THE GUV'NOR

John Ellis

Licensee of the Crown Inn, in Oakengates, Telford, says that differential rates of duty for draught and packaged products could be the answer to many problems

So, just imagine that you are the British Government.

You are aware that some of the population have an unhealthy attitude towards alcohol. They drink too much and misbehave. This creates strains on public services, such as police and hospitals. It frightens your voters from going into town centres at night, and leaves their streets strewn with cans and bottles the next morning.

What would you do? Would you allow these people to drink more alcohol, sold to them at less than cost price, so that they can drink themselves into oblivion, unhampered by the person who sold it to them? Or perhaps you would rather they were in a safe environment, where their supplier is under a legal duty to protect the public from harm and to uphold the law?

Would you make things harder for this responsible supplier, while removing restrictions from the one who did not supervise his customers' consumption? Not if you wanted to look responsible, you wouldn't.

Yet, that is what we see happening in Britain today. More and more restrictions are piled on the responsible licensee, while supermarkets are able to compete to see who can lose the most money on alcohol sales.

The traditional answer of increasing duty levels has only made matters worse, as white-van man has been overtaken by the retail giants as the main purveyor of alcohol to the "let's-get-legless" squad.

So, the answer lies in differentiating the levels of duty between products sold for consumption in different locations. Products sold in draught form could have the level of duty reduced, while those sold in bottles or cans could attract a higher rate. It could even be designed to be "revenue neutral". Imagine the benefits: improved environments from reduced alcohol drunk on the streets, reduced litter and waste; reduced strain on emergency and health services; greater social cohesion, as people would go to pubs to benefit from less expensive drinks; increased tax revenue from more successful licensees.

Differential duty looks like a vote winner to me. It might even swing the balance in a general election - should we ever have one.