Benscomputer.no-ip.org
As many readers know, I work in an Off-licence and will in fact soon be applying for my personal license.
However I am currently incensed at the way that Trading Standards and the Government are behaving. I work bloody
hard to ensure that I do not serve anyone who even appears remotely underage. In fact I stick firmly to
the guideline of "If they look under 21 they need to prove they are 18 or over". This also applies to
cigarettes, I am no less strict about who I serve Tobacco products (and related) to than I am with alcohol. I
have on one occassion been threatened with knives as a result of refusing to serve two young lads cigarettes,
but given the circumstances of the boys, the police were unable and unwilling to proceed. Desspite all this the
whole industry is being tarred with one brush, there is an £80 on the spot fine for anyone who sells to an
underage person, or knowlingly sells alcohol to someone supplying a minor. There is in fact a £1000 for minors
buying alcohol, yet this as far as I know has never been enforced. The £80 on the spot fine has been enforced
many times, and supplying to minors will also earn you an 'interrogation.' Many within the Industry now feel
that Trading Standards are trying to catch people out for the benefit of public figures, whilst the real problem
is
minors who still continue to try and purchase alcohol (or indeed cigarettes.)
The rhetorical question is of course, why should I bother to be so strict, when trading Standards are so determined to catch me out? After all determination does usually mean that some trick will eventually be employed to catch you out.
The main reason for my writing this piece today is that I recently purchased some beer at a local supermarket (I won't name which one). The lad on the till did not ID me, whilst I am over 18 I do not (in my perception) look over 21. Some may feel that I should be glad that he did not ID me, however I feel it severely undermines the work that I do in trying to prevent underage sales.
Trading Standards and the government need to impose more fines on those attempting to purchase the alcohol (or cigarettes) and those buying on the behalf of minors. There will always be stores that are not strict about ensuring that people are of the appropriate age, and these stores do indeed need to be dealt with. However by educating the young, and ensuring that those old enough to buy alcohol know the penalty of supplying to minors, the issue of underage sales can be greatly reduced.
I will of course be continuing my work to prevent underage sales, because I care about my job and I believe that minors should not be allowed access to alcohol. I had several run-ins with Alcohol when I was younger, and I have to say I wouldn't wish them on anybody. Some may argue that I learned from it, but I think it is better to keep children from the dangers of alcohol than to put them at risk in the hope they will learn a lesson.
If Trading Standards are truly serious about combating underage sales then for me to believe that it has not just become a PR campaign we do need to see the law working in both directions. We do not wake up and think "I'll serve some kids tonight I think" The kids get up and think "I'll try get some alcohol from the offy tonight." All I am asking for is some recognition from the Government that Off-Licenses are not the cause of the problem. Children are, whether through determination or lack of education on the subject, the intent lies solely with the minors.
To give the government their dues, the latest Licensing act does state as one of its aims that Children should be educated on the subject. I don't want any readers to think that I am criticising what Trading Standards and the local authorities do, I believe that their policy of Test Purchases is important, however the law should recognise where the intent lies, and so we should see more of these children being fined/prosecuted. A question often put to me, when I talk to people about underage attempts, is where did the child get the money from in the first place? If the children are unable to get the money to come out and buy a bottle of vodka, then they will be unable to put jobs at risk by attempting.
The government has recently upped the tax on beer in response to what they call binge drinking, I have already detailed what true binge drinking is in another article, however this combined with other recent activities show what a convenient scapegoat alcohol is for the government. Politicians have been using alcohol as a political scapegoat since the 1800's when the big evil at the time was of course Gin.
I'm not asking Trading Standards for much, simply that they also pursue those that have attempted (and in some unfortunate cases succeeded) to purchase alcohol from a licensed establishment. Perhaps then parents and schools will pay proper attention to the need to educate children of the risks of over-indulging on alcohol.
And please, if you believe that anyone could believe you to be under 21 then carry some form of identification. If you do not have ID when you are asked for it, we have paperwork to do to prove that we are excersising due diligence. I have asked people for ID before and found that they are nearly 40, just because you are over 18 does not necessarily free from being asked for ID, it is nothing personal, simply that we have to preserve our jobs, and doing so means ensuring that underage sales simply do not happen!
The rhetorical question is of course, why should I bother to be so strict, when trading Standards are so determined to catch me out? After all determination does usually mean that some trick will eventually be employed to catch you out.
The main reason for my writing this piece today is that I recently purchased some beer at a local supermarket (I won't name which one). The lad on the till did not ID me, whilst I am over 18 I do not (in my perception) look over 21. Some may feel that I should be glad that he did not ID me, however I feel it severely undermines the work that I do in trying to prevent underage sales.
Trading Standards and the government need to impose more fines on those attempting to purchase the alcohol (or cigarettes) and those buying on the behalf of minors. There will always be stores that are not strict about ensuring that people are of the appropriate age, and these stores do indeed need to be dealt with. However by educating the young, and ensuring that those old enough to buy alcohol know the penalty of supplying to minors, the issue of underage sales can be greatly reduced.
I will of course be continuing my work to prevent underage sales, because I care about my job and I believe that minors should not be allowed access to alcohol. I had several run-ins with Alcohol when I was younger, and I have to say I wouldn't wish them on anybody. Some may argue that I learned from it, but I think it is better to keep children from the dangers of alcohol than to put them at risk in the hope they will learn a lesson.
If Trading Standards are truly serious about combating underage sales then for me to believe that it has not just become a PR campaign we do need to see the law working in both directions. We do not wake up and think "I'll serve some kids tonight I think" The kids get up and think "I'll try get some alcohol from the offy tonight." All I am asking for is some recognition from the Government that Off-Licenses are not the cause of the problem. Children are, whether through determination or lack of education on the subject, the intent lies solely with the minors.
To give the government their dues, the latest Licensing act does state as one of its aims that Children should be educated on the subject. I don't want any readers to think that I am criticising what Trading Standards and the local authorities do, I believe that their policy of Test Purchases is important, however the law should recognise where the intent lies, and so we should see more of these children being fined/prosecuted. A question often put to me, when I talk to people about underage attempts, is where did the child get the money from in the first place? If the children are unable to get the money to come out and buy a bottle of vodka, then they will be unable to put jobs at risk by attempting.
The government has recently upped the tax on beer in response to what they call binge drinking, I have already detailed what true binge drinking is in another article, however this combined with other recent activities show what a convenient scapegoat alcohol is for the government. Politicians have been using alcohol as a political scapegoat since the 1800's when the big evil at the time was of course Gin.
I'm not asking Trading Standards for much, simply that they also pursue those that have attempted (and in some unfortunate cases succeeded) to purchase alcohol from a licensed establishment. Perhaps then parents and schools will pay proper attention to the need to educate children of the risks of over-indulging on alcohol.
And please, if you believe that anyone could believe you to be under 21 then carry some form of identification. If you do not have ID when you are asked for it, we have paperwork to do to prove that we are excersising due diligence. I have asked people for ID before and found that they are nearly 40, just because you are over 18 does not necessarily free from being asked for ID, it is nothing personal, simply that we have to preserve our jobs, and doing so means ensuring that underage sales simply do not happen!
