?it is a small minority of people who are causing the trouble and this is easily controlled with police being highly visible.and dont blame bar staff for serving drunks in a busy club with thumping music and bad lighting as people can appear sober and only require one more drink to get drunk.have you also heard of the saying it was only when the air hit me i realised i had too much to drink
Posted by: Maurice on 8:52pm Thu 30 Aug 07
[quote][bold]ADDISON DE WITT[/bold] wrote:
90% of Glaswegians are intoxicated most of the time. Its very depressing. Friday and Saturday night in Glasgow City Centre looks like downtown Bagdad. Its a little bit upsetting when one is going to the Opera you have the misfortune to encounter these drunken creatures in the gutter throwing up. These drunken wretched Zombies are filling up Accident and Emergency wards of hospitals, wasting the doctors and nurses valuable time. . [/quote] 90% of Glaswegians are intoxicated most of the time?
I wonder where that statistic come from, sounds a bit exaggerated if you ask me.
Then again 42% of all statistics are made up!
ADDISON DE WITT wrote:
90% of Glaswegians are intoxicated most of the time. Its very depressing. Friday and Saturday night in Glasgow City Centre looks like downtown Bagdad. Its a little bit upsetting when one is going to the Opera you have the misfortune to encounter these drunken creatures in the gutter throwing up. These drunken wretched Zombies are filling up Accident and Emergency wards of hospitals, wasting the doctors and nurses valuable time. .
90% of Glaswegians are intoxicated most of the time?
I wonder where that statistic come from, sounds a bit exaggerated if you ask me.
Then again 42% of all statistics are made up!
Posted by: Disgruntled, Edinburgh on 8:53pm Thu 30 Aug 07
Jim, you already pay for the consequences of excessive drinking through taxes -- for additional policing and hospital services. Beyond the usual Saturday night A&E drunks, you'd also be paying for all those cases of alcoholism and cirrosis in the years to come.
Jim, you already pay for the consequences of excessive drinking through taxes -- for additional policing and hospital services. Beyond the usual Saturday night A&E drunks, you'd also be paying for all those cases of alcoholism and cirrosis in the years to come.
Posted by: Dark house, INVERCLYDE on 9:22pm Thu 30 Aug 07
"Paying for those cases of alcoholism and cirrhosis in the years to come" Do you really think you are not paying for them now jim and do you think you only get cirrhosis of the liver from drinking disgruntled.
What about pancreatitis, alcohol related brain damage. peripheral neuropathy, TB, heart problems, circulation problems or the broken bones, cuts and abrasions, not to mention the mental health problems suffered by problem drinkers and their families. Do you really think you are just paying for cirrhosis. If it makes you happy to think your taxes are just going on cirrhosis of the liver carry on thinking that.
"Paying for those cases of alcoholism and cirrhosis in the years to come" Do you really think you are not paying for them now jim and do you think you only get cirrhosis of the liver from drinking disgruntled.
What about pancreatitis, alcohol related brain damage. peripheral neuropathy, TB, heart problems, circulation problems or the broken bones, cuts and abrasions, not to mention the mental health problems suffered by problem drinkers and their families. Do you really think you are just paying for cirrhosis. If it makes you happy to think your taxes are just going on cirrhosis of the liver carry on thinking that.
Posted by: ADDISON DE WITT, On my yacht moored at Monte Carlo The French Riviera on 9:28pm Thu 30 Aug 07
[quote][bold]Maurice[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]ADDISON DE WITT[/bold] wrote:
90% of Glaswegians are intoxicated most of the time. Its very depressing. Friday and Saturday night in Glasgow City Centre looks like downtown Bagdad. Its a little bit upsetting when one is going to the Opera you have the misfortune to encounter these drunken creatures in the gutter throwing up. These drunken wretched Zombies are filling up Accident and Emergency wards of hospitals, wasting the doctors and nurses valuable time. . [/quote] 90% of Glaswegians are intoxicated most of the time?
I wonder where that statistic come from, sounds a bit exaggerated if you ask me.
Then again 42% of all statistics are made up!
[/quote]
OK. OK .
I made the figure up Its more like 99% of all Glaswegians are drunks
When i get off the train at Central Station on friday or saturday night.
Glasgow city centre is like Dante's Inferno.
My Chinese valet has to step over the piles of drunks in the gutter.
throwing up, and causing mayhem and havoc.
If you go abroad to France or Italy .You dont see drunks at all.
Glasgow has a binge drinking culture, Im afraid.
.
Maurice wrote:
ADDISON DE WITT wrote:
90% of Glaswegians are intoxicated most of the time. Its very depressing. Friday and Saturday night in Glasgow City Centre looks like downtown Bagdad. Its a little bit upsetting when one is going to the Opera you have the misfortune to encounter these drunken creatures in the gutter throwing up. These drunken wretched Zombies are filling up Accident and Emergency wards of hospitals, wasting the doctors and nurses valuable time. .
90% of Glaswegians are intoxicated most of the time?
I wonder where that statistic come from, sounds a bit exaggerated if you ask me.
Then again 42% of all statistics are made up!
OK. OK .
I made the figure up Its more like 99% of all Glaswegians are drunks
When i get off the train at Central Station on friday or saturday night.
Glasgow city centre is like Dante's Inferno.
My Chinese valet has to step over the piles of drunks in the gutter.
throwing up, and causing mayhem and havoc.
If you go abroad to France or Italy .You dont see drunks at all.
Glasgow has a binge drinking culture, Im afraid.
.
Posted by: Boab, Glasgow on 10:55pm Thu 30 Aug 07
Tricky one, this. Pubs will go under if you keep taxing them and they actually keep some kind of control over drunken behavior. How about raising the drinking age (unthinkable, I know) and increasing the amount of policemen? Stiffer sentences wouldn't go amiss too, but I always seem to be suggesting that.
Tricky one, this. Pubs will go under if you keep taxing them and they actually keep some kind of control over drunken behavior. How about raising the drinking age (unthinkable, I know) and increasing the amount of policemen? Stiffer sentences wouldn't go amiss too, but I always seem to be suggesting that.
Posted by: stonehaven on 12:22am Fri 31 Aug 07
Addison
you can't spell!
Posted by: jim bee on 2:30am Fri 31 Aug 07
dark horse.let me get this right ,it is your opinion that just about every disease being treated by nhs is alchohol related.the way you are going on we should just keep our noses to the grind and sit in the house every night and read a book,oops that could lead to eye sight failure,repe stress syndrome weak wrists,broken bones with books falling on toes.lets get a grip.its a tiny percent that get into the state you are talking about.real policing and more prisons where conditions are kept spartan instead of holiday camps would turn it round in the end.
dark horse.let me get this right ,it is your opinion that just about every disease being treated by nhs is alchohol related.the way you are going on we should just keep our noses to the grind and sit in the house every night and read a book,oops that could lead to eye sight failure,repe stress syndrome weak wrists,broken bones with books falling on toes.lets get a grip.its a tiny percent that get into the state you are talking about.real policing and more prisons where conditions are kept spartan instead of holiday camps would turn it round in the end.
Posted by: Disgruntled, Edinburgh on 9:54am Fri 31 Aug 07
Christ, who let the Daily Record readers in?
Christ, who let the Daily Record readers in?
Posted by: Myrmillo, Batavadorum on 10:57pm Fri 31 Aug 07
Boab, above, is essentially right. Kenny MacAskill is right, too, in wanting to take positive action - but this isn't the way, because it punishes the innocent along with the guilty and brings standards down to a low level. But it has provoked a debate - and that t good.
I have again spoke.
Boab, above, is essentially right. Kenny MacAskill is right, too, in wanting to take positive action - but this isn't the way, because it punishes the innocent along with the guilty and brings standards down to a low level. But it has provoked a debate - and that t good.
I have again spoke.
Posted by: TheWiseOne, Glasgow on 3:01pm Sat 1 Sep 07
Better still, why don't we tax all individuals depending on the amount of crime carried out in their neighbourhood. After all, if the police are having to spend most of their time and resource in specific areas, then the rest of us are being short changed.
Residing in a leafy suburb, the last time I saw a member of the constabulary was in the local bakery, where he was in the process of arresting a danish pastry.
Better still, why don't we tax all individuals depending on the amount of crime carried out in their neighbourhood. After all, if the police are having to spend most of their time and resource in specific areas, then the rest of us are being short changed.
Residing in a leafy suburb, the last time I saw a member of the constabulary was in the local bakery, where he was in the process of arresting a danish pastry.
Posted by: William Alexander, Delta, Canada on 8:50am Sun 2 Sep 07
Try the American way. If a bar provides intoxication services to a customer, the bar owner is legally responsible for his subsequent actions.
If a dispenser of alcohol or tobacco supplies an under age customer the company and its staff are heavily fined and may go to prison .
No place of business will supply a minor with either product without photo ID and birth date via a drivers license.
No sneak taxes etc
Try the American way. If a bar provides intoxication services to a customer, the bar owner is legally responsible for his subsequent actions.
If a dispenser of alcohol or tobacco supplies an under age customer the company and its staff are heavily fined and may go to prison .
No place of business will supply a minor with either product without photo ID and birth date via a drivers license.
No sneak taxes etc
Politics
INDEX
Comment | Read Comments (32)
