A fairer tax

I am not pro-temperance, and the breadth and quality of the alcoholic products offered at large superstores is superb; they should be congratulated on this.

But the concept that they will be discouraged from investing in Scotland because of the impact this tax will have on their profits is breathtakingly disingenuous.

We all know that a large proportion of their alcohol sales are loss-leaders to bring in footfall to their stores. Their predatory pricing has made the local, friendly off-licence a distant memory. The end consumer pays for this additional tax, not the retailer, because it will inevitably be passed on (directly or indirectly).

Anything that adds a few bob to the cost of excessive alcohol drinkers cannot be a bad thing.

The tax is unlikely to change the drinking habits of a hardened alcoholic, but maybe it will provide a bit of finance to help pay for the massive social cost alcohol heaps upon Scottish society in extra cost for health, police and loss of productivity. Instead of these large retailers expressing their corporate social responsibility in planting token trees in local parks (up against which their customers may, no doubt, relieve themselves of their previous purchases), perhaps it would be better for them be seen to support this excellent initiative.

Graeme Allan

Easter Warriston

Edinburgh

Nobody likes to be taxed, so it is no surprise that the large supermarkets are opposed to the idea of a public health levy on the sale of tobacco and alcohol.

As an independent public health charity ASH Scotland also has an interest in this issue – but we support the levy, because our concern is to reduce the harm tobacco use causes to the people and the overall economy of Scotland.

Over the years tobacco control has been a huge success story for Scotland. Through a comprehensive approach to legislation, service development and public information smoking rates have dropped from 47 per cent in 1972 to less than 25 per cent today. We have seen one supermarket chain, Lidl, stop selling cigarettes altogether.

Yet tobacco remains a huge drain on our society. Adult smoking rates have remained consistently higher in Scotland than in England and Wales; 90 per cent of lung cancer deaths, and nearly a quarter of deaths overall, are attributable to tobacco.

Successive Scottish administrations have shown that a proactive approach to tackling tobacco can help free people from their tobacco addiction, saving lives and helping the economy.

But this requires investing resources up front. Is it fairer to pay for this through general taxation (a levy on all of us) or a levy on those who have profited so much from the sale of tobacco?

John Watson

ASH Scotland

Frederick Street

Edinburgh