How do we, as Australians reduce the number of incidences of alcohol related violence? Early closing times, and 1am lockouts are not the answer, says NSW Premier Kristina Keneally. This may have been the solution in Newcastle, however Ms Keneally has said that "There is no silver bullet here, there is no one-size-fits-all approach." Police officers, doctors and paramedics would beg to differ, still calling for bans on shots, cocktails, mix drinks and any drinks containing over 5% alcohol after 10pm. Followed by 1 am lockouts.
For Sydneysiders this solution is not be an option, due to the many attractions that Sydney has to offer to the 'night owls' of the world. These attractions are frequented, not only by residents themselves, but tourists who travel from within Australia and around the world to participate in what they have to offer. The majority of patrons can drink safely and in a responsible manor, however there few that can not seem to control themselves and this is where the issue is created.
Ms Keneally does not want to turn NSW into a "dull and boring" state, and in fact there have been calls for pubs and clubs to be open 24 hours. The premise behind this is that, if all of the alcoholically over lubricated patrons are flooding onto the streets between 3 and 5 when the establishments are closing, then there is an influx of people into small areas. Especially around 3, when it is the designated Taxi changeover time. This creates a situation where there are few feasible transport options, and so there is commotion on the streets. Consequently, something has got to give, and that can on occasion result in violence, that most likely would not occur, had the parties involved not been under the influence of alcohol.
Ms Keneally's view that there is no "one-size-fits-all approach" is of great value, as our alcohol problem in Australia and NSW is a highly cultural problem, a solution needs to be created from within our culture. Otherwise, for example, we could just copy Italy, and have no legal drinking age. But we are not Italian, we are Australian.
What is your opinion? Lock out or rock out? Have your say in the comments section.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Newcastle appears to be the heralded success story but what about Melbourne, who abandoned similar approaches mere months into the trial? From what I hear, Sydney's been having a rough go of it too. Canberra largely rejected the idea.
ReplyDeletePlans to make venues pay higher licensing fees here in the ACT kind of sound like a strangulation of the same theme - punishing business for providing goods and services at a cost to willing patrons.
Calling for venues to, ultimately, pay for the irresponsibility of patrons (through either losing business after lock-outs or higher licensing fees) would be like making a purveyor of footwear responsible for a client who, despite all warnings, ate the contents of the silica pack and suffered because of it.
Maybe that's a bad analogy but the point I'm trying to make is that the problem isn't pubs and clubs. So to answer your question, I am staunchly opposed to the concept of lock-outs. Locking people out of secure venues is not going to contain drunken violence and I'm not sure those trying to implement this policy have any idea of what goes on any popular night-strip or even in the minds of severely alcohol-effected persons.
Really, if Keneally wanted to make a difference she'd get out on that beat she promised to tread with NSW coppers and see it first hand.
Ultimately though, I believe it's cultural or certainly generational norms that ought to be addressed in order to end alcohol-related violence. The only problem for people like Keneally is that tackling these issues through better education and, honestly, reframing the minds of thousands of young Australians (who believe drinking to the extent we (I am definitely a part of this collective, hence my assumed authority on the subject) do is healthy and the mostly negative outcomes are somewhere close to 'normal' at best but at worst 'not as bad as *name* last week') isn't the sort of quick-fix election ploy politicians think voters want to hear. And you can divide THAT collective into two parts - the older generations who love a grumble about what hooligans we are, and the younger generation, who demand and deserve their their freedom of everything, including their right to get paralytic (thanks Mike Skinner) and aren't afraid to exercise their vote to swing the political pendulum the other way just to 'get keep the "worst" party out'.