What an odd statement. Given that the use of the word "quality" is in itself merely a promise of characteristic and not necessarily a good one, it looks like the sort of thing that one might expect from a PR firm working with faceless MegaCo. But it seems to be the position of CAMRA... if this story is to be believed:
Her Majesty's Revenue and Custom's guidelines added that he must pay 20p duty a bottle, measure how much alcohol is in his beer and record how much malt he buys. Mr Shields from Bishop's Waltham, Hampshire also had to get a personal licence to sell alcohol and undergo a criminal records check by the police. 'It's totally over the top for someone who just wants to sell beer to friends,' he said. But Campaign for Real Ale spokesman said: 'It's right that if you are selling it to people then you have to make sure it is of a demonstrable quality.'
Paul posted the story for the quirk of a fan being forced to be a brewer but it strikes as having another angle... the presumption that bureaucratic registration is somehow related to creating goodness. What I mean by this is this - is the same beer be better free or sold? Is not the question of "demonstrable quality" separate from the terms of the transaction? In this take on the story, the CAMRA rep goes further suggesting the man sticks with home brewing. Why wouldn't they support such nano-brewing?
The other thing for me is if that was all the government needed from me to set up a tiny brewery operation, I would do it in a heartbeat. Sadly, the powers that be here in the Great White North would never allow it.
Comments
Pivní Filosof - October 27, 2009 2:50 AM
I think that by "demonstrable quality" they mean that the beer is fit for human consumption. Whether is "good" as we understand it or not, that's something else.
Anyway, I've read the original article somewhere in the digital worlds, and it's a non story. There are rules for everyone who wants to set up a brewery in the UK, everyone who wants to do that has to go through the same. Some of them might be hard to understand (checking of criminal record, place an ad in the local paper), but they are the same for everyone.
The bloke is an idiot. If he really wanted to sell his beer only to friends, he would do it for cash only without having to tell the authorities, and if those people are really his friends, they will keep it among themselves.
Barry M - October 27, 2009 7:24 AM
He was definitely an idiot. It's fine to make beer and give it away, in whatever quantity in the UK and Ireland, but once you sell it, then the tax people will want a cut. That's what it boils down to.
Here in Germany I'm supposed to register as a home brewer, which technically limits the amount I can produce (200 litres per year) and the gravity. My friends and neighbours have not ratted me out yet, presumably because they get free, quality beer :D
Alan - October 27, 2009 8:44 AM
Who knew beer people were such statists? We all know good homebrew is vital to the barter economy. What's the difference? Is the law correct just because it is the law? If I can sell you a 20 year old two stroke gas lawn mower, I should be able to sell a beer.
Pivní Filosof - October 27, 2009 1:50 PM
Well, if we are friends, I'll buy your beer, lawn mower or home made cheese because I know you and trust you, and I won't ask you for an invoice or any sort of document on the product, I know that if there's anything wrong with the lawnmower I can go back to you and you'll see that it gets fixed, and I know that your beer or cheese won't make me sick. I won't care if you have a permit to sell them or not, really.
Now, it's not that I'm against this bloke selling his beer, but he should have known what sort of paperwork he was going to need if he wanted to make his brewery official. The question here is, if he only wants to sell the beer to his friends, why bother to register it then? Is there something he is not telling us?
Bailey - October 27, 2009 3:51 PM
We get tons of these stories in the UK. They can be summarised as: "Bureaucrats ignore common sense and ruin fun of ordinary person." When you dig deeper, they're invariably more like "Ordinary person blatantly ignores clear rules and is annoyed to be told off."
I agree with PF: if they're his mates, he shouldn't be *selling* them beer. If he wants to sell beer, he has to pay duty and comply with the law.
Now, whether those laws need changing to make it easier to start a small brewery is a different question!