Dual Standards on Alcohol by the UK Government

We are hearing that David Cameron and his government are looking to impose minimum pricing for alcoholic drinks to address problems with alcoholism and drink fueled social issues.

At the same time, the Palace of Westminster where the government resides has a subsidised bar, paid for by the taxpayer, to ensure MPs and other staff can enjoy cheap drink.

If this is not dual standards then I don't know what is. Apparently there is already a history of drink fueled problems within this bar.

At the very least, the subsidies in the bar should be removed so that drinkers there pay the same prices as anyone else in pubs in that part of London does.  I think however it should be taken further perhaps and closed completely.  MPs are already capable of making daft decisions on their own without adding beer goggles to their armoury of decision making tools.

How many private sector employers actively encourage drinking during the working day by providing a bar AND subsidising the drink costs.  In many of the workplaces I have encountered drinking is frowned upon during the working day and some go as far as to have a condition of employment that you may be required to take a breathalyser test (certainly in my last employment where you could be asked to go home if the test was positive as safety standards could be breached)

I would also point out to the government that many alcohol fueled problems are caused by drinkers in night clubs and bars where prices are already exorbitant.  A minimum price will have most impact upon the moderate social drinker and not address the problem at all.

The Nanny State

It appears that once again our government are meddling where they aren't needed and won't have any beneficial effect.

This time it is an attempt to reduce the salt in our diets. 

Some time ago we read of a council which tried to reduce salt consumption by insisting that takeaway food shops, primarily fish and chips, only had salt cellars with a reduced number of holes as opposed to those with many holes commonly used.

I doubt that had any effect, people would just shake longer to get the amount of salt they wanted, and very much doubt anyone from the council measured whether there was any benefit.

This time it is being tackled at government level with instructions to manufacturers to reduce salt levels in food stuffs, bacon being a prime example.  Not only is salt a flavouring it is also a preservative.  We therefore risk having products that neither taste as good or last as long!

This has already been demonstrated with HP Sauce.  This already had a lower salt version available for those who choose to reduce their salt intake, but the government insisted the salt level in the standard version was reduced - to the disgust of lovers of the sauce.  It is not as if the changed level will have a significant effect anyway - a reduction of a fraction of a gram in one hundred grams of product translates into a minuscule amount when you consider how little sauce is consumed in any one meal.

What is happening here is that the public are not being given the choice of taking the existing low salt version if they wish, but being forced to have a low salt version.

What next?  Perhaps we will be told that plain crisps should be just that, no salt at all.  Then we can extend it across the rest of the crisp range - for example it will perhaps just be vinegar crisps!

Salt sales in shops will also have to be banned - or maybe put on ration coupons to prevent individuals getting too much.

The reality is that if people want salt with their food they will have salt with their food, whether this be as a constituent or an addition they make at home.

Some of my examples above are extreme and ridiculous - or are they?

Con the Customer

A certain well known supermarket, as part of it's health and environment plan, pledges to reduce salt in their foods.

This is widely advertised in their stores and on their website, as well as in the downloaded documents they provide.  They claim to be reducing salt in their foods, ahead of government guidelines.

So you may think that if you buy their own brand foods you will get a low salt product. Yes?

No actually, in fact in a recent survey of bread they came out in the worst five prepackaged breads for salt content.  A couple of sandwiches (without spread or filling, some sandwich) could use as much as one third of the guideline maximum salt intake for an adult.

I happened to find that we had a pack of this in our larder, and guess what - the report is correct.

Back to reading the label and not believing the advertising!

Caveat Emptor