""(There IS a law which forbids serving alcohol to an already intoxicated person, but I wonder if this is ever adhered to?) How do more civilised countries manage to keep their drunks down to a minimum?""

This is the major difference between the "Local", and the large Town Pubs and Nightclubs.

The landlord of a local pub is usually very aware of the level of sobriety of his clients, and rather good (so I've observed) at deciding when they've had enough and tactfully sending them on their way still capable if somewhat unsteady. These houses also still tend to turn out at 11.30 or thereabouts.

Large pubs and nightclubs serve large numbers of clients, using multiple staff, none of whom can possibly monitor the drinking of any one person, leading to a degree of unawareness of overindulgence. It is those venues which disgorge multiple disorderly, incapable, or violent drunks onto the streets in the early hours.

It would be logical to support the local and curb the activities of the others, but the exact opposite is happening and the responsible landlords are the ones gong out of business.

I believe that the tied pub system should be banned, and local landlords should be allowed to purchase wherever they wish, which would enable them to compete by using cash and carry trade outlets.

Rentals charged by the freeholders (where the licensee rents the premises) should be subject to review by rent tribunals, since the pub is also the landlord's home.

Lastly, the extension of opening hours which has had the opposite of the effect foreseen by the Blair/Brown government should be rescinded as a failure.

That might put some sanity back into the situation. At least it would change the activities of the proportion of clients who have only left the local for the larger venues because they can drink for several hours more.

Maybe we might move back towards the days when binge drinking was the domain of Holidaymakers abroad, and basically lasted for two weeks per year.

Don T.