|
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On May 7, 4:38*pm, Railist wrote:
On May 8, 12:14*am, 1506 wrote: On May 7, 3:58*pm, John B wrote: On May 7, 11:54 pm, Tom Barry wrote: However, the wider point that someone commuting from, say, Uxbridge can't have a drink on the way home while someone from Oxford can be *sold* one holds true, and has interesting class implications. I'm not sure the class point holds - someone commuting to Stratford can buy a drink, whereas someone commuting to Chalfont and Latimer can't even drink one... Do the carts on Thameslink sell Alcohol? *IIRC they do. I don't think it does have 'class' implications. I think there is a problem with anti-social behaviour on the Underground, but my issue is how will this be enforced? With some difficulty one would have thought. At one time, one of the Circle Line stations had a bar on the platform. IIRC it was Saint James Park. Baker Street certainly had/has a bar outside the barrier line. So, at the very least the public is being sent mixed messages. And, let us not forget the Met. Railway's Pullman cars where Alcohol was served on board. Moreover , it seems possible that having bought a drink at Marylebone one could travel to Amersham whilst enjoying a drink on a Chiltern train. If one bought a drink at Baker Street one would not be allowed to consume it whilst travelling, over the very same metals, on a Metropolitan line train. As an asside many US transit systmes ban eating and drinking, of any sort, on board buses and trains. LA Metro comes to mind. |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On May 7, 5:33*pm, wrote:
On 8 May, 00:14, 1506 wrote: On May 7, 3:58*pm, John B wrote: On May 7, 11:54 pm, Tom Barry wrote: However, the wider point that someone commuting from, say, Uxbridge can't have a drink on the way home while someone from Oxford can be *sold* one holds true, and has interesting class implications. I'm not sure the class point holds - someone commuting to Stratford can buy a drink, whereas someone commuting to Chalfont and Latimer can't even drink one... Do the carts on Thameslink sell Alcohol? *IIRC they do. No, because they no longer exist. Understandable given the conditions on Thameslink in the central area. Althought, it was certainly good to have the option of buying a snack. They were also removed from The fast Cambridge / Kings Lynn services on the GN route when FCC took over. Whoever operates the trollies on "Southern" services did have alcahol available a few months back on the Brighton line. I wouldn't normally take a lot of notice, however a business type indulged in a couple of shorts en route to Brighton on the 09.06 from Victoria and recieved some unaproving glances. IIRC this has always been legal on rains in the UK. One wonders about the guy's liver. :-) |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
1506 gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying: Baker Street certainly had/has a bar outside the barrier line. There's a 'spoons above Baker St station, but access is only from outside. Moreover , it seems possible that having bought a drink at Marylebone ....except they've closed the little corner shop in the concourse, in order to refurb it into another chain sandwich place... one could travel to Amersham whilst enjoying a drink on a Chiltern train. If one bought a drink at Baker Street one would not be allowed to consume it whilst travelling, over the very same metals, on a Metropolitan line train. Indeed. |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
"1506" wrote IIRC this has always been legal on rains in the UK. One wonders about the guy's liver. :-) Railway byelaw 4(2) could be used to ban the carrying or consumption of alcohol on trains, and is sometimes used in connection with football matches, as governed by the Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol) Act 1985. Peter |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On May 8, 10:11*am, Adrian wrote:
1506 gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: Baker Street certainly had/has a bar outside the barrier line. There's a 'spoons above Baker St station, but access is only from outside. Times have changed. There was once a bar inside the station entrance, but before the barriers. I have to say it was a lousy bar with mediocre service. Moreover , it seems possible that having bought a drink at Marylebone ...except they've closed the little corner shop in the concourse, in order to refurb it into another chain sandwich place... Nothing is sacred. Has the Victoria and Albert close? one could travel to Amersham whilst enjoying a drink on a Chiltern train. *If one bought a drink at Baker Street one would not be allowed to consume it whilst travelling, over the very same metals, on a Metropolitan line train. Indeed. So the County, sorry region, of London had a leader with a clue. Albeit an anti-semitic pro-terrorist lefty. Now it has a clueless pompous ass for a leader. Wow, Hobson's choice already. |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
1506 gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying: Moreover , it seems possible that having bought a drink at Marylebone ...except they've closed the little corner shop in the concourse, in order to refurb it into another chain sandwich place... Nothing is sacred. Has the Victoria and Albert close? No, still there, I think. |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On May 8, 10:44*am, Adrian wrote:
1506 gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: Moreover , it seems possible that having bought a drink at Marylebone ...except they've closed the little corner shop in the concourse, in order to refurb it into another chain sandwich place... Nothing is sacred. *Has the Victoria and Albert close? No, still there, I think. We can be grateful for that. Can it not function as an Off-License? |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
In message , Adrian
writes Baker Street certainly had/has a bar outside the barrier line. There's a 'spoons above Baker St station, but access is only from outside. Which is actually the old LUL recruitment office - Oh the irony! -- Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building. You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK (please use the reply to address for email) |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On Thu, 08 May 2008 10:03:59 -0700, 1506 wrote:
snip As an asside many US transit systmes ban eating and drinking, of any sort, on board buses and trains. LA Metro comes to mind. So do many British ones, *except* (in general) for trains. The Midland Metro bans it, for example, though it's not rigidly enforced and (I hope) nobody is going to be pulled up for a bottle of water on a hot summer's day on a crowded tram. Actually, if they were I wonder whether they'd have a human-rights case... -- Bewdley, Worcs. ~90m asl. |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT), 1506
wrote: As an asside many US transit systmes ban eating and drinking, of any sort, on board buses and trains. LA Metro comes to mind. A good number of the American systems do, as, closer to home, does Metrolink. I do hope TfL don't go that far. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:33:38 +0200, Roland Perry
wrote: Plenty of bus operators ban all food and drink. Only those who are more interested in their cleaning bill than in passenger comfort. It is a benefit of bus and train travel that one can safely enjoy refreshments, unlike while driving a car. I understand and support a ban on hot food, as it stinks, but so long as you don't chuck the rubbish on the floor there's no good reason for not allowing at least cold drinks and sandwiches. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
Neil Williams wrote:
On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT), 1506 wrote: As an asside many US transit systmes ban eating and drinking, of any sort, on board buses and trains. LA Metro comes to mind. A good number of the American systems do, as, closer to home, does Metrolink. I do hope TfL don't go that far. They explicitly tell you to carry water on the Underground in summer. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
"Arthur Figgis" wrote in message et... Neil Williams wrote: On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT), 1506 wrote: As an asside many US transit systmes ban eating and drinking, of any sort, on board buses and trains. LA Metro comes to mind. A good number of the American systems do, as, closer to home, does Metrolink. I do hope TfL don't go that far. They explicitly tell you to carry water on the Underground in summer. They'll probably have walk through machines to test it for the presence of gin or vodka by then :-) Paul S |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
"1506" wrote in message
On May 7, 4:38 pm, Railist wrote: On May 8, 12:14 am, 1506 wrote: On May 7, 3:58 pm, John B wrote: On May 7, 11:54 pm, Tom Barry wrote: However, the wider point that someone commuting from, say, Uxbridge can't have a drink on the way home while someone from Oxford can be *sold* one holds true, and has interesting class implications. I'm not sure the class point holds - someone commuting to Stratford can buy a drink, whereas someone commuting to Chalfont and Latimer can't even drink one... Do the carts on Thameslink sell Alcohol? IIRC they do. I don't think it does have 'class' implications. I think there is a problem with anti-social behaviour on the Underground, but my issue is how will this be enforced? With some difficulty one would have thought. At one time, one of the Circle Line stations had a bar on the platform. IIRC it was Saint James Park. Sloan Square, I thought. |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On Thu, 8 May 2008 21:09:52 +0100, "Paul Scott"
wrote: They'll probably have walk through machines to test it for the presence of gin or vodka by then :-) It did occur to me that those who wish to continue drinking alcohol on the Tube will just get round the new rule by carrying it mixed with a soft drink in the appropriate soft drink container. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On May 8, 1:23*pm, "Recliner" wrote:
"1506" wrote in message On May 7, 4:38 pm, Railist wrote: On May 8, 12:14 am, 1506 wrote: On May 7, 3:58 pm, John B wrote: On May 7, 11:54 pm, Tom Barry wrote: However, the wider point that someone commuting from, say, Uxbridge can't have a drink on the way home while someone from Oxford can be *sold* one holds true, and has interesting class implications. I'm not sure the class point holds - someone commuting to Stratford can buy a drink, whereas someone commuting to Chalfont and Latimer can't even drink one... Do the carts on Thameslink sell Alcohol? IIRC they do. I don't think it does have 'class' implications. I think there is a problem with anti-social behaviour on the Underground, but my issue is how will this be enforced? With some difficulty one would have thought. *At one time, one of the Circle Line stations had a bar on the platform. *IIRC it was Saint James Park. Sloan Square, I thought.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes, that is the one. It has been a while! |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
In message
, at 15:45:28 on Thu, 8 May 2008, 1506 remarked: With some difficulty one would have thought. *At one time, one of the Circle Line stations had a bar on the platform. *IIRC it was Saint James Park. Sloan Square, I thought.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes, that is the one. It has been a while! Also Liverpool St. -- Roland Perry |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
In message , at 19:38:39 on Thu,
8 May 2008, Neil Williams remarked: Plenty of bus operators ban all food and drink. Only those who are more interested in their cleaning bill than in passenger comfort. It is not conducive to passenger comfort to be surrounded by litter, smelly food and so on. It is a benefit of bus and train travel that one can safely enjoy refreshments, unlike while driving a car. National Rail trains are different, but no-one is likely to starve when on a local bus. I understand and support a ban on hot food, as it stinks, but so long as you don't chuck the rubbish on the floor there's no good reason for not allowing at least cold drinks and sandwiches. Unfortunately, people only seem to understand total bans, as somewhat evidenced by people gleefully rehearsing various 'loopholes' in this thread. -- Roland Perry |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
1506 wrote:
As an asside many US transit systmes ban eating and drinking, of any sort, on board buses and trains. LA Metro comes to mind. In the UK, Metrolink bans all food and drink (maybe other tram systems too?) I was once allowed to *carry* a takeaway on a Metrolink tram by the TTIs, so long as I kept it wrapped up and wasn't tempted to eat any of it. I was told in no uncertain terms that even this concession was on a "Just this once" basis. Cheers mark-r -- |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On May 8, 9:55*pm, (Neil Williams)
wrote: On Thu, 8 May 2008 21:09:52 +0100, "Paul Scott" wrote: They'll probably have walk through machines to test it for the presence of gin or vodka by then :-) It did occur to me that those who wish to continue drinking alcohol on the Tube will just get round the new rule by carrying it mixed with a soft drink in the appropriate soft drink container. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. I am working on a mental sleeve that fits around a can of Tennants Super that makes it look like you are drinking Fanta Rob |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
Mark Robinson wrote:
1506 wrote: As an asside many US transit systmes ban eating and drinking, of any sort, on board buses and trains. LA Metro comes to mind. In the UK, Metrolink bans all food and drink (maybe other tram systems too?) I was once allowed to *carry* a takeaway on a Metrolink tram by the TTIs, so long as I kept it wrapped up and wasn't tempted to eat any of it. I was told in no uncertain terms that even this concession was on a "Just this once" basis. To which the obvious next question is - is Metrolink better or worse for drunken loutish behaviour than the London Underground? I've no idea how to answer that, though, but here's a start: http://www.almostwitty.com/weird/an-...the-metrolink/ Tom |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
wrote Whoever operates the trollies on "Southern" services did have alcahol available a few months back on the Brighton line. I wouldn't normally take a lot of notice, however a business type indulged in a couple of shorts en route to Brighton on the 09.06 from Victoria and recieved some unaproving glances. It looks as though the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, is jumping on the Boris Johnson bandwagon, and is threatening to ban alocohol from all trains http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle3897384.ece Peter |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On 9 May, 13:42, "Peter Masson" wrote:
Whoever operates the trollies on "Southern" services did have alcahol available a few months back on the Brighton line. I wouldn't normally take a lot of notice, however a business type indulged in a couple of shorts en route to Brighton on the 09.06 from Victoria and recieved some unaproving glances. It looks as though the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, is jumping on the Boris Johnson bandwagon, and is threatening to ban alocohol from all trains http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle3897384.ece To be fair to Jacqui Smith (and other sentences you'll seldom see used), she actually said: "I also understand people's concerns about anti-social behaviour on public transport. Working with passengers, transport staff and operators, Ruth Kelly and I will take action to answer these concerns. "We want to stamp out ASB on our buses, trains and trams. If more powers are needed to protect staff and the travelling public, we will provide them." I don't see that as a call for a ban on alcohol on all trains, although there may be something I've missed. [I'm deeply unimpressed that the authoritarian press are taking Boris's election as a vindication that The Public want to see booze banned everywhere, rather than proof that Labour have become so unpopular that even the Ken bounce couldn't hold them the Mayoralty no matter what kind of buffoon the Tories put forward nor how daft his policies...] -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On Fri, 9 May 2008, Tom Barry wrote:
Mark Robinson wrote: 1506 wrote: As an asside many US transit systmes ban eating and drinking, of any sort, on board buses and trains. LA Metro comes to mind. In the UK, Metrolink bans all food and drink (maybe other tram systems too?) I was once allowed to *carry* a takeaway on a Metrolink tram by the TTIs, so long as I kept it wrapped up and wasn't tempted to eat any of it. I was told in no uncertain terms that even this concession was on a "Just this once" basis. To which the obvious next question is - is Metrolink better or worse for drunken loutish behaviour than the London Underground? I've no idea how to answer that, though, but here's a start: http://www.almostwitty.com/weird/an-...the-metrolink/ On-train dealers! When oh when will we have such luxuries in London? tom -- I could tell you a great many more particulars but suppose that you are tired of it by this time. -- John Backhouse, Trainspotter Zero |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On May 9, 2:26*am, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:45:28 on Thu, 8 May 2008, 1506 remarked: With some difficulty one would have thought. *At one time, one of the Circle Line stations had a bar on the platform. *IIRC it was Saint James Park. Sloan Square, I thought. Yes, that is the one. *It has been a while! Also Liverpool St. -- Roland Perry Wow, I didn't know that. Which platform is it on? |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On 2008-05-09, Rob wrote:
On May 8, 9:55*pm, (Neil Williams) wrote: On Thu, 8 May 2008 21:09:52 +0100, "Paul Scott" wrote: They'll probably have walk through machines to test it for the presence of gin or vodka by then :-) It did occur to me that those who wish to continue drinking alcohol on the Tube will just get round the new rule by carrying it mixed with a soft drink in the appropriate soft drink container. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. I am working on a mental sleeve that fits around a can of Tennants Super that makes it look like you are drinking Fanta Rob Long ago and far away, a friend of mine had an enormous number of soft-drink cans that contained beer. He worked for a brewery that had bought a new canning machine which had to be tested before the cans arrived, so they used whatever they could get that would work in the machine. Of course it was illegal to sell them, and may even have been illegal to give them away, so they put them on pallets under a tarpaulin at the back of the brewery yard, and 'forgot' about them. They're still there, of course :) . My friend liked to give them to thirsty friends and acquaintances without warning so he could enjoy the reaction. E |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
In message
, at 08:51:16 on Fri, 9 May 2008, 1506 remarked: With some difficulty one would have thought. *At one time, one of the Circle Line stations had a bar on the platform. *IIRC it was Saint James Park. Sloan Square, I thought. Yes, that is the one. *It has been a while! Also Liverpool St. Wow, I didn't know that. Which platform is it on? *was* on... the outer Circle line platform, near the driver's end apparently. -- Roland Perry |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On Fri, 9 May 2008 14:08:47 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote
To which the obvious next question is - is Metrolink better or worse for drunken loutish behaviour than the London Underground? I've no idea how to answer that, though, but here's a start: http://www.almostwitty.com/weird/an-...the-metrolink/ On-train dealers! When oh when will we have such luxuries in London? Perfect for buying that enlivening 'line' before work in the morning :-) |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
|
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
|
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article , (Tom Barry) wrote: Richard J. wrote: It was managed by Silverlink previously. LU only took over the managment when LO was launched. I assume that formally it's still owned by Network Rail. Thanks for clearing that up, I thought it went LU before the LO takeover, but the announcement could have been well in advance of it happening. I'm puzzled by that because I thought it was handed over to LU at BR privatisation, like East Putney to Wimbledon Park definitely were. I guess the difference was that the only passenger services that called at East Puney/Southfields/Wimbledon Park were LU, whereas both Silverlink Metro and LU served Gunnersbury and Kew Gardens. At http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ns_station.jpg you can see the Silverlink-style station name plate at Kew Gardens. -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On 2008-05-09, Rob wrote:
On May 8, 9:55*pm, (Neil Williams) wrote: On Thu, 8 May 2008 21:09:52 +0100, "Paul Scott" wrote: They'll probably have walk through machines to test it for the presence of gin or vodka by then :-) It did occur to me that those who wish to continue drinking alcohol on the Tube will just get round the new rule by carrying it mixed with a soft drink in the appropriate soft drink container. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. I am working on a mental sleeve that fits around a can of Tennants Super that makes it look like you are drinking Fanta Rob Long ago and far away, a friend of mine had an enormous number of soft-drink cans that contained beer. How long ago? Beer actually doesn't maintain its quality for more than a relatively short period of time. Arguments will vary, but 120 - 180 days seem to be mentioned as a rough time frame for canned/bottled brews, i.e. four to six months. He worked for a brewery that had bought a new canning machine which had to be tested before the cans arrived, so they used whatever they could get that would work in the machine. Of course it was illegal to sell them, and may even have been illegal to give them away, so they put them on pallets under a tarpaulin at the back of the brewery yard, and 'forgot' about them. They're still there, of course :) . My friend liked to give them to thirsty friends and acquaintances without warning so he could enjoy the reaction. E |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On Sat, 10 May 2008 19:30:39 -0700, Nobody wrote:
How long ago? Beer actually doesn't maintain its quality for more than a relatively short period of time. Canned shandy? Sorry, I'm assuming that actually contains beer... Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
Neil Williams wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 19:30:39 -0700, Nobody wrote: How long ago? Beer actually doesn't maintain its quality for more than a relatively short period of time. Canned shandy? Sorry, I'm assuming that actually contains beer... Is it written down anywhere how much alcohol needs to be in something before it's "an alcoholic beverage"? Am I going to be carted off to prison for sitting on a bus taking NyQuil cough syrup (which includes alcohol)? |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On Sun, 11 May 2008 20:42:22 +0100, Mark Morton wrote
Is it written down anywhere how much alcohol needs to be in something before it's "an alcoholic beverage"? ISTR it used to be 2%. |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT), 1506 wrote:
Moreover , it seems possible that having bought a drink at Marylebone one could travel to Amersham whilst enjoying a drink on a Chiltern train. If one bought a drink at Baker Street one would not be allowed to consume it whilst travelling, over the very same metals, on a Metropolitan line train. Presumably if one were waiting on the platforms at Harrow-on-the-Hill station for (e.g.) an Uxbridge service, and one wanted to take a sip from one's hip flask, one would have to wait for a Chiltern train to arrive, hop on, take a swig, and hop off again. |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On Wed, 07 May 2008 19:14:29 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote:
Given that most incidents late at night involve alcohol consumed a long way from TfL premises or vehicles I wonder how long it will be before "the civility on public transport" argument means drunk or tipsy people won't be allowed on to the system because it's incompatible with Mayoral views on how we should conduct ourselves? How loud an outcry will there be from the huge entertainment business sector if there is even a hint of policy going that way? I assume alcohol is not actually being banned - just the consumption of it? Otherwise a few supermarkets might lose some trade from those who doing their shopping and then hop on a bus or train home. Having an open container of alcohol will be banned, but otherwise you'll be allowed to carry it. |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
"asdf" wrote in message
On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT), 1506 wrote: Moreover , it seems possible that having bought a drink at Marylebone one could travel to Amersham whilst enjoying a drink on a Chiltern train. If one bought a drink at Baker Street one would not be allowed to consume it whilst travelling, over the very same metals, on a Metropolitan line train. Presumably if one were waiting on the platforms at Harrow-on-the-Hill station for (e.g.) an Uxbridge service, and one wanted to take a sip from one's hip flask, one would have to wait for a Chiltern train to arrive, hop on, take a swig, and hop off again. You'd have to run over the bridge to do that... Chiltern and Uxbridge lines Met trains don't use the same platform. |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On Sun, 11 May 2008 21:11:31 +0100, Stimpy
wrote: On Sun, 11 May 2008 20:42:22 +0100, Mark Morton wrote Is it written down anywhere how much alcohol needs to be in something before it's "an alcoholic beverage"? ISTR it used to be 2%. You are confusing percentage (of alcohol by volume) with degrees proof. 100deg proof = ~57 % abv ('Merkan measure is different). From http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pd...olguidance.pdf :- "10. All prepacked drinks with an alcoholic strength of more than 1.2%(abv) must be labelled with an indication of alcoholic strength by volume. This must be shown as a figure (to not more than one decimal place) preceded by the word "alcohol" or by the abbreviation "alc" and followed by the symbol "% vol". Specified positive and negative tolerances are permitted in respect of the indication of alcoholic strength. 11. Specified descriptions can be used to describe drinks of not more than 1.2%(abv). These descriptions include: · "low alcohol" - a drink with an alcoholic strength by volume of not more than 1.2%; · "de-alcoholised" - a drink from which the alcohol has been extracted and which has an alcoholic strength by volume of not more than 0.5%; and · "alcohol-free" - a drink from which the alcohol has been extracted and which has an alcoholic strength by volume of not more than 0.05%. 12. Furthermore, the description “non-alcoholic” shall not be used in conjunction with a name commonly associated with an alcoholic drink, except in the composite name “non-alcoholic wine” when that composite name is used in accordance with regulation 43 of the Food Labelling Regulations." In Scotland, an "alcoholic drink" is merely defined as "a drink consisting of or containing alcohol" [s.147(1) Licensing (Scotland) Act 2005]; in England and Wales "alcohol" is defined (with exceptions) as "spirits, wine, beer, cider or any other fermented, distilled or spirituous liquor" [s.191(1) Licensing Act 2003]. The principle exception in the context of drink is that alcohol[ic drink] of a strength less than 0.5% is excluded from those general definitions [s.191 Licensing Act 2003, s.2 Licensing (Scotland) Act 2005]. Slainte! |
Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
On Mon, 12 May 2008, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 11 May 2008 21:11:31 +0100, Stimpy wrote: On Sun, 11 May 2008 20:42:22 +0100, Mark Morton wrote Is it written down anywhere how much alcohol needs to be in something before it's "an alcoholic beverage"? ISTR it used to be 2%. You are confusing percentage (of alcohol by volume) with degrees proof. 100deg proof = ~57 % abv ('Merkan measure is different). Yes, which i've never got. My understanding is that British proof was defined as the percentage of alcohol at which a mixture of the spirit with gunpowder would explode when lit. Why the septics switched to the gratuitously different, chemically meaningless and practically no-better-than-ABV system of 1 degree = 0.5 % ABV, i really don't know. The usual sheer wrongheadedness, i suppose. tom -- Argumentative and pedantic, oh, yes. Although it's properly called "correct" -- Huge |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:54 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk