Alcohol restrictions and the community

Dr Sherry Saggers from Edith Cowan University
is one of the authors of the recently released report
"Evaluation of the Tennant Creek Liquor Licensing Restrictions"
Here is her address to the the recent
21C conference in Tennant Creek.

When I first came to Tennant Creek interviewing people for the evaluation of the alcohol restrictions, many people seemed to think that Tennant Creek had been singled out with respect to restrictions.
In fact the 'local option system', that is the means by which communities can legislate or agree to prohibit or restrict alcohol sales, is widespread, both in the world and across Australia. The system works well in indigenous communities. Many have declared themselves 'dry' and Territorians will be well aware of that tradition of 'dry' communities. People in Queensland have also had similar experiences.
In July 1995, in response to complaints about excessive drinking and its consequences, the Northern Territory Liquor Commission agreed to a trial restriction of the sale and supply of alcohol for six months.
The proposals were that the restrictions would be in two phases of thirteen weeks, with restricted trading on Thursdays, which was chosen because it was largely the time at which Social Security pensions were received. There were also restrictions on variations on trading days, other than Thursdays and restrictions on front bar and takeaway sales.
At the time, restrictions provoked intense debate in the town around the perceived economic costs of restrictions, people's belief that this imposed on their invidual rights and that it would lead to a heightening of racial tensions.
At the end of the first trial period an evaluation conducted by Peter Dabbs and Tom and Ian Crundell indicated a number of positive indicators with respect to the restrictions themselves. For instance, they reported that there were fewer police incidents over the trial period, there was a reduced disturbance to public order and there was improved health and welfare across a number of domains.
Following what was a very contentious Liqour Commission hearing, again with intense debate amongst the town's people, the Liqour Commission agreed to implement restrictions similar to those in phase one of the trial and they are the restrictions that have been in place ever since.
Earlier this year we, along with several other researchers, were approached to submit a tender to the Beat the Grog Committee, which consists of both health, community and business interests here in Tennant Creek to do an evaluation of the restrictions since the period of the trial.
The terms of reference included examining the continuing impact of the restrictions on the community, that is those imposed by the Liquor Commission in 1996. We were asked to look at the effectiveness of the restrictions since February 1996, both before and since the using of the restrictions and to try and assess the ongoing response of the community to the restrictions.
We collected a whole range of data: on alcohol consumption from the liqour commission, on alcohol related harm from both health, welfare and police records and we conducted a house to house survey here in Tennant Creek. We also conducted informal interviews amongst key stake holders, amongst both the Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communities.
Less than thirty percent of the population polled in the community surveysaid they had been adversely affected by any one of the restrictions. In fact very few people mentioned that the restrictions affected them very much at all. Overall, the majority of the town was in favour of retaining or strengthening all of the current restrictions.
Over half the population favoured additional restrictions which would limit the sale of alcohol in glass containers, limit the sale of high alcohol content drinks to one bottle per person, per day and extend the current restrictions on Thursday takeaways to licensed premises within a fifty kilometre radius of Tennant Creek.
A lot of people said that the drinkers may be drinking less cask wine but the difference was made up by drinking more fortified wine. This in fact was not the case, although people had been drinking more fortified wine.
If we look at alcohol consumption, there has a been a steady decline since the introduction of the trial restrictions, from 25 litres of pure alcohol, per capita in the year prior to the restrictions, which is higher than the Northern Territory in general and much higher than Australia per capita, to 22 litres in the year following the introduction of the restrictions and to 20 litres in the following year.
So there has been a steady and significant decline in alcohol consumption. The slight increase in the consumption of fortified wine in no way negates the much more significant decline in other beverage sales.
In terms of health and welfare, there's been no increase in alcohol related hospital admissions, there has probably been a reduction, but the data was not specific enough for us to make those decisions.
In terms of public order, there has been a reduction of criminal behaviour at least on Thursdays and very clear evidence that if restrictions are coupled with good policing, there is a reduction in public disorder. Townspeople that we interviewed, mentioned that in the past few months, policing has significantly increased in town and that it has had a very important and benficial effect.
In terms of the economic impact, because business people didn't make information available to us, we weren't able to determine what effects, if any, the restrictions had had on business activity in Tennant Creek. However, it's true that tourism data indicates that any decline which may have been caused by the restrictions, and that is yet to be demonstrated, has since been turned around and that the number of visitors is increasing.
Our recommendations include: -
o all existing restrictions be retained,
o additional restrictions regarding the sale of alcohol in glass containers,
o limiting high alcohol beverages to one bottle per person, per day,
o extending the Thursday restrictions to a 50 kilometre radius,
o a restriction on takeaway sales from social and sporting clubs on Thursdays,
o front bar restrictions apply to the Shaft, which in effect is operating against the spirit of the restrictions,
o provision of exemptions to the Thursday takeaway ban for bonafide tourists,
o that a liquor inspector should be located in Tennant Creek or that the police should be trained to do this.
In conclusion, the link between alcohol and economic development is a very direct and demonstrated link in communities right across Australia. To understand the reasons for excessive consumption of alcohol, we need to look at some of the history of the position of Aboriginal people in this country and their position in the economy of this country. Also, that the work on alcohol restrictions by local communities, not just in Tennant Creek, but in communities right across Australia demonstrate both the acknowledgment of Aboriginal people of the contribution of alcohol abuse to their economic situation and their acknowledgment also of the importance of doing something about it. We believe this research conclusively demonstrates that alcohol restrictions are doing something about it.