Opinion & Commentary
Bar must be raised to curb pub violence
Many people have strong opinions on the best way to tackle alcohol-related harm.
Some argue their right to drink shouldn't be curtailed because of the actions of a few, while others advocate greater restrictions on the supply of alcohol.
The NSW system, which penalises problem bars with lockouts, alcohol restrictions and bans on glass, is a good example.
Recent statistics released by NSW Tourism and Hospitality Minister, George Souris show a drop in alcohol-related incidents in 31 of 42 venues subject to these conditions.
In 2008, NSW significantly reformed old liquor laws.
Under the NSW system, any clubs linked to 19 or more alcohol-related incidents in one year are placed under level one restrictions, which include a mandatory 2am lockout and bans on the use of glasses and serving shots after midnight.
If levels of alcohol-related violence are reduced then the restrictions are lifted.
From June 16, NSW pubs will no longer be subjected to these restrictions yet 18 more venues have been added to the most violent venues list.
The strength of this approach is that it is flexible enough to respond to change and provides economic incentives for licensees to clean up their act.
This is different to new measures recently adopted in Perth, which will see all licensed venues in the Northbridge suburb subjected to lockouts and restrictions on the amount of alcohol sold.
Restrictions should be commensurate with levels of alcohol-related harm, and differentiate between those bars which are causing problems and those that are not.
A one-size-fits-all approach will never work as different venues have different characteristics and attract different types of patrons.
However, publicans have a greater degree of control over the behaviour of patrons than they realise (or admit to). 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.
This is most noticeable in hotels in the far north of the country known as "Aboriginal pubs", which tend to have low levels of amenities and less enforcement of dress or standards of behaviour.
One of these types of premises is the front bar of the Todd River Hotel in Alice Springs. It is known locally as the "Animal Bar" and caters for a mostly indigenous clientele.
In July 2010, the Licensing Commission suspended its trading for five days after a licence breach in 2009 when about 230 patrons crammed into a bar where the maximum permitted was 100.
A five-day suspension of its license was probably nothing more than a slap on the wrist for the owner of the hotel.
Instead of coming down hard on the suppliers of alcohol, the Northern Territory government chose to focus on problem drinkers.
Tough new laws to ban problem drinkers from buying alcohol and force them into rehabilitation are due to be introduced next month.
Individuals should take responsibility for their actions and behaviour.
But at the same time bar owners who regularly flout the law or experience large numbers of alcohol-related incidents on their premises should also take responsibility.
Unfortunately proposed changes to the Northern Territory Liquor Act which would have empowered police to shut bars to combat violence were shelved. According to a former Department of Justice senior licensing and regulation policy officer, Peter Jones, who drafted the proposed reforms, they were discarded because of lobbying by the Australians Hotels Association.
Attempts to overcome intractable alcohol problems in the Northern Territory will inevitably fail if they continue to ignore the role licensed premises play in fuelling the problem. The Northern Territory should take a leaf out of NSW's book and get tougher on problem bars.
Sara Hudson is a Research Fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies.
