Friday, 4 June 2010


I see "NICE" the National Institute of Clinical Excellence, in between restricting drugs which are available to cancer sufferers abroad, from patients here on the grounds they are not "cost effective" has found anothert hobby horse.
I did not realise that the more money you have the better you can take your alcohol, but that is the case if NICE is to be believed.
It wants a minimum price for alcohol, possibly doubling the cost in order to stop drunkenness and associated health problems caused by excessive drinking. They obviously come to this conclusion as a result of controlled surveys which demonstrate their thesis.

Wealthier middle and upper classes would not be affected by the rise in alcohol price and would be able to continue their pleasures as before knowing that their livers are made of sterner stuff.
The poorer parts of society having weaker livers would be hard hit, but then when did their simple pleasures bother this self styled elite. I'm sure Prince Harry or Fergie will not have to cut down their drinking (but then they've got stronger livers as well as deeper pockets).

I agree that binge drinking is a problem but why penalise all because of the behaviour of the few.
Far better to punish those who cause trouble in the street while drunk. Alcopops and strong lager sales in supermarkets could be controlled while normal weaker beer bought on pubs could be taxed less, and thus help to preserve a national institution.

Of course this is not just about excessive drinking it is about control of the people with pseudo independent organisations such as NICE in the vanguard of these Stazi like proposals.

In a free society people should do as they wish without government sponsored busybodies trying to think up new rules to impose on us. So long as they do not affect anybody else and face the consequencies of their behaviour it's got b***er all to do with NICE or the State.

No comments: