Petition to government re: Small Brewers Relief

The Treasury has announced changes to Small Brewers Relief (SBR) – the progressive tax system that has revolutionised UK brewing. These changes will reduce the 50% duty threshold from 5,000hl to 2,100hl: small breweries will have to pay more duty, whilst larger breweries could pay the same or less.

The amount of extra revenue this may raise will be a pittance initially and is likely to dwindle to nothing as currently successful businesses close down. So much for joined-up thinking in government. 

► Please sign here.

AB InBev's anti-union aggression in India

HBLM members demanding union rights in Sonepat, India

AB InBev is known for many international brands, including Beck's, Budweiser, Castle Lager, Cerveza Corona, Hoegaarden, Leffe and Stella Artois.

Although for some time now the company has been attacking trade union rights at the brewery in Sonepat, about 27 miles north of Delhi in India, it has recently been escalating its anti-union pressure. In response, the union has since February been defending its members with a permanent protest at the factory gate.

For the past two years, local managers have refused to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement with the Haryana Breweries Limited Mazdoor Union (HBLM) and opted for repression, suspending active union members and dismissing four elected union leaders, including the president and the general secretary.

When selective victimisation failed to break the union's struggle for rights and recognition, management orchestrated a physical attack on a peaceful union protest on 28 April outside a Sonepat government office in which a union committee member was seriously injured. They then made a false complaint to the police against union members alleging assault; this resulted in the arrest of the union leaders who have since been released on bail.

AB InBev Sonepat workers and their families are continuing their 24-hour protest at the factory gate in support of their right to union recognition and collective bargaining free from harassment and victimisation. Send a message to AB InBev, insisting they reinstate all HBLM union leaders and members, withdraw the false assault allegations, recognise the union and negotiate in good faith.

And once you've signed, why not boycott AB InBev products?

Support music venues against NIMBYs

Every so often, you hear about people moving into a neighbourhood, only to begin complaining about something already well established in the area, whether it be church bells, a factory, a music venue or, in the case of Southport, the planes from RAF Woodvale which has been there since the Second World War. I  wrote about this in July last year.

Music venues are particularly at risk from complaints by new neighbours. While I appreciate that music in pubs might not be everyone's cup of tea, to complain about something that has existed before you moved into an area is quite selfish, and has sometimes caused long-standing music venues to stop presenting music or to close down altogether. Surely it makes more sense to check out an area before committing yourself to moving there?

Here is a petition to Parliament on the subject.

Amber warning

Copied from Rock Against The Right's Facebook page

This may surprise some people but, as a rule, I am not a great follower of political speeches; words are cheap, after all, and I prefer to judge our rulers by what they do, not what they say. However, there are times when the words should be heeded, and one example is Home Secretary Amber Rudd's speech to the recent Tory Party rally.

In particular, among a whole swathe of proposals designed to appeal to the large xenophobic element in her audience, she floated the idea of forcing companies to reveal what proportion of their workforces are migrants. At a time when hate crimes are on the increase after the EU vote, it seems irresponsible to give the bigots more ammunition. I'd say there's a good chance that 'named and shamed' companies would face a racist backlash, a reaction that would rapidly extend from the company to the workers themselves. They might as well put signs outside proclaiming: "Here be foreigners!" 

I can see no point in this idea, except to try to foment consumer boycotts which, if they gain enough support, may close businesses down and put people out of work - not forgetting the loss of provision of goods and services to us. Less drastically, employers may reduce their workforces to shed migrant workers, or not expand if that growth could only be achieved using migrant staff. This interference in an employer's right to choose the people he or she sees as most suitable will benefit neither the business concerned or the country as a whole. Young white males who drift into ultra-right politics, blaming foreigners for taking 'their' jobs, should have got their finger out at school, instead of dismissing it all as rubbish, failing, and then becoming angry when potential employers pick others who worked hard to make themselves more employable.

The UK's hospitality industry relies on migrant workers, who make up an estimated 24% of the workforce. The Association of Licensed Multiple Retailers has said: "Pubs, bars and restaurants do not actively recruit abroad seeking foreign workers; they recruit locally and it is unfair to imply that businesses are failing to support the UK workforce or failing in their duty to provide opportunities or training."

To give an example: according to the People 1st, a skills and workforce development organisation, the British hospitality industry will have to recruit 11,000 chefs in the next eight years. With colleges reporting a decline in applications for full-time chef courses, employers will have no option but to look elsewhere for staff. What does anyone gain from such employers publishing the proportion of migrant workers they employ? 

Let's hope this pointless proposal does not make it beyond the conference rostrum, but if it does, it will over the years cause difficulties for all areas of the hospitality industry without any discernible gains for those of us who use it, or indeed for the country generally.

There's a petition on this subject asking Ms Rudd to abandon this ill-considered idea.

These people own Meantime Brewery

One of the ongoing protests

I wrote in July about SABMiller's vicious union-busting in Australia. Regrettably the situation has not been resolved, and on 8 September, thousands of union members and supporters marched through the centre of Melbourne to support workers at Carlton United Breweries whose employment conditions came under brutal attack when they were told their pay would be cut by 65% due to a new sub-contracting arrangement. The unions rejected the company's diktat and have maintained round-the-clock protests at the plant.  

Such behaviour is normal practice for SABMiller. I wrote in July last year about similar union-busting tactics applied by them in Panama. Should the mooted takeover of SABMiller by InBev go ahead, the dominance of the combined group over the world beer market will be something to be very worried about. If anyone feels secure because we have a record number of micro-breweries in the UK nowadays, don't be: they'd happily cherry-pick the commercially most successful brands and use their increased market domination to squeeze out others; it's already been announced that up to 576 UK jobs would go should the takeover go ahead.

The IUF* Executive Committee, which met in Geneva on 7 and 8 September, sent a message of solidarity and support to the Australian marchers and their unions. If you'd like to send a message to the company too, please click here.

SABMiller operates in 80 countries on every continent, and its many brands include Meantime Brewery, Fosters, Grolsch, Miller, Peroni and Pilsner Urquell.

* The International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations.

Turn the Blundell into a community pub

The Blundell Arms on its last day of opening

I know it's a bit of a long shot, but a Jason MacCormack has set up a 38° petition to turn the Blundell Arms in Upper Aughton Road, Birkdale, Southport, into a community pub. It was the home of the Bothy Folk Club for 38 years, and I've been to many private celebrations of friends there, such as birthdays, weddings and wakes. As Jason points out, it is a very large building which could successfully be used for a number of community activities beyond just being a local pub. The petition is here.

SABMiller do it again

Carlton United Breweries, an Australian company, have sacked 54 union machine maintenance workers at their Melbourne brewery in preparation for the impending merger between their parent company, SABMiller, and AB InBev. The workers, members of the AMWU and the ETU unions, were told their jobs would be contracted out, but that they could return to work for the subcontractor, as long as they accepted a 65% pay cut.

The unions are challenging the dismissals by demanding reinstatement of the sacked workers and compliance with existing agreements. They are supported in this by the production workers at the plant who are represented by another union, United Voice. They describe the dismissals as union-busting: the company had deliberately stockpiled supplies for pubs and big retailers to undermine the effects of the strike they knew their actions would provoke. Before the dismissals, the maintenance crews were being worked for more than 60 hours per week but management refused to hire new workers to reduce the pressure.

Although AB InBev has not yet taken over SABMiller, workers in the latter conglomerate are already suffering from the notorious cost-cutting which drives 3G Capital, owners of AB InBev. Now even the suggestion of an acquisition by 3G leads to job cuts.

Please sign this IUF* petition to show support and send a message to the company.

These companies have form: I wrote a post almost exactly a year ago called 'SABMiller's True Colours', and just over three years ago about AB InBev in 'Brewery with a behavioural disorder?'

* The IUF is the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations.

Not the best anything in the world

I don't like Carlsberg - deluded slogan "probably the best beer in the world" - but I like the way they treat their employees even less. Their treatment of their own staff has prompted the IUF (the International Union of Food workers) to issue this call:

Eleven members of the IUF-affiliated Cambodian Food and Service Workers' Federation (CFSWF) employed by transnational brewery giant Carlsberg's joint venture, local brewer Cambrew, have been dismissed in retaliation for taking strike action on 16 January. Workers are fighting the company's attempt to impose short-term employment contracts and late working hours.

The beer promotion women are employed by Cambrew to market and serve Angkor beer at restaurants, where they compete with promoters from other breweries working in the same restaurants.

Please click here to tell Carlsberg to reinstate the dismissed workers, enter into good faith negotiations with CFSWF and ensure that Carlsberg/Cambrew respects its workers’ rights.

Two fingers from Brewdog

I wrote on the 3 September how Brewdog's campaign to wrest money from their fans to fund their business had caused offence: they've been accused of mocking homeless people, trans women and sex workers in their video, with the message: don't force them [i.e. Brewdog] to do such humiliating things to raise money.

Despite 20,508 signatures on the petition, Brewdog are unrepentant. Their response was: "If you believe we are ridiculing [trans people, homeless people, sex workers], you are either misguided, ill-informed or out of your tiny mind."

They're so full of themselves, they just don't get it, do they? Their intentions aren't really the point; if you cause this kind of offence inadvertently, the best thing to do is apologise. By accusing 20,508 petitioners of being misguided, ill-informed or out their tiny minds, they have shown a breath-taking arrogance, especially as I am sure they can understand why some people are upset, even if they think they are wrong to be so.

To give an analogy: I have in the past been politely stopped by women friends when I used the term 'girl' to describe a young adult woman. My response was to say sorry and correct myself. No offence intended or caused. If I had persisted in saying 'girl' in front of those women, then it would then have been clear I was deliberately trying to cause offence. This is in effect what Brewdog has done.

If they'd just said "sorry, didn't mean to upset anyone" and withdrawn the video, they'd have gained some respect for listening. As it is, they've shown what they are: arrogant wealthy businessmen who refuse to accept they may have made a mistake. This suggests to me they actually believe all their own hype, so you can add the word 'deluded' to the mix.

That tells me all I need to know about them really.

P.S at 4.22pm: 20,524 signatures now.

Roscoe Head sale - update

A sign in the Roscoe Head

Further to my post on Monday about the Roscoe Head in Liverpool, CAMRA Liverpool Branch are taking very seriously the risk to this pub, one of five nationwide, and the only pub in the North of England, in every edition of the Good Beer Guide.

On four separate occasions, Punch Taverns refused to sell the pub to the licensee Carol Ross because, they said, the Roscoe Head was part of their core estate. Suddenly, and with very little notice to Carol, it was redesignated non-core and sold to New River, who are a property development company with a record of closing and converting pubs. The only assurance New River have given is that there are no plans to redevelop the Roscoe Head or any other pubs they've recently acquired into convenience stores "at this stage". There is no guarantee about conversion into something other than a convenience store, or how long "this stage" will last.

The Roscoe Head is a popular, attractive and well-maintained pub. None of the usual arguments about pub closures - run down, not well used, economically unviable - apply here. There's no doubt that many pubs sit on prime sites that can produce a bonanza if redeveloped, but that fact alone isn't a good argument to redevelop them. The Roscoe Head is very much a locals pub near the city centre, and is popular with a range of pub goers, not just real ale drinkers. Regrettably we live in an age of rampant capitalism that defines everything by its monetary price, with little regard to its real value by other, more human measures.

Here is a petition to Liverpool City Council to register the Roscoe Head as an Asset of Community Value (AVC), whereby planning permission is required to change a building's use or to demolish it.

There is a demo planned outside the pub at 2.00pm next Saturday 12 September. I suspect there may be some refreshment associated with the event.

Capitalist 'Punks' offend again

BrewDog, officially the most irritating brewery in the world*, has offended again with their latest attempt to raise cash to the extent that a petition has been set up to demand that they withdraw it and apologise. The petition states:

BrewDog beer company claims to be "beer for punks". They claim to be ethical. Yet in their new crowdsourcing video they mock homeless people, trans women and sex workers. They say, "don't make us do this" whilst performing as offensive caricatures of people, many of whom already suffer discrimination every day. They are mocking the lives and experiences of people who real punks would be defending and helping. Worse, this is a fundraising video - they're using these images in an exploitative manner to make money.

I regard the video as rather vain and quite childish, but I can see why some people might find it offensive, so I've signed. I've done this aware that BrewDog will probably regard this petition as a badge of honour, because they claim to be punks.

Except they're not really: they are no more punks than Richard Branson is a hippy. You'd never seriously put them alongside The Clash, The Sex Pistols or Siouxsie and the Banshees, would you? There's 'iconoclastic' - and there's 'silly'. If you want to sign the petition, it's here.

* Source: Rednev's ReARM.

SABMiller's true colours

"We are all workers" reads the first line.

This may be of interest, especially if you like Meantime beers, Carling, Peroni, Pilsner Urquell, Fosters, Grolsch, Miller, Coca Cola, Fanta - among many others.

Workers at Cervecería Nacional, Panama's beer and soft-drink subsidiary of global brewing corporation SABMiller, have been on indefinite strike since July 10. The workforce is represented by two unions who have worked together to produce joint proposals for a new collective bargaining agreement, but the employer has refused to deal with more than one union. It has also told the workforce to give up their collective bargaining rights, barred active reps from the workplace and withheld wages earned before the strike. It doesn't take a genius to work out that this is a thinly disguised attempt to divide and rule the workforce by an employer who doesn't want to work with unions at all.

The Meantime Brewing Company, a London craft brewery recently acquired by SABMiller, should note this display of true colours. As Woody Allen once said, "The lion will lay down with the lamb, but the lamb won't get much sleep."

What can we do? Well, there's more info here and if, like me, you don't agree with the company's actions, please sign the petition: I've noticed that bad international publicity sometimes does get results.

Brewery with a behavioural disorder?

Now an InBev brand, this was
once a welcome sight in pubs

AB InBev is the world's largest brewing corporation. In this country, as well as brewing various lagers, they are also responsible for the production of two formerly great real ales: Bass and Boddingtons. Their website describes these as two "local favourites"; well, perhaps 35 years ago. So what have they been up to?

There is a tiny brewery in Wandsworth called Belleville which produces American-style cask beers. The brewery was started in January this year by a group of friends who had children at the Belleville Primary School, and they sell their beer to local pubs. AB InBev's lawyers have sent the brewery a letter giving Belleville 28 days to stop using the Belleville name because, they claim, it could be confused with the products of their Belgian subsidiary, Belle-Vue which brews lambic beers. For the world's biggest multi-national brewing corporation to bully a microbrewery with a five barrel capacity because of a name that is similar but not identical to one their own products is both ludicrous and distasteful in the extreme. Obviously Belleville cannot afford to challenge this demand in court and so are considering changing the brewery's name to Northcote after the road where the school is situated. It just goes to show that if you're rich enough, you can shamelessly be a bully without breaking the law.

Meanwhile in Canada, AB InBev are facing a strike at their Labatts brewery because of serious assaults on the workers' terms, conditions and wages, and which would destroy collective bargaining. In one way, it's obvious why they're doing this, as individuals negotiating their own rates of pay have much less clout than negotiators representing an entire workforce. But it's not obvious in another way, because even AB InBev's own website states that it has more than 200 brands worldwide that in 2012 generated revenue of $39,800,000,000 (US dollars). Any savings from cutting staff wages and terms in Canada must be less than peanuts to this company. It is another example of this rich and powerful corporation engaging in bullying.

If AB InBev were a human, I seriously doubt it would be allowed out unsupervised.

Click here for more on the Labatt's dispute; there's also a petition here.

Molson Coors - look behind the mask

Just window dressing?

In recent years, Molson Coors has been carefully honing a positive image for itself among drinkers and the public. Unfortunately, the gap between their PR and their actions is becoming an unbridgeable gulf. Here are some examples:

Publicity:
1. Molson Coors won a lot of brownie points when it took over the Cornish brewer Sharps, best known for Doom Bar, and instead of closing it, actually invested in it and declared that it was committed to its future. This certainly helped improve their image among real ale drinkers. I wrote about this in January.

2. Molson Coors has sponsored the grandly-named beer bloggers conference (in reality, a themed holiday). The conference website urged attendees a year or two ago: "If you are attending this weekend, please make sure to thank MolsonCoors when you get the chance!" What a great endorsement from one of the organisers.

3. Carling, a Molson Coors brand, is sponsor of the current Scottish national side and was until recently sponsor of the English League Cup.

Points 1 and 2 are designed to get beer drinkers on board, and to that end have been quite successful. Point 3 is aimed not only at sports fans, but also at the general public by getting the Carling name displayed prominently on TV and in the press.

Reality:
1. In February I wrote about how Molson Coors, despite their sponsorship of national football, was trying to evict Alton Town FC, a football team in the regional Wessex League, from its ground to build houses, even though alternative venues aren't readily available and the team may fold as a result. As I previously wrote, they probably counted on the fact that this spiteful piece of money grubbing, which must be worth peanuts to the world's seventh largest brewer by volume, would be unlikely to make national news; if so, they're right, although Private Eye did its best.

2. Unite members at the Molson Coors Burton Brewery and Shobnall Maltings are fighting plans to sack the 455-strong workforce and re-employ them on inferior terms with pay cuts of up to £9,000 per year. Agreements previously made with the workforce would be torn up and replaced by terms unilaterally imposed by Molson Coors. Earlier this year, the company had been campaigning for a reduction in beer duty to help its profitability, but even though this has happened, they are still attacking the pay and conditions of their staff.  More information here, and if you agree with me that such behaviour is unacceptable, there's a petition here.

These examples show that their commitment to sport is only to high profile events - stuff the grass roots - and to brewing only to make money; Sharps and bloggers' conferences are just so much window dressing. I understand that capitalist companies exist to make money, but there is more than one way of going about it: trying to crush your workforce into submission is not the only option. If we see any more good news stories concerning Molson Coors, it's worth bearing in mind that any good PR from this company is just a mask.

The true face of pubco greed

The Caledonia, Liverpool

The Caledonia on Catharine Street, Liverpool, has been sold by its owners, the pub company Admiral Taverns, to a property developer who has given the licensee, Laura King, 28 days' notice to quit. Neither she nor her staff had any idea that the pub was up for sale; it was surreptitiously done behind their backs. She will be jobless and homeless and seven staff will also be out of work. The Caledonia is a successful real ale pub that has also a place in the local live music scene; it was "short listed for Live Music venue of the year at the 2012 Liverpool Music Awards and has become the home of Liverpool's vibrant Americana and bluegrass scene." (Liverpool Confidential) In fact Laura has turned the pub around in three years from a failing pub full of "drug takers and scallies" (in her words) to the successful and popular local it is today. It's a pub I like to visit when I'm in that part of the city.

So why it it being sold? Simply because its owners were made "an offer that couldn't be refused". It is not entirely clear who the buyers are, but it seems certain that they don't intend to keep it open as a pub. The pubco's website states: "Admiral Taverns understands that developing great business partnerships with our licensees is the only way to build success. We recognise that our pubs will only thrive and prosper in their communities if we attract passionate people to run them, and then give them all the support they need to maximise their success." And then, once they have maximised their success, chuck them out with 28 days' notice as long as the price is right: 30 pieces of silver, I expect. Laura, who is 28, said, "It's such a shame as a young person who's built up a business which is now in profit for the first time in a long time, to have all that taken away.” 

There can be no mistake here: this pub is not closing because it's failing, or because of supermarket prices, the smoking ban, or any other of the usual reasons given. It is closing because of pubco greed, pure and simple. The sick joke here is that on its website, Admiral Taverns boasted in March that it had been awarded Pub Company of the Year at the Publican Awards, which are hosted by the main pub trade magazine, the Morning Advertiser. While they were raising glasses to celebrate their award, they were cheerfully negotiating the destruction of one their own pubs.

More details in Liverpool Confidential here.

P.S. (30 April): further news on this story in the Liverpool Echo.

P.P.S. (4 May): save the pub website and petition here.

Duty to Parliament

The e-petition receives
some unexpected support

An e-petition to the Government against the beer duty escalator has reached 100,000 signatures, which means that the matter now has to be debated in Parliament. As I'm sure most readers here will know, the beer tax escalator increases the tax on beer by 2% above the rate of inflation, and is a significant reason why beer has gone up in my local pubs by about 50% over the last 4 or 5 years, and - in my opinion - why pubs have been closing down in such numbers in recent years. 

I have written several times about this issue (instead of me regurgitating those arguments, you can see the posts here), but I will just point out one fact: the UK pays 40% of the beer tax in the EU, with the 26 other countries paying the remaining 60%. We can't blame Brussels for that - we created this all by ourselves. To clear up one misconception, the e-petition doesn't call for a tax cut, just for the end of above inflation tax rises.

It's not too late to sign, and more signatures will give the petition even more clout. Just click here.

Getting drunk

Mediaeval monk raiding the wine cellar

Drinking isn't about getting drunk. CAMRA says that, as do certain beer snobs who claim that we don't pay enough for our carefully brewed real ales. This may seem fair from the point of view of the small brewer who is struggling to make a decent living, but in fact they are all wrong because we are paying too much for our beer, not because brewers are ripping us off, but because the government is. I've written before about the levels of beer tax, and if you haven't signed the petition to Parliament about the beer tax escalator (by which beer tax is increased by 2% more than inflation every year), I'd ask you to click on this link and do so.

Going out and getting bladdered is now very expensive. I can remember on one occasion when I was student drinking 22 pints from lunchtime until we were chucked out of a Manchester night club at 2.30 in the morning. A year or two ago I mentioned this exploit in my local, saying I couldn't do that now, at which point my friend Sam pointed out that I'd rolled up at the pub just a few weeks earlier and said I'd had 19 pints in Liverpool, and had then proceeded to have a couple before being chucked out at pub closing time. The probability is that I have exceeded that 22-pint high point many times without realising it.

Although I rarely do it, every so often I enjoy a good session that lasts all day, and on one occasion, more than 30 years ago, I went a 28-hour drinking session. I know that I can drink 20+ pints and still walk home, lock the front door, take my contact lenses out and get undressed before going to bed, although I'm fairly certain I've never done it when I've had to go work the next day. I have never collapsed on the couch and slept fully dressed until the next morning. But I rarely indulge in such a drinking spree; on the contrary, quite often nowadays I don't arrive at the pub until after 10.00 p.m.

I'm not sure why I feel this desire every so often to go completely overboard, and I don't know anyone of my age who can keep up with me pint for pint when the mood takes me. I am for the most part a social drinker, but sometimes I like to blow away the cobwebs.

All I can say is that I have never been arrested, never been actually thrown out of a pub or been barred from one. The wife of a friend once told me I was the most polite drunk she had ever come across. I believe that bad drunken behaviour is not caused by the alcohol, but by the mindset that some idiots have that being drunk is a licence to behave badly - so they do. This view is supported by social anthropologist, Kate Fox, whose interesting assessment you can read here. My post on her findings is here.

Although it's now very unusual for me to embark on such all-day sessions, my experience of them has caused me to laugh at news reports which declared in shocked tones that some yob or other had committed offences after a 10-hour drinking session. Although drink is no justification for bad behaviour or criminality, the media seems to endorse that pathetic explanation by constantly repeating it. Why can't they see that they are giving yobs the excuse they need by allowing them to claim that their misconduct was caused by the drink? That it was not them really - it was all out of character - the drink took over. This is of course nonsense and an abdication of personal responsibility. It seems quite simple to me that if you can't behave when you're drunk, don't drink, at least not to excess.

In the meantime, on the rare occasion I have an all-day session, I still really enjoy it. I do recommend it: it's good for the soul. Just don't get into any fights.

Throwing away the key

According to an article in the Morning Advertiser, the pub trade's newspaper, "A new Government report on how red tape cuts should be enforced has praised the hospitality industry, calling it 'key to the UK economy'. Regulation and Growth, compiled by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, noted that the tourism and hospitality sector is 'ripe in growth potential' and acknowledged estimates from the trade that 510,000 new hospitality jobs can be created by 2020.

The report discusses how regulations, rather than getting in the way, should assist the industry to reduce costs and support growth at local and national level. So will they now look at our grossly over-regulated pub industry and analyse what unnecessary interference is seriously damaging what is still a major part of the hospitality industry, and a major employer to boot? I seriously doubt it:  reports are all well and good, but it's what the government chooses to do with them that counts, and very many reports are shelved if when they don't suit ministers' prejudices. 

As John Ellis of the Crown Inn, Oakengates, says in the comments underneath the article, "If we are so 'key to the economy', why are they trying to tax us out of existence?" Good question, which deserves an answer, but won't get one.

The Advertiser has told the government to "put your money where your mouth is" by setting up an e-petition to Parliament to reduce the reduce VAT to 5% for the hospitality sector, pointing out that '21 countries in the EU have a lower VAT rate for the hotel sector and 13 for the overall hospitality sector. In France, tax was reduced from 19.65% to 5% and led to the creation of 21,700 jobs in the first year. A cut in VAT could help create 320,000 jobs in the post Olympic years and help save pubs, restaurants and hotels.'

Even if these figures are over-optimistic, the general point is still true. The petition has a long way to go before it reaches the 100,000 signatures that would trigger a Commons debate. Why not help it along by signing it here?

The Budget - more stupidity

I am humiliated: despite intense lobbying by this blog and many others, George Osborne hasn't taken a blind bit of notice. According to the BBC website, "duty on all tobacco products to rise by 5% above inflation from 18:00 today - the equivalent of 37p on a packet of cigarettes.  No change to existing plans on alcohol duty - meaning the duty will rise 2% above the rate of inflation, putting more than 5p on the price of a pint."

Frankly, I don't think anyone is very surprised, but if the Coalition tries to claim they can't afford to cut beer duty, or at least freeze it, for financial reasons, then they will be lying, because even some in the Treasury are realising that increases on beer and cigarette duty are increasingly self-defeating and will raise little or nothing. Many people will simply spend the same money buying less, so no tax gain there; some may stop going out altogether. By making the smuggling of alcohol and cigarettes more profitable, the amount lost to the Treasury will continue to escalate, while giving our pubs an increasingly hard time, resulting in closed small businesses and lost jobs. None of this makes any economic sense.

Politicians whom I don't agree with are one thing; politicians who are incredibly stupid, as this lot are, are an insult to our intelligence. There are many more reasons to despise this budget, but I've kept within the remit of my blog here. Please sign the beer tax escalator petition to the right if you haven't done so already.

But I don't drink 7.5% beer ...

As you may know, the government has introduced a higher rate of duty for beers above 7.5%.  They say it will pay for cutting the duty on beers below 2.8%, but frankly I'm not convinced; anyone who accepts this excuse at face of value has underestimated the deviousness of governments.  Having established the principle of different levels of duty, it would be a simple matter in future to reduce the percentage point at which the higher level of duty is payable, say to 6.5% in a couple of years' time, then to 5.5%, and so on, all rationalised by arguments about health, binge drinking and public disorder.  Once the principle has been established, changing when the higher rate of duty kicks in is a mere detail.

I rarely drink beer of such strength, but if the trigger point for higher duty was reduced in stages to, say, 5%, then it would begin to affect me, my preferred strengths being in the 4 to 5.5% range.  So that's one of the reasons why I've signed this petition calling on the government to reverse the tax increase, even though it doesn't affect me at present. 

The petition gives other reasons to oppose this measure: "the higher rate of tax levied on beers brewed at 7.5% or above will have an adverse effect not only on small innovative British Breweries, but also on the independent retailers and local pubs who stock their produce.  The way to tackle binge drinking amongst the young is with education not taxation." 

The social anthropologist Kate Fox argued recently (see my previous post) that scaremongering and punitive tax increases are not only ineffectual but often counter-productive, meaning that government alcohol initiatives are a complete mess.  This measure is just more of the same.  It's time politicians took a mature and sensible approach to alcohol, not driven by tabloid headlines and the desire to be seen to "do something", believing that doing anything is better than doing nothing.  Too often that simply isn't true.  Please sign.