july 2013 - amazon s3 · 2015-10-21 · ahasubmissiontocitizens’jury – july 2013 2 introduction...

AHA Submission to Citizens’ Jury – July 2013

2

Introduction - A look at the hotel and liquor industry in South Australia

The South Australian Hotels Association (AHA|SA) is the industry membership body which represents hotels and related licences in South Australia.

The AHA|SA represents over 80% of the hotel industry and its members include a diverse range of hospitality focussed businesses, including traditional metropolitan and regional hotels, smaller bars and taverns, accommodation specialists, late night entertainment providers, functions centres, dining specialists and tourism destinations.

These businesses play a vital role in South Australia’s economic and social wellbeing, as the South Australian Attorney General himself stated in December 2012 when he said:

“Pubs, nightclubs and other licensed venues form a vital part of our State’s economy and provide for a vibrant and colourful culture and nightlife.”1

The AHA|SA understands The Citizen’s Jury has been tasked to answer the following question.

“How can we ensure we have a vibrant and safe Adelaide nightlife?”

In order to provide background information and context for its deliberations the AHA|SA offers the following submission. It contains information about the legislative framework under which licensees operate their legal responsibilities, as well as broader information about the sale and consumption of liquor in SA. Issues specific to anti-social behaviour are also discussed including pre-loading, binge drinking, illicit drug use, transport and the role of venue design in promoting safe venues and behaviours.

We are pleased to provide this information and would be very happy to present to The Citizen’s Jury, provide more information as requested and/or any address any questions which may arise following this submission.

Background - The South Australian Hotel Industry

There are around 630 hotels in South Australia. These hotels:

employ around 24,000 people generate $1.5 billion in retail sales annually support 21,000 live band performances give $9 million every year to charities, sport and community groups train more than 150 apprentices and trainees each year hold properties with a capital and commercial value of $3.1 billion.2

But hotels do much more than just this. In regional areas they are often the natural gathering place for the community and a focal point for socialising, sporting clubs and friendship. In remote areas, hotels may be the only facility available providing access to information and services including money (ATM’s), food, beverage and accommodation. Hotels also importantly provide a source of decentralised employment including vital experience for winemaking students.

The sale of alcohol is a fundamental component of any successful Hotelier’s business. The AHA|SA and its members recognise that with a licence to sell alcohol comes responsibilities and that alcohol has both benefits and costs to community and society - with excessive alcohol consumption linked to negative impacts on families and communities.

1 “Late Night Safety in South Australia”, December 2012, page 2, www.agd.sa.gov.au 2 Research conducted for AHA|SA by McGregor Tan


3

The negative aspects of the product are not exclusive to South Australia or to Australia, they are issues that confront all advanced economies. Addressing them is a complex task and solutions must be considered within the context of ensuring the economic benefits and ‘vibrant and colourful culture’ of South Australia remains.

Vibrancy – Perceptions of the Adelaide CBD

In mid July 2012 the AHA|SA engaged McGregor Tan Research to conduct a survey on “Perceptions of the Adelaide CBD as a vibrant city”.

Almost two thirds of respondents stated that they thought Adelaide CBD needed to be more vibrant and that Melbourne was a more vibrant city than Adelaide.

Interestingly however when these respondents were read a list of possible options and asked which they believed would make the Adelaide CBD more vibrant, almost three quarters (71% - the highest number) nominated better public transport to and away from the Adelaide CBD. All responses were:

Option %

1 Provide better public transport to and away from the Adelaide CBD 71%

2 More all day cafes and laneway eateries 65%

3 More business to create more jobs in the Adelaide CBD 65%

4 More festivals, events and attractions in the Adelaide CBD 54%

5 A larger population in the Adelaide CBD 46%

6 Longer shopping hours 44%

7 More upmarket retail outlets 42%

8 More late night bars, pubs and night clubs 26%

As can be seen, additional late night venues including bars and mainly drinking places featured significantly down the list with strong support for all day/daytime support for all day cafes and eateries. Examining the respondents, Option 3 (festivals etc) was rated highest amongst 18-39 year olds as was option 5 (shopping). When looking at option 7 (late night bars etc), this was mentioned by a higher proportion of 18-39 years and more specifically those 18-24 – although it still rated low overall.

Safety and anti-social behaviour

Anti-social behaviour is the term which tends to be used by Governments to describe disorderly, disruptive or violent behaviour. In the context of this submission and the recent SA Government Inquiry into the Sale and Consumption of Alcohol it means these behaviours as a result of drinking alcohol (or taking drugs).

The term ‘alcohol-fuelled violence’ is also used, although the role of alcohol versus drugs in the violence is unspecified and sometimes murky. Instances of alcohol-fuelled violence are usually reported if at, or near, a licensed premise regardless of whether the people involved have been inside that premise or whether the violence is random (against strangers) or pre-meditated (someone known). As a case in point, one high profile example of alcohol-fuelled violence in


4

Adelaide over the past few years occurred outside a licensed premise but was actually a gang-related incident between people who knew each other.

The AHA|SA is pleased to see that between 2007 and 2011 serious and minor assaults on streets and around licenced premises at night decreased.3

2007 2011

Minor Assaults 3271 2887

Serious Assaults 450 239

Unfortunately though there are still instances of excess alcohol consumption, inappropriate behaviour and alcohol-fuelled assaults.

Addressing anti-social behaviour and striving for a safe and vibrant city will only happen using an evidence based approach and if the existing laws are enforced and evaluated. A blanket approach, while easy for regulators and enforcement agencies simply penalises the majority for the behaviours of the few. The next section examines what laws exist or are in-train in this regard.

Legislative Context

There are a number of pieces of legislation which directly relate to the licensing, conduct, responsibilities and operation of hotels and licence holders.

Liquor Licensing Act 1997

The Liquor Licensing Act 1997 (The Act) is the primary legislation covering the sale of liquor at licensed premises. The Act allows for a number of different liquor licenses to be granted including: Hotel Licence, Retail Liquor Merchant’s Licence, Wholesale Liquor Merchant’s Licence, Club Licence, Direct Sales Licence, Entertainment Venue Licence, Limited Club Licence, Producer's Licence, Residential Licence, Restaurant Licence, Special Circumstances Licence and the new Small Venue Licence.

A Liquor Licence authorises the licensee to sell and supply liquor in accordance with the conditions of the licence - which are set out in The Act. This includes responsibilities in relation to: crowd controllers (‘bouncers’), supervision and management, supply of liquor to lodgers, entertainment, noise, employment of minors, non-supply of liquor to minors, sale and supply to ‘intoxicated persons’, offensive or disorderly conduct, disciplinary action, special powers to remove or refuse entry, powers to bar patrons.

3http://www.agd.sa.gov.au/sites/agd.sa.gov.au/files/documents/Promotional%20material%20by%20AGD%20for%20external%20audiences/2012-Late-Night-Safety-%20Information-Paper.pdf

http://www.olgc.sa.gov.au/default.asp?page=liquor.licenses.Liquor_Club_Licence_021203.htm

http://www.olgc.sa.gov.au/default.asp?page=liquor.licenses.Liquor_Direct_Sales_Licence_021203.htm

http://www.olgc.sa.gov.au/default.asp?page=liquor.licenses.Liquor_Entertainment_Venue_Licence_021203.htm

http://www.olgc.sa.gov.au/default.asp?page=liquor.licenses.Liquor_Limited_Club_Licence_021203.htm

http://www.olgc.sa.gov.au/default.asp?page=liquor.licenses.Liquor_Producers_Licence_021203.htm

http://www.olgc.sa.gov.au/default.asp?page=liquor.licenses.Liquor_Residential_Licence_021203.htm

http://www.olgc.sa.gov.au/default.asp?page=liquor.licenses.Liquor_Restaurant_Licence_021203.htm

http://www.olgc.sa.gov.au/default.asp?page=liquor.licenses.Liquor_Special_Circumstances_Licence_021203.htm

http://www.cbs.sa.gov.au/small-venue.html

http://www.cbs.sa.gov.au/small-venue.html

http://www.agd.sa.gov.au/sites/agd.sa.gov.au/files/documents/Promotional%20material%20by%20AGD%20for%20external%20audiences/2012-Late-Night-Safety-%20Information-Paper.pdf

http://www.agd.sa.gov.au/sites/agd.sa.gov.au/files/documents/Promotional%20material%20by%20AGD%20for%20external%20audiences/2012-Late-Night-Safety-%20Information-Paper.pdf


5

The General Code of Practice

The Act provides for mandatory Codes of Practice which impose further enforceable licence conditions and trading obligations. The current General Code of Practice came into operation on 18 January 2013 and replaced the previous code introduced at the commencement of the Liquor Licensing Act in 1997. The current General Code of Practice, supported by Guidelines is very proscriptive and sets out what licensees must do with respect to managing the service of alcohol in their individual premises. There is a requirement to undertake a risk assessment and develop a premise-specific Management Plan which includes actions and procedures to reduce and manage anti-social behaviours resulting from the sale of alcohol and other practices of the premises.

The General Code covers specific issues of: Responsible Service of Alcohol Training for all staff (previously only mandatory for approved

‘responsible persons’) practices relating to minors promotion of responsible attitudes to consumption of liquor drink spiking prevention of intoxication, disorderly, offensive, abusive or violent behaviour disturbances

The AHA|SA has been extremely pro-active in the development of this General Code of Practice, liaising extensively with the Office of Consumer and Business Affairs, including working with them on the development of a government template for the Code. AHA|SA has also provided each of its members with a Management Plan template, training and information on compliance with the Code.

Other amendments which deal with patron behaviour in and around licensed premises have recently been made to The Act. Barring provisions have been strengthened, including the right for police to bar people from specific premises, all premises in a location or from a particularly category of premises (e.g. nightclub). Police can use these provisions proactively in order to prevent people attending licensed premises if they commit an offence, have a history of violence, or if their welfare is at risk due to consumption of alcohol at a licensed premise.

Expiation fees for people who are behaving in an offensive or disorderly manner in (or in the vicinity of) licensed premises will be increased from $160 to $500 (this legislation is currently before SA Parliament).

The Act has traditionally only focussed on ‘intoxication’ as a result of consumption of liquor. However the recently introduced General Code of Practice expanded the scope of intoxication to include liquor or illicit substances. It is also proposed to amend the Liquor Licensing Act to define intoxicated. This definition will be:

Intoxicated – a person is intoxicated if- (a) the person’s speech, balance, co-ordination or behaviour is noticeable affected, and (b) it is reasonable in the circumstances to believe that the affected speech, balance, co-

ordination or behaviour is the result of the consumption of liquor or some other substance.

Should a licensee (or staff) breach The Act, Regulations or conditions of licence (which includes Codes of Practice) they may be prosecuted in the criminal courts or have action taken by the Liquor


6

and Gambling Commissioner or the Commissioner of Police before the Licensing Court. This may result in a fine of no more than $15,000, and/or disqualification from holding a licence.

All of these provisions make it clear to licensees and their staff they must take their obligations and responsibilities seriously.

Before more and more, increasingly stringent, requirements are imposed upon the Industry this new General Code of Practice, which has been operational for less than three months, must be allowed time to be imbedded and properly evaluated.

The General Code of Practice applies 24 hours a day for all venues and became effective 18 January 2013. The additional Late Night Code will commence 1 October 2013. All staff are now also required to have Responsible Service of Alcohol training and the Hospitality Industry is continuing to transition its employees.

The AHA|SA believes that sufficient laws and regulations currently exist to ensure the responsible service of alcohol. We do not believe any further requirements should be imposed on liquor license holders until a thorough evidence-based review is undertaken.

The Late Night Code of Practice

A proposed Late Night Code of Practice has recently been approved by the Minister and is expected to commence on 1 October 2013. This Code will apply in addition to the General Code and will impose further restrictions on the hotel industry including mandatory lock outs (people can stay on the premises but cannot re-enter after a certain time) and restrictions on the types of drinks which can be sold. The Late Night Code also contains requirements for drink marshals, first aid training, closed circuit TV (CCTV), metal detectors, queue management as well as a strengthening of the responsible service obligations.

Lock out exemption for the Adelaide Casino from the Late Night Code

Given the Government’s stated hard-line position on anti-social behaviour and the introduction of the General and Late Night Codes of Practice, the AHA|SA finds it extraordinary that the lock out provisions contained in the Late Night Code of Practice will not apply to the Adelaide Casino. If the Government is really serious about addressing anti-social behaviour linked to alcohol consumption it must also address the behaviour of the ‘biggest pub in town’ which is situated in the busiest night-time entertainment precinct in town.

We believe that the Casino late on a Friday or Saturday night attracts the same demographic and experiences the same alcohol-related issues as the adjacent West End entertainment precinct. We believe also that issues of anti-social behaviour will be further exacerbated when the 3am lock-out commences as people try to go to the only place in the area that is able to let them in.

The AHA|SA made a separate submission to the proposed Late Night Code of Practice can be found here, www.ahasa.asn.au.

http://www.ahasa.asn.au/


7

Details of both of these Codes of Practice, together with guidelines published by the Liquor and Gambling Commissioner, can be found on the Office of Liquor and Gambling website, here.4

The Summary Offences Act

The Summary Offences Act 1953 deals with offences of public order and also contains significant powers of the police. It gives police the power to enter onto licensed premises - in addition to the extensive powers provided by the Liquor Licensing Act 1997.

The Summary Offences Act 1953 is used mainly when a person commits an offence in a public place and it provides a way police can disperse crowds and/or require someone to move away from an area.

Senior Police also have powers under this Act to take action where premises are overcrowded and where there is serious risk of injury or damage. In these instances police can order people to immediately leave or they can require the licensee to remove people and address the overcrowding. In these circumstances police can also require the premises to close for up to 12 hours.

A recent amendment to this Act created an offence to carry an offensive weapon in, or near, a licensed premise. It also increased the rights of police to search people and increased the general police powers to remove people from a licensed premise or other public place where offences/disturbances are being, or have been committed. These changes are all intended to aid in the proper management of hotel patrons.

Public Intoxication Act 1984

The Public Intoxication Act 1984 enables police to apprehend people if they are under the influence of alcohol or a drug and take them to the person’s home, a police station or other place where they can be cared for.

Being intoxicated in a public place (including in a hotel) is not an offence in itself and people apprehended under the Public Intoxication Act 1933 are not charged. However, licensees and their staff can require someone who is intoxicated to leave the premises or can refuse entry to the premise on the basis of them being intoxicated. Under the Liquor Licensing Act it is an offence to serve an intoxicated person, but they can be on the premises.

The Development Act 1993

The Development Act 1993 sets out the considerable approval process to be undertaken by someone who wishes to set up a licensed venue and these approvals are required before a Liquor Licence can be granted. Under the Development Act a number of features are assessed including location and number of exits and sanitary facilities (toilets etc), and adherence to accessibility guidelines. The development approvals relating to dealing with noise, venue capacity and other related matters are also usually imposed as conditions of the liquor licence.

4www.olgc.sa.gov.au/default.asp?page=liquor.Licensees_Obligations.code_of_practice.Liquor_Code_of_Practice_first_page_021203.htm&menu=liquor

http://www.olgc.sa.gov.au/default.asp?page=liquor.Licensees_Obligations.code_of_practice.Liquor_Code_of_Practice_first_page_021203.htm&menu=liquor




8

Summary

Most licensees actively promote Responsible Service of Alcohol and comply with the various obligations.”5 We believe AHA|SA members understand their legal and social obligations and seek to fulfil them. None of them believe anti-social or violent behaviour as a result of excess alcohol consumption is acceptable or, frankly, good for business.

As the General Code of Practice only commenced early this year and the Late Night Code does not commence until 1 October 2013 there has simply been no assessment or evaluation to suggest whether these measures have made any contributions to assaults or behaviour, positive or negative.

The further changes to the Liquor Licensing Act 1997 which will prohibit supply of free or discounted drinks after midnight and will increase expiation fees for unruly behaviour to $500 plus Victims of Crime Levy have yet to commence and results of these changes are yet to be evaluated.

The AHA|SA does not believe any further laws or requirements are necessary and certainly the recent ones need to be introduced, bedded-in and evaluated before any additional ones are contemplated. Even then we would argue that further changes to laws or regulations should be issue specific and should address specific problems at specific venues.

We do not believe that a blanket approach which penalises the majority for the issues that affect the few is fair and believe it is damaging to both the businesses involved, the reputation of the sector and ultimately the vibrancy of the nightlife in Adelaide.

While recognising their obligations, our hoteliers also tell us that from the ‘coal-face’ anti-social behaviours involve more than just what happens ON their premises and issues such as drugs and pre-loading (when someone drinks off premise before they go in) must also be considered.

Alcohol Consumption

Alcohol has a significant and integral role in the cultural and social life of Australians today. It is used to celebrate and commiserate significant life events including birth, death, marriage, graduation, promotion - and the opposite!

Alcohol is also represented through literature, music and visual arts and through the alcohol industry’s sponsorship of major sporting events and music festivals. Alcohol is legal, socially sanctioned and widely promoted.6

South Australia has a particular interest in alcohol as it is responsible for more than half of the total production of all Australian wine. It is this first class wine production, our internationally renowned wine regions, our iconic beer brewers and our emerging cider breweries which form part of what makes SA both an attractive tourism destination and a great place to live.

National Alcohol Consumption

In its annual publication, the Australian Bureau of Statistics tracks alcohol consumption patterns and changing tastes of Australians over time.7

5 “A Safer Night Out, page 3 6 http://drinkwisewebsite.s3-ap-southeast-1.amazonaws.com/2011/10/National-Centre-for-Education-and-Training-on-Addiction-NCETA-Flinders-University.pdf 7ABS Publication No. 4307.0.55.001 – Apparent Consumption of Alcohol, Australia 2010-11. 03/05/2012

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_wine


9

Source: ABS – Apparent Consumption of Alcohol, Australia 2010-11.

The statistics show that overall consumption of alcohol is at its lowest since about 1964. In 2010-11 there was 10.0 litres of pure alcohol available for consumption per person in Australia - less than the 10.3 litres in 2009-10 - and this equates to around 2.2 standard drinks (10grms of pure alcohol) per day per person over 15 years of age. Alcohol consumption peaked at 13.1 litres of pure alcohol per person in 1974-75.

Statistics are expressed as ‘available for consumption’ only because the Bureau of Statistics looks at production and imported quantities to determine the figures. They state the numbers would be slightly overestimated as it doesn’t subtract quantities used in cooking, wasted or cellared.

The level of apparent consumption of the different alcoholic beverages has also changed substantially over time. In particular, the proportion of pure alcohol available for consumption as beer has decreased (from 76% to 42%), while the proportions of white and red wines have increased from 12% to 37.4% as have spirits and Ready-To-Drink’s (RTD) from 12% to 20%.8

Beer

Per person, the apparent consumption of pure alcohol from beer rose strongly in the decade following World War II, followed by a period of slower growth. It peaked in 1973-74 and 1974-75 with an average of 9.2 litres of pure alcohol per person and has decreased markedly since, with 4.2 litres of pure alcohol per person in 2011.

Wine

Red and white wine consumption has increased over time, reflecting the changing patterns of drinking in Australia. White wine makes up the majority of this with 48% in 2010-11, followed by red

8 “apparent” numbers are used as statistics are based on production levels and are indicators of consumption. It is likely that actual consumption may be lower as no adjustments are allowed for alcohol which has been stored at retail or wholesale level, cellared, discarded or used in the preparation food.


10

wine (36.6%) and other wines (15.4%). The slight decrease between 2009-10 and 2010-11 is due to a decrease in consumption of others wines (including dessert wine, sparkling wines, sherry and vermouth).

Spirits and Ready to Drink (RTDs)

The quantity of alcohol available for consumption as spirits increased by 4.8% since 2009-10. The volume of RTDs available remained relatively stable, indicating both that the introduction of a specific tax on RTDs has not had a marked impact on consumption of this product category, and may have pushed consumption patterns towards spirits.

A wide range of factors have affected patterns of consumption of alcohol in Australia, although it is difficult to attribute any one factor to the changes in the data. Changes in the age structure of the Australian population, changing economic conditions (and the resulting effects on employment rates and levels of disposable income) and changing consumer preferences all may have increased or reduced consumption at different times over the past 50 years. Some additional factors which may have contributed to increases are:

the increasing affluence of the Australian population in years following World War II the arrival of large numbers of post-World War II migrants from European countries with

traditional cultural associations with wine changing legislative and social conditions through the 1970s, such as the introduction of anti-

discrimination laws (for example, in relation to the preclusion of women drinking in public bars in Australia)

growth of the Australian wine industry changes in viticultural and climatic conditions, leading to higher alcohol content in wines a wider range of choice available to consumers

Factors that may have contributed to a reduction in consumption are:

legislative changes, i.e. the introduction of random breath testing (between 1976 and 1974, and in 1988)

changes in excise imposed upon the sale of alcohol greater government focus on and community awareness of negative effects of alcohol use the introduction of low alcohol beers.

Individual Alcohol Consumption

According to 2013 research by the Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education (FARE), 77% of Australian adults drink alcohol, a slight decline from previous years.9 The vast majority of these individuals drink in moderation and drink responsibly, with 73% drinking on two days or less per week and 27% on three days or more.

FARE’s research also suggests that on each drinking occasion around half of all people consume 1-2 standard drinks, one third consume 3-5 standard drinks and a little more than 1 in ten drinkers (12%) consume 6-10 drinks.

9 FARE, Annual Alcohol Poll 2013: Attitudes and Behaviours, page 24


11

Of concern is that the number of people drinking more than 6 standard drinks on any one occasion is increasing, with a 1% increase since 2012 and a 5% increase over the last 4 years.

Excess alcohol consumption has been linked with negative health and social outcomes. Conversely, a lower level of consumption has been linked with positive health benefits and feelings of well-being, as well as the obvious tourism, economic and other benefits to South Australia.

While recognising the need to address the very real negative outcomes of excess alcohol consumption, there are also dangers in demonising alcohol as only negative with no positives. As succinctly put by Stephen Strachan, the CEO of the Wine Federation;

“Genuine public concern about alcohol abuse and related health and social problems in Australia is

slowly but very deliberately being usurped to sell a message that all alcohol is bad all the time.”

“Unfortunately, the likes of the National Alliance for Action on Alcohol have decided that moderation is not good enough and that any attempts to address alcohol abuse other than by

hiking up the price or banning it completely are a waste of time - or tainted.”

Any look at history will see that prohibition of alcohol is an unhelpful and unrealistic option. Reasonable and constructive debate and a moderate and realistic approach will recognise the harms of very high levels of alcohol consumption as well as the overall benefits to the economy and society of a responsible drinking culture. This would go a long way to addressing the harms at their cause while preserving the benefits.

On-premise Alcohol Sales

While only responsible for a portion of the 20-25% of all liquor sales on-premise, South Australian hoteliers operate in an increasingly competitive and an extremely high regulated environment. As discussed as well as the Liquor Licensing Act 1997 this regulation includes:

the Liquor Licensing Act 1997 General Code of Practice the recently introduced Late Night Code of Practice Responsible Service of Alcohol Principles (RSA) and compulsory training.

The majority of Licensees are well aware of, and take seriously, their social and legal obligations as well as the penalties should they not meet their legal requirements. Notably these requirements include responsibility for people on their premises even though these people may not have purchased or consumed alcohol on the premises.

This view is supported by a substantial report on liquor licensing in Australia recently published by the National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction (NCETA) based at Flinders University. The report was supported by the SA Police.

One of its key findings was:

“Many licensed premises are not problematic, most are well run and operate within the law. However, the increased availability of alcohol in general (especially where associated with cheaper prices and easier access to take-away products) can exacerbate alcohol-related problems in the


12

community, further highlighting the importance of both the role of liquor licensing legislation and its effective and appropriate enforcement.”10

Pre-Loading

A.J.M. of the Forsyth Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research describes pre-loading as drinking before entering nightclubs (or hotels), ‘side-loading’ as consuming alcohol purchased elsewhere while attending nightclubs and continued drinking after leaving these premises as ‘back-loading’.11 The focus of concern in Australia is very much on pre-loading.

As seen, between 75-80% of all liquor sold is sold for consumption away from licensed premises. While some of this alcohol is certainly purchased for moderate consumption by adults in a controlled environment it is also the common practice of some to ‘pre-load’ (alcohol and drugs) before going to licensed premises.

Pre-loading significantly contributes to the excess (and rapid) consumption of alcohol and is recognised in most debates about alcohol and anti-social behaviour.

For operators of licenced premises pre-loading is a real problem as intoxication may not be apparent at the time someone is given entry to a venue but quite soon afterwards they are seriously so - even without purchasing an additional alcoholic drink. One SA hotelier has advised that his most purchased drinks are water and energy drinks and that it is his opinion that the majority of his patrons pre-load.

Pre-loading clearly impacts upon licenced premises (in operation and profitability) and while practices and procedures can be implemented at the venue to control further service there is little that licensees can do to prevent pre-loading as it happens away from them.

The March 2013 report of the National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund (NDLERF), “Patron Offending and Intoxication in Night-Time Entertainment Districts” examined the nature and extent of pre-loading in detail.12

In part it found that almost two thirds of people admitted to pre-loading an average of six standard drinks. Generally males reported pre-loading more than females and with higher levels of consumption.

The major motivation for pre-loading was price with almost two thirds (61%) reporting this as the primary reason. Twenty two per cent nominated fun/catching up with friends and 7.3% did it in order to become intoxicated before entering licensed venues.

The complete details of all reported motivation are in the table below.

10 Trifonoff, A., Andrew, R., Steenson, T., Nicolas, R., Roche, A. M., Liquor Licensing Legislation in Australia: Part 2, A jurisdictional breakdown, NCETA, page xvi. 11 http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/14659890902966463 12 National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund (NDLERF), “Patron Offending and Intoxication in Night-Time Entertainment Districts, monograph series no. 46.

http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/14659890902966463


13

National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund (NDLERF), “Patron Offending and Intoxication in Night-Time Entertainment Districts, monograph series no. 46, page 39.

The study also revealed that the most common drinking place for pre-loading was in a private home (82%). Only four per cent admitted to pre-loading in vehicles and a very small number admitted to drinking on public transport.

National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund (NDLERF), “Patron Offending and Intoxication in Night-Time Entertainment Districts, monograph series no. 46, page 38

This would suggest that measures to address pre-loading in transport while potentially a positive move might not actually have a large impact on the overall level of pre-loading.

Illicit Drugs and Energy Drinks

A number of commentators have raised questions about an inter-relationship between increased anti-social behaviour and consumption of a combination of alcohol and other substances including illicit drugs and caffeine-based energy drinks.


14

Although limited research examining the use and harms of Energy Drinks (such as Red Bull, “V”, Mother) has been conducted overseas no detailed research is currently available in Australia.13

What is clear is that the consumption of energy drinks amongst young people (18-30) is common. In its study, the NDLERF reported that almost 25% of respondents said that they consumed energy drinks that evening and around 65% of those mixed their energy drinks with alcohol, with mixing more common in the younger age groups, see below.

The study also reported that the main motivators for combining energy drinks and alcohol were taste, boosting energy and ‘buzz’ and peer pressure.

Also according to the study, consumption of energy drinks peaked between 1.00am and 3.00am. Average consumption was 1-2 energy drinks, with an average maximum of three drinks (one more than the recommended daily intake which is two drinks/cans).

National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund (NDLERF), “Patron Offending and Intoxication in Night-Time Entertainment Districts, monograph series no. 46, page 41

Of greater concern was the level of consumption which was between 1 and a huge 20 drinks. At 80mg of caffeine per drink, (equivalent to one cup of coffee) it is clear that the consumption of the equivalent of 20 cups of coffee over a relatively short period of 6-8 hours is well in excess of the daily amount recommended by the manufacturers of the drinks.14

While there are clearly questions about the effects of excess energy drinks and excess alcohol consumption and patterns of behaviour when these are combined, what is less clear is to what extent this leads to anti-social behaviour.

We believe that more independent Australian based research is required and if appropriate a targeted education and policy response developed.

16% of respondents to the NDLERF study admitted to taking illicit drugs as well as alcohol.15 Anecdotal evidence suggests it is much higher in some age groups. Similarly evidence from our members also suggests that they regularly turn away patrons who are obviously under the influence of illicit drugs.

13 FARE, Alcohol and Caffeinated Energy Drinks: A preliminary study exploring patterns of consumption and associated harms. Nov 2011, page 5. 14 National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund (NDLERF), “Patron Offending and Intoxication in Night-Time Entertainment Districts, op cit, pages 40-44. 15 NDLERF, op cit, page 44


15

Although illegal it is clear that drugs are regularly, and easily, obtained and consumed in conjunction with alcohol, further impairing judgement and affecting behaviour. Greater policing and enforcement is needed.

Drinking Age

The legal age to both purchase and consume alcohol on licenced premises in Australia is 18, an age which is in line with the vast majority of countries worldwide, although some are lower (16 in Italy, Belgium, Germany, Luxemburg, Portugal & the Netherlands), some higher (Iceland, many Asian countries and many of the States of the United States) and of course some countries prohibit alcohol consumption altogether (Afghanistan).

Depending on the country the minimum age that alcohol can be legally consumed may be different than the age when it can be purchased. These laws vary among different countries and many laws have exemptions or special circumstances. Most laws apply only to drinking alcohol in public places, with alcohol consumption in the home being generally unregulated. The United Kingdom is the only country that has a minimum legal age for drinking alcohol in a home.16

Some countries also have different age limits for different types of alcoholic drinks.

The AHA|SA believes that the most appropriate legal age to obtain and/or consume alcohol is one that reflects general current community expectations and beliefs, taking into account things such as social and economic well-being. In South Australia this ‘age’ has been debated and adjusted since at least 1863.

Prior to 1863, the first South Australian statute regulating the sale of alcohol made no mention of age and since then the legal drinking age has been set as low as 12, as high as 21, and has risen and fallen at various times (see following table).

16 http://www.icap.org/portals/0/download/all_pdfs/icap_reports_english/report4.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom


16

The AHA|SA has not seen any evidence of any community support for a move to increase the legal age for the purchase or consumption of alcohol and by international example 18 years of age would seem the generally accepted ‘norm’.

It is clear also that the legal drinking age is not a strong indicator of binge drinking rates. A number of relevant conclusions were drawn in a study in “Social Science & Medicine”. (The legal drinking age is in brackets).17

Binge drinking amongst US college students has become a major public health concern (drinking age 21).

Although Canadians (18, 19 in most states) were more often drinkers, US (21) students were more often binge drinkers.

Finland (18), France (18), Germany (16 for beer, 18 for spirits), Sweden (18) and UK (18) had the highest frequency of binge drinking for the younger age group (18-29).

Higher volume per drinking occasion and higher proportions of binge drinking were found in UK (18), Sweden (18) and Finland (18) compared with Italy (16), France (18) and Germany (16 for beer, 18 for spirits).

Different patterns of drinking were identified in different European countries, with the Nordic countries reporting more binge drinking, and central and Mediterranean countries the least.

The study also found that cultural and social factors were a better predictor of binge drinking than drinking ages.

The SA Government consistently urges a ‘European’ drinking culture (by which we presume that it refers to the Southern European culture of supposedly drinking less not the Eastern European or UK one of drinking more!) As seen above, the cultures held up as the models to emulate do not necessarily have higher drinking ages.

The fact is that the majority of young people do drink responsibility for the vast majority if not all of the time. For those who do not, a mixture of actions must be used to address this, actions that are more multi-faceted than simply raising the age. After all, illegal drugs remain illegal but are still consumed with increasingly regularity by young people, some much younger than 18 (and some not so young).

In a practical sense raising the drinking age would have a marked detrimental effect on the State’s economy. People between 18-25 years of age make up a significant majority of workers in the hospitality industry. Hospitality work provides employment and experience for thousands of people throughout their university and transition years, as well as for those for whom hospitality is their chosen career.

An increase to the drinking age would also result in lack of employment for these thousands of young people together, critically, with a commensurate lack of job seekers to fill vital roles in hotels, clubs, restaurants, bottle shop and licensed sporting clubs. Should older people actually be found to fill those jobs, wages would be higher and would place another burden on these businesses.

In addition, raising the drinking age would require significant levels of taxpayer funding to;

17 Kuntsche. E, Rehm, J. and Gmel, G. “Characteristics of binge drinkers in Europe”, op cit.


17

support comprehensive education programs in secondary schools and tertiary institutions to convince 16 to 21 year olds of the merits of the policy.

support effective policing of the age limit and to manage the consequential increase in underage drinkers.

support employment retraining for 18 to 21 year old employees and compensation/subsidy for the same loss of employment.

The Australian Secondary Students’ Alcohol and Drug Survey

Also when considering the question of age, and while enormous attention, efforts and resources are focused on preventing sales to minors by licensed premises, the reality is that the likely source is far closer to home. The Australian Secondary Students’ Alcohol and Drug survey (ASSAD) is a triennial national survey of secondary school students’ use of licit and illicit substances. It was developed from a triennial national survey assessing students’ use of alcohol and tobacco that was conducted collaboratively by Cancer Councils across Australia, commencing in 1984. The table below documents the most recent results (2011). The most likely source of alcohol for all age groups was parents (32.9%), friends (22.8%) and someone else purchased (21.3%). See the table below for full details.

In Australia it is illegal for a person underage (minor) to consume alcohol on licensed premises and it is illegal for a minor to consume or possess alcohol in a public place unless in the company of an adult guardian or spouse of the minor.

It is not illegal in South Australia for a person under 18 to consume or possess alcohol in a private place. The current age of 18 therefore applies only to consumption and possession on licensed premises and in public (unless in the company of an adult guardian or spouse of the minor).

Most common sources of last alcoholic drink among current drinkers^#† Australian secondary school students 2011


18

Drinking in their own or a friend’s private home is the primary way the majority of minors are accessing alcohol and pre-loading.

The AHA|SA supports the Liquor Licensing (Supply to Minors) Amendment Bill introduced by Member of Morialta, Mr John Gardner in September 2012, which would make it an offence to supply alcohol to a minor without the permission of the minor’s parent.

Alcohol Supply and Retailing (South Australia)

Alcohol is available in South Australia for sale and consumption ‘on-premise’ (hotels, restaurants, clubs, nightclubs, cafés, function centres etc.) and in ‘packaged’ form or ‘off-premise’. Off premise means purchased for consumption somewhere else, i.e. from hotel or stand-alone bottle shops, on-line, liquor outlets, or from cellar doors.

Packaged Liquor and Market Share

Currently 75% to 80% of alcohol sold is purchased ‘off-premise’. This means that only 20% and 25% of alcohol purchased is consumed in a licensed premise.

The AHA|SA has long advocated for effective licensing system which controls access to, and places effective responsibility on, all sellers of alcohol products. While we are sometimes accused of self interest in this area it is clear that the controls around venues that sell for ‘on-premise’ consumption are increasingly strict yet no such attention is paid to packaged liquor which supplies a huge 80% of all alcohol sold.

Packaged liquor is generally cheaper per standard drink than on-premise alcohol and this is a critical factor when dealing with issues such as pre-loading.

A report by Deakin University found:

“Drinking levels are clearly increasing, pre-loading is a bigger issue, venues are open later than

they used to be, an issue for all of us to look at is off-premise and the sale of pre-packaged

liquor.”18

Market Saturation

In total there are more than 5752 liquor licences in South Australia which means South Australia already has the highest number of liquor licences per adult population - at 1 per 224.

18 Sydney Morning Herald front page story, Tuesday, 11 December 2012.

http://www.johngardnermp.com.au/parliament/speeches/982-20-september-2012-liquor-licensing-supply-to-minors-amendment-bill.html


19

Jurisdiction Adult population per licensed premise ACT 430 NSW 369 NT 268 QLD 506 SA 224 TAS 271 VIC 229 WA 414 Average 317

*Source: Liquor Licensing Legislation in Australia – NCETA (launched in SA in November 2012)

South Australia has over 2,875 licences to sell alcohol in packaged form.

Current number of retail liquor outlets in SA that can sell packaged liquor (OLGC)

Hotels 626

Retail Liquor Merchants 191

Wholesale Liquor Merchants (can sell 10% retail)

349

Direct Sales (on-line) 427

Producers (cellar door) 1,282

Total 2,875

Source: http://www.olgc.sa.gov.au/liquor/Statistics/Liquorstats.pdf

The AHA|SA firmly believes that there are adequate retail outlets and opportunities for the public to buy packaged alcohol in South Australia and that there is neither a demonstrable need nor any justifiable reason to increase this number through the granting access to additional retail liquor licences outside the current regime, for example to supermarkets.

This view was agreed with in the most recent review of the Liquor Licensing Act.

“the restriction on the types of outlets which can sell liquor ie supermarkets, service stations and delicatessens, has been maintained to prevent an increase in availability of liquor…….. an undue proliferation of liquor outlets may lead to harmful practices to meet the increased competitive pressures”19

And further,

“I am convinced from my own inspections and discussions within the industry throughout Australia that the standard of hotels and bottle shops in South Australia is the highest in Australia. I am concerned that an immediate total deregulation by removing “need” concept and allowing the sale 19 Anderson, T.R., Q.C., Review of the South Australian Liquor Licensing Act 1985, October 1996, page 2.

http://www.olgc.sa.gov.au/liquor/Statistics/Liquorstats.pdf


20

of liquor in supermarkets and elsewhere may not be in the best interests of the government’s economic development strategy and tourism development and the wider needs and interests of the South Australian community.”20

The current licensing arrangement has delivered a highly competitive structure which preserves an independent small/medium business sector and balances the community concern for alcohol availability with the commercial opportunities that encourage investment and employment in the Industry.

This, together with the effect of the overwhelming market share of the two dominant grocers, (Coles and Woolworths) on the wine industry and existing small/medium SA retail liquor businesses are the main reasons why the AHA|SA so strongly opposes the recent State Government proposal to allow the sale of wine in supermarkets.

Dominance of Coles and Woolworths

During the past decade, the supermarket duopoly has increased their combined market share to over 59% of industry revenue.21 There has been a major shift away from bottle shops and ‘high-street’ liquor retailers to big-box liquor stores (e.g. ‘Dan Murphy’ and the like).

Over the last five years the retail liquor industry has seen the growing market dominance of Woolworths and Coles at the expense of smaller independent liquor retailers. Over the five years through 2012-13, these supermarkets have taken advantage of this to negotiate agreements with alcohol producers, discounting some liquor products to levels independent retailers have struggled to compete with.

20 Ibid, page 19. 21 Liquor Retailing in Australia September 2012 www.ibisworld.com.au


21

The following table displays the duopoly marketing brands currently operating in South Australia.

The examples below show how national and even domestic local supermarkets promote unsustainable prices and in the process devalue brands and origins i.e. commoditise wine generally.

THE DUOPOLY BRANDS

Woolworths Coles

Dan Murphy

Mac’s Liquor

B.W.S.

Cellarmasters (Australia’s largest on-line wine seller

First Choice

Liquor Land

Vintage Cellars

Example 2: Even local Independent grocers treat wine as a commodity. With each purchase of $100 of groceries at the Brighton Foodland you can purchase a 750ml bottle of New Zealand wine for $5. That’s approximately 0.65cents per standard drink. This particular product was retailing at a competitor from $14.95.

NB: this Foodland and Cellarbrations store are owned by the same entity.

Example 1: The current prevalence of extremely cheap alcohol is of serious concern to the AHA|SA when considering issues as the viability of the SA wine industry and our member bottle shops, as well as the influence on pre-loading prior to going to licensed premises.


22

Viable and Competitive Alternative Retail Outlets

There is a viable and competitive alternative to the Coles/Woolworths duopoly, namely the many hundreds of independent retail liquor stores, wholesale liquor merchants, and the 427 direct liquor sellers (i.e. on-line – many specialising exclusively in South Australian boutique products), in addition to some 600 hotels and 1,282 producers (cellar doors).

Many retailers trade under various cooperative marketing banners such as Sip & Save, Thirsty Camel, Cellarbrations, Bargains etc. They use their cooperative buying and marketing arrangements to compete against the massive market dominance of Coles and Woolworths but they are in fact predominantly small, medium and family based. A significant number are in regional areas, employ local people and invest in South Australia.

It’s of interest to note that such market dominance is less likely to occur in the United States of America or Europe because of ‘anti-trust’ and market dominance laws. No such impediments exist in Australia. Further, many States in the USA utilise quotas based on population to determine the number of licenses in effect in a community i.e. ‘x’ number of liquor licenses per head of population.

On-line Liquor Sales

On-line liquor sales will continue to surge as Woolworths and Coles invest in on-line outlets and other specialist online wine retailers’ benefit from consumer demand for variety and quality.

Woolworths also own ‘Cellarmasters’ - an online and direct wine sales business, which does not have a physical “bricks and mortar” retail presence. Significantly, Cellarmasters also operates a winemaking business known as “Dorrien Estate” and is involved also in businesses that provide bottling and logistics services to other winemakers.22 Cellarmasters is Australia’s largest on-line liquor outlet and already accounts for 33% of all on-line sales.

The impacts of the easy availability of cheap alcohol from on-line retailers is not fully understood. The AHA|SA has some concern on issues such as how proof of age is determined together with the impact of large volume on-line sales to rural and remote communities, often with free delivery.

Alcohol Pricing

Taxes on alcohol are the responsibility of the Federal Government. Beer and spirits are subject to excise (tax) based on alcohol content and wine is taxed on the wholesale price (ad valorem) which does not take into consideration the alcohol content.

Producers of wine are rebated the tax on the first $500,000 in sales whether wholesale, retail, cellar door or on-line i.e. no tax is paid on the first $0.5 million in sales. The level of excise/tax directly impacts retail pricing.

Using price to affect sales and reduce demand has sometimes been introduced by Governments in order to reduce overall consumption (i.e. tobacco) or consumption of one specific product, such as the 2008 increase in excise on RTDs or ‘alcopops’.

22http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/Woolworths-the-fresh-booze-people/


23

The Federal Government’s imposition of the steep 70 % additional excise on what became known as ‘alcopops’ has shown equivocal results. An Access Economics study of hospital admissions showed that “there was no significant decrease in alcohol-related Emergency Department presentations of 15-29 year olds compared with any of the control groups after the increase in the tax”.23 At the same time the study cited a drop in sales of RTD’s and a (smaller) increase in the sale of other beverages, including spirits.

While sales data may indicate levels of overall consumption this data cannot measure changes to the number of drinks consumed on any one occasion. As a measure to address binge drinking there is no evidence that this pricing measure has been effective.

While a counter argument may be that a better model would be to increase the price of ALL alcohol, the AHA does not support this for a number of reasons.

First and foremost, the vast majority of people simply do the ‘right thing’ and it is unreasonable for them to be penalised for the behaviour of a minority.

Secondly, price is a blunt economic instrument which tends to disadvantage those with the least money to spend and not affect those with the most. Price mechanisms are only effective when price actually matters to a person and then matters enough to them to change their purchasing decisions. Even then those individuals choose what to forego when money is scarce, and it may not be alcohol which is left on the bottle shop shelf, it may be essential items such as food or health care. This of course has associated problems.

The imperfect nature of pricing signals is also illustrated by examining the recent recommendation of Ken Henry. In his Tax Review, Henry recommended the application of a volumetric tax on alcohol. The modelled results of his recommendation are in the table below.

23 “Effect of the increase in “alcopops” tax on alcohol-related harms in young people: a controlled interrupted time series”, Medical Journal of Australia, 195 (11/12).


24

Under the proposed volumetric tax system model, bottled wine currently priced at $27 per bottle would have no change in retail price (a bottle of 750ml Penfold’s Grange would drop in price by over $90) and the on-premise price of beer would rise by 0.13 cents in tax per ‘schooner’ (285ml of full strength beer) plus retailer margin.

Critically, the tax change would lead to a 22% decrease in the price of a standard bottle of spirits. But studies suggest that both pre-loading and the rapid consumption of alcohol by younger age groups is more closely associated with beer and spirits than with wine.24 Therefore, if these studies are correct, the imposition of a volumetric tax would reduce the price of the very alcohol type which is consumed most by the group who are, arguably, the reason for the imposition of the pricing mechanism in the first place.

The increase in the on-premise price of alcohol would also further increase the retail price difference between on-premise and off-premise - leading to a further increase in packaged liquor sales and pre-loading (as price is the dominant reason people pre-load now).

Simply put, the imposition of a volumetric tax would make it cheaper to buy spirits relative to other products but would not effectively address issues of alcohol related anti-social and violent behaviour.

As well, there would be a 120% increase in the price of cask wine, which would have a huge impact on some members of society - often the retired older demographic - who may only be able to afford this wine option. It is unfair to penalise this demographic for no reason.

Such a large increase in the price of cask wine compared to bottled wine would also likely lead to dramatic fall in the sales of cask wine, which would critically damage the wine industry and particularly the high volume producing Riverland wine region.

Other

Personal Responsibility and Accountability

Given the existing legislative framework the AHA|SA believes that one critical element in addressing anti-social behaviour and enhancing safety is increased and targeted enforcement of the existing legislation. If people are both educated on their responsibilities and run a real risk of being penalised for poor behaviour then this will go a long way to address issues of high levels of intoxication and associated violence or unruly behaviour.

The AHA|SA supports the increase of expiation fees for disorderly and/or offensive behaviour to $500 and believes these fines should also include offences such as failure to leave a licensed premise when requested and attempting to return to a licensed premise within 24 hours. This would not diminish the importance of the obligations of the licensee but would also encourage people to develop a responsible attitude to their consumption of alcohol.

Targeted education is also is one tool to address the negative impacts of alcohol use. This is a view endorsed by the Youth Affairs Council of South Australia’s Anne Bainbridge who stated that education should be at the forefront of efforts to reduce alcohol-related harm for young people, not

24 Kuntsche. E, Rehm, J. and Gmel, G. “Characteristics of binge drinkers in Europe”, Social Science & Medicine (2004), 113-127


25

legislative change. “It would be more useful if we spent time helping young people and the broader community understand the impacts of drinking.”25

Social and Cultural Research

The issue of young people, alcohol consumption and violence is more complex than simply one of over-indulgence. A 2010 paper by the Youth Coalition of the ACT entitled “Dutch courage: Young People, Alcohol and Alcohol Related Violence” stated that there is a set of young people who value violence as a means to obtain status, empowerment and to claim a legitimate identity. 26 This research suggested that merely addressing their pattern of drinking may not have a marked impact on the anti-social behaviour of this group and that the deeper issues of violence itself should also be addressed.

The AHA|SA believes there is a need for further research into the social and cultural context of drinking in Australia with particular emphasis on the perspectives and experiences of young people in South Australia.

We believe the views and experiences of the very demographic who are over-represented in alcohol related violence, namely young men, together with the experiences of young women are key to understanding and changing patterns of alcohol consumption and alcohol related anti-social behaviour.

The ACT report also suggested that education and peer group discussion was valuable in highlighting that the social norms and values of the majority were not those of the young people so often represented in the media. In other words, the majority did not support or seek to mimic the behaviour of that minority who regularly behave badly and make the papers.

Police Presence and Enforcement

A visible police presence and enforcement is key to promoting safer precincts and encouraging appropriate behaviour. AHA|SA recommends that police be actively encouraged to use powers under the Public Intoxication Act to remove intoxicated people from public places. As stated earlier the AHA|SA has welcomed the move to increase expiation notices to $500 where the behaviour of a person is disorderly or offensive.

Public & Other Transport

In discussions with the AHA|SA the one critical issue identified by SA Police, SA Ambulance Officers, hotel owners, volunteer organisations and the young people themselves is the lack of transport to get away and home from late night precincts.

An effective strategy to reduce the likelihood of alcohol related anti-social behaviour and violence is to simply ensure that there are convenient, affordable and, critically, safe ways for people to leave entertainment precincts and to get away from crowds and potentially aggressive situations.

The lack of transport options in city areas such as Hindley Street and near the Adelaide Casino result in long queues at taxi ranks, many people hanging around, people waiting for the first train service to start and this can easily lead to frustration, altercations, or worse. 25 YACSA Executive Director, Anne Bainbridge, www.yacsa.com.au 26 Barker, J. (2010) Dutch Courage: Young People, Alcohol and Alcohol related violence ACT: Youth Coalition of the ACT.


26

It is not enough to have managed taxi ranks if there are no taxis available for a number of hours. It is clear also that despite managed taxi ranks, many taxis continue to pick up passengers after being hailed on the street, sometimes after people have dangerously hailed them by walking (intoxicated) onto the street. As well as the potential for pedestrian/vehicle crashes this leads to further delays at taxi ranks.

In addition not all people can afford a taxi fare, especially those in outer suburbs and therefore more expensive and, arguably, lower social economic areas. People who may have been drinking, as well as those who haven’t, are more at risk if waiting for hours for public transport to recommence. They may also choose to ‘risk it’ and walk or drive their own vehicle.

This will become even more critical when the 3am lock-out applies as part of the proposed Late Night Code of Practice. People who may have been queuing at a venue will then be locked out of all venues and there must be options available to leave the precincts in an orderly and timely way.

Lack of transport is also an issue outside the metropolitan area and in larger country towns such as Port Lincoln and Mount Gambier. Few or no taxis and a lack of public transport results in people having no transport options to safely get home and induces people to risk drinking and then driving as they can see no other option.

Structural Design

The Victorian Department of Justice has done significant work on the minimisation of anti-social behaviours through safe venue design and design Guidelines for both new and existing venues. 27

The Guidelines aim to aid in improved safety for patrons and staff through looking at the design and fit out of the actual venue. In doing so, the Guidelines recognise that the potential for conflict, anti-social, or indeed unlawful, behaviour may increase in areas which are crowded, unsupervised and where people feel unsafe, uncomfortable or frustrated.

The considered design and management of entries, exits, queues, footpaths, lane ways, car parks, public spaces, internal activity areas, toilets, outdoor drinking, dining/smoking areas and other common areas is likely to have a positive impact on both the experience of patrons and reduce the likelihood of anti-social behaviours occurring.

Internal design and planning should consider:

venue layout and design furniture layout/placement including reducing ‘vertical’ drinking – (standing only - which

may increase speed of consumption) placement of signs and other items as well as lighting, climate control and noise reduction clear sightlines, uncongested exit and entry points sufficient amenities including toilets to minimise queuing, loitering and frustration reduced conflict points or dark unsupervised areas.

27 “Design Guidelines for Licensed Venues”, Victorian Department of Justice, 2009.


27

Outdoor design should be aimed at minimising opportunities for conflict, noise or concealment and should consider, streetscape, queue management, noise, litter and vandalism. Passive surveillance, lighting, supervision and bins and good visual connections may form part of this.

The extent to which any one venue can implement changes to its design will depend on the particular venue and any changes should certainly be in keeping with the particular unique style and character of the venue itself.

The AHA|SA does believe it would be appropriate for venues to be required to automatically refit their premises however safer design guidelines should be used when designing new venues or at times when existing venues are planning to renovate, refit or replace furniture. Naturally these principles must be applied in conjunction with existing Development Rules.

Determining the Economic Costs of Alcohol Abuse

From time to time estimations of the ‘social cost’ of particular behaviours is calculated. The calculations attempt to put a dollar figure ‘cost’ to society on things such as car crashes, work place injuries, or alcohol abuse. These costs can include things such as ‘personal loss of future earnings’ and loss of productivity to the economy if someone is incapacitated and can’t work plus things like costs on health sector and cost to family members if they have to stop work to take care of someone.

Current research has shown that calculations to determine the social cost of alcohol to the Australian community has been substantially over-estimated.

Recent estimates by the health advocates put the annual cost at more than $15 billion.28 However a paper authored by economist Dr Eric Crampton et.al. from the University of Canterbury exposes flaws in the methods used to determine this figure, concluding that at least 75 per cent of this figure would be dismissed by mainstream economic methods.

The Crampton report shows that at most, only $3.8 billion of the headline figure of $15 billion can count as costs borne by such external parties. Crampton says that the $15 billion estimate of the annual cost of alcohol is meaningless from an economic and policy perspective, and the use of this figure should be abandoned.29 The weakness in the proposition is that in the past 15 years, there has been no analysis of the benefits of consuming alcohol.”

Matt Burgess of the Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation and Brad Taylor from the Australian National University states:

“No estimate of any activity’s value, and no policy implications, can be derived from an assessment limited to the downside risk of an activity. The healthist literature passes off headline

costs as representing value.”

28 “The avoidable costs of alcohol abuse in Australia and the potential benefits of effective policies to reduce the social costs of alcohol” by David J. Collins, Macquarie University and Helen M. Lapsley, University of Queensland and University of New South Wales, 2008 29 Crampton, E., Burgess, M., Taylor, B, What’s in a cost? Comparing economic and public health, Journal of the New Zealand Medical Association, NZMJ 24

August 2012, Vol 125 No 1360; Page 66


28

Any serious consideration of economic costs to the community of negative consequences of alcohol consumption must also equally take into account all of the tangible economic benefits to the State of a vibrant hotel and clubs industry, as well as an international wine and beer industry. These calculations should also include income to Federal and State Governments through the high level of taxes and fees paid by the hotel industry including excise, GST, payroll tax, stamp duties, liquor licence fees, work cover, gambling taxes and the emergency services levy. In fact SA imposes the highest level of taxes on businesses than any other jurisdiction in Australia.30

Given the cost per annum of alcohol according to Crampton’s research is no more than $3.8 billion and the comparable tax take on alcohol is more than that amount, there is no justification for arguing increasing the tax size of the Government revenue pie.

Leadership Institute of South Australia (LISA) - AHA|SA Alcohol-fuelled Violence Think

Tank Project

In March 2013 the AHA|SA engaged LISA to undertake a Think Tank to come up with innovative ways to reduce alcohol-fuelled violence. The report resulting from this Think Tank will be provided to the Citizen’s Jury separately for information.

Conclusion

The AHA|SA firmly believes that most people do not drink to excess and that most people behave in a responsible manner.

The AHA|SA also believes that the hotel industry takes its responsibilities with regards to the Responsible Service of Alcohol seriously and that enough regulations exist to ensure that licensees are held to account should they not do so.

Solutions to alcohol related anti-social behaviour MUST be evidence based, multi-faceted and must deal with the broad range of critical and related issues, including pre-loading and side-loading, enforcement and regulation, late night transport options, cultural factors, peer pressure, education and personal responsibility, and illicit drugs. Other relevant cultural and social issues must also be taken account, including the complexities in the indigenous communities of SA.

Individual solutions to individual problems are also needed, recognising that not all geographic areas are the same. Solutions must also be in relation to the real size of the problem. No assaults or violence is acceptable however it would, for example, be unworkable and undesirable to return to a 6pm closing time or to prohibit alcohol altogether.

We are keen to see a vibrant and safe South Australia and so much of this vibrancy is due to the existing hotels, restaurants and other entertainment venues. It is in no-one’s interests to have anti-social behaviour just as it is in no-one’s interests to regulate the sector and make their businesses unviable. We would welcome the opportunity to speak with the Citizen’s Jury and provide more information as it sees fit.

30 Institute of Public Affairs State Business Tax Calculator FactSheets page 9.

july 2013 - amazon s3 · 2015-10-21 · ahasubmissiontocitizens’jury – july 2013 2 introduction...

Documents