Drink confusion

What a ham-fisted hash the Scottish Government has made of its promotion of a minimum alcohol price; surely they carried out thorough research into a likely successful unit cost.

Yet, not only did they refuse to set this at the start, they won't reveal it for another month or so, before presenting the bill.

Some people are opposed to the general principle on the grounds that the suggested price of 40p would be ineffectual, but if a higher price is envisaged, this would encourage support. I personally believe anything less than 1 would fail.

Equally belatedly, there is now the suggestion of a trial period, which would have overcome much of the opposition. This must have occurred to them before now, so why didn't they float the possibility earlier?

Has it perhaps occurred to them that if a price hike fails to curb sales, then reverting to the status quo would lead to an increase?

ROBERT DOW

Ormiston Road

Tranent, East Lothian

Those advocating making it tougher for alcoholics by legislation of one kind or another (Letters, 6 August) really ought to take a close at the USA and Prohibition. There, they decided to go further than merely increasing prices - they banned alcohol altogether for a number of years. Result: alcoholism and problem drinking soared.

Only when it is realised that you cannot legislate your way into making people drink sensibly, and that the underlying cultural and social problems must be tackled, will any headway be made.

ALEXANDER MCKAY

New Cut Rigg

Edinburgh