Lives saved and our freedom not threatened

It was 12 months ago today that then Premier Barry O’Farrell announced the range of measures to curb alcohol abuse and alcohol-fuelled violence in the inner city.

The measures, which include 3am last drinks and 1.30am lockouts for pubs and clubs in the CBD, Kings Cross and Darlinghurst are moderate, with the aim of ensuring the people of Sydney have the freedom to enjoy a night on the town without fear of receiving a life threatening injury. And that the residents of Kings Cross and Darlinghurst the freedom to enjoy the amenity of their suburbs.

To that end, the measures appear to be working, and I’ll gladly pick the freedom to end my night out in a taxi and not in the back of an ambulance.

It’s important the government stays the course and maintains the measures that were passed through the Parliament on 30 January 2014; measures which included the commitment to a two-year statutory review.

Over the course of last week, the NSW government flip flopped on its commitment to Sydney’s life-saving measures to curb alcohol violence. Acting Premier Troy Grant initially flagged that a review of the measures would be brought forward, but by week’s end, Premier Mike Baird’s office had reaffirmed the government’s commitment saying, “The Premier has no intention of changing the lockout laws.”

Midweek, with the Premier still in India, and the government’s exact position getting less clear by the day, the Herald had been quick to throw the government a lifeline. The paper’s editorial last Wednesday supported the government’s decision to bring forward the review of the measures.

The editorial argued an early review was necessary on two points; firstly that the restrictions on individual freedoms are an imposition and secondly, because the negative impact on business is reportedly, so dramatic.

Both of those points are wide of the mark. The Herald spoke of the ‘‘wide-ranging restrictions on the movement of its citizens’’ as if all of Sydney has been placed under curfew. I imagine the spirited defence of the ‘‘liberty to drink’’ was a response to a vocal minority with a clear vested interest, but in truth there are far more important freedoms to be fighting for.

The Herald also highlighted that violence and hospital admissions have already dropped sharply, but emphasised that they have come at the cost of a downturn in alcohol sales, with pubs and clubs alleging their profits are down.

However, it’s incorrect to see that in any way as being a failing of the measures. The primary purpose of these new measures is to reduce late-night alcohol availability, and in turn, reduce the unacceptably high levels of alcohol harms in hotspots such as Kings Cross and the city’s CBD.

Any downturn in alcohol sales is not an unintended consequence. It is absolutely what the measures were designed to do. And for that we should be unapologetic.

The bottom line is that venues whose financial success was predicated solely on serving copious amounts of booze with little regard for the consequences, now have two choices. Watch business profits continue to decline, or adapt and diversify within the new, safer, legislated environment in order to survive and thrive.

Those who have sought to blame the changes for the failings of a business model based solely on booze ought to be aware their claims will be subject to close scrutiny and held to account.

At the time the laws were introduced, I commented that the tough new measures were an indication that the NSW government finally understands that to effectively tackle alcohol-fuelled violence you have to be prepared to address the issue of availability.

Maybe, there are some in government who don’t understand or are not prepared to concede that alcohol is no ordinary commodity.

Thankfully for now, Premier Baird’s renewed declaration of support for the lockouts last Friday suggests the NSW government remains committed to evidence-based reform that reduces harm and saves lives.

This post originally appeared in The Sydney Morning Herald on January 21, 2015 as ‘Government must stay the course on alcohol curbs’.