The consultation period on Safe, Sensible and Social, the newest consultation by the government on managing the effects of alcohol in our communities, has now closed. The consultation was interesting in many ways, especially as it recognised the drinks industry’s abject failure to self-regulate for more than a decade, while taking a timid approach to sorting the problem out.
Many of us involved in the licensing of premises in our local authorities welcomed many of the changes of the Licensing Act 2003. It began the process of empowering local councils and communities to begin to shape their communities in terms of what bars and clubs there could be and how we could regulate their opening and operation. This latest consultation doesn’t move us that much forward.
While I appreciate the need for clear indications of unit size and strength on glasses and on all labels, so that drinkers (such as myself) know the amount we’re consuming, the consultation largely tinkers around the edge. It is about the industry as a whole, there is little about the day to day, on the street issues of how the trade actually operates in pubs, clubs and off licences.
As a local councillor, I am frustrated that Alcohol Disorder Zones can only be in response to existing problems – yet places like Glasgow can implement a ban on the public consumption of alcohol and it has succeeded. I am frustrated that the government continues to work out a way of having yellow and red cards for those who sell alcohol to minors. If a shopkeeper breaks the law, then their licence should be able to be revoked after the first offence, if the licensing committee sees fit. Why can’t we as local ‘place shapers’ decide upon issues such as over-provision? Why can’t we simply say that areas have reached saturation and that we don’t want any more, without going through a ridiculous series of hurdles to do so?
Fundamentally, this consultation fails to properly distinguish between ‘on’ and ‘off’ sales. Off licences and supermarkets stock super strength alcohol, they sell it cheaply, with longer hours than pubs and clubs and once the customer leaves their premises, they are no longer their concern. Here government needs to introduce statutory guidance as to conditions for off licences to restrict the availability of alcohol and to force the drinks industry to agree to a definition of ‘strong’ or ‘super strength’ alcohol and then to prohibit it.
The consultation makes clear the grounds for action. Alcohol creates more harm in our poorer communities. Those most vulnerable are those who are buying cheap, strong alcohol. It has become cheaper to buy. Alcohol admissions to our hospitals have almost doubled in five years and now make up 6 per cent of all hospital admissions.
Government needs to act. It needs to free up local licensing authorities to set the restrictions and parameters on how they want alcohol to influence their own community, by allowing them the powers to control the number of outlets and decide when enough is enough.
Government needs to call time on the drinks industry. Self regulation has failed and it’s costing the public purse dearly. Clear labelling, stopping bargain basement prices and promotions, ending the cash cow of ‘strong’ and ‘super strength’ products and, most importantly, getting to grips with off licences and supermarkets who are the most frequent sellers to the underage.
The drinks industry is a powerful lobby. I and many others who enjoy a sociable drink or three will welcome the clear control of supply and information while allowing us the freedom to buy.
It’s time for a conversation with the public, not the drinks industry – they’re drunk with success and you can’t get sense out of a drunk.