Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 3 Hansard (27 March) . . Page.. 681 ..

MS FOLLETT (continuing):

It is my view that any artificial closing time, whether it is 6 o'clock or 3.00 am or whatever, will have the same effect. We will see drinkers trying to make the most of whatever limited time is available to them, perhaps with their judgment blurred by alcohol anyway, and I cannot see how we could fail to have a repeat of the same phenomenon that the 6 o'clock swill saw. I also think that, unlike 6 o'clock closing, where presumably the drinkers had had only an hour or two after work to ingest alcohol, with a 3.00 am closing time the drinkers would have had several hours - five, six or seven hours - in which to drink, and we could see an even worse phenomenon occurring.

I am also seriously concerned about the issue of binge drinking, particularly for inexperienced or young drinkers. I have seen that, whenever there is a limit on the supply of a commodity, those people who are particularly keen on it tend to overdo it. Whether it is cakes at a kids party or whatever, if there is a limited supply available some people will seek to maximise their share of that supply. If we do see 3.00 am closing, we will see an increase in binge drinking, particularly amongst young and inexperienced drinkers. I think that is a serious issue that we ought to consider as well.

I also believe that there is a high probability that imposing a closing time in the city area, which I understand is Mr Osborne's intention, could well see a displacement of the unacceptable behaviour, the illegal behaviour perhaps, to some other area of Canberra. It is a fact that drinking places, particularly nightclubs, where people congregate in large numbers, go through fashions. Sometimes it is this nightclub, sometimes another nightclub, where everybody tends to gather. If it is known that, say, in the city the nightclubs, the taverns, will be closing at 3.00 am, people may well choose to spend their evening in Manuka and we may simply see a displacement of the unacceptable behaviour.

It is not clear to me whether Mr Osborne intends this kind of closing regime to be brought in right across Canberra, and perhaps that is another matter he might want to make clear. It would be very undesirable indeed if we were simply to see people transferring what I fully accept is unacceptable behaviour to another area, perhaps where it is less easy to control. For example, if they go to Tuggeranong or to Belconnen, where there is not the concentration of business houses and hence police resources, transport and so on, it may be even more difficult to control the unacceptable behaviour as a result of late-night drinking.

Finally, I would like to point out that we have heard at length from Mr Moore, in particular, on the issue of heroin, that prohibition does not work and has been proved not to work. Yet here we have an attempt to impose a limited prohibition regime on the consumption of alcohol. Why prohibition might be thought to work in relation to alcohol when Mr Moore clearly believes that it has not worked in relation to heroin is something I would be very interested to hear about. It does, in my view, smack of hypocrisy. I believe that the legislation Mr Osborne has brought forward, while well intentioned, could in fact have unintended consequences that exacerbate the problem. That is my greatest concern, and I believe that by weakening the Assembly's own powers in relation to this matter we are probably denying ourselves the opportunity to debate in detail many of the issues that ought to be debated.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .