Friday. 6pm. Glasgow Queen Street to Edinburgh Waverley. The train’s pretty quiet on the whole, especially for a Friday night close to Christmas. I’m thinking I might get to read some of my book – Stoner by John Williams (v good) – or even better, have a cheeky wee nap before the night’s festivities begin. It certainly looks like it’s going to be a nice and peaceful journey.
Wrong! We’re pulling into Falkirk High. There’s a group of lads on the platform, about 20 of them in all, and they’ve obviously been having a good time of it already. Fair enough, but I’d rather they went into one of the other carriages. They probably will. Wrong! They’re getting into this one and are plonking themselves down at the tables around me. Me and the woman across the aisle exchange a look. How is this going to go?
To be honest: fine. The boys have obviously had a few before getting on the train and they’re very loud and boisterous and some of their banter would make the postmistress blush, but they’re absolutely fine and big groups of lads don’t necessarily spell trouble. In fact, speak to the people who work on trains and planes and they’ll tell you that when it comes to troublemakers, groups of women are way worse than groups of men.
But what’s noticeable about the group who get on at Falkirk High is that they’ve taken drinks onto the train with them, bottles of Bud that clatter and clink as they sit down, and as the train pulls away, they open the bottles and start swigging. I consider pointing out to them that, according to Railway Byelaw 4 (2), in force from November 16th, 2020, no alcohol can be drunk on board any ScotRail train at any time of day and that any passenger with intoxicating liquor can be asked to leave the railway, but I’m not sure if the lads have read Railway Byelaw 4 (2) and I’m not sure how they’ll react to me pointing it out to them.
Then the conductor comes along and I wonder what’ll happen next. She clocks the group, and she clocks the bottles of Budweiser, but does she say anything? Of course she doesn’t. Would you? It’s Friday night, there’s a big group of tanked-up lads and she’s on the train on her own and is expected to impose the no-alcohol rule without any kind of backup. Quite sensibly, she asks for their tickets, turns a blind eye to the rest of it, and moves on.
Read more: Mark Smith: Sarwar versus Starmer. Thatcher wins
I don’t know about you but if I was the conductor on that train I’d have done the same thing and it’s a thing I’ve seen happen quite a few times in the last couple of years: people getting on the train and knocking ‘em back seemingly unaware of the ban or not caring. On one occasion, a relative of mine (who’s braver than me) pointed out to one group (of women) that drinking was against the rules but they just shrugged their shoulders and carried on necking the prosecco. And why wouldn’t they? The no-alcohol rule isn’t being enforced. It’s probably unenforceable. And it’s certainly unworkable.
That last point – the unworkability – is only one of the reasons the alcohol ban on trains is going to have to go, and it looks like, finally, the reality of the situation is getting through to the powers-that-be. ScotRail is conducting a survey of its passengers on whether the ban should be kept and although I don’t think that’s necessarily the best way to do things (did they carry out a survey before they introduced the rule? no) it may be ScotRail’s attempt to get the Scottish Government to see sense.
Provided the survey goes the right way of course. There’s a certain type of Scot – the eyebrow-raising, no-fun, tutting, rules-is-rules type – that thoroughly approved of the introduction of the booze ban (and most other bans) and would thoroughly approve of it being kept. They are also exactly the sort of person who likes to fill in online surveys about their opinions so there’s a chance the results of ScotRail’s poll may be skewed in that direction. It’s something we need to be aware of.
However, the truth is ScotRail doesn’t need a survey to ditch the ban, all they need is logic and fairness. I know there’ll be some who say the real solution to a rule not being enforced is to properly enforce it and that’s true to an extent, but the only way to enforce the booze ban would be to have a security team on every train and on a service that’s already cutting staff, that’s not going to happen. And so we need to ask what purpose a rule serves if it’s being broken routinely, brazenly, and unconcernedly? Rules are only meaningful if there are consequences for those who break them.
But unworkability and unenforceability aren’t the only reasons to drop the alcohol ban – there are plenty of others. What the Scottish Government seemed to be suggesting a while back was that the motivation for the rule had shifted from the original (dubious) one – prevent the spread of coronavirus – to preventing or reducing anti-social behaviour. The First Minister said the other day that particular weight would be given to the voices of women who are often those who say they feel unsafe because of anti-social behaviour. But where’s the evidence the booze ban has had any effect on antisocial behaviour? Tell it to the conductor on the 6pm to Edinburgh Waverley. Or the woman across the aisle from me. The ban has had no effect whatsoever.
The alcohol ban also fails the test of proportionality. It can certainly cause issues – I’m still scarred by the sight of the guy vomiting into a pint glass on the overnight to London and I’ll never forget the guy urinating on the floor of the late-night from Edinburgh. But I’ve been on thousands and thousands of trains with hundreds and hundreds of people drinking alcohol (including me) and there’s been no trouble whatsoever. Even the lads who got on at Falkirk High were fine; yes, they made me feel a bit uncomfortable but I don’t think laws should be introduced just to prevent people feeling a bit uncomfortable. In other words, it is not proportionate to remove a right that belongs to everyone because someone occasionally abuses it.
Read more: Mark Smith: The heart of Glasgow – we’re still not getting it are we?
The hope now is that ScotRail’s survey will deal with the problem and come up with the right result and so I urge you, next time you’re on a train, to fill in the survey and tell them in no uncertain terms to get rid of the ban. It may be that you ignore it already of course and surreptitiously sip from a can of something nice that you picked up at the M&S at the station, and I understand why you would do that: you can see how misguided and pointless this rule is.
But the bigger point is that for a rule to be good, it needs to have a clear motivation. It needs to be consistent and proportionate. And it needs to be workable and enforceable and the booze ban on trains fails every one of those tests. Perhaps we’re about to see it dropped. Perhaps we’re about to take the sensible and sober option. I hope so.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel