MSPs pass Alcohol Bill without minimum drink pricing

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11719594

The above link refers to the MSPs Alcohol Bill aiming to tackle Scotland's historical alcohol problems.  Key measures including a minimum drink price and raising the purchase age for off licence sales have not been included in the bill.   It aims to end the sale of alcohol at heavily discounted prices, as well as offers such as buy on get one free.   It is hoped that the bill with 'pave the way for the introduction, in future, of a "social responsibility fee" on retailers who sell alcohol.

Do you think that these measures will significantly impact the social and health damage caused by alcohol consumption in Scotland or will they just stratch the surface?

'24-hour drinking culture failed'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10784060

'24-hour drinking culture failed'.

Home Secretary Theresa May said: “The benefits promised by the 24-hour drinking 'cafe culture' have failed to materialise and in its place we have seen an increase in the number of alcohol related incidents and drink fuelled crime and disorder.”

This comes before an expected plan to overhaul licensing laws to tackle alcohol related violent crime, which has increased since the implementation of 24-hour drinking.

The new laws are intending to support local communities and to punish those venues that are deemed to facilitate violent crimes.

Does it come as a surprise to you that the 24-hour drinking laws in the UK have not produced any benefits, but rather caused more problems? Do you think the concerns about trying to encourage a cafe culture should have been considered more carefully before the laws were passed or is it only with hindsight we can see what a failure this concept has been?

 

Prof. Nutt Debate - the resignations continue...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8353685.stm

The link above will take to you a article published by the BBC that reports that three more government advisers have resigned after Mr Johnson sacked his chief drugs adviser, Prof. David Nutt.

Whilst the ACMD have been in discussions with the Home Office about how to work effectively with each other, it would seem that the sacking of Prof. Nutt for 'crossing a line' into politics has had a significant impact, so far resulting in 5 council members resigning.

On one hand the Home Office is publishing positive statements about how to go forward – on the other hand, many people, including the Lib Dem's science spokesman relay further criticism:
“The fact the resignations come after Alan Johnson met the ACMD demonstrates he just doesn't get it when it comes to the importance of respecting the academic freedom and integrity of independent, unpaid, science adviser.”

What do you think about politics and science and will the Home Office continue to pay for their decision with more resignations?

 

Prof. Nutt - what do you think?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6509297/MPs-demand-answers-over-Nutt-sacking.html

The link above refers to an article published by The Telegraph that discusses the letter that the Commons Science and Technology Committee has written to Mr Johnson requesting details about the sacking of Prof. Nutt - specifically if he had breached the terms of his contract or the codes of practise before he was forced to resign.

There is much controversy over the sacking of one the countries leading advisors - what do you think?  Do politics and science have some common ground or if researched based evidence at odds with what the government thinks we need to know?