Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Friday, 5th December 2008 Change Date

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

SNP faces defeat over alcohol age limit



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 02 October 2008
THE Scottish Government is facing defeat today over its plans to raise to 21 the age limit for buying alcohol from shops.
The opposition parties are expected to unite behind a Conservative Party motion attacking the new age-limit plans.

The criticism of the SNP proposals inside the parliament has also been matched by opposition outside. Last week, a 10,000-signature
petition was handed in to parliament and an online campaign was launched to fight the proposals.

The government remains undeterred, however, and has insisted it will continue with the proposals to ban under-21s from buying drink from shops to reduce binge drinking and antisocial behaviour.

The measure is part of a package to crack down on binge drinking, including separate aisles for alcohol in supermarkets and minimum pricing.

But critics believe that Kenny MacAskill, the justice secretary, has gone too far with these age-limit plans and he will have to withdraw them or face a succession of defeats in parliament.

Tom French, co-ordinator of the Coalition Against Raising the Drinking Age in Scotland, said: "They have pushed forward a policy that cannot be backed up by the evidence."

His group has offered to work with the Scottish Government on other aspects of its alcohol policy, but not on the rise in the purchase age.

Mr French said: "If they try to push the overall legislation through with this attached, they will fail. They have got every opposition party against them and, it seems, the majority of the country."

Opponents believe it is ridiculous to leave the age limit for buying alcohol in pubs at 18 while raising it to 21 for shops, which means young people would be able to go to a pub and drink, but not buy a bottle of wine on the way home.

They have also pointed out that most international comparisons show real problems if the on- and off-licence age limits are different.

The Scottish Government move has mobilised students around the country, turning even Nationalist students against the SNP.

Murdo Fraser, the deputy Tory leader in the Scottish Parliament, said: "We have problem drinkers at every age in society. To target 18-21-year-olds suggests that group alone has a problem which does not apply to other sectors of society. This proposal is discriminatory, and there is simply no evidence to back it up."

He added: "Before we consider further legislation, we have to ensure we are properly enforcing the laws that currently exist."

Yet, despite this opposition, the Scottish Government is continuing to insist on the age-limit plans, arguing that it would curb "uncontrolled open-air and home drinking".

A spokeswoman said: "Alcohol misuse costs Scotland over £2.25 billion every year. Raising the off-sales drinking age is just one of our ideas for bringing about a wider cultural shift in Scotland's approach to alcohol. Other proposals include a minimum price for alcohol, a ban on irresponsible promotions and a social responsibility fee for some retailers."





The full article contains 509 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 01 October 2008 10:18 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Scottish National Party
 
1

Guga II,

Rockall 02/10/2008 00:27:27
It's time wee Eck got rid of that waste of space, Kenny MacAskill, before he does any more damage to the SNP.
2

famous 15,

Edinburgh 02/10/2008 00:33:19
Not sad to see it fall but Scotland must moderate its over use of alcohol. I am no saint in these matters but as I get older it becomes clear that alcohol misuse is a problem. Why is it that we are not content to enjoy just one drink. The common English pub style of having two half pints in an evening I now realise is commendable and makes no statement on their "hardness". C'mone Scotland! Wise up!
3

Edward,

02/10/2008 00:40:11
Scotland does need to get its act together on this. Its no use being critical of the Scottish Governments attemt at tackling the binge drink problem. Every Scot must take a cold hard look and accept the fact that the problem will simply not go away and must be dealt with. So far no one other than the govrnment has come up with anything!
As for the 'Coalition Against Raising the Drinking Age in Scotland' they really need to grow up!
4

ThomasP,

02/10/2008 00:48:19
I don't see the Opposition Parties offering alternatives.
5

Keren, It's time,

02/10/2008 01:15:38
Watch out for at least two SNP MSP's voting with the opposition - you heard it here first...
6

Conan the Librarian™,

02/10/2008 01:16:04
4
ThomasP.

I can remember the time when pubs shut at 10pm.

In those days you could buy a "carry-oot" from the pub to go onto somebodie's house for a party.

If you own a house, it's much better to have the pubs open longer.

Seriously.
7

Conan the Librarian™,

02/10/2008 01:30:24
I just typed "Somebodie's" :-(

Time for another beer.
8

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 02/10/2008 01:53:42
While well intended the raising of the off licence age to 21 is not practical. The problem of underage drinking needs to be tackled by creacking down on the off licences where the problem exists. That includes the major supermarkets. With self service checkouts "Approval needed" is I guess often given without adequate checks being made on those who are buying alcohol. When there are queues it is an easy option just to pass the customer through.
9

Solo Lobo,

02/10/2008 02:16:29
It's not the 18's and over who are causing the problems, it's the underagers getting blasted on alcopops and cheap beers who should be targetted, and those who sell to them.

As to the point raised by #2 famous 15, if we all went into the pub and had two half pints in an evening there would be many more pubs closing due to lack of income, and lots of Aussies out of work :-}. The pubs have enough trouble just now trying to earn a living without a bunch of teetotallers filling up their premises.
10

!Ya basta!,

02/10/2008 02:53:57
I think it is a damn good idea and sends an important message to young people and older people alike. I think it also sends an important message to people visiting Scotland and helps start to clean up the image of Scots as drunkards.

This is a drug after all. We wouldn't even be having this debate for other drugs.

Of course, on its own it's not enough but it would be a good start and I see no real reason why it can't be implemented.

The main people to lose from this are p*** heads (users), retailers (dealers) and drinks manufacturers (pushers). The pushers and big retailers nobody should care about 'cos they can easily afford this, and as their reaction shows, they have no genuine corporate responsibility and care only for their shareholders and profits, despite all the damge they are doing.

The little retailers I do feel a bit sorry for but as dealers of this drug they have to live in their own towns with the consequences and societal problems this drug causes. You can't have it both ways.

The main people to gain would be young people whose exposure to drinking culture would be slightly lessened and who would get a clear message. For some people this wil have an effect.

The Tories as usual are making no sense. Starting of by targetting the young is generally thought of as a good strategy in many areas of health care. I don't believe they are standing up for young people, they are just trying to curry favour with them while cuddling up to their natural bed fellows, big business. They have never stood for young people.

And Labour and Lib Dem MSPs should stop being so partisan and support this initiative.

If this bill is passed, what harm can it do? the worst is that it would be ineffective 9there are plenty of bills that like on that books) and I don't believe that would be the case.

If we want to do something about our drink problem we have to make a start and this is as good as anything else that has been put forward.

I'm keeping m
11

!Ya basta!,

02/10/2008 02:55:22
I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

PS Solo LObo - so what if a few pubs have to close, better for society as a whole.
12

Forward not Back,

02/10/2008 03:37:43
#8 - spot on.

The legislation is already there to tackle the problem. Enforce the existing legislation first.
13

somerferg,

perth 02/10/2008 05:29:24

I would love to see this go through as a small step in the right direction to deal with the drink culture which has been holding Scotland down for so long. Unfortunately I fear it will be defeated by those who cry about their right to get pi$$ed anytime/anywhere etc,etc whilst of course taking no responsibility for the damage this attitude does to the fabric of Scots society i.e. domestic violence/health damage/loss of productivity. Glad to see the SNP government as usual looking after the interests of Scots and Scotland and being brave enough to deal with the difficult problems unlike the opposition parties who are happy to keep the plebs poor and ignorant whilst they line their own pockets.
14

beeree,

still in Local 02/10/2008 06:47:03
The big problem is that elements of society consider it the done thing to get drunk, and drunker, and drunker, and legless on a regular basis.

This attitude carries on from generation to generation.

MacAskill's proposal is only a publicity stunt and does not address the root causes. Although what those actually are I am not sure but there is a need to break the cycle.

Perhaps one way might be to enforce the current laws. I first went into the St Mungo Vintners when I was thirteen.

I believe it is also against the law to serve a drunk person. Have there ever been any prosecutions?
15

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 02/10/2008 06:47:19
Its obvious the opposition is more concerned with defeating the government than the legislation itself.
Its a shabby attempt at a propaganda coo nothing more.
There is nothing wrong with the legislation nor the idea. You have no authority to stop somebody doing something if you dont make it illegal first. There are other methods which also have to be introduced but there is nothing wrong with this as a kick off.
Like I said its more important for the opposition to be seen to defeat the government than it is to pass or fail good or bad legislation.
16

Randomly Blocked Poster, ,

02/10/2008 07:11:28
Why don't they make drugs illegal as well that should stop a lot of the anti social behaviour.
17

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 02/10/2008 07:29:05
12 Forward
I have to agree. We seeem to have entered an era of saying that the only solution to a problem is to ban something.
18

sonofhamish,

edinburgh 02/10/2008 07:43:35
#14 spot on. There is something deeply wrong with the relationship of the British to drink. Its cheaper and just a readily available on the Continent, but they seem to handle it fine.

19

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 02/10/2008 07:48:27
17

So the only solutions to problems are to not ban anything?
20

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 02/10/2008 08:05:58
19 parcel
The converse of my comment is not applicable and was not implicit in my statement though you may have inferred it.
21

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 02/10/2008 08:32:07
It seems that, IF there was such a thing as a Scottish Alcoholic Party it would win every election with a landslide and remain in power forever!

22

Boy Wonder,

02/10/2008 08:41:32
Kenny McAskill is going to cost the SNP votes!

Get rid of him!
23

AM2,

Scotland,UK 02/10/2008 09:01:33
#4 ThomasP

Actually, Murdo Fraser's suggested alternative was quite clear: simply enforce the existing laws.

For example, there's something not quite right about the fact that Northern Constabulary, which serves only about six percent of the Scottish population, makes more "drunk and incapable" arrests than all the other forces combined!

Northern
2004/5: 644
2005/6: 729
2006/7: 873
2007/8: 699

Strathclyde
2004/5: 617
2005/6: 564
2006/7: 543
2007/8: 461

Tayside
2004/5: 86
2005/6: 97
2006/7: 82
2007/8: 55

Central Scotland
2004/5: 44
2005/6: 31
2006/7: 30
2007/8: 35

Grampian
2004/5: 39
2005/6: 38
2006/7: 52
2007/8: 27

Lothian
2004/5: 29
2005/6: 17
2006/7: 15
2007/8: 23

Dumfries and Galloway
2004/5: 18
2005/6: 13
2006/7: 13
2007/8: 17
24

TWC,

Ayrshire 02/10/2008 09:05:20

The Scottish Government have test results which show reduced drink, violent behaviour in our youth, two of our major problems

The opposition parties have failed miserably to make progess here in spite of the current laws. Kids are drunk under 15 now.

This needs to be implemented even if it does curtail the freedom of our 18-20 year olds.

Sorry boys and girls but we need to try it at least.
25

nuffnuff,

Edinburgh 02/10/2008 09:12:10
HOME BREW FOR SCOTLAND
26

Miss H,

02/10/2008 09:18:37
1 Guga as is sometimes the case you don't really get this.

yes, it is likely that the national ban on under 21s will not get through.

But everything else will. Minimum pricing, separate sales points for alcohol, everything else that the government proposed - that will all be passed. The students for example have accepted the whole package, minimum pricing, the ban on cheap promotions, 3 for 2 type sales - the whole shebang. All they want is for the ban on under 21 sales to be taken out the package. Fine.

And communities all over Scotland will now be aware of the effectiveness of a ban on sales to under 21s. You don't actually need legislation to do this, it can happen at local level without any legislation and you can bet it will be happening a lot more often now.
27

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 02/10/2008 09:19:03
Another "populist" move from the SNP bites the dust. What about some real policy initiatives?
28

Ewan M,

02/10/2008 09:26:34
#29 hear hear. Time to start properly enforcing existing legislation.

#13 somerferg are you employed by the SNP?
29

Miss H,

02/10/2008 09:36:07
25 The point of the ban on under 21s sales is that it reduces crime - it's not about saying let us not bother to enforce existing laws. It's about enforcing existing laws and going one step further. The Scottish Government has already rolled out test purchasing across the whole of Scotland but let's face facts about this.

We all know it is not 15 and 16 year olds going into off sales and buying drink. It's usually 17 and 18 year olds doing it for them. If you raise the age to 21 then I dare say 21 year olds will go in to buy drink for 18, 19 and 20 year olds - but they are less likely to be buying it for 15 and 16 year olds. Do you get the picture?

That's the attraction of the policy to many people. Yes I recognise the civil liberties arguments but you have to balance that against the effect that alcohol fuelled anti social behaviour has on communities.

No-one actually has a right to get pissed. It's time we started to spell that out.
30

Ananurhing,

02/10/2008 09:56:38
This was never going to fly. Prohibition doesn't, and never has worked. Let it go Kenny. You were wrong on this one. If you dig in on this, you'll damage your parties prospects!
31

Belinda-2,

02/10/2008 10:08:06
I am fortunate not to live in an area where anti-social behavioiur arising from alcohol misuse is not the over-riding issue.

Having said that I don't believe that government tinkering with adults' purchasing of legal products is the best way to proceed. I am glad if this proposal is going to be, or has been, defeated.
32

AM2,

Scotland,UK 02/10/2008 10:12:17
#31 Miss H

This really shouldn’t be a party political issue, but you force my hand.

If the SNP is committed to using existing police powers, why do the figures in my post #25 show about 300 fewer D&I arrests in 2007/8 than in the previous year? Do you know how many of those arrests resulted in an actual fine?

I’m intrigued by your claim that an under-21 ban “reduces crime”. Please could you remind us why Professor Sheila Bird (vice-president of the Royal Statistical Society) described the figures on which the SNP based that claim as “hugely statistically insignificant”? She also said that “the way the results are being reported, it may not even be spin, it may be naivety. Why do you disagree?
33

AM2,

Scotland,UK 02/10/2008 10:13:27
#33

Go on, beat your straw man harder. Nobody will notice! ;-)

SU post: http://www.scottishunionist.com/search/label/CyberNats
34

Peter Curran,

Kirkliston 02/10/2008 10:20:58
So our government can expect defeat on its courageous attempts to stop alcohol-fuelled violence in our towns and cities, based on a petition raised by a 22-year old Edinburgh university student and the determined opposition of the Tories.

22-year old university students are unlikely to be at sharp end of experiencing the drunken violence and mayhem that makes life a misery for ordinary families all over Scotland, nor are the kind of people who sign the petition.

The alcohol industry is, and always has been, dominated by Tories at the highest levels, and the Beerage - the massed ranks of Tory knights and peers who were enobled for their contribution to society - and the Tory Party - through the medium of dispensing alcohol to the masses, is a powerful political lobby in the land. Make no mistake - behind the cries of indignation at the proposed legislation is a powerful vested interest - the booze business.

That is not to say that all of the industry is irresponsible. The consumption of alcohol in properly regulated premises and in social gatherings is part of the fabric of our society, and the best people in this important sector of Scottish economic activity try to ensure that their customers drink responsibly and that young people are prevented from obtaining easy access to cheap alcohol. Our government recognises and support that secor of the industry. But there are more unscrupulous forces at work in this opposition to the legislation.
35

Alan B,

02/10/2008 10:21:57
On balance I think this would be a good move to raise the age limit to 21 (and making sure it was enforced).

No-one is not saying 18 yrs and over should not drink. You just drink in a pub. So it is not prohibition.

The idea behind this is too stop street drinking and drinking in unsupervised environments with associated petty crime like vandalism, fighting etc. Gnerally it is about meaning the other folk can walk along the street or go into a park without fear.

It is easier to stop the sale rather than having to deal with groups of drunken troublemakers. it will also help reduce underage drinking.

As a quid pro quo i would like to see the age that you can drink reduced to 17 (maybe even 16) in pubs.

The previous government brought in rules to say that you could not drink in public. This can hit the liberty of folk that are saying wanting a drink at a barbeque or fishing etc. But on the whole we have to balance that against preventing trouble.

At the end of the day how many 18 or 19 yr old really will have a drink of wine with their meal. I know at that age u just went to the pub and got p****.
36

Alan B,

02/10/2008 10:28:30
#Miss H

What is the point of separate sales points that seems abit daft to me? (I agree with moving the age to 21 for off licences sales)



37

Alan B,

02/10/2008 10:32:12
#AM2

Why would you be against raising the age to 21 for off licence sales (other than you will critise anything the snp do)?

It is not a ban on alcohol as you can drink freely in a pub from the age of 18.

It is just about unsupervised drinking at that age generally to prevent the binge drinking and associated trouble that comes with street drinking.

It also does not stop a parent buuying alcohol.
38

Otis Boone,

Sacramento 02/10/2008 10:44:58
Take it from an American who recently was underage - just because you raise the purchasing age to 21 does not mean that those under 21 will not still be able to make purchases.

Just because the government hires underage decoys to get persons my age (over 21) to buy them alcohol in order to arrest me for furnishing a minor does not stop the practice.

Just because binge drinking is a huge problem here and where you are does not mean that new law is necessary, as law only keeps the honest honest.

In other words, tell Alex Salmond not to replicate the Government of California by turning your proud homeland into a Nanny State. Tell Alex Salmond there are only two ways to stop binge drinking: 1) prohibition (which didn't work here, and is how the Kennedy and one branch of the Bush Families became wealthy, as bootleggers), or 2) deglamorization.

No young adult thinks what his parents do is "cool" or "hip." So parents, show up at fraternity and university parties en masse, hit the beer bongs, play beer pong and darts, get completely sloshed and eventually your child won't do it because he no longer thinks its fun.

In other words, be parents. Train them early.
39

Miss H,

02/10/2008 10:49:38
36 AM2

You would need to ask the chief constable of each force that question. Politicians cannot instruct the police in operational matters. What they can do is provide resources for specific matters such as test purchasing or community policing. But chief constables are responsible for the actual services. In any case, drunk and incapable is the least worrisome offence in most peoples view. If you take the Stenhousemuir pilot which lasted 6 months (and did not include any additional police resources) at the end of it there was a 60% reduction in serious assaults, a 40% reduction in breach of the peace incidents and a 28% reduction in minor assaults. I dare say the results in Stenhousemuir are hugely statistically insignificant – but for communities like Stenhousemuir which were being plagued by drink fuelled general badness it is something they will be considering. Fair enough if people like Belinda at 34 live in areas where drink is not a big problem but there are areas where it is a really serious problem and the people who live there need options.

40 The point about separate sales poiunts for booze is the same as for fags - so it's not just seen as part of the general shop like detergent or oranges. It's a psychological thing. People think more about what they are buying and how much they are buying. Also makes it easier to ID people who look like they may be underage.
40

Urban Guerrilla,

Edinburgh 02/10/2008 10:51:19
Hooray! Loathsome puritans! They'll live to regret having suggested such a stupid, mean, petty, sanctimonious, vindictive policy. Freedom for ever!
41

Ananurhing,

02/10/2008 10:55:02
#35

Many of us have children or relatives who will be affected by this legislation. Prohibition simply doesn't work. Education does. How many of these Spanish or Italian 16 and 17yr olds do you ever see falling about drunk?
We have a cultural problem with alcohol in Scotland. To demonise or criminalise all 18 to 21yr old people who take a drink, because of the actions of a small minority of them, is wrong and doomed to failure. This will not stop any young people getting their hands on alcohol if they want it.
The prohibition we already have with under 18s doesn't work. As it doesn't with drugs.
42

Alan B,

02/10/2008 10:55:30
#Otis Boone

Remember they do not plan to ban alcohol consumption for under 21s. 18 yr ols will still be able to drink in pubs etc. All this does is stop someone under the age of 21 buying alcohol in off licences.
43

Alan B,

02/10/2008 10:58:08
#Ananurhing

This is not about banning 18yr olds from drinking. They can still drink in a pub. This is about banning alcohol sales from off licences to those under 21.

As such this is not prohibition.
44

Miss H,

02/10/2008 11:08:36
47 God almighty. How many times can people repeat that we have a cultural problem with alcohol? I think we all know that. Also I expect that practically every opposition politician will come out with some varuation on the theme that we need a cultural shift in the way we use alcohol. Yep we do. That is the equivalent of saying nothing at all really.
45

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 02/10/2008 11:10:25
Miss H:

"No-one actually has a right to get pissed. It's time we started to spell that out."

Go away you santimonious fool. Of course people have the right to get drunk.

Anyone who agrees with these ridiculous, inane measures is a complete moron who is incapable of rational thought. You do not, repeat NOT, deal with people who are breaking the law by targetting those who are abiding by it.

This whole situation has probably come about by over-zealous enforcement of the drink laws in any case. The last way to deal with it is to impose yet more laws. What do they want to do? Start a spate of burglaries and muggings for alcohol? Believe me, that is likely to happen. If neds are prepared to break into your home to steal a DVD player, they are going to be more than willing to do the same for a few bottles of scotch.

I was under the impression from the Nationalists here that the SNP stood for the freedom of Scotland. Well, in the current SNP parliamentary party, we have two prominent members who seek to restrict and curtail the freedoms of those who live in Scotland. One is Shona Robison and the other is Kenny MacAskill. They need to be booted out before they cause any more damage.
46

The wilkman,

Isle of Skye 02/10/2008 11:29:34
One reason this measure might make a difference is that quite a lot of the buying of alchohol for underage drinkers is done by people just over the legal limit. That's probably why it worked so well in the trials.
47

Ananurhing,

02/10/2008 11:36:34
#49 Alan B

So a 20yr old working, voting taxpayer can drink to their livers malcontent in a pub, but can't take a bottle of wine to a civilised dinner party? Also 18 to 21 yr old drinkers are no more prone to alcohol abuse than over 21s. Its a jackhammer to crack a nut which demonises, stigmatises, and potentially criminalises a social group of law abiding people.
Presumably this legislation doesn't outlaw a third party buying alcohol from off sales for 18 to 21yr olds. Therefore it's futile.
I'm pretty sure South American style justice measures would have an impact on anti social drinking. Doesn't justify it though.
48

Ananurhing,

02/10/2008 11:44:39
#50 Miss H

"47 God almighty. How many times can people repeat that we have a cultural problem with alcohol?
That is the equivalent of saying nothing at all really"

So is prohibition........Miss!
49

AM2,

Scotland,UK 02/10/2008 11:47:32
#42

“Are you suggesting that Inspector Dewar is a liar?”

I suppose I should be grateful that you posed that as a question rather than lambasting me for impugning police integrity, or somesuch – as has been your style in the past!

No, of course I’m not suggesting that Inspector Dewar is lying.

I am, however, suggesting that your understanding of the nature of the pilot is limited. Three police forces were involved, of which Tayside was only one. There were also pilots in Armadale (Lothian) and in Stenhousemuir and Larbert (Central).

The pilots were conducted over only a short period (April to June) and involved much more than just an under-21 ban. While some interesting – and indeed, encouraging – results were obtained¸ there was no pretence, except by SNP politicians, that they were in any way conclusive.

The SNP spun the figures to the point of absurdity, for example claiming that serious assaults were down 60 percent. In reality the figures were so small (five against two) as to render comparison meaningless. Proper study is now required, as Prof Bird said.

Your quote of Inspector Dewar was in reference to the whole pilot, not just to the under-21 ban aspect. Nor were you correct to try and generalise your misrepresentation of his comments to the whole police service.

Chief Inspector Bob Beaton, who led the alcohol crackdowns in Stenhousemuir and Larbert, said: “It's difficult to separate the different strands to say which have been most successful. It does appear this is working, but there have been a number of initiatives and the under-21 alcohol ban is just one.”

I could now ask if you are suggesting that Chief Inspector Beaton is a liar? ;-)
50

Seumas McCue,

Haddington 02/10/2008 11:48:10
The big problem is that MacAskill just happens to be right in this one. Unfortunately he is going to be defeated by an unholy alliance of vociferous students and the licensed trade as well as the traditional supporters of the Tories, the booze manufacturers.
Scotland has a major drink problem with a lot of public drunkenness. Much of this is demonstrated by a lot of drunk kids running round the least well off communities at night. They drink Mad Dog, Buckie, Cider and other concoctions which are cheap and potent.
We all know that even if the law was passed it would no more stop sales to under 21 year olds than the present law stops sales to under 18 year olds, but it would stop sales to 16, 17, 18 and 19 year olds, who are the biggest problems for drunkenness.
Of course the Unionists don't give a damn about the people of Scotland if they can score points off the Nationalist government.
51

AM2,

Scotland,UK 02/10/2008 11:53:35
#55

Re: "When I come back, I want to see a post from you..."

Done it, Sir. Please don't mark my work too harshly!

#59

Re: "the Unionists don't give a damn about the people of Scotland"

You actually believe that, don't you? Do you also think we love our kids less?
52

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 02/10/2008 11:57:05
#53:

The findings of some daft baised "scheme" are not going to change the fact that you don't deal with law breakers by targetting those who abide by the law.

And I'm not a "unionist" either. Neither am I a "nationalist"... in the same whay that I am not a "protestant" and nor am I a "catholic".

I go with common sense, which at times seems to be a great deal more than the sheep-like, propaganda-dulled majority do.
53

,

02/10/2008 12:00:51
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
54

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/10/2008 12:10:10
#14 Agreed.

This really should be about changing attitudes towards alcohol - that is the real issue.

It seems crazy to me that an 18 year-old is old enough to vote, get married and pay taxes but is not old enough to decide if they want to drink.
55

AM2,

Scotland,UK 02/10/2008 12:10:45
#62 Joe-kerr

Has it ever occurred to you that the majority of people simply tend to disagree with you? It's not spite. It's not undermining the parliament. It's certainly not "anti-Scottish". It's just honest disagreement. I'm not sure why that concept is so difficult for you.
56

AM2,

Scotland,UK 02/10/2008 12:12:47
#63

Re: "You don't even regard Scotland as a nation"

*sigh* You've accused me of that before. I've corrected you before. Why repeat it?

Ach, enough of this. You can have the final word. Real life calls...
57

Ananurhing,

02/10/2008 12:17:46
#52 Independent like everyone else

I'm not looking to have the last word on this. Most young people I know in this age group are actually very nice, enlightened, socially responsible people. I'm heartened by their attitudes. The social and political awareness of many of them is sharper than that of some of their elders, and they give me hope for the future.
Often they police their peers and shun the delinquents among them. I trust them.
I don't think these measures will work, and I think telling these people they are not to be trusted, and stigmatising them would be counter productive.

We've seen huge inroads being made in education. Talk to your average 12yr old about issues such as healthy eating, dental health, smoking, social responsibility, and they're well up on it. They're not just trotting it out parrot fashion, they're doing it, they're living it.

I'm well aware we have a problem with a minority of young people, it has always been thus. I just don't believe these measures will have any impact on them, and run the risk of alienating those we should be encouraging.
58

Miss H,

02/10/2008 12:23:53
51 Hysterical rubbish. If this was passed it would not make it illegal for under 21s to buy drink or indeed to get drunk. It would make it illegal for them to buy drink in shops that's all. They could still drink in pubs and clubs and indeed student unions.
59

Miss H,

02/10/2008 12:24:44
54 That's exactly right but maybe a bit too much common sense for some people.
60

Miss H,

02/10/2008 12:26:13
57 And who is promoting prohibition?
61

,

02/10/2008 12:28:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
62

,

02/10/2008 12:29:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
63

izzie,

dundee 02/10/2008 12:30:52
oooh just been listening to FMQ;s and you 'midnight cybernats' have been told off by Ian (Andy) Gray
64

Miss H,

02/10/2008 12:32:05
58 Not so - the Stenhousemuir pilot lasted 6 months.

Of course it is always going to be difficult to extrapolate statistics from something small scale but the point is it worked there, it can work elsewhere.

Pause for a moment to consider how many communities would benefit from that. You probably don't live in one but I dare say you drive through them now and then.

This is not a nationalist/unionist debate by the way. The Tories in Scotland might be against it but people like Boris Johnston have said they support the idea.

Let's wait and see if the Mayor of London looks at bringing in such legislation. We would see a lot of the opposition in Scotland vanish like snow off a dyke.
65

,

02/10/2008 12:32:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
66

LEAL,

02/10/2008 12:34:33
I really think the government should find common ground with the other parties on this hugely important issue.The first thing is to have a zero tolerance on drunkenness on the streets.Rigorously enforce the existing laws for a sixmonth period before deciding what other measures to take.I dont think there are many outlets left selling to underagers.Good,lets keep it that way.lets now tackle the people who buy drink for under agers.Give these dealers the maximum available sentence.It is good that the SNP are atleast trying to do something about this scourge.The lab/lib administrations of the past were half hearted about it.(and everything else)
67

Ananurhing,

02/10/2008 12:39:48
#59 Seamus

This is not a unionist V's nationalist argument. You muddy the issue by trying to make it so, and do the Nationalist cause no good at all.

I've been accused of being an extreme ultra nat before, which I'm not. I'm pro independence and support the SNP govt.
I just think that MacAskill has got this one wrong by a mile. His proposed legislation is reactionary, and futile. Here we are trying to say we're grown up, and responsible enough to make our own decisions, whilst trying to inhibit and impinge upon a group of people amongst us.
Don't forget this is the same MacAskill who was lifted for drunk and disorderly at a football match himself.
Nothing quite so zealous as a convert!
68

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/10/2008 12:42:33
#80 I agree somwhat. If existing laws were actually enforced properly then I doubt there would be the need to bring in this idiotic change.
69

Yeah1,

02/10/2008 12:46:41
#75

"You clearly have no idea what your support wants, your only interested in petty point scoring and not allowing the elected government of Scotland to carry out it's task on behalf of all the people."

They are a minority government so the other parties have the power and the right to block any policies they disagree with.

Perhaps you feel the government should be allowed to implement whatever policies it wants without any opposition?
70

Ananurhing,

02/10/2008 12:48:01
#73 Miss H

Legislation to prohibit 18 to 21 yr olds from buying alcohol from off sales, is prohibition.
71

Miss H,

02/10/2008 12:55:09
84 No it is not. It is defining where and when alcohol can be bought. It is not preventing them buying it.

It is this sort if hysterical over-reaction that undermines your case.
72

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 02/10/2008 13:00:07
The supermarkets in my area have been operating an over 21 policy for a number of years now. Never heard anyone complaining about that.

Indeed, I believe Asda has upped the age limit to 23 or 25.

Even my local has an over 21s only policy after 9pm but I don't know if they enforce it as I'm never in a pub at that time.

So there does appear to be some degree of responsibility being borne by a section of the licenced trade already, which can only help the police to enforce the existing laws by reducing the number of sales outlets likely to be selling to the youths in question.
73

Miss H,

02/10/2008 13:00:19
82 We have already discussed the problem with existing laws. Under age drinkers are not the ones actually buying booze. It is bought by their older friends. Raising the age to 21 would make it less of a problem as 21 year olds are less likely to purchase for 15, 16 and 17 year olds than 18 year olds are because there is a much bigger gap between a 21 year old and a 15/16 year old than there is between an 18 year old and a 15/16 year old. Someone aged 21 and someone aged 15 would be most unlikely to socialise in the same crowd.
74

Alan B,

02/10/2008 13:02:44
#Ananurhing

Prohibition is generally when you have a complete ban. Not just a ban on buying it in shops rather than pubs.

If prohibition is any sort of ban then we have prohibition already by not being able to drink in public spaces.

Why can adults not have a drink at a barbacue in a park or on the beach (ok the last few summers are not good examples :) ). It is about a balance between letting people go out the house in the evening without drunk youngsters causing trouble. Personally i would like to see the age of drinking reduced but in pubs. eg 17.

As for your response about under 21s not being able to buy alcohol for a dinner party. Serious how many under 21s would have a dinner party.

We can all remember what it was like when we were 18/19. Mostly you drink in pubs. And from my own experience when you bought alcohol from off licences it was something like a 1/2 bottle of vodka that goes into a bottle of coke for the walk/bus into town before you hit the pubs.

Parents can still buy alcohol for under 21s for occassions when they do want to drink in the house.
75

Ananurhing,

02/10/2008 13:04:29
#85 Miss H

I can assure you I am neither hysterical, nor over reacting, whereas you seem to be in denial of the undeniable facts.
You've said nothing to undermine my argument. We'll just have to disagree on this. Which is healthy. Hysterical over reactive mudslinging isn't....Miss!
76

livilion,

livingston 02/10/2008 13:05:52
I wonder if I'm stating the obvious?
Most young people want, like everyone else, to enjoy themselves but usually lacking experience, confidence or the full set of social skills are being brought up to think that getting completely wrecked on mind altering substances is the least 'painfull' or akward way to go about it.

Stop them getting alcohol and they'll be offered and accept alternatives from the seedier side of the community. These alternatives may indeed quickly impact on rowdy behavious by sending them off to sleep.

However farther down the line I feel the price to be paid for this short term fix may ultimately be far more costly as quick cash is sought to pay for drugs.

Kids grow up to set their own kids their example as role models. It is our fault as adults if we set a bad example.

Too many of us think it hilarious to get each other blind drunk, without a thought for what this teaches the next generation, who in their turn will push the limits just that bit further than the previous one.
'I can't remember a thing and I feel really ill, I must've had a great time'?

We need to develop a civilised pub/cafe culture where having fun is not about how totaly wasted you get. The rest of Europe has it, are they somehow smarter than we are, and they don't need drink taxed out of their reach to make them behave either.

We also need to provide activities for those 12-18 year olds which equip them for life, and build their self confidence, so that they do not need the crutch of 'Dutch courage' when dealing with social situations, and can behave themselves like responsible adults when left to get on with it.

77

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/10/2008 13:06:21
#88 The issue is though that existing laws are neither resourced nor policed effectively.

It seems to me that by raising the age to 21 the Scottish government are taking the easiest and cheapest route to the problem.
78

livilion,

livingston 02/10/2008 13:10:47
84 Ananurhing
Legislation to prohibit 16-18 yr olds from buying alcohol from off sales, is prohibition.
We already have it.
79

livilion,

livingston 02/10/2008 13:14:18
92 The Federalist
Stop them drinking and they'll just go for the next alternative. Far better to get them to drink in an adult fashion and for adults to also drink in an adult fashion to set them an example to emulate.

80

Ananurhing,

02/10/2008 13:17:26
#89 Alan B

I know several people in their 20s who have dinner and drink at home with their friends, which include under 21s. They do this more and more as pubs are just too expensive for them. I had dinner in my home last week with friends and family which included two under 21s. They brought wine with them. They're nice people and behave responsibly.
My point is they're not some social sub group. They're members of our society, equal to you or I.
Agreed there is a problem in our society with some over and under 21s. I don't think this is a healthy or effective way to deal with the problem.
81

Ananurhing,

02/10/2008 13:25:29
#93 Livlion

Agreed! And it doesn't work! But at least it's a line that applies right across the age group. BTW under 18s are still aloud legally to drink. They're just not aloud to buy it. So is that prohibition or not!
82

Ananurhing,

02/10/2008 13:49:11
Whoops! Aloud should read allowed of course.
83

TWC,

Ayrshire 02/10/2008 14:05:24
Well I started drinking at 15 in 1962 and I bought it in an off license so whatever Labour were doing then didn't work and as far as I know it's the same law today.
They will vote against anything SNP say -- I am struggling to keep myself from voting for SNP through sheer frustration.
We need to make some kind of progress on this, so what will be the proposed compromise - and don't tell me it's implement the Law cause we know it doesn't work.
84

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 02/10/2008 14:25:45
98 TWC
The Tories were in power in 1962 but then you would have been too young to vote.
85

Miss H,

02/10/2008 14:27:02
92 They are resourced and powers have been enhanced - like I said the SNP Government has already rolled out test purchasing across the whole country. But test purchasing is not going to stop people aged 18 buying alcohol to give to people aged under 18 is it? Unless you think that everyone that looks 18 should be followed to see what they do with the drink. Even if that happened (which it is not going to because it would be ridiculous) I can still see problems. If they drink in public in most places that is going to be an offence so they can get picked up for that especially if underage drinkers are present. But if they go into a house what are the police going to do? They have no automatic right to enter nor do I think that the police should have an automatic right to enter a private home.

Ananurhing your arguments become more ridiculous by the minute. By your logic any kind of licensing of the sale of alcohol is prohibition.

Why can’t you buy alcohol in libraries or schools or hospitals?

Is that prohibition?

If you accept that the relevant authorities can set terms and conditions on the sale of alcohol they can also change those terms and conditions. That does not equate with prohibition of the sale of alcohol.


86

Belinda-2,

02/10/2008 14:34:06
Agree with #91, and whoever said that you don't deal with criminality by targeting the innocent.

If you treat the young like mindless idiots who will do anything to get their hands on mind-alterering substances, some of them will perceive themselves in just that way, just as the traffickers of substances that are just as dangerous as alcohol will identify them as a target group. People will find ways round the laws, using alcohol or something else. The result will not be pretty.

Echo Sheila Bird, who rightly said that describing a drop in assaults from 5 to 2 as 60 per cent was 'naughty'.

Legislation may not be completely 'prohibitionist' but still have prohibitionist tendencies (characterised by a government deciding when and how people buy things, partly for their own good of course). The social engineering agenda is obvious certainly to grown adults (expecially those just back from the front in Iraq or Afghanistan). It screams of disrespect for people's choices: as ever, people are allowed choice only if it is 'the right choice'.

The government can't seem to interfere without making the situation worse. They wish to continue letting youngsters buy drinks in pubs, where they are under supervision: but who brought in the smoking ban, which has led to more people of all ages drinking in unsupervised conditions? ... the Labour Party, fully backed by most of the major parties in Scotland.

And what of places where there are hardly any hospitality venues left: not everyone lives in cities. Will the government force venues to cater for 18 year olds if they have already decided to cater only for over 21s?

Government interference in what you can and can't buy will not change the culture, except to damage it: culture being the expression of how people determine their own lives: not the official version of how to make the right choices.




87

TWC,

Ayrshire 02/10/2008 14:38:42
ugly George, I think perhaps in UK the Tories were in power but locally I think it was Labour. Any way We need to try something.
I believe if we could move Scottish Labour away from New Labour they would become a more attractive prospect and perhaps try some new policies. Get some more money control which we could concentrate on Scottish problems.
Drink and cold will kill more people in Scotland than nuclear weapons.