Late-night levy plan for bars and nightclubs Southampton

Andover Advertiser: Late-night levy plan for city bars and nightclubs Late-night levy plan for city bars and nightclubs

PLANS for a controversial late-night levy on Southampton’s bars and clubs are set to go out for consultation.

Council chiefs want to hear residents’ views on their plans to introduce a charge to help cover the cost of drunken revellers.

But members of the city’s licensing trade have again called on the city council to scrap the scheme, which they say will unfairly penalise pubs and clubs.

As previously reported, the plans unveiled by Labour city council bosses and the Hampshire Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) Simon Hayes, would see venues operating after midnight pay an annual fee of between £299 and £4,440.

It is expected the charge would raise about £240,000 each year, with 70 per cent going to the police and 30 per cent to the council.

The levy would be spent on managing the city’s night-time economy, taxi marshalling, street cleaning and improving CCTV coverage.

It could also go on running an In Case of Emergency (ICE) bus to help people who are injured or in need of help, new temporary public conveniences and street pastors.

Labour council leader Simon Letts said: “We are interested to get the public’s views on it.

“We expect there is widespread community support for it but there will be some opposition from the licensing trade and we are keen to hear their views too.

“We don’t think the levy is onerous and may in fact help custom.”

But some members of the trade remain fiercely opposed to the new levy. Chris Reich, chairman of the Southampton Licensees’ Link and area manager for JD Wetherspoon, said: “We’re disappointed the council and PCC are still looking at it.

“It is yet another tax on businesses in this city. I think it will impact on some people trading and will mean some people have to close earlier, meaning there will be less choice for people coming into our city.”

“We would ask them to put a halt to this now.”

The council’s Cabinet is set to ask officers to kick-start the consultation process at a meeting tomorrow.

Consultation is set to be formally launched next month, with a deadline for responses of July 30.

Details will be published on the council’s website, and be available in its offices at Guildhall Square.

The new levy could then be implemented next February.

Comments (35)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:16am Mon 14 Apr 14

sotonboy84 says...

I think it's a great idea. Although individuals make the decision to drink alcohol, these places that are open after midnight sell alcohol and between them contribute to antisocial behaviour, criminal damage and general mess.

It's only right that these places pay towards preventing this type of behaviour and damage because it's unfair for them to make their profits but for taxpayers to pay for the aftermarth. The streets around certain areas such as Beford Place and London Road are disgusting with vomit, chewing gum and kebabs to dodge.

The charge would only affect those businesses open after midnight and I don't believe that they can't afford £25-£370 a month and saying that businesses would close early or go out of businesses is a over exaggeration. They're clearly not taking any responsibility in the current situation but leaving it to taxpayers to sort so this is a way forward to address the issue. It has my full support.
I think it's a great idea. Although individuals make the decision to drink alcohol, these places that are open after midnight sell alcohol and between them contribute to antisocial behaviour, criminal damage and general mess. It's only right that these places pay towards preventing this type of behaviour and damage because it's unfair for them to make their profits but for taxpayers to pay for the aftermarth. The streets around certain areas such as Beford Place and London Road are disgusting with vomit, chewing gum and kebabs to dodge. The charge would only affect those businesses open after midnight and I don't believe that they can't afford £25-£370 a month and saying that businesses would close early or go out of businesses is a over exaggeration. They're clearly not taking any responsibility in the current situation but leaving it to taxpayers to sort so this is a way forward to address the issue. It has my full support. sotonboy84
  • Score: 26

11:33am Mon 14 Apr 14

bigfella777 says...

Somebody should have to foot the cleaning bill, it takes the council workers the best part of six hours every Sat and Sun morning. Yesterday the parks were strewn with litter with most of it 2 feet from a bin, this charge should go to the fast food business owners as well to make it fair.
Somebody should have to foot the cleaning bill, it takes the council workers the best part of six hours every Sat and Sun morning. Yesterday the parks were strewn with litter with most of it 2 feet from a bin, this charge should go to the fast food business owners as well to make it fair. bigfella777
  • Score: 28

12:00pm Mon 14 Apr 14

hulla baloo says...

bigfella777 wrote:
Somebody should have to foot the cleaning bill, it takes the council workers the best part of six hours every Sat and Sun morning. Yesterday the parks were strewn with litter with most of it 2 feet from a bin, this charge should go to the fast food business owners as well to make it fair.
The bar owners pay enough in taxes, council rates etc.
If there is a problem with the cleaning up of the drinkers, arrest them and make them pay accordingly.
[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: Somebody should have to foot the cleaning bill, it takes the council workers the best part of six hours every Sat and Sun morning. Yesterday the parks were strewn with litter with most of it 2 feet from a bin, this charge should go to the fast food business owners as well to make it fair.[/p][/quote]The bar owners pay enough in taxes, council rates etc. If there is a problem with the cleaning up of the drinkers, arrest them and make them pay accordingly. hulla baloo
  • Score: -11

12:01pm Mon 14 Apr 14

camerajuan says...

As bigfella said, it's not nightclubs who make the mess or provide patrons with the means to create such mess. Kebab shops & any eaterie open when clubs close should foot the bill for cleaning.
As bigfella said, it's not nightclubs who make the mess or provide patrons with the means to create such mess. Kebab shops & any eaterie open when clubs close should foot the bill for cleaning. camerajuan
  • Score: 15

12:24pm Mon 14 Apr 14

WalkingOnAWire says...

The diversity of opinion about this is the very reason it's been opened up for consultation. I hope everyone who takes the trouble to post here about it also makes sure they are their views felt through the process itself so they can be taken into account.
The diversity of opinion about this is the very reason it's been opened up for consultation. I hope everyone who takes the trouble to post here about it also makes sure they are their views felt through the process itself so they can be taken into account. WalkingOnAWire
  • Score: 7

12:24pm Mon 14 Apr 14

cliffwalker says...

This seems a very reasonable proposal. It's the late night venues who make the profits from selling the alcohol so it's right they should make the biggest contribution towards clearing up the consequences.

Are there any plans for a clean-up tax for late night take-aways? Again, they are the one's making the money - they should help pay for the mess.

Late-night businesses only have to pay the same taxes at the moment as all the other city establishments.
This seems a very reasonable proposal. It's the late night venues who make the profits from selling the alcohol so it's right they should make the biggest contribution towards clearing up the consequences. Are there any plans for a clean-up tax for late night take-aways? Again, they are the one's making the money - they should help pay for the mess. Late-night businesses only have to pay the same taxes at the moment as all the other city establishments. cliffwalker
  • Score: 11

12:46pm Mon 14 Apr 14

elvisimo says...

sotonboy84 wrote:
I think it's a great idea. Although individuals make the decision to drink alcohol, these places that are open after midnight sell alcohol and between them contribute to antisocial behaviour, criminal damage and general mess.

It's only right that these places pay towards preventing this type of behaviour and damage because it's unfair for them to make their profits but for taxpayers to pay for the aftermarth. The streets around certain areas such as Beford Place and London Road are disgusting with vomit, chewing gum and kebabs to dodge.

The charge would only affect those businesses open after midnight and I don't believe that they can't afford £25-£370 a month and saying that businesses would close early or go out of businesses is a over exaggeration. They're clearly not taking any responsibility in the current situation but leaving it to taxpayers to sort so this is a way forward to address the issue. It has my full support.
It is pointless. You take millions of pounds away from the police and then make a paltry offer of 70% of the money raised (circa £170k) to help offset this and deal with "antisocial" behaviour. How long will that amount last - couple of weeks.
I would have though that Hampshire constabulary who have announced 550 job losses and £55m in budget cuts would find this an insulting joke.
[quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: I think it's a great idea. Although individuals make the decision to drink alcohol, these places that are open after midnight sell alcohol and between them contribute to antisocial behaviour, criminal damage and general mess. It's only right that these places pay towards preventing this type of behaviour and damage because it's unfair for them to make their profits but for taxpayers to pay for the aftermarth. The streets around certain areas such as Beford Place and London Road are disgusting with vomit, chewing gum and kebabs to dodge. The charge would only affect those businesses open after midnight and I don't believe that they can't afford £25-£370 a month and saying that businesses would close early or go out of businesses is a over exaggeration. They're clearly not taking any responsibility in the current situation but leaving it to taxpayers to sort so this is a way forward to address the issue. It has my full support.[/p][/quote]It is pointless. You take millions of pounds away from the police and then make a paltry offer of 70% of the money raised (circa £170k) to help offset this and deal with "antisocial" behaviour. How long will that amount last - couple of weeks. I would have though that Hampshire constabulary who have announced 550 job losses and £55m in budget cuts would find this an insulting joke. elvisimo
  • Score: 3

12:48pm Mon 14 Apr 14

Bobs Your Uncle ? says...

tax them as much as possible.
tax them as much as possible. Bobs Your Uncle ?
  • Score: -4

1:05pm Mon 14 Apr 14

Hercules Grytpype-Thynne says...

All we need now is a levy on take away shops, convenience stores and off licences to pay for the street cleaners to clear up after their customers who are too last to take their litter home and in some instances to place it in a bin a matter of feet away.
All we need now is a levy on take away shops, convenience stores and off licences to pay for the street cleaners to clear up after their customers who are too last to take their litter home and in some instances to place it in a bin a matter of feet away. Hercules Grytpype-Thynne
  • Score: 8

1:28pm Mon 14 Apr 14

killthrill says...

GOOD!
start with the dungeon in bevois valley!
GOOD! start with the dungeon in bevois valley! killthrill
  • Score: 0

1:50pm Mon 14 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
tax them as much as possible.
They already do, by definition.
[quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: tax them as much as possible.[/p][/quote]They already do, by definition. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 0

1:51pm Mon 14 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

killthrill wrote:
GOOD!
start with the dungeon in bevois valley!
Why?
[quote][p][bold]killthrill[/bold] wrote: GOOD! start with the dungeon in bevois valley![/p][/quote]Why? Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 4

2:10pm Mon 14 Apr 14

elvisimo says...

cliffwalker wrote:
This seems a very reasonable proposal. It's the late night venues who make the profits from selling the alcohol so it's right they should make the biggest contribution towards clearing up the consequences.

Are there any plans for a clean-up tax for late night take-aways? Again, they are the one's making the money - they should help pay for the mess.

Late-night businesses only have to pay the same taxes at the moment as all the other city establishments.
no late night pubs and bars pay an average of £33k in alcohol duty.

if you are interested between 2008 and 2013 taxes on alcohol increase by 42% whilst at the same time beer sales were down 21%.

A more sensible tax regime would eliminate the need to sell quantity with minute margins.

Unlikely as the licences trade provides £12b in tax.

55p in the pint is excise duty and 54p is VAT. - tax is about 12 times that of Germany and Spain.
[quote][p][bold]cliffwalker[/bold] wrote: This seems a very reasonable proposal. It's the late night venues who make the profits from selling the alcohol so it's right they should make the biggest contribution towards clearing up the consequences. Are there any plans for a clean-up tax for late night take-aways? Again, they are the one's making the money - they should help pay for the mess. Late-night businesses only have to pay the same taxes at the moment as all the other city establishments.[/p][/quote]no late night pubs and bars pay an average of £33k in alcohol duty. if you are interested between 2008 and 2013 taxes on alcohol increase by 42% whilst at the same time beer sales were down 21%. A more sensible tax regime would eliminate the need to sell quantity with minute margins. Unlikely as the licences trade provides £12b in tax. 55p in the pint is excise duty and 54p is VAT. - tax is about 12 times that of Germany and Spain. elvisimo
  • Score: 2

2:48pm Mon 14 Apr 14

sotonboy84 says...

elvisimo wrote:
sotonboy84 wrote: I think it's a great idea. Although individuals make the decision to drink alcohol, these places that are open after midnight sell alcohol and between them contribute to antisocial behaviour, criminal damage and general mess. It's only right that these places pay towards preventing this type of behaviour and damage because it's unfair for them to make their profits but for taxpayers to pay for the aftermarth. The streets around certain areas such as Beford Place and London Road are disgusting with vomit, chewing gum and kebabs to dodge. The charge would only affect those businesses open after midnight and I don't believe that they can't afford £25-£370 a month and saying that businesses would close early or go out of businesses is a over exaggeration. They're clearly not taking any responsibility in the current situation but leaving it to taxpayers to sort so this is a way forward to address the issue. It has my full support.
It is pointless. You take millions of pounds away from the police and then make a paltry offer of 70% of the money raised (circa £170k) to help offset this and deal with "antisocial" behaviour. How long will that amount last - couple of weeks. I would have though that Hampshire constabulary who have announced 550 job losses and £55m in budget cuts would find this an insulting joke.
It would do more to address the problem than the current £0 contribution from these bars is currently doing.

The cuts are across Hampshire & although I agree not ideal, raising funding this way will address the issue in Southampton & not the whole of Hampshire. The police & council are two different things.
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: I think it's a great idea. Although individuals make the decision to drink alcohol, these places that are open after midnight sell alcohol and between them contribute to antisocial behaviour, criminal damage and general mess. It's only right that these places pay towards preventing this type of behaviour and damage because it's unfair for them to make their profits but for taxpayers to pay for the aftermarth. The streets around certain areas such as Beford Place and London Road are disgusting with vomit, chewing gum and kebabs to dodge. The charge would only affect those businesses open after midnight and I don't believe that they can't afford £25-£370 a month and saying that businesses would close early or go out of businesses is a over exaggeration. They're clearly not taking any responsibility in the current situation but leaving it to taxpayers to sort so this is a way forward to address the issue. It has my full support.[/p][/quote]It is pointless. You take millions of pounds away from the police and then make a paltry offer of 70% of the money raised (circa £170k) to help offset this and deal with "antisocial" behaviour. How long will that amount last - couple of weeks. I would have though that Hampshire constabulary who have announced 550 job losses and £55m in budget cuts would find this an insulting joke.[/p][/quote]It would do more to address the problem than the current £0 contribution from these bars is currently doing. The cuts are across Hampshire & although I agree not ideal, raising funding this way will address the issue in Southampton & not the whole of Hampshire. The police & council are two different things. sotonboy84
  • Score: 1

3:17pm Mon 14 Apr 14

O_crusti says...

couldn't the money going to temporary public loo's go on real permanent loo's?
The post about late take-aways' charge is a very good and valid point, that is probably the biggest contributer to later night litter.
couldn't the money going to temporary public loo's go on real permanent loo's? The post about late take-aways' charge is a very good and valid point, that is probably the biggest contributer to later night litter. O_crusti
  • Score: 3

3:18pm Mon 14 Apr 14

The_Fuzz22 says...

Pretty elitist.
A relatively tiny charge to the big clubs, with discount deals on alcohol, spilling wasted people onto the street.
A massive one to small pubs and bars where problems are generally handled by the staff.
Pretty elitist. A relatively tiny charge to the big clubs, with discount deals on alcohol, spilling wasted people onto the street. A massive one to small pubs and bars where problems are generally handled by the staff. The_Fuzz22
  • Score: 2

3:21pm Mon 14 Apr 14

elvisimo says...

sotonboy84 wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
sotonboy84 wrote: I think it's a great idea. Although individuals make the decision to drink alcohol, these places that are open after midnight sell alcohol and between them contribute to antisocial behaviour, criminal damage and general mess. It's only right that these places pay towards preventing this type of behaviour and damage because it's unfair for them to make their profits but for taxpayers to pay for the aftermarth. The streets around certain areas such as Beford Place and London Road are disgusting with vomit, chewing gum and kebabs to dodge. The charge would only affect those businesses open after midnight and I don't believe that they can't afford £25-£370 a month and saying that businesses would close early or go out of businesses is a over exaggeration. They're clearly not taking any responsibility in the current situation but leaving it to taxpayers to sort so this is a way forward to address the issue. It has my full support.
It is pointless. You take millions of pounds away from the police and then make a paltry offer of 70% of the money raised (circa £170k) to help offset this and deal with "antisocial" behaviour. How long will that amount last - couple of weeks. I would have though that Hampshire constabulary who have announced 550 job losses and £55m in budget cuts would find this an insulting joke.
It would do more to address the problem than the current £0 contribution from these bars is currently doing.

The cuts are across Hampshire & although I agree not ideal, raising funding this way will address the issue in Southampton & not the whole of Hampshire. The police & council are two different things.
The pay a huge amount as it stands in terms of Excise Duty and VAT. (2nd in alcohol tax behind Finland). I think that this sort of ill thought out policy will do more harm than good.

Yes it may pacify the Daily Mail brigade but will do nothing to address the problem. It will instead go after an industry that is not looking particularly healthy. You have seen the demise of Regent Inns, SFI, Luminar, Barracuda etc You don't have people queuing up to take these sites a walk down the high street shows.

The police job losses are the latest round (Feb 14) - when complete this will take the number of police redundancies to 1300. Even at a best guess you can apportion a reasonable percentage of these losses to Southampton - even at 10% that would be 130 at 15% would be 195. The money they think this scheme "could" raise will pay for 3 or 4 officers when employers NI costs etc are factored in. Its just smoke and mirrors.
[quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: I think it's a great idea. Although individuals make the decision to drink alcohol, these places that are open after midnight sell alcohol and between them contribute to antisocial behaviour, criminal damage and general mess. It's only right that these places pay towards preventing this type of behaviour and damage because it's unfair for them to make their profits but for taxpayers to pay for the aftermarth. The streets around certain areas such as Beford Place and London Road are disgusting with vomit, chewing gum and kebabs to dodge. The charge would only affect those businesses open after midnight and I don't believe that they can't afford £25-£370 a month and saying that businesses would close early or go out of businesses is a over exaggeration. They're clearly not taking any responsibility in the current situation but leaving it to taxpayers to sort so this is a way forward to address the issue. It has my full support.[/p][/quote]It is pointless. You take millions of pounds away from the police and then make a paltry offer of 70% of the money raised (circa £170k) to help offset this and deal with "antisocial" behaviour. How long will that amount last - couple of weeks. I would have though that Hampshire constabulary who have announced 550 job losses and £55m in budget cuts would find this an insulting joke.[/p][/quote]It would do more to address the problem than the current £0 contribution from these bars is currently doing. The cuts are across Hampshire & although I agree not ideal, raising funding this way will address the issue in Southampton & not the whole of Hampshire. The police & council are two different things.[/p][/quote]The pay a huge amount as it stands in terms of Excise Duty and VAT. (2nd in alcohol tax behind Finland). I think that this sort of ill thought out policy will do more harm than good. Yes it may pacify the Daily Mail brigade but will do nothing to address the problem. It will instead go after an industry that is not looking particularly healthy. You have seen the demise of Regent Inns, SFI, Luminar, Barracuda etc You don't have people queuing up to take these sites a walk down the high street shows. The police job losses are the latest round (Feb 14) - when complete this will take the number of police redundancies to 1300. Even at a best guess you can apportion a reasonable percentage of these losses to Southampton - even at 10% that would be 130 at 15% would be 195. The money they think this scheme "could" raise will pay for 3 or 4 officers when employers NI costs etc are factored in. Its just smoke and mirrors. elvisimo
  • Score: -2

3:26pm Mon 14 Apr 14

999medic says...

I I don't think charging the bars will do much however they do need to take responsibility for selling drinks priced at 70p a time, they say they margins are minute and yet they sell vodka at this level. Also I think charge those people who get themselves either so ****, take drugs or end up fighting requiring emergency services. Tax them £500 a time that would cut out a lot of trouble. I have dealt with hundreds of people who fall into this bracket, and them and their mates think it's their god given right to get get this way and then have no responsibility to pay for it.
I I don't think charging the bars will do much however they do need to take responsibility for selling drinks priced at 70p a time, they say they margins are minute and yet they sell vodka at this level. Also I think charge those people who get themselves either so ****, take drugs or end up fighting requiring emergency services. Tax them £500 a time that would cut out a lot of trouble. I have dealt with hundreds of people who fall into this bracket, and them and their mates think it's their god given right to get get this way and then have no responsibility to pay for it. 999medic
  • Score: 2

3:33pm Mon 14 Apr 14

elvisimo says...

999medic wrote:
I I don't think charging the bars will do much however they do need to take responsibility for selling drinks priced at 70p a time, they say they margins are minute and yet they sell vodka at this level. Also I think charge those people who get themselves either so ****, take drugs or end up fighting requiring emergency services. Tax them £500 a time that would cut out a lot of trouble. I have dealt with hundreds of people who fall into this bracket, and them and their mates think it's their god given right to get get this way and then have no responsibility to pay for it.
I guess they work on the idea of sell high volumes at small margins. It gets the punters through the doors. Agree with a fine. Also think that the licensing system could be used as an effective route of policing troublesome establishments. After all this is now controlled by the council.
[quote][p][bold]999medic[/bold] wrote: I I don't think charging the bars will do much however they do need to take responsibility for selling drinks priced at 70p a time, they say they margins are minute and yet they sell vodka at this level. Also I think charge those people who get themselves either so ****, take drugs or end up fighting requiring emergency services. Tax them £500 a time that would cut out a lot of trouble. I have dealt with hundreds of people who fall into this bracket, and them and their mates think it's their god given right to get get this way and then have no responsibility to pay for it.[/p][/quote]I guess they work on the idea of sell high volumes at small margins. It gets the punters through the doors. Agree with a fine. Also think that the licensing system could be used as an effective route of policing troublesome establishments. After all this is now controlled by the council. elvisimo
  • Score: 2

4:01pm Mon 14 Apr 14

Burt HInkler says...

CRAZY CRAZY CRAZY, Labour Council are killing our town centre with parking charges and more cost that will increase pricing and reduce customers. Simone Hayes hasnt got a clue what hes talking about.

LABOUR OUT
CRAZY CRAZY CRAZY, Labour Council are killing our town centre with parking charges and more cost that will increase pricing and reduce customers. Simone Hayes hasnt got a clue what hes talking about. LABOUR OUT Burt HInkler
  • Score: -1

4:19pm Mon 14 Apr 14

Thelma _wheeler41 says...

I think this is a good idea but don't agree with 30% going to the council perhaps the 30% should go to fund the paramedics who deal with the aftermath of alcohol related incidents . Other wise this levy will just be yet again another money spinner for the SCC.
I think this is a good idea but don't agree with 30% going to the council perhaps the 30% should go to fund the paramedics who deal with the aftermath of alcohol related incidents . Other wise this levy will just be yet again another money spinner for the SCC. Thelma _wheeler41
  • Score: -1

4:29pm Mon 14 Apr 14

loosehead says...

Surely it's better to have all these bars/disco's near to each other to keep an eye on the revellers instead of hitting them with costs so they shut & these revellers go to other areas & what clobber quite peaceful pubs because they get busy?
Denham's campaigning to keep the pub yet it seems this council want to shut them?
We all were young we all(most) went to town what would we have said if the pubs/clubs shut because they got hammered by the council?
Surely it's better to have all these bars/disco's near to each other to keep an eye on the revellers instead of hitting them with costs so they shut & these revellers go to other areas & what clobber quite peaceful pubs because they get busy? Denham's campaigning to keep the pub yet it seems this council want to shut them? We all were young we all(most) went to town what would we have said if the pubs/clubs shut because they got hammered by the council? loosehead
  • Score: -1

4:30pm Mon 14 Apr 14

espanuel says...

elvisimo wrote:
cliffwalker wrote:
This seems a very reasonable proposal. It's the late night venues who make the profits from selling the alcohol so it's right they should make the biggest contribution towards clearing up the consequences.

Are there any plans for a clean-up tax for late night take-aways? Again, they are the one's making the money - they should help pay for the mess.

Late-night businesses only have to pay the same taxes at the moment as all the other city establishments.
no late night pubs and bars pay an average of £33k in alcohol duty.

if you are interested between 2008 and 2013 taxes on alcohol increase by 42% whilst at the same time beer sales were down 21%.

A more sensible tax regime would eliminate the need to sell quantity with minute margins.

Unlikely as the licences trade provides £12b in tax.

55p in the pint is excise duty and 54p is VAT. - tax is about 12 times that of Germany and Spain.
A litre of beer in the s/market over here is 70 cents, at a bar 1.50€. And you don't see them spewing all over the road and drunk.
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cliffwalker[/bold] wrote: This seems a very reasonable proposal. It's the late night venues who make the profits from selling the alcohol so it's right they should make the biggest contribution towards clearing up the consequences. Are there any plans for a clean-up tax for late night take-aways? Again, they are the one's making the money - they should help pay for the mess. Late-night businesses only have to pay the same taxes at the moment as all the other city establishments.[/p][/quote]no late night pubs and bars pay an average of £33k in alcohol duty. if you are interested between 2008 and 2013 taxes on alcohol increase by 42% whilst at the same time beer sales were down 21%. A more sensible tax regime would eliminate the need to sell quantity with minute margins. Unlikely as the licences trade provides £12b in tax. 55p in the pint is excise duty and 54p is VAT. - tax is about 12 times that of Germany and Spain.[/p][/quote]A litre of beer in the s/market over here is 70 cents, at a bar 1.50€. And you don't see them spewing all over the road and drunk. espanuel
  • Score: 0

4:38pm Mon 14 Apr 14

Lone Ranger. says...

Burt HInkler wrote:
CRAZY CRAZY CRAZY, Labour Council are killing our town centre with parking charges and more cost that will increase pricing and reduce customers. Simone Hayes hasnt got a clue what hes talking about.

LABOUR OUT
Priceless ....... Who is SIMONE Hayes ........ Are you sure that its not YOU that doesnt know what they are talking about ...... after changing the sex of the commissioner ..... LMAO
[quote][p][bold]Burt HInkler[/bold] wrote: CRAZY CRAZY CRAZY, Labour Council are killing our town centre with parking charges and more cost that will increase pricing and reduce customers. Simone Hayes hasnt got a clue what hes talking about. LABOUR OUT[/p][/quote]Priceless ....... Who is SIMONE Hayes ........ Are you sure that its not YOU that doesnt know what they are talking about ...... after changing the sex of the commissioner ..... LMAO Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

7:09pm Mon 14 Apr 14

RealTalkSouthampton says...

Two points:
most people get tanked up at home and then go to pubs,bars, clubs for a top up.

If this is what Hampshire police are recommending then shouldn't they be applying the charge to the whole of Hampshire.

I can understand both points of view with this. But most of that money will be swallowed up by beauracy. What people should championing is inventive ideas to incurrage startups in southampton and not just the city centre. All communities would appreciate this kind of positive intervention which would generate more revenue for the council.
Two points: most people get tanked up at home and then go to pubs,bars, clubs for a top up. If this is what Hampshire police are recommending then shouldn't they be applying the charge to the whole of Hampshire. I can understand both points of view with this. But most of that money will be swallowed up by beauracy. What people should championing is inventive ideas to incurrage startups in southampton and not just the city centre. All communities would appreciate this kind of positive intervention which would generate more revenue for the council. RealTalkSouthampton
  • Score: 0

8:37pm Mon 14 Apr 14

Money Launderer says...

RealTalkSouthampton wrote:
Two points:
most people get tanked up at home and then go to pubs,bars, clubs for a top up.

If this is what Hampshire police are recommending then shouldn't they be applying the charge to the whole of Hampshire.

I can understand both points of view with this. But most of that money will be swallowed up by beauracy. What people should championing is inventive ideas to incurrage startups in southampton and not just the city centre. All communities would appreciate this kind of positive intervention which would generate more revenue for the council.
Some of what you say is true, people do drink at home an awful lot more these days but drinking yourself into oblivion seems to be the culture of the cities students and younger population, so why has this become the norm?

Cheap drinks offers like 80p in Bedford Place (50p spirit & mixer at a bar in Bevois Valley) have just fuelled this culture and encourage such disorder. Sadly it's spreading, I was in Oxford Street only last week (the grown up end of town, or so I thought) and was disappointed to be approached by some Magaluf/18-30 type promoter offering us free drinks vouchers for the local Mediterranean bar. Are theses bars so dull and their offer so poor that the only way to get people in, is by throwing FREE drinks at them and exacerbating any alcohol fuelled problems further? It would appear so, poor guidance and mis-management are clearly to blame.

With regards to your second point, the town centres bars were all given over £30k in taxpayers money by the council only a couple of years ago, for inventive ideas, sadly they blew it and now have nothing left to show. All these bars seem to care about it money ringing in their tills and they take no responsibility for the service they provide.

I work and reside in the city and when asked 'Do I think that Southampton's bars and clubs should pay a levy' my answer is YES!
[quote][p][bold]RealTalkSouthampton[/bold] wrote: Two points: most people get tanked up at home and then go to pubs,bars, clubs for a top up. If this is what Hampshire police are recommending then shouldn't they be applying the charge to the whole of Hampshire. I can understand both points of view with this. But most of that money will be swallowed up by beauracy. What people should championing is inventive ideas to incurrage startups in southampton and not just the city centre. All communities would appreciate this kind of positive intervention which would generate more revenue for the council.[/p][/quote]Some of what you say is true, people do drink at home an awful lot more these days but drinking yourself into oblivion seems to be the culture of the cities students and younger population, so why has this become the norm? Cheap drinks offers like 80p in Bedford Place (50p spirit & mixer at a bar in Bevois Valley) have just fuelled this culture and encourage such disorder. Sadly it's spreading, I was in Oxford Street only last week (the grown up end of town, or so I thought) and was disappointed to be approached by some Magaluf/18-30 type promoter offering us free drinks vouchers for the local Mediterranean bar. Are theses bars so dull and their offer so poor that the only way to get people in, is by throwing FREE drinks at them and exacerbating any alcohol fuelled problems further? It would appear so, poor guidance and mis-management are clearly to blame. With regards to your second point, the town centres bars were all given over £30k in taxpayers money by the council only a couple of years ago, for inventive ideas, sadly they blew it and now have nothing left to show. All these bars seem to care about it money ringing in their tills and they take no responsibility for the service they provide. I work and reside in the city and when asked 'Do I think that Southampton's bars and clubs should pay a levy' my answer is YES! Money Launderer
  • Score: -1

9:28pm Mon 14 Apr 14

elvisimo says...

Money Launderer wrote:
RealTalkSouthampton wrote:
Two points:
most people get tanked up at home and then go to pubs,bars, clubs for a top up.

If this is what Hampshire police are recommending then shouldn't they be applying the charge to the whole of Hampshire.

I can understand both points of view with this. But most of that money will be swallowed up by beauracy. What people should championing is inventive ideas to incurrage startups in southampton and not just the city centre. All communities would appreciate this kind of positive intervention which would generate more revenue for the council.
Some of what you say is true, people do drink at home an awful lot more these days but drinking yourself into oblivion seems to be the culture of the cities students and younger population, so why has this become the norm?

Cheap drinks offers like 80p in Bedford Place (50p spirit & mixer at a bar in Bevois Valley) have just fuelled this culture and encourage such disorder. Sadly it's spreading, I was in Oxford Street only last week (the grown up end of town, or so I thought) and was disappointed to be approached by some Magaluf/18-30 type promoter offering us free drinks vouchers for the local Mediterranean bar. Are theses bars so dull and their offer so poor that the only way to get people in, is by throwing FREE drinks at them and exacerbating any alcohol fuelled problems further? It would appear so, poor guidance and mis-management are clearly to blame.

With regards to your second point, the town centres bars were all given over £30k in taxpayers money by the council only a couple of years ago, for inventive ideas, sadly they blew it and now have nothing left to show. All these bars seem to care about it money ringing in their tills and they take no responsibility for the service they provide.

I work and reside in the city and when asked 'Do I think that Southampton's bars and clubs should pay a levy' my answer is YES!
If bars have to compete with supermarkets and the tax man and the beer escalator (finally stopped) then they will go for volume. You have to be at least as attractive as the cost of a night in.

The council seem very happy to rake in the business rates from these places ( which are approx 50% above market value but mysteriously the rating revaluation keeps getting um 'delayed').

These drinks promotions are no different to the one we had when I was a student except a bit dearer ( 10p a pint night at Sheffield Roxy 1991). It has always gone on.

If you are going to introduce a levy on bars for antisocial behaviour then tax supermarkets for selling ready meals to obese people and corner shops for selling cigarettes that may cause cancer. There are many things in this world that are bad for you. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you have to. How about a speeding levy for car manufacturer - it could go on and on.
Councils should do something proactive and not this pathetic non event that the misguidedly feel keeps them in touch with their "voters (?)'
[quote][p][bold]Money Launderer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RealTalkSouthampton[/bold] wrote: Two points: most people get tanked up at home and then go to pubs,bars, clubs for a top up. If this is what Hampshire police are recommending then shouldn't they be applying the charge to the whole of Hampshire. I can understand both points of view with this. But most of that money will be swallowed up by beauracy. What people should championing is inventive ideas to incurrage startups in southampton and not just the city centre. All communities would appreciate this kind of positive intervention which would generate more revenue for the council.[/p][/quote]Some of what you say is true, people do drink at home an awful lot more these days but drinking yourself into oblivion seems to be the culture of the cities students and younger population, so why has this become the norm? Cheap drinks offers like 80p in Bedford Place (50p spirit & mixer at a bar in Bevois Valley) have just fuelled this culture and encourage such disorder. Sadly it's spreading, I was in Oxford Street only last week (the grown up end of town, or so I thought) and was disappointed to be approached by some Magaluf/18-30 type promoter offering us free drinks vouchers for the local Mediterranean bar. Are theses bars so dull and their offer so poor that the only way to get people in, is by throwing FREE drinks at them and exacerbating any alcohol fuelled problems further? It would appear so, poor guidance and mis-management are clearly to blame. With regards to your second point, the town centres bars were all given over £30k in taxpayers money by the council only a couple of years ago, for inventive ideas, sadly they blew it and now have nothing left to show. All these bars seem to care about it money ringing in their tills and they take no responsibility for the service they provide. I work and reside in the city and when asked 'Do I think that Southampton's bars and clubs should pay a levy' my answer is YES![/p][/quote]If bars have to compete with supermarkets and the tax man and the beer escalator (finally stopped) then they will go for volume. You have to be at least as attractive as the cost of a night in. The council seem very happy to rake in the business rates from these places ( which are approx 50% above market value but mysteriously the rating revaluation keeps getting um 'delayed'). These drinks promotions are no different to the one we had when I was a student except a bit dearer ( 10p a pint night at Sheffield Roxy 1991). It has always gone on. If you are going to introduce a levy on bars for antisocial behaviour then tax supermarkets for selling ready meals to obese people and corner shops for selling cigarettes that may cause cancer. There are many things in this world that are bad for you. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you have to. How about a speeding levy for car manufacturer - it could go on and on. Councils should do something proactive and not this pathetic non event that the misguidedly feel keeps them in touch with their "voters (?)' elvisimo
  • Score: 1

11:54pm Mon 14 Apr 14

Money Launderer says...

elvisimo wrote:
Money Launderer wrote:
RealTalkSouthampton wrote:
Two points:
most people get tanked up at home and then go to pubs,bars, clubs for a top up.

If this is what Hampshire police are recommending then shouldn't they be applying the charge to the whole of Hampshire.

I can understand both points of view with this. But most of that money will be swallowed up by beauracy. What people should championing is inventive ideas to incurrage startups in southampton and not just the city centre. All communities would appreciate this kind of positive intervention which would generate more revenue for the council.
Some of what you say is true, people do drink at home an awful lot more these days but drinking yourself into oblivion seems to be the culture of the cities students and younger population, so why has this become the norm?

Cheap drinks offers like 80p in Bedford Place (50p spirit & mixer at a bar in Bevois Valley) have just fuelled this culture and encourage such disorder. Sadly it's spreading, I was in Oxford Street only last week (the grown up end of town, or so I thought) and was disappointed to be approached by some Magaluf/18-30 type promoter offering us free drinks vouchers for the local Mediterranean bar. Are theses bars so dull and their offer so poor that the only way to get people in, is by throwing FREE drinks at them and exacerbating any alcohol fuelled problems further? It would appear so, poor guidance and mis-management are clearly to blame.

With regards to your second point, the town centres bars were all given over £30k in taxpayers money by the council only a couple of years ago, for inventive ideas, sadly they blew it and now have nothing left to show. All these bars seem to care about it money ringing in their tills and they take no responsibility for the service they provide.

I work and reside in the city and when asked 'Do I think that Southampton's bars and clubs should pay a levy' my answer is YES!
If bars have to compete with supermarkets and the tax man and the beer escalator (finally stopped) then they will go for volume. You have to be at least as attractive as the cost of a night in.

The council seem very happy to rake in the business rates from these places ( which are approx 50% above market value but mysteriously the rating revaluation keeps getting um 'delayed').

These drinks promotions are no different to the one we had when I was a student except a bit dearer ( 10p a pint night at Sheffield Roxy 1991). It has always gone on.

If you are going to introduce a levy on bars for antisocial behaviour then tax supermarkets for selling ready meals to obese people and corner shops for selling cigarettes that may cause cancer. There are many things in this world that are bad for you. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you have to. How about a speeding levy for car manufacturer - it could go on and on.
Councils should do something proactive and not this pathetic non event that the misguidedly feel keeps them in touch with their "voters (?)'
I thought they were already taxing the cigarette industry? Cigarette advertising banned, cigarettes are now sold behind shutters and soon in plain packaging. A pack of 20 in my day cost about 80p (just a bit before you were a student) move forward to 2014 and that same packet costs up to £10 in some shops.

I was also a student in 91 but promotions were about 50p then (Bournemouth), however the culture was also very different and the term anti-social behaviour wasn't even a word back then! If the beer promo price increased at the same rate as fags then a promo drink would cost over £5 (over £1 Sheffield), yet you consider that 50p today is still ok? I agree supermarkets selling alcohol at a loss and off licenses such as 'Bargain Booze' are only furthering the decline in the industry and I agree a stronger line has to be taken with them. That however is a far bigger political issue than the levy, the fact remains that bars are still managed in a one-dimensional way where high numbers through the door with cheap booze is preferred to a few spending a little more but giving the same profit margin - 10 people spending £1 or 1 person spending £10 what is the difference? Quality should always supersede quantity!
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Money Launderer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RealTalkSouthampton[/bold] wrote: Two points: most people get tanked up at home and then go to pubs,bars, clubs for a top up. If this is what Hampshire police are recommending then shouldn't they be applying the charge to the whole of Hampshire. I can understand both points of view with this. But most of that money will be swallowed up by beauracy. What people should championing is inventive ideas to incurrage startups in southampton and not just the city centre. All communities would appreciate this kind of positive intervention which would generate more revenue for the council.[/p][/quote]Some of what you say is true, people do drink at home an awful lot more these days but drinking yourself into oblivion seems to be the culture of the cities students and younger population, so why has this become the norm? Cheap drinks offers like 80p in Bedford Place (50p spirit & mixer at a bar in Bevois Valley) have just fuelled this culture and encourage such disorder. Sadly it's spreading, I was in Oxford Street only last week (the grown up end of town, or so I thought) and was disappointed to be approached by some Magaluf/18-30 type promoter offering us free drinks vouchers for the local Mediterranean bar. Are theses bars so dull and their offer so poor that the only way to get people in, is by throwing FREE drinks at them and exacerbating any alcohol fuelled problems further? It would appear so, poor guidance and mis-management are clearly to blame. With regards to your second point, the town centres bars were all given over £30k in taxpayers money by the council only a couple of years ago, for inventive ideas, sadly they blew it and now have nothing left to show. All these bars seem to care about it money ringing in their tills and they take no responsibility for the service they provide. I work and reside in the city and when asked 'Do I think that Southampton's bars and clubs should pay a levy' my answer is YES![/p][/quote]If bars have to compete with supermarkets and the tax man and the beer escalator (finally stopped) then they will go for volume. You have to be at least as attractive as the cost of a night in. The council seem very happy to rake in the business rates from these places ( which are approx 50% above market value but mysteriously the rating revaluation keeps getting um 'delayed'). These drinks promotions are no different to the one we had when I was a student except a bit dearer ( 10p a pint night at Sheffield Roxy 1991). It has always gone on. If you are going to introduce a levy on bars for antisocial behaviour then tax supermarkets for selling ready meals to obese people and corner shops for selling cigarettes that may cause cancer. There are many things in this world that are bad for you. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you have to. How about a speeding levy for car manufacturer - it could go on and on. Councils should do something proactive and not this pathetic non event that the misguidedly feel keeps them in touch with their "voters (?)'[/p][/quote]I thought they were already taxing the cigarette industry? Cigarette advertising banned, cigarettes are now sold behind shutters and soon in plain packaging. A pack of 20 in my day cost about 80p (just a bit before you were a student) move forward to 2014 and that same packet costs up to £10 in some shops. I was also a student in 91 but promotions were about 50p then (Bournemouth), however the culture was also very different and the term anti-social behaviour wasn't even a word back then! If the beer promo price increased at the same rate as fags then a promo drink would cost over £5 (over £1 Sheffield), yet you consider that 50p today is still ok? I agree supermarkets selling alcohol at a loss and off licenses such as 'Bargain Booze' are only furthering the decline in the industry and I agree a stronger line has to be taken with them. That however is a far bigger political issue than the levy, the fact remains that bars are still managed in a one-dimensional way where high numbers through the door with cheap booze is preferred to a few spending a little more but giving the same profit margin - 10 people spending £1 or 1 person spending £10 what is the difference? Quality should always supersede quantity! Money Launderer
  • Score: 0

7:21am Tue 15 Apr 14

loosehead says...

Money Launderer wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
Money Launderer wrote:
RealTalkSouthampton wrote:
Two points:
most people get tanked up at home and then go to pubs,bars, clubs for a top up.

If this is what Hampshire police are recommending then shouldn't they be applying the charge to the whole of Hampshire.

I can understand both points of view with this. But most of that money will be swallowed up by beauracy. What people should championing is inventive ideas to incurrage startups in southampton and not just the city centre. All communities would appreciate this kind of positive intervention which would generate more revenue for the council.
Some of what you say is true, people do drink at home an awful lot more these days but drinking yourself into oblivion seems to be the culture of the cities students and younger population, so why has this become the norm?

Cheap drinks offers like 80p in Bedford Place (50p spirit & mixer at a bar in Bevois Valley) have just fuelled this culture and encourage such disorder. Sadly it's spreading, I was in Oxford Street only last week (the grown up end of town, or so I thought) and was disappointed to be approached by some Magaluf/18-30 type promoter offering us free drinks vouchers for the local Mediterranean bar. Are theses bars so dull and their offer so poor that the only way to get people in, is by throwing FREE drinks at them and exacerbating any alcohol fuelled problems further? It would appear so, poor guidance and mis-management are clearly to blame.

With regards to your second point, the town centres bars were all given over £30k in taxpayers money by the council only a couple of years ago, for inventive ideas, sadly they blew it and now have nothing left to show. All these bars seem to care about it money ringing in their tills and they take no responsibility for the service they provide.

I work and reside in the city and when asked 'Do I think that Southampton's bars and clubs should pay a levy' my answer is YES!
If bars have to compete with supermarkets and the tax man and the beer escalator (finally stopped) then they will go for volume. You have to be at least as attractive as the cost of a night in.

The council seem very happy to rake in the business rates from these places ( which are approx 50% above market value but mysteriously the rating revaluation keeps getting um 'delayed').

These drinks promotions are no different to the one we had when I was a student except a bit dearer ( 10p a pint night at Sheffield Roxy 1991). It has always gone on.

If you are going to introduce a levy on bars for antisocial behaviour then tax supermarkets for selling ready meals to obese people and corner shops for selling cigarettes that may cause cancer. There are many things in this world that are bad for you. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you have to. How about a speeding levy for car manufacturer - it could go on and on.
Councils should do something proactive and not this pathetic non event that the misguidedly feel keeps them in touch with their "voters (?)'
I thought they were already taxing the cigarette industry? Cigarette advertising banned, cigarettes are now sold behind shutters and soon in plain packaging. A pack of 20 in my day cost about 80p (just a bit before you were a student) move forward to 2014 and that same packet costs up to £10 in some shops.

I was also a student in 91 but promotions were about 50p then (Bournemouth), however the culture was also very different and the term anti-social behaviour wasn't even a word back then! If the beer promo price increased at the same rate as fags then a promo drink would cost over £5 (over £1 Sheffield), yet you consider that 50p today is still ok? I agree supermarkets selling alcohol at a loss and off licenses such as 'Bargain Booze' are only furthering the decline in the industry and I agree a stronger line has to be taken with them. That however is a far bigger political issue than the levy, the fact remains that bars are still managed in a one-dimensional way where high numbers through the door with cheap booze is preferred to a few spending a little more but giving the same profit margin - 10 people spending £1 or 1 person spending £10 what is the difference? Quality should always supersede quantity!
Many pubs are responsible & stop underage drinkers but I've worked on the door of a pub & the amount of bottles women carry in their bags bought from supermarkets to drink in pubs is unbelievable.
Unlike fags even the Yanks admit drinking in moderation is good for you so why should it be hammered? Why should sensible drinkers have to pay 90% of the cost of a pint in tax?
If this Levy increases the cost of a drink more & more are going to buy it in supermarkets then have a drink in the pubs .
the pubs start to lose money so shut so they move to areas like Shirley,Woolston or Portswood(drinkers) so we then hammer those areas?
[quote][p][bold]Money Launderer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Money Launderer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RealTalkSouthampton[/bold] wrote: Two points: most people get tanked up at home and then go to pubs,bars, clubs for a top up. If this is what Hampshire police are recommending then shouldn't they be applying the charge to the whole of Hampshire. I can understand both points of view with this. But most of that money will be swallowed up by beauracy. What people should championing is inventive ideas to incurrage startups in southampton and not just the city centre. All communities would appreciate this kind of positive intervention which would generate more revenue for the council.[/p][/quote]Some of what you say is true, people do drink at home an awful lot more these days but drinking yourself into oblivion seems to be the culture of the cities students and younger population, so why has this become the norm? Cheap drinks offers like 80p in Bedford Place (50p spirit & mixer at a bar in Bevois Valley) have just fuelled this culture and encourage such disorder. Sadly it's spreading, I was in Oxford Street only last week (the grown up end of town, or so I thought) and was disappointed to be approached by some Magaluf/18-30 type promoter offering us free drinks vouchers for the local Mediterranean bar. Are theses bars so dull and their offer so poor that the only way to get people in, is by throwing FREE drinks at them and exacerbating any alcohol fuelled problems further? It would appear so, poor guidance and mis-management are clearly to blame. With regards to your second point, the town centres bars were all given over £30k in taxpayers money by the council only a couple of years ago, for inventive ideas, sadly they blew it and now have nothing left to show. All these bars seem to care about it money ringing in their tills and they take no responsibility for the service they provide. I work and reside in the city and when asked 'Do I think that Southampton's bars and clubs should pay a levy' my answer is YES![/p][/quote]If bars have to compete with supermarkets and the tax man and the beer escalator (finally stopped) then they will go for volume. You have to be at least as attractive as the cost of a night in. The council seem very happy to rake in the business rates from these places ( which are approx 50% above market value but mysteriously the rating revaluation keeps getting um 'delayed'). These drinks promotions are no different to the one we had when I was a student except a bit dearer ( 10p a pint night at Sheffield Roxy 1991). It has always gone on. If you are going to introduce a levy on bars for antisocial behaviour then tax supermarkets for selling ready meals to obese people and corner shops for selling cigarettes that may cause cancer. There are many things in this world that are bad for you. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you have to. How about a speeding levy for car manufacturer - it could go on and on. Councils should do something proactive and not this pathetic non event that the misguidedly feel keeps them in touch with their "voters (?)'[/p][/quote]I thought they were already taxing the cigarette industry? Cigarette advertising banned, cigarettes are now sold behind shutters and soon in plain packaging. A pack of 20 in my day cost about 80p (just a bit before you were a student) move forward to 2014 and that same packet costs up to £10 in some shops. I was also a student in 91 but promotions were about 50p then (Bournemouth), however the culture was also very different and the term anti-social behaviour wasn't even a word back then! If the beer promo price increased at the same rate as fags then a promo drink would cost over £5 (over £1 Sheffield), yet you consider that 50p today is still ok? I agree supermarkets selling alcohol at a loss and off licenses such as 'Bargain Booze' are only furthering the decline in the industry and I agree a stronger line has to be taken with them. That however is a far bigger political issue than the levy, the fact remains that bars are still managed in a one-dimensional way where high numbers through the door with cheap booze is preferred to a few spending a little more but giving the same profit margin - 10 people spending £1 or 1 person spending £10 what is the difference? Quality should always supersede quantity![/p][/quote]Many pubs are responsible & stop underage drinkers but I've worked on the door of a pub & the amount of bottles women carry in their bags bought from supermarkets to drink in pubs is unbelievable. Unlike fags even the Yanks admit drinking in moderation is good for you so why should it be hammered? Why should sensible drinkers have to pay 90% of the cost of a pint in tax? If this Levy increases the cost of a drink more & more are going to buy it in supermarkets then have a drink in the pubs . the pubs start to lose money so shut so they move to areas like Shirley,Woolston or Portswood(drinkers) so we then hammer those areas? loosehead
  • Score: 0

8:07am Tue 15 Apr 14

St.Winch70 says...

elvisimo wrote:
sotonboy84 wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
sotonboy84 wrote: I think it's a great idea. Although individuals make the decision to drink alcohol, these places that are open after midnight sell alcohol and between them contribute to antisocial behaviour, criminal damage and general mess. It's only right that these places pay towards preventing this type of behaviour and damage because it's unfair for them to make their profits but for taxpayers to pay for the aftermarth. The streets around certain areas such as Beford Place and London Road are disgusting with vomit, chewing gum and kebabs to dodge. The charge would only affect those businesses open after midnight and I don't believe that they can't afford £25-£370 a month and saying that businesses would close early or go out of businesses is a over exaggeration. They're clearly not taking any responsibility in the current situation but leaving it to taxpayers to sort so this is a way forward to address the issue. It has my full support.
It is pointless. You take millions of pounds away from the police and then make a paltry offer of 70% of the money raised (circa £170k) to help offset this and deal with "antisocial" behaviour. How long will that amount last - couple of weeks. I would have though that Hampshire constabulary who have announced 550 job losses and £55m in budget cuts would find this an insulting joke.
It would do more to address the problem than the current £0 contribution from these bars is currently doing.

The cuts are across Hampshire & although I agree not ideal, raising funding this way will address the issue in Southampton & not the whole of Hampshire. The police & council are two different things.
The pay a huge amount as it stands in terms of Excise Duty and VAT. (2nd in alcohol tax behind Finland). I think that this sort of ill thought out policy will do more harm than good.

Yes it may pacify the Daily Mail brigade but will do nothing to address the problem. It will instead go after an industry that is not looking particularly healthy. You have seen the demise of Regent Inns, SFI, Luminar, Barracuda etc You don't have people queuing up to take these sites a walk down the high street shows.

The police job losses are the latest round (Feb 14) - when complete this will take the number of police redundancies to 1300. Even at a best guess you can apportion a reasonable percentage of these losses to Southampton - even at 10% that would be 130 at 15% would be 195. The money they think this scheme "could" raise will pay for 3 or 4 officers when employers NI costs etc are factored in. Its just smoke and mirrors.
It is an unhealthy business! Don't bleat on about excise and tax etc...the consumer pays this. However it does seem unfair to simply target only establishments that open past midnight, the bulk of the drinking groundwork is done before that, via cheap supermarket booze and bars that may close before that!
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: I think it's a great idea. Although individuals make the decision to drink alcohol, these places that are open after midnight sell alcohol and between them contribute to antisocial behaviour, criminal damage and general mess. It's only right that these places pay towards preventing this type of behaviour and damage because it's unfair for them to make their profits but for taxpayers to pay for the aftermarth. The streets around certain areas such as Beford Place and London Road are disgusting with vomit, chewing gum and kebabs to dodge. The charge would only affect those businesses open after midnight and I don't believe that they can't afford £25-£370 a month and saying that businesses would close early or go out of businesses is a over exaggeration. They're clearly not taking any responsibility in the current situation but leaving it to taxpayers to sort so this is a way forward to address the issue. It has my full support.[/p][/quote]It is pointless. You take millions of pounds away from the police and then make a paltry offer of 70% of the money raised (circa £170k) to help offset this and deal with "antisocial" behaviour. How long will that amount last - couple of weeks. I would have though that Hampshire constabulary who have announced 550 job losses and £55m in budget cuts would find this an insulting joke.[/p][/quote]It would do more to address the problem than the current £0 contribution from these bars is currently doing. The cuts are across Hampshire & although I agree not ideal, raising funding this way will address the issue in Southampton & not the whole of Hampshire. The police & council are two different things.[/p][/quote]The pay a huge amount as it stands in terms of Excise Duty and VAT. (2nd in alcohol tax behind Finland). I think that this sort of ill thought out policy will do more harm than good. Yes it may pacify the Daily Mail brigade but will do nothing to address the problem. It will instead go after an industry that is not looking particularly healthy. You have seen the demise of Regent Inns, SFI, Luminar, Barracuda etc You don't have people queuing up to take these sites a walk down the high street shows. The police job losses are the latest round (Feb 14) - when complete this will take the number of police redundancies to 1300. Even at a best guess you can apportion a reasonable percentage of these losses to Southampton - even at 10% that would be 130 at 15% would be 195. The money they think this scheme "could" raise will pay for 3 or 4 officers when employers NI costs etc are factored in. Its just smoke and mirrors.[/p][/quote]It is an unhealthy business! Don't bleat on about excise and tax etc...the consumer pays this. However it does seem unfair to simply target only establishments that open past midnight, the bulk of the drinking groundwork is done before that, via cheap supermarket booze and bars that may close before that! St.Winch70
  • Score: 0

8:12am Tue 15 Apr 14

Dai Rear says...

No. No. No. Once the State, in any of its manifestations, starts a new tax it cranks it up and up and up. Look at the Death Tax, now payable on the price of a terraced house, look at Inflation Tax (CGT) Look at supertax, millions more paying it each decade. LOADS of tax is paid by these outlets-VAT, Excise Duty, Payroll Tax, taxes for licensing.
2 proper responses. Prison , always, for late night alcohol fuelled disorder and big fines for littering, including littering with gastric contents. Much of the spending on high priced late night drinking is funded by too high Housing Benefit. Correlate addresses with Housing Benefit records and where it's in payment, halve it. If you have to help mum with the rent you'll not afford to get off your head on pricey booze at 2am
No. No. No. Once the State, in any of its manifestations, starts a new tax it cranks it up and up and up. Look at the Death Tax, now payable on the price of a terraced house, look at Inflation Tax (CGT) Look at supertax, millions more paying it each decade. LOADS of tax is paid by these outlets-VAT, Excise Duty, Payroll Tax, taxes for licensing. 2 proper responses. Prison , always, for late night alcohol fuelled disorder and big fines for littering, including littering with gastric contents. Much of the spending on high priced late night drinking is funded by too high Housing Benefit. Correlate addresses with Housing Benefit records and where it's in payment, halve it. If you have to help mum with the rent you'll not afford to get off your head on pricey booze at 2am Dai Rear
  • Score: 0

8:16am Tue 15 Apr 14

Dai Rear says...

Should have said "Correlate defendants' addresses with Housing Benefit records"
Should have said "Correlate defendants' addresses with Housing Benefit records" Dai Rear
  • Score: 0

7:53am Wed 16 Apr 14

Parkerjsmith says...

I want to make sure that it is very important to see whether or not his is something that is going to improve in many way.
I want to make sure that it is very important to see whether or not his is something that is going to improve in many way. Parkerjsmith
  • Score: 0

1:47pm Fri 18 Apr 14

Money Launderer says...

Parkerjsmith wrote:
I want to make sure that it is very important to see whether or not his is something that is going to improve in many way.
Only if the bars take more responsibility.
[quote][p][bold]Parkerjsmith[/bold] wrote: I want to make sure that it is very important to see whether or not his is something that is going to improve in many way.[/p][/quote]Only if the bars take more responsibility. Money Launderer
  • Score: 0

9:55am Tue 22 Apr 14

Parkerjsmith says...

Government has replaced a right to work with a permission to work, and has imposed fees for the granting of this permission. It is a great shame.

Best restaurants in Singapore
http://www.blvd.sg/o
ur-venues
Government has replaced a right to work with a permission to work, and has imposed fees for the granting of this permission. It is a great shame. Best restaurants in Singapore http://www.blvd.sg/o ur-venues Parkerjsmith
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree