What planet do these people live on? According to the adviser's, binge drinking, rowdiness and public disorder will be eradicated by imposing a minimum price for a unit of alcohol for all consumers. Or is this yet another stealth tax?

Tell me how penalising all alcohol users will reduce the binge drinking and anti-social behaviour conducted by a minority of people? I believe that the major problems of binge drinking are within York city walls and therefore fail to understand why I and other responsible people drinking in rural pubs and clubs should be discriminated against by imposing a minimum price for a unit of alcohol.

Let's assume that the Government raises the price of a unit of alcohol by 40 pence, and also assume that a binge drinker will consume between 8 – 10 pints of beer or the equivalent in spirits etc.

The financial penalty imposed on this group of people will equate to £3.20p-£4 for a night's drinking. Does anyone really believe that this increase in cost will be a deterrent to the binge drinker?

According to reality police programmes on television, it appears that the preferred action by the police when arresting someone for anti-social behaviour due to alcohol abuse, is a fixed penalty fine.

This fine does not cover the wages of the police officers or custody staff involved in the arrest, or the cost of materials for the mountain of paperwork that is produced and neither for the cost of transport.
Nor does it cover the cost of medical treatment for those officers injured during these often violent arrests or the number of drunks attending A&E departments.

I suspect that imposing a fixed penalty fine rather than dealing with the offenders more appropriately assists the police force to achieve its performance targets and is therefore an easier option, but totally ignores the cost to the police budget and subsequently the tax payer.

Please do not blame the supermarkets, clubs or publicans for encouraging binge drinking or anti–social behaviour due to their promotions. The majority of people who go to these venues act responsibly and drink sensibly; therefore any impetus for reducing incidents of anti-social behaviour/alcohol abuse must be directed at the offenders, not the innocent.

Anyone who commits an arrestable offence whilst under the influence of alcohol, should not be dealt with by the police as expediently as possible in an attempt to improve Government-enforced performance targets, but should be arrested and charged with the appropriate offence and automatically committed to the magistrates' court.
If they plead guilty or are found guilty at a subsequent trial, the minimum penalty must be to repay the cost of all expenditure incurred by the tax payer including court costs.

I am sick of this nanny state that persistently deals with law breakers leniently at a cost to the tax payer and then suggests imposing penalties on those who abide by the law by increasing the cost of a unit of alcohol.

John Wills
Elvington