OK, so the last time I posted one of these videos, everyone jumped down my throat despite me saying it was not Labour policy, just something I had been sent by one of the groups lobbying for reform.
Having said that, this one is about giving the licensing power back to communities, something I totally support.
Have a look.
I wonder what criteria the various communities would use to decide which businesses can stay open and which ones would close.
I think it is poor science to attribute all alcohol related harm to an increase in licensed premises.
I don’t think that community choice on licensing will be a panacea for New Zealand’s alcohol problems.
I believe that the introduction of sugary, ready-to-drink beverages is responsible for at least some of the increases in the statistics mentioned in the video. When a drinker crashes after a sugar/caffeine-high coupled with alcohol induced intoxication they are destined for impulsive behaviour and poor decision making.
I hope our health system will be ready for the plague like proportion of type 2 diabetes that will undoubtedly come some way down the line as a result of the mass consumption of sugary, ready-to-drink products that are currently so popular with our young people.
I agree that communities should have a say about licensing.
I totally support community feedback on liquor licensing. For example: do you know how hard it is to get a bottle of wine after 8pm on the North Shore? There’s nothing open. OK, there are supermarkets, but the nearest liquor store to my house open after 8 is about 10-15 kms away.
Wherever these cut-price, open all night stores are going in, it’s not on the North Shore. We could use one!
The last video was attacked because it implied that you can drink yourself to death with beer.
This one is not bad. It just has too many numbers in it. Authors need to work on not being boring.
I agree with the idea. Like I wrote once here, New Zealand’s liquor shop density is too much. In other countries where I had a chance to drink, the nearest McDonalds was usually closer than the nearest place to buy alcohol.
Having said that, I would prefer to limit the hours when people are allowed to buy/sell alcohol rather than anything else. There are so many liquor shops already that stopping opening new ones won’t help, and to drive owners of existing businesses out of business by ordering to close their shops would be wrong. I mentioned in the last discussion that usually problems start when people, after consuming their initial purchase, go back for a top-up. Banning alcohol sales from 9pm till morning could work better. It would keep the impulse buyers away from it.
Meh – Its legal and people should be able to buy it as a matter of connivence. Making fewer outlets or handing the licencing to community boards is not going to solve the issue.
Using their (poor) logic. Selling drugs is illegal and not in shops open anywhere – thus there should not be a drug problem.
Perhaps they should concentrate on the people – a boozer will always get booze.
p.s. As mentioned – we could really do with a discount off licence on the Shore. As long as they sell decent wine.
The statistics say discount all-night liqour stores are far more likely to be found in Otara and Cannons Creek than the North Shore. So yes, Bob, you could lobby for more in your community if that’s what you wanted, while other communities could try to reduce the number of off-liscenses if that’s what they want.
I don’t think anyone thinks this is the panacea for reducing alcohol harm. No one measure is, but there is plenty of evidence that a sensible package including liscensing reform will make a difference.
The atrocious spelling in my previous comment shouldn’t be taken as any indication that I’ve been sampling the wares of my nearest liquor store!
Everytime we drive by a local discount liquor store, in a very low socio-economic area, my partner asks which idiot allowed it to open in such a silly place as the locals really can’t afford it on their income (dole, etc…).
Chris, Bob: the market seems so saturated with liquor stores, and so competitive, that if there’re none in your area it is probably because they wouldn’t make enough money. And they wouldn’t because there are not enough impulse buyers in the area. The thing is, no matter how much the stores advertise their “discounts” they are most of the time more expensive than the supermarket. They are like local dairies which sell stuff at a premium to people who forgot to buy it when they were at the supermarket. Liquor stores open till late cater mainly to people who already drank some and now want more or to people who didn’t plan to drink that day and wouldn’t make the effort to get into the car and drive to the supermarket if they had to do it to buy, but will buy when it’s within walking distance. These are groups more likely to cause problems when drunk, compared to the “planned party” people.
And for you North Shore people it is probably easy to just go to a shop/supermarket and buy enough to last you for a month or till your next visit in the supermarket, so lobby for more liquor stores in your area all you want and get some, but in the meantime do not make a big problem out of it because it is not, and the damage done by excessive drinking in poor communities is real and is a problem. I believe availability is an issue, it does affect consumption, and while the reasons of alcohol abuse are complex and need to be addressed, availability is something that is much easier to “fix” to get some results and a good place to start.
(I have 2 liquor stores within 3 min walking distance (3 if 10 minutes) and I can see how it works.)
Alcohol is a very damaging drug, personally and societally. And I am not talking to those who enjoy 2-3 standard drinks a go. More like those who enjoy 11 or 12 standard drinks at a go.
I wonder how long before the back room boys of the alcohol industry would start funding certain people in communities to “think” a certain way when addressing licence issues?
My comments above were somewhat tongue-in-cheek
Availability is not a huge problem.
That said, I despair at most of the control mechanisms proposed for alcohol. Note that I regard alcohol as quite different from, say, tobacco, in that any amount of tobacco is quite harmful, while moderate amounts of alcohol probably aren’t (although there’s research both ways). The problem with cost based control is that it works well, but probably not for the people who have the biggest problem. I reduce the amount I drink as the price goes up (or, at least, buy the cheaper stuff). But do people with serious alcohol problems respond to price changes this way? I haven’t seen any study which indicates they do, only that overall consumption drops with price changes, which may just be due to the moderate group buying less.
Also, I don’t think you could price alcohol at a level which would inhibit middle-class binge drinking without pricing the poor out of drinking anything, which seems very unfair.
I think the only real answer is to directly tackle problem drinkers. Which is difficult. Don’t try to change the rules for everyone — try to identify and support the specific people with a problem.
The cost that alcohol has on the community is double what the government recieves in alcohol tax. About a 500 million short fall when the cost of crime and medical treatment is added up.
Good policing enforcing where there is an alcohol ban is working in Christchurch. Basically NO warning in a liquor ban area as too much preloading was occurring and prosecuting for having alcohol where it is not permitted.
Cheap commercial rents in places like Otara & Cannons Creek further stoke the cycle. It’s worth noting that South Central L.A. just before the infamous 1992 riots had more liquor outlets than the whole state of Pennsylvania.
@ Big Nose Bob: Yes, I’m against all “pricing out” solutions too. They only cause more harm to the families of addicts. Also, I’d be among the priced out pretty fast, and I enjoy a drink on a Sat night without causing any problems. This is why I’d go for limiting hours and locations. (Sorry if my reaction to your tongue in cheek comment was too serious – I’m a relative newcomer to the country/culture and sometimes have problems detecting when people are serious and when not).
@ tracey: you’re right, the industry could lobby/bribe the local community. Maybe it’d be better to just set the same rules for everyone – limited number of shops, dependent on the area/population, and auction off the licences to the highest bidder, the extra money going to something benefitting the community.
@Big Nose Bob, man your common sense makes returning to this blog even sweeter!
I have nothing against the idea of local areas limiting liquor stores, but don’t ban alcohol from daries you’ll put people out of business.
Pricing would affect many hard working decent people. I was told about how tragic Ireland is with its endangered pub culture,
, that was a place where communities got together, and now some are forced to do their drinking at home 
Due to price hikes!
Big Nose Bob I to agree about not changing the pricing of alcohol. It is the access of alcohol which to me is the key.
Spud I hope the day of the dairy/superette selling alcohol is over because it allows the access of alcohol into the community where there is too often not a liquor ban area. Liquor ban areas stop the consumption of alcohol as too much preloading can be traced back to the dairy/superette.
Liquor ban areas are not adequately being policed. When a dairy/superette are not able to sell alcohol it will be less likely for the area to have intoxicated people in it.
Treetop, liquor ban policing just makes me think we live in a police state!
Most people who breach liquor bans are down and outers who are drinking because their lives suck. Preloaders tend to preload because the price of drinks in bars is too high for them. I have preloaded many a time, drinking far more at a time than I wanted to just so that the alcohol would stay in my system for longer. 
At least they can buy some grub to go with their booze.
It is getting harder to tell the difference between the down and outers and the preloaders. An intoxicated person is an intoxicated person whose inhibitions go out the window when drunk and disorderly.
When it comes to controlling the streets due to intoxicated people who vomit, urinate, discard their alcohol litter (which breaks windows, young children walk over broken bottles, animals may require a visit to the vet to remove shards of glass, the already mentioned human waste) assaults, verbal arguments, shouting which wakes up the neighbours, deaths and injury on the road due to alcohol. The stance taken by government and the public has to be one that minimises the effects of alcohol on the community and which has a consequence for the unnecessary, immature and inconsiderate behaviour which being drunk and disorderly causes.
@Treetop – I take yer point about the vomit and broken glass. The broken glass thing could get got around by them saying that they can have alcohol as long as it is in plastic. There is a difference between being drunken and being disorderly, there are many friendly drunks who offend no one when they are merrily staggering the streets. If people are to be punished for anything it should be for being disorderly, not for having booze in their hands.
The litter generated from alcohol is a big issue in itself. A fine for discarding human internal waste and packaging pertaining to alcohol may assist intoxicated people to get it that they are being a problem to society.
I would give no warning, but I would give a choice to pay the fine or do a three hour stint taking a wheelie bin about with a broom and shovel. This is what I mean by consequences for behaviour.
You got me thinking about purchasing grub from a dairy to go with booze. I am left thinking why is grub so expensive from a dairy compared to a supermarket and booze purchased from a dairy is comparable to supermarket prices?
I like your second paragraph, people should be made to clean up their own mess! Totally agree!
!
I know that grub is expensive because they can turn over as much product as a supermarket and they have to eat. I’ve never purchased booze from a dairy so I haven’t looked at the prices.
I have purchased booze from a night and day store and that tends to be a little more expensive. Maybe the dairies are competiting with the local liquor stores and that’s why they charge less. 
I meant can’t turn over as much product. Sigh, edit button.
Bags would have to be biodegradable.