The British Retail Consortium, which represents supermarket chains such as Tesco, J Sainsbury and Asda, hit back at MPs on the Commons home affairs select committee, who said they should be banned from selling alcohol at below cost.
The recommendation was welcomed by the pub industry, which is seeing pubs close at the rate of around five a day, while its share of alcohol sales plummets.
The industry has been damaged in recent years by an increase in purchases in the off-trade, brought on by factors such as the smoking ban and cheaper alternatives in supermarkets.
Stephen Robertson of the BRC said it was not the norm for retailers to sell alcohol at less than cost. He said it was a sales strategy used occasionally to promote new brands.
He said: "Promotions don't create excessive consumption. They simply offer customers value for money alongside other groceries. Promotional activity tends to be on larger volumes, which are consumed with friends and family over an extended period.
"At a time when household budgets are under pressure, these measures would penalise the majority who drink perfectly responsibly."
Ministers said they were examining the recommendations carefully.
Up to now, the government has consistently failed to find a consensus on the subject, with the business department and Treasury pitted against the department of health, which is seeking more draconian new rules.
Comments
Please, Please please don't let the government ban alcohol promotions at the supermarkets.Once again this nanny state that we live in is pandering to the minority morons who can't control their alcohol intake.Why should the majority of responsible drinkers be penalised by the government and not be able to take advantage of the great offers at the supermarkets.Lets not forget as well it was the supermarkets who reduced the cost of fuel to consumers, were where the government then. They need to keep their noses out of our business, we will decide when and if we want to take up the promotions of cheaper wine etc. we do not need the government interfering in our lives any more.
Excessive consumption of alcohol \(by a wide variety of socio economic groups) is a symptom of a wider malaise in our society that has not been adequately addressed by this or previous governments.
Why are so many of us keen to turn to alcohol \(or drugs, or gambling, or pornography, etc) for our 'relaxing' time? None of the above is really likely to help our wallets, health or social standing in the long run and yet we are continually drawn to these pursuits.
Address this and you might start to build a better world.
The Government \(and future incumbents) appear sadly bereft of vision in this area so in the meantime we are stuck with a raft of their well meaning but ill thought out knee jerk measures.
Remind me again why we extended pub opening hours to enable people to drink until two in the morning?
We live on a highly repressed, over-regulated, over-taxed, small, damp, wet island, where the summer consists of a few weeks of sunshine in early May. That's why we like to drink ourselves into a stupor at the first opportunity.
This is a typical response form the UK government and just shows how they turn a social/pyschological problem of our time into an economic one. When will they learn that not all 'problems' of English culture do not stem from our wallets.
The comments posted above are brilliant and sum up entirely the problem faced when discussing \(and for the government, drafting policy related to) the social issue of 'drinking'. The comments of JG centre around the question of Why? - a question answered succinctly, and maybe very correctly, by RO. Meanwhile P o'M tends to look to a self-centred interest to determine a wider social policy \(and why not - don't we all?) but her point can be extended - why should the majority of responsible football spectators be forced to pay for heightened police presence at football grounds; why should the healthy pay NI for an NHS that is used by the unheallthy? etc etc. I'm not quite sure if the interpretation and appraisal of government intent by TM is correct but he nevertheless indicates that the said government have failed to convince him of their understanding and purpose in dealing with this matter. All comments reflect the problem that is faced and why it is so difficult to solve. The fact is the UK does have a social drinking problem that is costly \(whether the bottom line is red is very debatable!), socially damaging and indicative of a deeper social problem \(yes JG/RT - I agree). If that is accepted as a root cause of the problem a 'curative' tax on escapism might as easily be levied on DVDs, holidays etc etc. However alcohol by it's very chemisrtry and nature is a drug and in being so must surely merit exception to the 'norm'. To avoid going beyond the point of interest here i would just like to add that the term 'sale of alcohol' might be indicative of misinterpretation of the problem - little thought or comment is accorded the notion that the debate centres on 'sale of products containing alcohol' i.e the quality, taste and overall pleasurable features of the products are oft overlooked by the intent and desire to extract alcohol from them. If people were somehow redirected to 'drinking' as a means to enjoying the drink itself rather than a means to a drunken end then maybe, just maybe, the issue can be addressed from a different perspective, "You don't eat just to get fat so don't drink just to get drunk" may well be a catchphrase with which you may well become familiar .................
Comments
patricia o'meara - 11/11/2008
Please, Please please don't let the government ban alcohol promotions at the supermarkets.Once again this nanny state that we live in is pandering to the minority morons who can't control their alcohol intake.Why should the majority of responsible drinkers be penalised by the government and not be able to take advantage of the great offers at the supermarkets.Lets not forget as well it was the supermarkets who reduced the cost of fuel to consumers, were where the government then. They need to keep their noses out of our business, we will decide when and if we want to take up the promotions of cheaper wine etc. we do not need the government interfering in our lives any more.
Jonathan Godson - 11/11/2008
Excessive consumption of alcohol \(by a wide variety of socio economic groups) is a symptom of a wider malaise in our society that has not been adequately addressed by this or previous governments. Why are so many of us keen to turn to alcohol \(or drugs, or gambling, or pornography, etc) for our 'relaxing' time? None of the above is really likely to help our wallets, health or social standing in the long run and yet we are continually drawn to these pursuits. Address this and you might start to build a better world. The Government \(and future incumbents) appear sadly bereft of vision in this area so in the meantime we are stuck with a raft of their well meaning but ill thought out knee jerk measures. Remind me again why we extended pub opening hours to enable people to drink until two in the morning?
Roger OThornhill - 11/11/2008
We live on a highly repressed, over-regulated, over-taxed, small, damp, wet island, where the summer consists of a few weeks of sunshine in early May. That's why we like to drink ourselves into a stupor at the first opportunity.
Tim Mears - 12/11/2008
This is a typical response form the UK government and just shows how they turn a social/pyschological problem of our time into an economic one. When will they learn that not all 'problems' of English culture do not stem from our wallets.
anton seloc - 19/11/2008
The comments posted above are brilliant and sum up entirely the problem faced when discussing \(and for the government, drafting policy related to) the social issue of 'drinking'. The comments of JG centre around the question of Why? - a question answered succinctly, and maybe very correctly, by RO. Meanwhile P o'M tends to look to a self-centred interest to determine a wider social policy \(and why not - don't we all?) but her point can be extended - why should the majority of responsible football spectators be forced to pay for heightened police presence at football grounds; why should the healthy pay NI for an NHS that is used by the unheallthy? etc etc. I'm not quite sure if the interpretation and appraisal of government intent by TM is correct but he nevertheless indicates that the said government have failed to convince him of their understanding and purpose in dealing with this matter. All comments reflect the problem that is faced and why it is so difficult to solve. The fact is the UK does have a social drinking problem that is costly \(whether the bottom line is red is very debatable!), socially damaging and indicative of a deeper social problem \(yes JG/RT - I agree). If that is accepted as a root cause of the problem a 'curative' tax on escapism might as easily be levied on DVDs, holidays etc etc. However alcohol by it's very chemisrtry and nature is a drug and in being so must surely merit exception to the 'norm'. To avoid going beyond the point of interest here i would just like to add that the term 'sale of alcohol' might be indicative of misinterpretation of the problem - little thought or comment is accorded the notion that the debate centres on 'sale of products containing alcohol' i.e the quality, taste and overall pleasurable features of the products are oft overlooked by the intent and desire to extract alcohol from them. If people were somehow redirected to 'drinking' as a means to enjoying the drink itself rather than a means to a drunken end then maybe, just maybe, the issue can be addressed from a different perspective, "You don't eat just to get fat so don't drink just to get drunk" may well be a catchphrase with which you may well become familiar .................