In my view, one of the paradoxes in the control of substances harmful to health and with adverse effects is the differential policy options taken in respect of alcohol, tobacco and narcotics. Many times, sensible policy dialogue is carried out as if it is a given that narcotics are more harmful relative to alcohol. More importantly, it is often unacknowledged that price mechanism could be used as part of policy for alcohol and health policy. As this article in the Guardian states, the government of the United Kingdom is considering the introduction of a minimum price policy for alcoholic beverages in order to reduce binge consumption and effects on other people.
The details state that the policy would establish a price floor of 40 pence for every unit of alcohol and that this would reduce crimes and accidents. Understandably, the retailers argue that this policy would affect income groups differently because it would raise the costs of consumption disproportionately for poorer individuals. As described in the story, this effect would almost certainly be the case. To my mind, it is also the lower income people who are most vulnerable to the adverse effects of alcohol consumption.
The details state that the policy would establish a price floor of 40 pence for every unit of alcohol and that this would reduce crimes and accidents. Understandably, the retailers argue that this policy would affect income groups differently because it would raise the costs of consumption disproportionately for poorer individuals. As described in the story, this effect would almost certainly be the case. To my mind, it is also the lower income people who are most vulnerable to the adverse effects of alcohol consumption.
No comments:
Post a Comment