County Hall imposes total alcohol ban
County council staff and councillors will no longer be allowed to indulge in a lunchtime tipple under a new booze ban.
Surrey County Council staff have been given a blanket ban on boozing during working hours the Advertiser can reveal.
A council spokesman gave the following explanation for the ban: "Our responsibility is to provide Surrey residents with the best value for money possible.
"We also have a leading role to play alongside our health colleagues, in promoting health, well-being and healthy lifestyles in Surrey. "With this in mind under our changes, drinking during the working day will no longer be allowed for our staff and members.
"This is so that the work we all do for the people of Surrey is to the highest standard all of the time."
Here is how some Mole Valley County Councillors took the news:
Councillor Chris Townsend (Ind, Ashtead) said: "They have banned alcohol at county hall and that means we can't have a glass of wine with our meal or any alcohol with the Christmas meal.
"I'm not sure it's gone down well with everyone but it doesn't worry me either way.
"I think it's interesting that it has been put in as a change, but to be fair, it is not unusual.
"There are companies that have something like this in place already."
Councillor Tim Hall (Con, Leatherhead and Fetcham East) said: "We are in the midst of a major change in policy and this will be a struggle for some people.
"The public have got the right to expect the highest level of service from county council workers and be on top of their game.
"A number of big organisations have already gone through this. It's a major cultural change. The world has moved on and we have moved with it. In six months time I am sure people won't be surprised by this. As far as work goes it doesn't make much of a difference to me."
Councillor Stephen Cooksey (Lib Dem, Dorking and the Holmwoods) said: "I think it is a good idea. It is important that the officers and councillors shouldn't suffer from the effects of alcohol when they are working.
"I think this is a very responsible policy to bring in."
Councillor Hazel Watson (Lib Dem, Dorking Hills) said: "I was involved in making the decision.
"The reason behind the decision was to ensure that all staff and all councillors were not adversely affected when carrying out their work.
"I am not aware of any specific incidents that have affected the decision, but I fully support it.
6 Comments
by anon, Lhead
Saturday, December 05 2009, 9:30AM
“Well said trapper!”
by Trapper, Bookham
Friday, December 04 2009, 9:24PM
“SCC: If you want ¿provide Surrey residents with the best value for money possible¿, then put your brain in gear and treat SCC Council tax payers money as if it were your own- you will be really surprised just how quickly and effectively this focuses the mind- I work for a FTSE 100 corporate in finance and this works for me every time- I do it every single day. If it was your own money; would you make the same decision? If not then seek advice (preferably not from a consultant), if you cannot comprehend this theory then maybe you need to look for another job. £50 may seem FA to an accountant on >£75K PA but that is serious cash to someone on the basic minimum wage, trying their best and trying to make ends meet : you are effectively spending their money by proxy.
Never mind what you¿re: ¿health colleagues, in promoting health, well-being and healthy lifestyles in Surrey¿ say- that is not your brief- do your own job- leave stuff that you are neither qualified nor paid to comment on to those who are. Just get on with managing Surrey services in an effective, efficient and financially rational ,accountable and informed way.”
by Sheila Hall, Dorking
Thursday, December 03 2009, 12:03PM
“How are they going to stop people drinking off the premises?
Send spies around the pubs and bars in the area to spot anyone on the county council payroll having a lunch-time tipple? Or perhaps they will introduce mandatory breath tests for all staff. Anyone working for County Hall had better not go out drinking in the evening on weekdays. Traces of alcohol can still be detected in the human body the day after.
Why aren't the staff unions fighting this. At one time, a dictatorial decision of this type would have been met with industrial action. It makes me long for the return of the 1970s.”
by Rog, Holmbury St. Mary
Thursday, December 03 2009, 11:50AM
“Well said, Trapper. This country is turning into an open prison, where law-abiding taxpayers are no longer trusted to behave responsibly. The veteran Labour crusader Tony Benn put it perfectly when he said the trouble with modern politicians is that they no longer wish to represent people, but want to manage them instead. I don't recall any council candidates having included this bossy proposal in their election manifestos.
Hazel Watson should resign from the Liberal Democrats because she has proved that she is neither a liberal nor a democrat.”
by anon, leatherhead
Thursday, December 03 2009, 11:35AM
“Totally agree with Trapper,ever thought of becoming an mp you seem to know what your talking about which is more than these wallys do.”
by Trapper, Bookham
Monday, November 30 2009, 10:32PM
“What total crap- another misguided and stupid idea from the nanny state that again further affects and erodes the basic rights of the common man (and woman)- How much taxpayers money have they spent evaluating this edict (probably outsourcing the entire process to external consultants)- if someone is clearly drunk on duty then sack them- next they will be banning salt and sugar in the outsourced staff canteens - (if there are any still left and the employees can still afford the prices)- and vetting employees packed lunches for ¿unhealthy eating habits¿ this is total nonsense and just goes to prove that SCC has jumped on the nanny state bandwagon ,does not trust its employees to behave in a professional manner- join a union and challenge it! - The morons that make these self opinionated and high handed decisions are mostly elected - a fact that they often forget (or more likely cannot comprehend). So just what is the "major change in policy¿ from SCC- is this just another ruse to spend even more council tax payer¿s money, making policy changes just for the sake of it. This is Surrey not Albania in the 1960¿s. - Spend the money repairing the appalling roads in Surrey- they are an absolute disgrace.”