The case for alcohol change

Alcohol is everywhere in Dunedin. It’s on our streets, in our shops and our homes, forming habits that can last a lifetime. But when does a taste for a tipple become a problem? In the second of a three-part alcohol series, Chris Morris considers the case for change. 

Keith Reid is not pushing for prohibition. But he also doesn’t pull any punches when asked about alcohol.

It is, he says, a product that leaves a trail of destruction in its wake — violence on the street, broken families at home, and the alcohol-fuelled injuries and illness that clog Dunedin Hospital.

All are symptoms of the city’s "dysfunctional" relationship with alcohol, and clear signs something has to change, Dr Reid believes.

But that doesn’t mean Public Health South is "anti-alcohol", Dr Reid told the Otago Daily Times in an interview.

"We’re not saying ‘don’t drink at all — you’ll get cancer’.

"We’re saying, ‘look, if you’re concerned about your health, you need to know that drinking increases your risk of cancer, and that starts with the first drink’."

His comments followed an outcry over the decision to strip South Dunedin soft drinks company Wests of its off-licence earlier this year.

The ruling came after Public Health South disagreed with the Dunedin District Licensing Committee, which granted Wests’ renewal, and took its case to the Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority (Arla).

The successful appeal prompted an outcry among sections of the hospitality sector, amid concerns officials were now engaged in a heavy-handed crackdown aimed at sections of the industry.

Dr Reid denied that, but said Public Health South’s aim was to shift the community’s relationship with alcohol towards safer ground.

"It’s about . . . sending a clear message to the industry, and to consumers of alcohol, that alcohol is a harmful product and needs to be treated with respect."

That push was given new impetus with the introduction of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012, which placed harm minimisation at the centre of the alcohol debate.

Alcohol-related harm was defined as "any crime, damage, death, disease, disorderly behaviour, illness, or injury, directly or indirectly caused, or directly or indirectly contributed to, by the excessive or inappropriate consumption of alcohol".

It was a wide brief, and one which handed Public Health South new power to get involved in liquor licensing, including scrutinising licensees, their venues and events, with harm minimisation the goal.

It was, according to Dr Reid, a "fundamental shift" in the approach to alcohol.

"There’s no ducking that," Dr Reid said.

"From a public health point of view, we felt very pleased by the new legislation, and we did feel this gave us a sense of legitimacy in working in alcohol, whereas previously we’d felt a little bit marginalised."

The case for change was also underscored by cold, hard statistics, which told a sobering story of alcohol’s impact in Dunedin.

Police figures logged 635 alcohol-related inner-city incidents each year between 9pm and 6am,  before  the introduction of mandatory 4am closing with the new Act in 2012.

Since then, alcohol-related calls in central Dunedin had dropped 39% between midnight and 3am, and by 29.6% between 3am and 6am.

The results were underscored when a high-powered police delegation, including then-Superintendent Andrew Coster, submitted on the council’s draft local alcohol policy during a public hearing.

The group started by showing hard-hitting CCTV footage to drive their point home, including a man having his head stamped on and a woman being choked.

"Innocent citizens are being harmed, seriously injured and killed by offenders who have consumed too much alcohol and it’s time to say it’s enough," Supt Coster said.

Statistics New Zealand figures released earlier this year backed the police view, showing streets surrounding the Octagon — now the centre of Dunedin’s nightlife — were among the most violent crime hot spots in the country.

Recorded incidents since just last year included numerous assaults, including on police, as well as sexual assaults and a central city stabbing.

Alcohol was said to be a major catalyst in most of the violence, and also a factor in nearly 2000 presentations at Dunedin Hospital’s emergency department last year alone, Southern District Health Board figures showed.

Dunedin police alcohol harm reduction officer Sergeant Ian Paulin, speaking this week, said it was clear the city still had alcohol issues to address.

"We are a university town. We have a lot of issues that other towns don’t have with regards to off-premises drinking.

"For me, it’s the driver of crime that interweaves with all the other drivers of crime . . . it’s omnipresent in just about every job we go to."

And officials have been reacting, from the introduction of a central city liquor ban to the tougher stance on off-licence outlets, the activities of the Dunedin Alcohol Partnership, and, increasingly, the University of Otago.

Just last week, University of Otago  vice-chancellor Harlene Hayne said the institution now spent $2.4 million a year trying to tackle alcohol problems, including funding Campus Watch, but it was like "bailing out the Titanic with a thimble".

The city had also signed off on its provisional local alcohol policy, with measures designed to curb alcohol-related harm, although appeals — including two lodged by supermarket chains — meant its introduction was on hold.

But that still left Dunedin business owners questioning aspects of the new approach, particularly the decision to strip Wests of its alcohol licence on appeal.

Arla’s decision was in keeping with the new Act’s focus on harm minimisation, but Wests director Alf Loretan questioned whether it had really helped reduce alcohol-related harm.

Customers, particularly the elderly, had made use of his store’s off-licence because it was convenient, but would now just travel further to buy alcohol elsewhere, he believed.

"I don’t think it’s going to reduce alcohol consumption. We weren’t in the trade to try to get people drunk or anything like that.

"I think it’s a pretty dogmatic stance some of these public health people have."

He also questioned Arla’s decision to overrule the Dunedin District Licensing Committee’s support for Wests, when the new Act, the LAP and the DLC were all intended as part of a push to devolve decisions on alcohol to a local level for the community’s benefit.

"They [the DLC] made a call to the best of their ability, and looking at the interests of the community, and that call was overruled by a judge from Wellington who’d never even come to Wests.

"That is annoying because it defies the purpose of the whole Act," Mr Loretan said.DLC committee chairman Colin Weatherall agreed, saying the successful appeal challenged the intent of the new system and left him "frustrated".

Wests had a "unique" history and place in the South Dunedin community, a clear record of "absolute compliance" and enjoyed widespread support — just the kind of local situation the DLC was best placed to understand, he believed.

"We believed it was the appropriate thing to grant them a licence."

Public Health South was acting within its rights by appealing the committee’s decision, "but I still don’t think it’s the right answer", Mr Weatherall said.

"In this case, [Arla] decided they were right . . . but what good’s that done for the city? Not a hell of a lot, I suspect.

"They won it on purity, rather than reality," he said.

Dr Reid disagreed, saying local decision-making still had to fit within the national legal framework.

In Wests’ case, the law said alcohol sales at such stores had to account for 85% or more of total sales to qualify for an off-licence, he said.

Wests did not, and Mr Loretan had failed to react to suggestions the store needed  to be reconfigured to survive  a legal challenge, Dr Reid  said.

The company had been attempting to run a shop within a shop — selling alcohol and fizzy drink in the same premises, with all customers using the same door and the same till.

That meant younger customers buying fizzy drinks were also exposed to an R18 licensed environment, alcohol-related signage and logos, including when queuing for purchases.

That was a concern because of the link between exposure to such material and future alcohol consumption patterns linked to alcohol-related harm, he said.

The DLC did not have the ability to overlook those legal requirements, as the Arla hearing confirmed, Dr Reid said.

"If they do attempt to be more liberal than that, then that’s where they’re going to run into trouble," Dr Reid said.

"I guess what’s been achieved is a clear message that if you’re going to sell alcohol, you have to sell it within the legal framework."

And, although "we’ll never know" if Wests customers were now simply buying alcohol elsewhere, research suggested reducing an area’s alcohol supply would reduce alcohol-related harm, Dr Reid said.

But that still left some in the hospitality industry criticising a perceived double-standard, when supermarkets remained free to sell the bulk of alcohol without the same 85% restriction foisted on stores like Wests.

It was an issue that re-emerged during the Wests hearing, when district licensing committee member Colin Lind questioned what was so different about the South Dunedin store when "every supermarket in this city has a shop within a shop selling alcohol — the same as this".

Children visiting any supermarket were forced to walk past alcohol displays, "and then when they get to the checkout . . . people in front of them have got bottles of alcohol", he said.

"Is that not as bad, or worse, than this particular premises?"

It was a distinction now written into the new law, which specifically exempted supermarkets from the 85% rule.

Mr Weatherall said supermarkets still faced new restrictions, including where alcohol could be displayed and how it could be advertised, designed to limit alcohol exposure.

Dunedin’s local alcohol policy proposed further restrictions, including reducing the hours supermarkets could sell alcohol,  7am-11pm to 9am-9pm, although was on hold pending the supermarkets’ appeals.

In the meantime, Dunedin’s supermarkets had been "reasonably good" at introducing some changes, including reconfiguring alcohol displays so customers did not have to walk through the middle of them, he said.

But they were resisting further costly changes until after the outcome of the local alcohol policy appeals was known, he said.

That left publicans like John MacDonald, owner of the Terrace Bar, frustrated that bars like his faced a tougher approach by liquor licensing authorities.

The vast majority of alcohol was purchased from supermarkets and bottle stores and consumed away from the city’s nightlife venues, but authorities appeared to be focused on pubs, he said.

"It’s easy to come into a pub and look to find fault with what we’re doing, rather than deal with some of the very obvious issues that happen outside licensed premises," he said.

Hospitality Association of New Zealand Otago branch president Mark Scully agreed, saying it was disappointing Wests had been targeted while supermarkets were free to continue "pretty much carte blanche".

"When you see a case like the Wests case, you can’t help but feel that something’s wrong — the amount of alcohol they sell and the exposure they put children to, versus a supermarket, where all of our children walk down supermarket aisles every week, through aisles of liquor.

"Unfortunately, you’ve got a couple of health officials who have followed the law to the letter of the law, and Wests fall outside that category.

"I think maybe the legislation needs looked at."

In 2014, following a marathon debate, Parliament voted not to introduce minimum alcohol pricing, as then-Justice Minister Judith Collins argued it would "hit moderate drinkers in the pocket" without compelling evidence supporting such a change.

That was despite a Ministry of Justice report which found the introduction of minimum pricing could save the country an estimated $624 million over a decade by reducing alcohol-related harm.

Mr Scully said off-licence sales, including from supermarkets, remained the "major driver" of alcohol consumption in New Zealand.

"A young person can still drink 18 bottles of beer for $20 and then hit town and get arrested outside a pub, and the pub’s in trouble," he said.

But Ms Collins’ replacement as Justice Minister, Amy Adams, told the Otago Daily Times in an interview supermarkets were well regulated, and she did not support any move to "relitigate" the minimum pricing debate.

"I think we’ve got the law well set in regards to supermarkets. I think we’ve got the law well set in regards wanting to bar the sale of alcohol in dairies and convenience stores.

"I’m not interested in changing either of those policies."

Supermarkets already faced restrictions, including a ban on the sale of spirits, and had "a very low level of non-compliance and issues arising from supermarket sales and associated behaviour", she said.

"What people do with the alcohol when they get it home, and whether they drink it responsibly and whether they go and cause harm, is another issue.

"It’s an issue that is a societal issue as much as anything. It’s very difficult to hold a supermarket responsible for what people do in their living rooms."