Alcohol Bans

[GlitterUnicorn]

The temperance/prohibition lobby have used covid-19 as an opportunity to ban alcohol in many places without any convincing supporting evidence. Take the 10:00pm curfew, no alcohol in restaurants, closure of 'wet only' pubs etc.

Temperance? Is this the 1920s?

 

[Trackman]

Temperance? Is this the 1920s?

TOC's will be making us sign the pledge before boarding next!

 

[CHAPS2034]

Temperance? Is this the 1920s?

Do a bit of research and you will see there is an underlying theme in some areas of public health of trying to severely restrict alcohol consumption in the UK.

I use (or rather used) the train every week to go somewhere and explore pubs and drink beer. Sometimes a day trip, sometimes a few days away.

But never had a drink on the train, saving my capacity to enjoy the pubs.

 

[GlitterUnicorn]

Do a bit of research and you will see there is an underlying theme in some areas of public health of trying to severely restrict alcohol consumption in the UK.

I use (or rather used) the train every week to go somewhere and explore pubs and drink beer. Sometimes a day trip, sometimes a few days away.

But never had a drink on the train, saving my capacity to enjoy the pubs.

Hardly temperance.

Yes, as a country reducing our alcohol consumption is a good thing. No-one is suggesting temperance or prohibition

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do a bit of research and you will see there is an underlying theme in some areas of public health of trying to severely restrict alcohol consumption in the UK.

There are certainly some elements of PHE (and the Police) who push that line quite hard.

 

[yorksrob]

Hardly temperance.

Yes, as a country reducing our alcohol consumption is a good thing. No-one is suggesting temperance or prohibition

If individuals have problems, we should help them to solve them.

Banning things is a slippery slope to prohibition.

 

[CHAPS2034]

Hardly temperance.

Yes, as a country reducing our alcohol consumption is a good thing. No-one is suggesting temperance or prohibition

Just Google "Anti- alcohol lobby" and you will find some interesting articles from some respectable publications on the cosy relationship between Public Health England and The Institute of Alcohol Studies. The latter are almost totally funded by the Alliance House Foundation who "promote alcoholic abstinence as a lifestyle choice and believe an alcohol free society can be reached by agreement".

Little steps at a time like banning alcohol on trains is another element ticked off their list.

 

[43066]

Hardly temperance.

Yes, as a country reducing our alcohol consumption is a good thing. No-one is suggesting temperance or prohibition

I suspect I’m enjoying my life rather more than you’re enjoying yours.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I suspect I’m enjoying my life rather more than you’re enjoying yours.

I think that's a bit harsh. Some people enjoy their life perfectly well without it, and it does cause a lot of problems for society. No way would it be allowed now if it was a new thing.

TBH I see no real reason it should be allowed on local train services, and for IC I can see the argument for it being allowed but must be purchased on board which gives a level of control. It's only a quirk of licensing that results in trains being exempt rather than licensed that that isn't already the case - everywhere else you can either have a licence OR allow carry-ins.

 

[yorksrob]

I think that's a bit harsh. Some people enjoy their life perfectly well without it, and it does cause a lot of problems for society. No way would it be allowed now if it was a new thing.

TBH I see no real reason it should be allowed on local train services, and for IC I can see the argument for it being allowed but must be purchased on board which gives a level of control.

They'd have to provide some decent beer in that case.

 

[GlitterUnicorn]

If individuals have problems, we should help them to solve them.

Banning things is a slippery slope to prohibition.

The slippery slope being both the biggest fallacy and the biggest cliche in social science.

Just Google "Anti- alcohol lobby" and you will find some interesting articles from some respectable publications on the cosy relationship between Public Health England and The Institute of Alcohol Studies. The latter are almost totally funded by the Alliance House Foundation who "promote alcoholic abstinence as a lifestyle choice and believe an alcohol free society can be reached by agreement".

Little steps at a time like banning alcohol on trains is another element ticked off their list.

That all sounds rather conspiratorial.

Any public health expert will tell you that excess alcohol consumption leads to major health problems and early death. The desire to reduce alcohol consumption isn't rooted in some ideology, it's just basic public health science. Reducing alcohol consumption and smoking is one of the many reasons working men don't die before they're 60 these days...

I think that's a bit harsh. Some people enjoy their life perfectly well without it, and it does cause a lot of problems for society. No way would it be allowed now if it was a new thing.

I do actually drink, alcohol just isn't a big enout part of my personality that I feel personally attacked by a ban on drinking on some trains... I can survive being sober until I get home...

 

[Bletchleyite]

They'd have to provide some decent beer in that case.

Yes, that would help, though the Tilting Ale sold on Avanti isn't bad.

 

[yorksrob]

Yes, that would help, though the Tilting Ale sold on Avanti isn't bad.

Well, I've yet to try it, but will do if the opportunity arises !

 

[43066]

I think that's a bit harsh. Some people enjoy their life perfectly well without it, and it does cause a lot of problems for society. No way would it be allowed now if it was a new thing.

TBH I see no real reason it should be allowed on local train services, and for IC I can see the argument for it being allowed but must be purchased on board which gives a level of control. It's only a quirk of licensing that results in trains being exempt rather than licensed that that isn't already the case - everywhere else you can either have a licence OR allow carry-ins.

If you work on the railway you enjoy a drink. Nobody cares about when it’s IC correct. Jesus. What does that even mean?!

You know when you can and when you can’t. I’ll leave it there.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Yes, that would help, though the Tilting Ale sold on Avanti isn't bad.

There'll be objections from pedants if that ale is served on the new, non-tilting Hitachi units!

 

[danm14]

Alcohol is banned on ALL Translink Northern Ireland Railways including the Enterprise (except if you are in First Class and purchased on board)

The requirement to buy on board (which is possible in both classes) was only brought in to try to lower antisocial behaviour by hen/stag parties and those travelling to/from sports events. It's completely unenforced normally, even by NIR staff who do enforce it on other routes, you can drink openly without issue.

Apart from the couple of onboard posters, it's also not mentioned anywhere by Irish Rail, and NI Railways have it well hidden away on the website, so it's dubiously enforceable especially when travelling northbound.

When it comes to other Translink services, the ban is actually on carrying alcohol, even unopened with no intention to drink it, so bringing a bottle of wine home with your shopping on the bus or train is technically a criminal offence.

 

[yorksrob]

The slippery slope being both the biggest fallacy and the biggest cliche in social science.

Is it really ?

Be that as it may, outside of social science, it seems to be alive and well.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I do actually drink, alcohol just isn't a big enout part of my personality that I feel personally attacked by a ban on drinking on some trains... I can survive being sober until I get home...

TBH if I've been out for a heavy night in London (which I don't do often, but it happens), a tea, coffee or a soft drink on the way home is a good thing, as it makes me feel less like death the following morning because I at least don't go to bed dehydrated.

I've had a drink on the train home exactly once (that I remember), pushed to do so by a friend, and regretted it the next morning.

As I said, InterCity is different - if you're taking a 4 hour journey you might well want a nice meal (if only) and a glass or two of wine or pint or two of beer. That doesn't cause any issues because people typically aren't already drunk when they board. What again does cause problems is people (for some reason there was in the 90s always such a Scotsman on every Glasgow bound IC, often with some form of musical instrument) who take a crate with them and treat the train as they would the rough pub round the corner from home, and that is incredibly intimidating to a lot of other passengers who have a right to travel without that intimidation.

The odd commuter might also want a beer or a glass of wine on the way home, but we're talking short journeys, they can always have it when they get home instead.

If you work on the railway you enjoy a drink. Nobody cares about when it’s IC correct. Jesus. What does that even mean?!

Essentially there's more case for allowing the consumption of alcohol on trains where it is sold. Those are typically longer distance trains. If it's sold and you can only consume what is sold, you can control its consumption by putting the trolley away or closing the buffet if some passengers are getting a bit over the top and won't calm it down (OK, some people will put vodka in a bottle of Coke, but I reckon few would think to do that). Also, the price will manage how much people have on board as it's pub prices rather than supermarket prices, so the idea of "tanking up" on the train on the way to the pub isn't sensible any more.

I also don't think that statement is likely to be true, anyway. There are plenty of Muslims who work on the railway, and I'm sure most of them don't drink. And lots of people don't drink for lots of reasons, some medical (like my Dad, or me temporarily for the last few weeks), some moral, some (increasingly common in young people) because they just don't like the taste or effect. In a way, to be honest, I prefer the atmosphere in a pub than the actual drink.

Is it really ?

Be that as it may, outside of social science, it seems to be alive and well.

I think it's sort of a thing, in that society is turning more Puritanical and obsesses with protecting individuals against themselves, something which I do not support.

However, with regard to alcohol, it causes great problems which affect others, and that is good grounds for legislation.

 

[yorksrob]

I think it's sort of a thing, in that society is turning more Puritanical and obsesses with protecting individuals against themselves, something which I do not support.

However, with regard to alcohol, it causes great problems which affect others, and that is good grounds for legislation.

It is, but I think that banning alcohol on trains (away from specific services where it is shown to be justified) is grossly disproportionate.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is, but I think that banning alcohol on trains (away from specific services where it is shown to be justified) is grossly disproportionate.

Given that most problems occur on the way to/from nights out, perhaps rather than "calling time after nine", the ban on regional and commuter services should be all day on a Saturday and Sunday, or at least the whole afternoon?

It's all very well to say to deal with the people causing a problem, but we don't have enough BTP to do that, you'd need two on every train to be sure of catching it before it causes an issue.

I was speaking more generally with that post, though. There's considerable evidence that the various lockdowns have caused an increase in domestic violence, which is no doubt at least in part caused by people getting tanked up at home because they can't go to the pub and have nothing better to do. I'm really very sure that if alcohol was invented today it definitely wouldn't be allowed as a beverage. From a personal perspective I've seen, over the years, far more problems caused to others than by any other drug (though due to passive smoking cigarettes came a close second when they were allowed in pubs).

 

[yorksrob]

Given that most problems occur on the way to/from nights out, perhaps rather than "calling time after nine", the ban on regional and commuter services should be all day on a Saturday and Sunday, or at least the whole afternoon?

It's all very well to say to deal with the people causing a problem, but we don't have enough BTP to do that, you'd need two on every train to be sure of catching it before it causes an issue.

I was speaking more generally with that post, though. There's considerable evidence that the various lockdowns have caused an increase in domestic violence, which is no doubt at least in part caused by people getting tanked up at home because they can't go to the pub and have nothing better to do. I'm really very sure that if alcohol was invented today it definitely wouldn't be allowed as a beverage.

No, I disagree with that. I enjoy a beer on the train back from wherever I'm going on a Saturday.

I personally believe that if there is trouble on train (any trouble, not just booze related) it should be allowable to summon the nearest local police if BTP are unavailable.

 

[sheff1]

The desire to reduce alcohol consumption isn't rooted in some ideology, it's just basic public health science.

The published aims of the Alliance House Foundation mentioned above are most definitely routed in ideology. AHF subsidiary the Institute of Alcohol Studies was prominent in the 2016 government review which introduced greatly reduced alcohol drinking guidelines which were later admitted to have been plucked out of the air rather than being based on science.

Of course, AHF / IAS are too clever to campaign for an immediate complete ban, preferring to chip away at things. Covid 19 provides an ideal opportunity for increased restrictions based on ideology rather than convincing evidence.

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

The published aims of the Alliance House Foundation mentioned above are most definitely routed in ideology. AHF subsidiary the Institute of Alcohol Studies was prominent in the 2016 government review which introduced greatly reduced alcohol drinking guidlelines which were later admitted to have been plucked out of the air rather than being based on science.

Of course, AHF / IAS are too clever to campaign for an immediate complete ban, preferring to chip away at things. Covid 19 provides an ideal opportunity for increased restrictions based on ideology rather than convincing evidence.

I live in Wales, there is now a 50p per unit minimum charge for alcohol, none of the extra we pay goes anywhere but the store owners pockets, it has slowed nothing down just cost normal people who enjoy a drink more.

I don't think the railwayshould be getting involved in it at all. There is plenty of legislation for abuse of alcohol in public or private places to take care of any issues that arise.

 

[GlitterUnicorn]

The published aims of the Alliance House Foundation mentioned above are most definitely routed in ideology. AHF subsidiary the Institute of Alcohol Studies was prominent in the 2016 government review which introduced greatly reduced alcohol drinking guidelines which were later admitted to have been plucked out of the air rather than being based on science.

Of course, AHF / IAS are too clever to campaign for an immediate complete ban, preferring to chip away at things. Covid 19 provides an ideal opportunity for increased restrictions based on ideology rather than convincing evidence.

But you're the one suggesting the grand conspiracy here between the majority of the public health officials of the developed world, and some obscure lobbyist group...

 

[CHAPS2034]

But you're the one suggesting the grand conspiracy here between the majority of the public health officials of the developed world, and some obscure lobbyist group...

How dramatic! Grand conspiracy? Oh dear..

And where has anyone said anything about the developed world? It's nothing to do with the rest of the world - just in England.

And they are anything but an obscure lobby group, with many of their members involved in carrying out alcohol studies with Public Health England.

People should be allowed to have a drink if they want to but be mindful of the potential consequences for themselves and others around them if they overindulge, whether on a train or not. Regrettably the minority of idiots spoil things for the sensible majority as seems to be the case with so many things nowadays.

 

[sheff1]

But you're the one suggesting the grand conspiracy here between the majority of the public health officials of the developed world, and some obscure lobbyist group...

Am I ? News to me.

What I thought I was doing was pointing out that the published aims of AHF were rooted in ideology. They do not hide the fact. Also a fact is that IAS were prominent in the UK government review of 2016.

I don't see anyone other than you making any reference to anywhere other than the UK.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I live in Wales, there is now a 50p per unit minimum charge for alcohol, none of the extra we pay goes anywhere but the store owners pockets, it has slowed nothing down just cost normal people who enjoy a drink more.

50p per unit is £1 a pint near enough. Other than Tesco Value Vodka there surely can't be much left that cheap.

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

50p per unit is £1 a pint near enough. Other than Tesco Value Vodka there surely can't be much left that cheap.

A litre bottle of spirits in England is around £16.00 in a supermarket, minimum of £18.75 in Wales, 4 cans of strong lager is now minimum of approx. £6.00.

The only positive is Tesco value vodka and Russian standard or Smirnoff are now the same price due to having the same amount of units. The point I loosely aimed at was , if we must pay more make the "tax" go to something useful, currently it goes into supermarkets profits, which seems at odds to the narrative

 

[Bletchleyite]

The only positive is Tesco value vodka and Russian standard or Smirnoff are now the same price due to having the same amount of units. The point I loosely aimed at was , if we must pay more make the "tax" go to something useful, currently it goes into supermarkets profits, which seems at odds to the narrative

I think the idea of it is to remove the bottom end of the market entirely, and thus reduce the "let's get tanked up" market which is the part that causes most of the issues. Someone who pays £2.50 for a bottle of beer in a supermarket to enjoy slowly isn't the problem and there's no reason to hit them with extra taxation.

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

I think the idea of it is to remove the bottom end of the market entirely, and thus reduce the "let's get tanked up" market which is the part that causes most of the issues. Someone who pays £2.50 for a bottle of beer in a supermarket to enjoy slowly isn't the problem and there's no reason to hit them with extra taxation.

I assure you, it isn't working.