I wish that CAMRA would make up its mind

In article ,

Count me in:-)

Indeed. But all some people can see is their own desires. I regret to say that CAMRA (which has done some really wonderful things in the past) sems to be falling into that mould.

With good reason. British beers (and British hard cheeses) are the best in the world. Some idiots, like the English, despise their heritage, and would rather have a chunk of brie with their lager:-(

/SNIP/

Me? I play in a ceilidh band and a morris band. I'm sure you know how I feel about this!

Surveys by the Publican can be found on their website. Please provide the link to the survey you refer to.

While you are at it, if licensees are so against flexible hours why have the Chief Execs of the two main licensee organisations (FLVA and BII) written such positive comments re changes?

"Many licensees would have been quite happy just to have the opportunity to extend the licensing hours for Friday and Saturday evenings as well as the entertainment situation resolved so that they could have a mixture of taped music and singers without having to apply for a public entertainment licence (PEL)." Tony Payne: chief executive, Federation of Licensed Victuallers' Associations

"I believe there are great opportunities for licensees in the new system and it is extremely important that we exploit them." John McNamara: chief executive, British Institute of Innkeeping (BII)

On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 0:28:59 +0100, Alan Perrow wrote (in message ):

Oh come on. It's that kind of generalisation that gets us a bad name.

Yeah British real ale is probably better than anyone else's, but beer in general? Our cheese and beer producing heritage is no more ingrained than many other countries.

It's that kind of complacency (amongst other things) that screwed the car, motorbike, steel, shipbuilding.....industries.

We could probably make those claims when we had a huge empire and had an industrial revolution before anyone else, but people can catch up and overtake!

You sound like a backbench Tory!

In article , Chris Rockcliffe writes

Another example from Edinburgh. During the festival many pubs have a more or less automatic 3am license. Not only do they not all chose to use it, but some of the pubs with a 3am license have been known to close earlier if there's not enough trade to justify paying the staff.

Oh, and has anyone mentioned the pubs in the centre of London that don't open in the evening?

Steve

The Publican is usually an 'interesting' read, willing to change editorial opinion weekly depending on who's shouting loudest (The Morning Advertiser's no better). That made it absurdly easy to watch support for deregulation collapse *as soon as they noticed it wasn't a free ride*.

The pub trade habitually resists change, it also has a short memory. 6 months after deregulation when trading patterns have settled down almost no one will remember complaining ;)

In order to remain viable.

What people choose to do is not always what they want to do. You may or may not like your job, but you do it for the financial rewards. You may not wish to work overtime, but you do it for the same reason. It's the same with many landlords, they may like their job or not, but it's a sure fire bet that most don't want to have to work every hour that God sends.

Can I suggest you find it yourself?

Totally irrelevant. Or about as relevant as believing that the NFU represents farmers.

That makes more sense than your comments. I cerainly agree that many licensees would like a more sensible approach to the PEL and that just extending the hours on a Friday and Saturday would be better for them than extending them all week.

The British Institute of Innkeeping is concerned mainly with standards and training courses AFAIK It does not state that it represents in any way landlords. What makes you think it does?

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 21:15:26 +0100, Paul Shirley wrote (in message ):

You, in the past, have claimed advertising and marketing don't affect you. What does that make you?

/HUGE SNIP/ 'cos it's getting pointless.

If the government were serious about slowing down, stopping, or reversing the present rate of pub closures it might address the following problms: The unduly high rate of duty in Britain;* The unduly high rate of local taxation (rates) in Britain;* Applying the maximum working week to *all* workers notr using the cop out of self employment; Having a sensible maximum number of pubs under single ownership, instead of the present 2,000 (AFAIK) In times of great difficulty (ie foot and mouth) realise that tourism is actually more important than farming, and offer some aid to tourist industries such as pubs

*In both of these areas CAMRA have achieved some results.

If we, the public, were serious about the same issues, we might start using our locals on a more regular basis instead of the ubiquitous tin can beer; we might accept that pubs are businesses so if that business is failing, and the licensee can reduce his losses by converting the old pub into something more profitable stop bleating about it. We might realise that what appears to be a gain (extended hours) is possibly someone else's loss, and actually ask the people concerned what they want. I love beer, but consider my health more important. However I would not reasonably want my doctor to work the sort of hours many small pub licensees do, despite my wishing to have an 11.00 p.m. appointment for my convenience, similarly with my dentist. We might consider the profit margin on beer in the light of a pub's profits, compare it with bars abroad, and stop believing that beer (good beer) is underpriced in this country. It's not often I agree with the Pickthall's but they are (IMHO) correct when they say that beer is often underpriced.

None of the above are likely to happen, what *is* likely to happen (IMHO) is further growth of jdw, because most drinkers are concerned with price, and further growth of grotneys, because they operate at a higher level of profit, and because there will always be people willing to risk some capital on a pubco pub because they think that pubs are a license to print money. Indeed I think that one of my favourite pubs (Skipton's Narrowboat) will be up against it in the near future when jdw opens up just up the road from them. I hope I'm wrong, but I fear...

In message , Alan Perrow writes

And what part of the new arrangements stops them doing that?

What Tony Payne was really saying is: "We don't like the new package so just give us the bits we like". You might understand why that might not be worth taking seriously... though I'm sure it won't stop you.

??? Well, allowing a licensee to close his pub and convert it into a country house is really going to save pubs is it?

Alan, with respect your ramblings are becoming most odd.

John B

It most certainly did, whether it's on their web site or not I know not, nor do I care. You could, if you wish, enlighten us as to any survey wish showed that publicans were in favour of being allowed increased hours.

The two organisations you quote are *not* licensee organisations. they are not funded by licensees through any form of choice, and indeed one of them makes its money by training licensees, and extra regulations of any form are a source of income to them. Why on earth do you think that they represent licensees?

Come into the real world. The NFU have plummeting membership numbers, and at the moment are selling their London headquarters with the sacking of 50 staff. This is precisely because they did *not* represent their members interests.

You do keep on about flexible licensing. That is not what will happen. Increased hours is what will happen.

It only has members (if you can call them that) because the law states that licensees have to be trained to a certain standard. The BII do just that, and in that respect work as a servant of the government, they most certainly do not have money paying members such as a trade union, which

*does* represent its members. I still await (with interest) the views of publicans on this subject.

In article , Brett... wrote:

OK I had a spare five minutes, and a quick Google with publican and hours revealed much including the fact that there is a CAMRA mention of the above survey (URL is http:/

but the link is broken. However Google states that the Publican's research revealed just 1% of licensees wish for 24 hour opening, and that most just want an extra hour at weekends. A BBC survey reveals that the average publican works 77 hours/week with around 25% working in excess of 90 hours/week These are the people you would have me believe are clamouring for longer hours? The only CAMRA survey I could find in the same 5 minutes is a West Berkshire one, (Mar-April 2003)in which they claim that there is strong public support (and I quote) Meke Benner said "men are generally in favour of longer opening hours than women" but this was under the heading of "Strong support for Flexible hours" It is clear that CAMRA associate flexible with longer, and quite rightly. An interesting one came from an Australian study on longer hours which showed clear advers effects. I can forward you the pdf file if you wish, it has several URL's in it. It also comments on the effects of longer hours in Iceland, and the results are, frankly, horrifying, viz: Emergency room injuries from accidents, up 23% Injuries from fighting, up 34% Suspected drunk driving, up 80% It also details the increased troubles in Ireland which came with extended hours, ditto B.C and Ontario, Ottowa, etc.

Now, howsabout *you* doing a little research?

On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 18:56:36 +0100, Alan Perrow wrote (in message ):

Yeah but it's rather grand to say beer in general there must be what 50 styles of beer in the world.

I thought you'd like that!

Harviestoun Schiehallion? The original Tennants?

I'll pass on the Irish chanpagne, though, thanks...

Here is the article from the Google Cache. Very interesting reading.

ALE Spring 2003 No. 309 CAMRA's Survey on Licensing Hours Results of CAMRA's major survey of public views on pub opening hours show that the majority of adults in England and Wales support the Government's plans to reform outdated liquor licensing laws by introducing more flexible opening hours for pubs. The nationwide survey of 1035 adults was in December 2002. Results exclude those who did not express a view.

The survey shows that 75% of adults believe a pub should be able to open when the publican pleases, providing the local community is protected from excessive noise and nuisance. 60% of adults believe there would be less disorder in town centres if pub closing times varied and 67% think adults should be treated as adults and should have the opportunity to drink in pubs at any time they choose.

Age Gap The results reveal that over-45 year olds are generally more in favour of longer pub opening hours than 16-24 year olds. 89% of 45-54 year olds and

77% of over-55 year olds believe a pub should be able to open when the landlord pleases subject to proper protection for the community from excessive noise and nuisance. 69% of 16-24 year olds agree. Men and women Men are generally more in favour of longer pub opening hours than women. 89% of men think a pub should be able to open when the landlord pleases, as long as the community is protected from excessive noise or nuisance. 63% of women agree. 70% of men, compared to 52% of women, also think there will be less disorder in town centres if pub closing times varied. 85% of men think adults should be treated as adults and should have the opportunity to drink in pubs at any time they choose. 54% of women agree.

Pub Goers Frequent pub-goers, those who visit pubs at least once a week, are only slightly more supportive (81%) of a more flexible approach than adults who visit pubs less than once a month (78%). Research by The Publican newspaper showed that only 1% of licensees would wish to open 24 hours - most just want an extra hour at weekends.

Regional differences Londoners are most in favour of a more flexible approach with 88% in support of longer opening hours. Adults in Yorkshire and the North East appear less convinced with 63% and 65% respectively. Percentage of adults whom 'agreed' or 'strongly agreed' that landlords should be able to open when they please as long as the community is protected from excessive noise or nuisance:

London 88% East 81% South & South East 83% Wales & South West 80% Midlands 71% North West 72% North East 65% Yorkshire 63%

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:05:12 +0100, Paul Shirley wrote (in message ):

Have you got a high opinion of yourself or a low opinion of everyone else?

What is this I see before me?...It looks remarkably like...goal-posts....yes...moving goal-posts.