David Cameron is determined to bring in a minimum price on alcohol, to much hullaballoo about whether this is: a) actually legal, b) morally correct, c) financially viable.
Just about every article you read on the subject mentions "minimum pricing" and "binge drinking" in the same sentence, as if bringing in a price of 40p per unit will stop the practice but the truth of the matter is this: nobody really knows what Binge Drinking means.
To me, minimum pricing should be brought in, but for the purposes of making the off-trade - establishments such as supermarkets, who sell alcohol in vast quantities at often below-cost or at-cost pricing in order to entice customers in and then have no responsibility for what happens afterwards - more responsible for the booze that they sell.
The minimum cost of 40p per unit won't suddenly make alcohol 'unaffordable', nor will it bring the price of the beer you consume at home up to the same level of that which you drink in the pub. And nor should it. Of course alcohol to be consumed at home should be cheaper than alcohol in a public house - you're actually buying two different experiences. At home, you're drinking a canned or bottled product, to enjoy in the company of your own home; in a pub you are buying the experience of the environment, be it a night out with your friends to enjoy music, a quiet chat, a meal with a loved one or simply somewhere to go for a change of scenery, for some company.
In a pub, the beer you drink will be drawn from a cask or a keg, your drink will be served to you in a (hopefully) clean and branded glass, you'll be surrounded by a friendly and lively environment and sometimes music or televised sport will be on offer, usually without charge. The price of your drink reflects that so, naturally, it will be more expensive than from a supermarket.
But often, Britain's apparent problem with Binge Drinking starts with the fact that many choose to begin their night out by staying at home and pre-loading - the act of drinking cheap supermarket booze at home before heading out to a pub or club much later.
When I was in my early twenties (I can say that, now I've just turned 40) a night out started in the pub at about 8pm. Today, for that generation, they don't think about booking the taxi in to town before 10:30pm. And the trade that supplies them with their early-evening liquor has little if any responsibility for the actions that follow, leaving it up to those of us who run pubs to take the blame.
Minimum pricing will go some way towards passing that responsibility on.
Meanwhile, Ann Widdecombe stops just short of doing a Jeremy Clarkson and suggesting all binge drinkers be shot in Tuesday's Daily Mail, an article that was accompanied by an obligatory picture of a young woman apparently comatose on a bench, beneath which stands a strategically placed bottle of Budweiser and another of Smirnoff Ice.
If Ms Widdecombe could define a Binge Drinker, I'd be happy. It is, of course, drinking to excess but by who's definition? The British Medical Association used to refer to drinking heavily over a weekend as bingeing, now it says it's an evening. Alcohol Concern says it's the equivalent of a man drinking five pints of standard lager or two large glasses of wine for a lady.
But the Office of National Statistics says a man drinking 8 units (four pints of standard lager) in one sitting just once a week is a binge drinker.
It won't be long before somebody enjoying a glass of wine with their dinner each night will be 'bingeing'.
By definition then, anybody who actually enjoys a drink - no matter how much, or where, they enjoy it - is a Binge Drinker. Minimum Pricing won't suddenly fix it.
But it will be a first step towards making the supermarket industry more responsible for their part in the whole fiasco.