Opinion & Commentary
Back to six-pack politics
The Age this week reported that Indigenous Affairs Minister Jenny Macklin was under pressure to introduce ''wet canteens'' in remote communities in the Northern Territory. Before she embarks on that path, Macklin would be wise to keep in mind the failures of the past.
The idea of drinking in a controlled environment, where people can consume alcohol with food and enjoy other recreational activities, sounds appealing. It definitely seems a better strategy than drinking to extreme intoxication in ''drinking camps'' where there are no formal controls.
But if on-premise options (such as wet canteens or licensed social clubs) are to be a viable means of reducing the harms associated with drinking takeaway alcohol, then the risks need close attention.
Alcohol-related violence and crime reached a seven-year high in Alice Springs last summer, with 1500 people (mostly women) treated for stab wounds. The crime wave was blamed on the alcohol restrictions introduced under the Northern Territory intervention, which saw displaced drinkers congregate in Alice Springs and other towns across the territory where alcohol was freely available.
However, although the intervention exacerbated the problem, there have always been itinerant drinkers and drinking camps. Until recently, their existence has been unofficially tolerated because it has served everyone's interests to segregate Aboriginal drinkers. Non-indigenous people have not really wanted them in the pubs and taverns in towns, and indigenous drinkers have enjoyed the freedom and perceived the tacit license to do what they like as a minor victory over those who disapprove of their drinking and behaviour.
The Northern Territory's ''Living with Alcohol Program'', introduced in 1992, advocated clubs as being ''places where people, with the support of family and community, can learn to drink alcohol in a responsible way''. By keeping people in their communities, clubs were seen as a way of reducing alcohol-related road fatalities and the influx of drinkers to towns. In reality, however, communities did not have the police resources to control drunken behaviour, and in most cases communities with canteens and clubs experienced increased alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harm.
Community-run premises were under pressure to produce profits for the community's benefit, which made them reluctant to regulate the sale of alcohol. The more alcohol sold, the more money the community council received.
A 1991 episode of ABC's Four Corners, "Six-pack politics", shows the fallacy of this arrangement. The Aurukun community council was able to build five houses a year from the profits of the canteen, but as fast as new houses were built they were destroyed by drunken people getting violent and fighting.
Canteens or clubs also risk institutionalising racially segregated drinking, with the potential for different (usually lower) standards in the responsible serving of alcohol. There is a strong correlation between the level of amenity in a bar or pub and levels of violence, with poor decor and upkeep in the bar giving patrons a message about the kind of behaviour expected. In the past, any canteens and clubs on indigenous land were poorly maintained and consisted of rudimentary corrugated iron structures with concrete floors, and a few tables and chairs, if any. Some of the irresponsible practices in canteens included supplying alcohol on credit, and serving people beyond the point of intoxication.
For years, the people of Aurukun argued against a canteen for fear that it would lead to alcohol-related violence and child neglect. Their fears came true with the introduction of a canteen in 1985. By 2000, the once ''liveable and vibrant community'' had a homicide rate more than 100 times the state's average.
Proponents of canteens or clubs on indigenous land argue that these problems can be overcome by having outside management and strict controls on the strength and availability of alcohol sold.
But although this strategy may work for some remote residents, others will want to drink more than the club or canteen will allow. Inevitably, as has occurred in Western Australia (where two towns, Fitzroy Crossing and Halls Creek, have restricted the sale of takeaway alcohol to low-strength beer) heavy drinkers will move to areas where alcohol is readily available.
The Northern Territory government's tough new reforms to ban problem drinkers from buying alcohol may counteract this movement to a degree, but they will not stop people from drinking and could lead to an increase in sly-grogging. While there is demand for alcohol, people will always find ways to circumvent the law.
The pressure on governments to come up with solutions to intractable problems can be intense and they invariably look for quick fixes. Failed policies from the past are sometimes repackaged and presented as something new. But if the government is going to recycle old policies such as introducing wet canteens in communities, then it should take into account lessons from history about what works and what does not.
Sara Hudson is a research fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies.
