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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 9 Hansard (27 August) . . Page.. 2626 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

The evaluation for the trial was put to tender, and the consultants contracted to undertake the evaluations are Mr John Walker and Mr David Biles. Both have many years' experience in criminological research. The evaluation has been designed over three stages: Stage one is a literature review and scoping study, and it is the stage one report that I now propose to table; stage 2 relates to the collection of baseline data; and stage 3 relates to the evaluation of the effect that restricted liquor trading hours have on antisocial behaviour. In tabling the stage one report, I note that the consultants reviewed relevant research and literature and recommended proceeding with the trial. They note that the literature findings are not always consistent, with some research indicating that an increase in the availability of alcohol leads to increases in criminality, while other research points to a lessening of crime and rowdyism resulting from the abandonment of traditional trading hours. It is likely that the dynamics governing the alcohol-related antisocial behaviour around late night entertainment areas are complex and probably to a large extent are idiosyncratic to a specified area, so it is not surprising to find some inconsistency among the research. Given that some research points to benefits from limited availability and given the likely idiosyncratic nature of some of the problems germane to the ACT, the recommendation to proceed with a fully evaluated trial is sound.

In the scoping study section of the report the consultants recommend that the evaluation should use a range of measurement protocols. These include evaluating existing strategies prior to the commencement of a trial; measuring pre and post levels of public nuisance, crime and fear of crime using a random survey methodology; using structured interview techniques, measuring licensees' expectations, experiences and perceptions during and after the trial; applying similar measures interviewing shopkeepers close to late night entertainment areas and interviewing taxi drivers; and consultation with the Australian Federal Police and liquor licensing section and using their incident data to analyse trends with respect to the type of incidents, timing of incidents, where incidents occur, and comparing this data with pre-trial data ranging back over recent years.

The consultants advise that this broad-based approach is necessary as it is unlikely that just one set of data would produce a reliable measure by itself. This broad approach is supported by the Government, although it will obviously have some cost implication. Because of the 12-month sunset clause voted in by the Assembly in the initial debate and the fact that we are required first to carry out a literature review, the trial itself cannot run for 12 months, obviously. The timeframe for the trial will be from 1 September 1996 to 31 March 1997. I table the stage one report and I commend its findings to the Assembly.

MS TUCKER (4.15): The Greens were arguing for some kind of literature search of this nature for the trial of regulation of trading hours, so I was interested to look at it. I have to say that I would have made a different interpretation of the references that were cited in this report. Even in the executive summary, I note that the consultants say that the most relevant literature concludes:

... that small variations in the hours of trading have little impact on overall levels of alcohol problems, but cites evidence purporting to show that the incidence of traffic accidents and assaults are closely associated with hours of trading with a peak occurring after closing time.

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