There’s a lot of chat at the moment about the drinking age and simple straw polls on the position of various MPs.
I want to throw some thoughts into the mix- the kind that get missed in a yes or no answer.
I believe we have a problem with the way we drink in New Zealand. I have never thought politicians alone can solve this issue, but we certainly have a role to play.
But the “we” element in all of this is important. For far too long we have focused on one particular set of people as both the catalyst of our problems and the source of all of our solutions – the young.
It’s easy to see how this happens. Many of us drink to varying degrees, but don’t wish to assume that we are part of the problem (and many will not be). The default option can become to apportion blame to other groups, and that often includes young people. And it’s easily done. We can all fall back on personal or anecdotal evidence of some young people, well under the age of 18, drinking in public and in private spaces, sometimes to excess.
But much of this is already happening outside of the laws we currently have. And I’m also sure a good chunk of people who support an age change are not doing so because its only 18 and 19 years olds (the group effected by a change in the minimum age of purchase) they see as the problem. So lets start being honest.
This is not about young people, this is about all of us.
Every time I have asked young people about alcohol in their lives, they talk about what they see around them; not just of the behaviour of their peers, but of adults, parents, caregivers. The ones who we know through research are supplying young people with alcohol a majority of the time, the ones who have been part of setting and maintaining New Zealand’s approach to drinking, and who are statistically almost as equally likely to drink to get drunk as a young person is.
That is why my position on alcohol reform is this: I support the age staying at 18 because I don’t believe shifting the age addresses our fundamental issues.
If a split age is the compromise that will at least stop a blanket increase, then I’ll consider that. But I’d much rather consider a comprehensive package of reforms that finally acknowledges that this is our collective problem, not just the problem of our ‘youff’.
Thanks Jacinda for posting this. I am seriously concerned that the whole liquor debate is being hijacked by this one issue. And I agree the problems are across age, gender and socio economic groups.
I think a split age sends a confusing message to young people and I believe 18 is an acceptable age to be able to legally purchase alcohol. There are so many other important issues in this debate that must not be diminished.
I will of course consider carefully all the options.
Good luck on this – I honestly dont know the answer – or even have a idea on how to start fixing the problems – and I appreciate that all parties are trying to do the best for NZ on this one.
When I hit varsity we had a split age. I can now understand the reasoning. I cannot agree at all that it is confusing, never was for me or my friends. The effect of having a split age is that 18yo are being told that they can drink when supervised. Never had a problem buying alcohol (even at 15) but I would not dream of supplying younger friends and I believe that this is the ‘youth’ problem that we have since the age was lowered.
18 is far to young.
An 18 year old is incredibility immature these day’s.
Most of them are still at school.
Great post Jacinda. There are problem drinkers amongst the “yoof” but there are problem drinkers in all other age groups too. I hope politicians start looking at what is making people in all these groups misuse alcohol, and come up with law changes that address that.
A substantial amount of 18 and 19 year olds will be out in the world. If they are at uni then they will go to parties and get it anyway.
Yes, heavy drinking is something people of all ages participate in. I know too many people who think that a cheap nights entertainment consists of downing a $12 bottle of wine by themselves five or six night of the week.
I can see the logic in that, it costs at least $16 for a movie ticket, more to eat out and more for drinksies.
Excellent post Jacinta, I agree that the drinking age a diverse issue and goes much further than simply raising the age.
I’m also pleased the PM allowed a conscience vote on this. Unlike several other commentators, I think this is still a moral issue. It’s about if an 18 year old is an adult or a child. Personally, I think if your old enough to vote, have sex, drive a car and be shot at in the military, then your old enough to have a beer.
Yes it would be simple to raise the age to 20 or 21, and we would probably save lives in doing so. But we would also take back a simple the liberty that our young adults should enjoy.—– I hope all Labour MPs show their true liberal colours and vote to keep the current drinking age.
I think the age should go up to 20…
I also think the following things would help; increase the ratio of liquor licences from 1 in 500 people to at least 1 in 1500 people, lower the tax on 4% beer while raise it on everything else, put warning labels on the bottles, ban alcohol advertising, lower the drink driving threshold, make any accident that involves a drunk driver killing an innocent person a mandatory murder charge and finally start a massive ad campaign that tells young NZers that the amount of people binge drinking is not normal worldwide…
That’s a start or you know you guys in Parliament could stick your heads in the sand because you don’t want to lose a few 18 and 19 year old voters…
There’s no reason why 18 year olds shouldn’t be able to have a beer. Or even three or four beers. By ten or fourteen beers it becomes a bit more of a problem though.
Jacinta, I couldnt agree more. This is not a single issue it’s an amalgam.
The idea that somehow yoof are supervised because they are in a pub flies in the face of common sense.
It is yet another issue where we have to look at it broadly…
No one ever thinks they have a problem with drinking, well very few. Most people I know have not only suffered a hangover bad enough to feel ill or “off their game” the next day but have done so in the last few months, of all ages. For most it’s not the first or last time. None of these folk would consider that alcohol is an issue for them.
It has a huge social cost through health, policing education etc, it connects us all.
‘There’s no reason why 18 year olds shouldn’t be able to have a beer. Or even three or four beers. By ten or fourteen beers it becomes a bit more of a problem though’
So Loota, are you going to punish the responsible majority to help prevent harm to the binging minority?
So Loota, are you suggesting that they can have beer rations then
I think that’s a great idea, like food stamps, booze stamps and they only get a certain amount a year 
when are you all going to learn that when you tell a young person not to do something they will want to do it more
And we all know that alcopops are basically Joe Camel in a bottle.
Maybe we could see the law as it currently stands more actively enforced.
Less selling to underage people, less people drinking too much at licensed premises.
We keep hearing of police underage stings working, we need to get to a situation where they don’t.
The more I think about this the less it makes sense:
If a young person, say 16 or 17, gets the ID of somebody who looks like them, they can more than likely get in to a bar or club. In doing so they’re knowingly breaking the law by pretending to be someone they’re not. They go in, buy alcohol etc, and keep consciously breaking the law, unbeknown to the owner of the place. But then if somehow this situation is discovered, the person who knowingly broke the law pretty much gets away, and instead the owner is punished.
Surely a good place to start would be punishing people for breaking the law, and actually giving them some consequences in situations like this?
Thank you for posting this Jacinda excellent post. Before you consider a split age however also consider this:
A home environment while drinking does not have bar staff to watch you too however bar staff often do not care how much you drink and if you cause trouble the result is for them to throw you out onto the street.
If people actually obey the new law then 18 year olds will be drinking in town for the first time, generally get completely wasted, get thrown out and end up chucking on the pavement with it essentially being up to their friends to give up their night in town to sit on a bench with them.
This is actually pretty much the standard result I have seen from people who did not drink before coming to university and is made worse by not having the ability to drink at home/a friends place where at least if you have a bit too much you can go to bed.
A licensed establishment is not necessarily any safer. A number of bars I would say are far less safe than drinking at home particularly in rural areas. A restaurant type situation is safer yes but a persons first drinking experience being at a bar at midnight is probably not a good idea. Split age is not necessarily going to be better than a straight up increase in age.
The only 18-19 year olds who will stop drinking entirely as a result of a split age will be the poor who cannot afford it assuming they don’t choose to simply put themselves into more debt instead. As you say most will carry on drinking anyway because they can still very easily source alcohol illegally.
Good on you Jacinda, with you 100%
Sorry, JacinDa, not JacinTa
Thank you Jacinda, this echoes my thoughts exactly – as a teetotaller my whole life (and not for religious or health reasons).
“as a teetotaller my whole life (and not for religious or health reasons).”
What other reasons are there..? Money, alcoholic ancestors, fear of offending people..?
Just curious as I’m a teetotaller but for health and money reasons…
Awesome post
Completely agree with the “we” being the solution, not just laying the blame with and penalising “youff”. Old people drink, young people drink. (Being a young person, my definition of ‘old’ could potentially offend some people
) It’s the drinking culture within New Zealand that is the issue, not the fact that the drinking age is what it is. If the Nacts had the balls to recognise this then maybe something might actually be done about it, rather than assuming that youff are to blame, so let’s all point the finger and avoid making a big decision that could actually help fix the problem.
@JMH – Other reasons for not drinking? Well, I don’t drink because I hate the idea of not being in control of myself, because I’ve got better things to spend my money on, because I’ve heard too many stories about what people I know have done when drunk and because I don’t think alcohol is absolutely necessary for a ‘good time’. Oh, and I’m not old enough yet
Didn’t want to. My friends started drinking when I was about 13 and it seemed pretty destructive to me – I was a bit scared of my parents too, they were light drinkers and Dad honestly didn’t drink til 21 (age allowed at the time) so I had them as role models and knew they would be disapointed if I got drunk as my friends did. The more I watched others the less it seemed like a good idea. Now, in my thirties, I haven’t developed the palate to like it (wine and beer) and would get v drunk v fast I suspect! I was opposed to putting the age down to 18, but now it just seems unfair to make it 20 – if we trust 18yos to make so many other important decisions about their lives then why not this? Better solution would be to address the actual drinking culture problems we have, because thatight actually work.
T”hat is why my position on alcohol reform is this: I support the age staying at 18 because I don’t believe shifting the age addresses our fundamental issues.” So yo have told us why you support the status quo, what is your solutions then.
Sure raising 18 to 20 will not solve the entire solution, yet increasing the age will not add to the problem and most probably reduce it. Until we have a solution little steps forward is the best we can hope for.
Politicians led the way for reducing the age and now look at the issues this has created, nothing was advanced in NZ with this, we have not matured in our attitude many would say we have regressed thanks to Jenny and the Helen for their insistance of 18.
Sure pre 99 many drank under age. But we were very conscience of our conduct so did not make an ass of ourselfs, now of right 18 do make an ass and ther eis nothing we can do.
Thanks to the pollys creating issues but no solutions.
@Ella kinda funny considering that your name is ALE backwards
Come on H – “Sure pre 99 many drank under age. But we were very conscience of our conduct so did not make an ass of ourselfs, now of right 18 do make an ass and ther eis nothing we can do”
Some of us started drinking mid teens and made as much of arse of ourselves as possible because, we were excused for being drunk, could get away with it and it was kinda fun (in a back of the Y sort of way)!
@ Spud – Weeeeeell… I guess it could be at a push
Is your name a subtle reference to vodka’s main ingredient?
No, but I did have vodka last night
Oh yeah! 
What Jeremy said. My friends were drinking underage pre99 and there was no conscious attempt to not make arses of selves (or others). I remember mote clearly than they do possibly because I was sober. There was vomitting in strangers’ gardens, letterboxes, rubbish bins. Stupid destructive behaviour. Hooking up w people unwisely. Probably driving drunk, certainly a fair bit of breaking road rules. Picking fights. Unhealthy drinking for the individual, the group, and society. I didn’t stand by and watch, but many others did, or encouraged it, including some of the parents.
The 18 and 19 year olds aren’t the only problem, the problem drinkers are the little 15 and 16 year old kids who think they’re hard and indestructible , and the middle-aged alcoholics as well.The problems not only with the 18 and 19 year olds.I think New Zealanders of all ages don’t drink responsibly.Most of the problem drinkers I know are over 30.I think the youths have grown up witnessing the adults around them get intoxicated so that they can’t even walk properly,let alone stand up straight.That is so in my case, and in many of my friends cases. I am 19 years old,and I will only have about 2 glasses of wine at a time, and I always ensure that I am in a safe place.The other day I saw some research that quoted that most binge drinkers and problem drinkers are in the age range of 20-50,according to a recent survey. Its not too much of an issue to me,seeing as I am 20 in March, and can get my parents to buy my drinks from the liquor shop,but I know a lot of people who will be affected,whilst they actually drink responsibly!
the worst thing is that they’re making all RTDs have only 5% of alcohol.That will only encourage people to drink the hard stuff,I mean,why would you buy a few 5% bourbons which works out to $12,when you can buy a bottle of spirits for $30. I think they should leave the RTDs how they are! What will end up happening is that all the drinkers who are used to buying them because they found them reliable because you don’t have to judge the amount you mix, will be pouring really strong drinks and they’ll get alcohol poisoning, or they won’t even bother buying something to mix it with and just drink it straight! And if they shut the night clubs at 2am, everyone will pour out onto the streets and cause trouble, I mean, its better to be safe in a club and drinking,where there are trained bouncers to ensure tghat everyone is safe, than out on the street. And not everyone can just leave straight away to go home, people would be waiting for infinity for the public transport to start up. I think the focus on alcohol education should be prioritized at an earlier age in schools,students are being educated far too late in life about how alcohol can cause injury and destruction.When I was in school, I found that we were given a lot of information about marijuana and meth-amphetamine, and a minuscule amount about the dangers of binge drinking and all the other issues linked to alcohol.More information should be given at a younger age,rather than having the drinking age increased.I am sure that the majority of parents would be shocked to see how little their children are being taught about drinking awareness,alcohol poisoning, binge drinking,drink spiking etc.If you wanted to learn about those issues you had to take health as a subject in 5th form!This has to change.
Brett says:
August 18, 2010 at 1:18 pm
18 is far to young.
An 18 year old is incredibility immature these day’s.
Most of them are still at school.
Actually Brett, I beg to differ. At the age of 18, I felt more mature than my mother and father. There were and still are times that I have had to nurse them through their hangovers,hand them panadol, clean up alcohol bottles and spills,make sure meals aren’t burnt when they have passed out whilst cooking dinner,wake them up for work,and hold their hair whilst they vomit and give them a bucket to vomit in. My parents and all of their friends drink daily,and they are all over the age of 40. Even when they only have 2 drinks a day I think it is too much and more than I have ever had.At one point in my life I thought their drinking was acceptable, but now I see it as a huge problem. It has affected me emotionally,socially,psychologically, and physically.The older generations who have parented the “youffs” should realize that it is not morally acceptable for their vulnerable and easily influenced teenagers to witness them in their drunken states.This is, I believe, the fundamental reason why New Zealand teens are drinking so excessively.Monkey see,monkey do, right?
This is going to make alcohol more expensive. Basic economics would suggest people are then going to go for the cheaper high, Drugs. I think drunk people are better than drugged up ones.
Well this is causing some controversy hehe.
I fully agree with what you are saying and hope many more people will be able to see that it is not the youth by them selves but the nation as a whole.
Some may say that youth just like to drink, are irresponsible, not old enough or stupid but has anyone actually stopped to look deeper into the problem?
The most accurate way id put it is that a “youth” is still susceptible to ‘sponge learning’. Just because they are not children anymore does not mean that they have stopped learning, they (we) still take in everything we see.
So with that we start to get on to a kind of “monkey see, monkey do” situation where a youth will see someone drinking (normally someone older) and think “well i think im an adult, why cant i have some of that?” and that is where i think the problem starts.
Youth now days do not have role models that provide positive learning and when they go out and have a good time there is no one to tell them “hey next time go easy” only someone who will scold and scare them with negative words not getting that this approach will get them nowhere.
So when Jacinda says “its not about young people, its about us” she means it.
We need to encourage youth to be more responsible with their lives, that means we provide them with more opportunities to learn positive morals, not take away their rights.
All we need is the chance to grow with support from everyone around us, without that we will do the same thing for the rest of our lives.
PS. There are so many issues surrounding youth and alcohol that are relevant to this argument for instance; causal factors, peer pressure, bulling, family violence and all that jazz. The list is too long for anyone to really make a judgment based solely on facts.
All you can do is make a decision based on your own morals.
From a youth whose at an age to be effected by these laws:
If I can’t buy booze at an off licence then I won’t be able to afford to at all, marijuana and ecstasy are the easy alternatives (and cheaper than drinking in town). This is the view of the vast majority of the people I know (largely successful university students).
This is something which I haven’t heard discussed a great deal. It seems to me that this law will simply swap alcohol driven violence for drug driven violence. Is that the change New Zealand wants?
Poor Anon
“I think they should leave the RTDs how they are! What will end up happening is that all the drinkers who are used to buying them because they found them reliable because you don’t have to judge the amount you mix, will be pouring really strong drinks and they’ll get alcohol poisoning”
Good point! 
“And if they shut the night clubs at 2am, everyone will pour out onto the streets and cause trouble, I mean, its better to be safe in a club and drinking,where there are trained bouncers to ensure tghat everyone is safe, than out on the street. And not everyone can just leave straight away to go home, people would be waiting for infinity for the public transport to start up.” –
2am? – how boring 
Nobody wants to be kicked out that early 
I thought 4am was bad enough 
“I am sure that the majority of parents would be shocked to see how little their children are being taught about drinking awareness,alcohol poisoning, binge drinking,drink spiking etc.” – I think parents shouldn’t rely on the state, my Ma gave me the booze talk – I knew it all at 13
Good point Jacinda.
I don’t believe that a law change will change much. Marijuana is illegal but that doesn’t stop a large proportion of NZer’s from smoking it (however I don’t believe marijuana use causes nearly as much problems as binge drinking, can’t understand how people are so very against marijuana smoking and yet binge-drink, or think that alcohol is less harmful)
Banning alcohol advertising would be a good idea, just as advertising tobacco is banned. We drink enough, don’t need the temptation of cheap alcohol shoved in our faces when we walk down the road, read the newspaper etc. And this would be for the benefit of both ‘youff’ and the older generations.