I used to be a cop. I’ve seen firsthand the damage that alcohol can cause when mis-used. Along the way I became a dad and, like most parents, worry about my kid’s safety. Now, I find myself as Managing Director of Brown-Forman Australia, proud makers of Jack Daniels. 

Melbourne CBD last New Year's Eve

I’m not sure which role has given me the sharper insight into life as most of us know it but if you think that this country recently had a ‘debate’ about alcohol policy, you’re dead wrong. 

What was supposed to pass for a war on binge-drinking has turned out to be a well meaning, but badly aimed, paint-ball skirmish – messy, misdirected and ultimately without lasting impact.

For all the focus on so-called ‘alcopops’ and alcohol taxes, it’s easy to forget that the vast majority of Australians enjoy the occasional drink. At home and in restaurants, clubs and pubs most of us drink responsibly, socially and moderately. 

However, for those who choose to mis-use alcohol and cause public grief there should be a simple message – no more. 

On any given Friday or Saturday night in our cities and towns, you can see how little impact raising taxes or advertising bans have had. Our streets are no safer, our communities no more secure. 

Most of us are fed up with the drunks’ anti-social behaviour. At best, their loud and loutish homeward-bound behaviour threatens only our slumber and the wheelie bins parked outside our homes. 

At worst, it’s the sickening, nasty violence we see chronicled by the 6 o’clock news on too many nights. Few are forced to face up to the consequences of their actions.

This is the grim reality of the serious abuse of alcohol by a minority of people who drink to get drunk. The first step for those of us looking for a solution is to admit that this is the real drinking problem we face as a community.

If ever there was a time to deal with the drunks on our streets, it’s now. Give our police – those at the coalface night after night – the power and resources to deal with the anti-social behaviour. 

We should make public drunkenness an enforceable offence across all states and territories. We need to levy large fines against those who misuse alcohol and arrest those who cause the damage. 

I’m not talking about those unfortunate people in our society who need our help but those who do the wrong thing and mis-use alcohol to harm others. It’s time the law caught up with them. 

For too long some law-makers have fiddled at the margins and focused on the wrong issues. 

If we want to tackle binge-drinking we need to look no further than our efforts on drink driving. We don’t ban cars, close hotels or levy more taxes on those who do the right thing and can least afford it. Instead – and quite rightly – we enforce the law and come down on those who break it.

To change behaviour there has to be a fear of getting caught. 

Constant education and regular random breath testing campaigns are fine examples of drink driving prevention – and they work because they instil a real fear of getting caught. 

Policing and enforcement are the keys to more secure communities. For those people who choose to mis-use alcohol, there should be a consequence. Without renewing society’s sense of responsibility, we’ll never get to the heart of problem drinking in the community. The binge will just go on.

The distilled spirits industry is committed to finding a solution to binge-drinking – and we’re ready to work with Government, the police and health groups. If there’s a war to be had, let’s wage it where it will make a difference. 

Michael McShane is a former NSW Police officer, the current Chair of the Distilled Spirits Industry Council of Australia and Managing Director of Brown-Forman Australia.

20 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Rationalist says:

      06:32am | 26/08/09

      Hear hear!

      Perhaps issuing an alcohol licence as part of a drivers licence and you are able to lose the right to buy alcohol from shops if you act stupidly while intoxicated (ie. drunk in the streets = 3 month ban, drink driving = longer).

      If you cannot use a fun thing responsibly and in moderation, you should have no right to buy it from a shop.

    • pete b says:

      06:39am | 26/08/09

      You want a police-based , taxpayer funded war on a A-grade anti-social drug? While your industry pockets big profits, selling the drug? Corporate welfare anyone? Where are these hundreds of extra police going to come from? Look at your own behaviour Michael - you’ve turned to the dark side Luke. It’s time the Liquor industry started paying for the range of serious behaviours you liquor up - us non-drinkers have subsidised you bludgers to long. And try some more creative solutions and self-responsibility,  rather than a look-at-us-we’re-tough-excops-we’re-doing-something war on drinkers.

    • charlie says:

      08:51am | 26/08/09

      “The distilled spirits industry is committed to finding a solution to binge-drinking”

      Well how about as a first step stop manufacturing and selling the lolly water alco-pops that contribute to teenagers overconsuming alcohol and losing control. Oh of course that won’t happen because it would hurt your bottom line.

    • Steve S says:

      09:23am | 26/08/09

      Being drunk per se in public should not necessarily be a criminal offence and it would be impossible to police.  There are varying degrees of drunkeness and for a great many the only harm they are doing when having a few too many beers, is too themselves which may result in a headache in the morning.  There are certain individuals, admittedly far too many, who have a pre-disposition to violent behaviour when they consume alcohol to excess.  Liquor manufacturers should be forced to hammer (pardon the pun) home the point that excessive alcohol consumption is dangerous to one’s health and much like anti-tobacco advertising, pay for saturated anti-alcohol advertising.  Whilesoever though, that big business are making an absolute skinful (again, please pardon the pun) through liquor sales (read Wesfarmers and Woolworths etc), I’m cynical enough to believe that there’ll be a lot of noise made about this but very little of substance done.

    • Amy says:

      09:48am | 26/08/09

      Imagine letting the police decide who is drunk and who isn’t! That is simply a recipe for racial profiling and malicious arrests/punishments of young, male idiots who have had too much to drink.

      What a hypocritical idea this is as well - McShane makes the profits off something he says the police should be cracking down on!

      More on my blog http://www.civiltonguesaustralia.com

    • Grant says:

      09:51am | 26/08/09

      Seriously, you want to give powers to the police to arrest anyone who looks intoxicated.

      What happens if they are disabled or having a panic attack or a nervous breakdown or simply tripped over something and the police man handle them because they think they think their drunk.

      Or maybe the police office didn’t like the way that person looked at them and oversteps the line, hmm the person isn’t being compliant so why don’t we uses the taser on them, 28 times… 

      Yeah great idea….

      Grant - 1
      Michael - 0

    • Stu says:

      11:26am | 26/08/09

      anyone noticed that the whole alcopops tax war didn’t achieve anything on the streets?  Giving cops the power to stop anti-social behavious isn’t radical - just long over due.  We used to do it but now all the do-gooders say go softly.  Enough is enough!

    • Joy Ess says:

      11:31am | 26/08/09

      Drinking lolly water and losing control????  Charlie, you’ve got to get out more.  The louts who get drunk and cause all the aggro are drinking beer and lots of it.  it’s not even about what they drink but how much they drink and being held responsible if they go too far.  Bring it on.

    • jonathan says:

      11:47am | 26/08/09

      Yeh, a peddler of strong liquor calling for a clampdown on drunks is like a ferrari dealer calling for a clampdown on speeding.

    • P says:

      11:49am | 26/08/09

      No no no you guys, he’s not saying that police can just arrest people willy nilly for appearing to be intoxicated, because Amy is 100% spot-on that such a system would result in racially-based, gender-based and age-based discrimination. He’s just saying that police set up random breath testing…. y’know… uhh… everywhere! Then those people that breathalise at *whatever amount* then get locked up or charged huge fines, because lord knows having a punitive approach toward alcohol and drug abuse has worked great in the US. ...right?

      Seriously though, why don’t we focus on treating the cause and not the symptoms: let’s tackle alcohol abuse and binge-drinking cultures, rather than punishing those who have grown up with alcoholic parents or in an environment where being drunk/high is seen as the pinacle of fun. That kind of attitude can be found in every socio-economic group, amongst every age bracket, and all genders. It needs to be addressed with educational campaigns, rehabilitation support and publicity, and yes - increased taxes on drinks normally not taken responsibly, with parallel advertisements about the changes and why they’ve been put in place - for the health and safety of yourself and others.

      By all means, the police play a role in subduing antisocial and dangerous behaviour in extreme circumstances, but let’s not start shifting toward a punitive system which could be so easily misused and targeted at whomsoever any particular policeman/woman wants to “catch out” that night.

      As others have said, the wide majority of people are able to become tipsy/drunk and have a genuinely good night out on the town without violence or public harm of any kind. So let’s NOT ban being drunk in public, now there’s an idea.

    • The Danster says:

      12:00pm | 26/08/09

      I have no idea if locking up violent drunks on a saturday night is going to work but seriously, has anything else helped?  cmon, as long as there are people who think getting a skinful of beer and looking for a fight is a fun night out, there’s always going to be a problem THEY ARE THE PROBLEM let the cops deal with them like anyone else who breaks the law!

    • Ricardo says:

      12:12pm | 26/08/09

      it’s not rocket science.  Guy drinks too much, can’t handle it, get’s aggro, get’s sorted by the police and cleared off the streets.  Street safer and the rest of us can go on with our business of having a normal night out with a social drink with friends.

    • MsMisha says:

      12:18pm | 26/08/09

      Jonathon - love your speeding analogy but that’s the point.  We don’t ban lamborghinis from the roads because some people speed on our roads.  And we don’t close roads because someone drives over the speed limit.  Enforce the laws when someone breaks them.  makes sense to everyone but the do-gooders who think every aggro drunk has some excuse to get drunk and beat people up.

    • Guy P says:

      12:41pm | 26/08/09

      Yes yes… but what we need are easy to implement, inexpensive, solutions.

      Having worked behind bars for years while studying, I’ve noticed the atmosphere on Melbourne city streets become progressively more unpleasant.

      Simple deterrents need to be aimed at BOTH the supply, and demand sides of the equation if any rapid headway is to be made on this.

      Here’s a start:

      1. Employ plain-clothes liquor licensing officials to scout CBD venues and issue fines to premises serving patrons visibly drunk, or otherwise clearly violating responsible service of alcohol laws.

      Too many venues view RSA laws as mere suggestions, sometimes simply ignore them comfortable in the knowledge that there is no monitoring and few repercussions. I should know—I’ve tended bar in several.

      2. Make anti-social drunkenness on the street s a misdemeanour offence—if it isn’t already—punishable by on-the-spot fines *AND*  a scheme wherein police tag those individuals who’ve come to their attention with a visible indicator such as a bright, indelible ink stamped across the hands. A visible flag would enable to venue door security and late-night bottleshop staff to identify those who must be refused refuse entry or service.
      It would also (one hopes) shame the perpetrator into hiding his fists in his pockets and taking the next cab home.

      Thuggish, juiced-up behaviour must no longer be acceptable. Education campaigns are one thing – attitudes towards booze will take years to change; the time is now to shame and punish those who ruin a night out the rest of us.

    • Jasper says:

      01:17pm | 26/08/09

      How do you define “drunk” in this circumstance? By random breath testing of the public in the street? C’mon are you serious?

      If you choose an arbitrary point at which someone becomes “drunk” then you’ll fill your lock-ups (oh, and State coffers) with the non-violent, perfectly sociable “drunks”. The cops could just sit outside a pub or club and breath test everyone before they get in a taxi, they’re in public and they’re drunk according to the law therefore they are guilty of being “drunk in public”

      And why should the many thousands of Australians who get drunk every weekend and get home without destroying someone else’s life be penalised because of the actions of a small group of people who can’t or won’t control themselves when drunk?

      Drinking licences, it’s the only way to go. At 18 everyone gets a drinking licence which is automatically revoked if the drinker in question is found drunk driving or violent under the influence.

      If you want sensible policy on this area, stop listening to the liquor industry, who have a major vested interest, and the cops – just because they have front line experience does not mean they can see the big picture.

    • Clint Walsh says:

      02:17pm | 26/08/09

      Breath test at the club….over limit…locked up

    • davido says:

      03:24pm | 26/08/09

      So would walking from a pub to a taxi rank constitute an offence? Would I be tasered for daring to step out the pub door? What constitutes drunkeness: .05 .08 or not being able to recite the alphabet backwards?

      Think people think! If you want to live in a police state, go down to your travel agent and book a ticket for Zimbabwe or China.

      The Taliban are offering special adult education classes in oppression for people just like you.

    • Brian Ward says:

      09:00pm | 26/08/09

      Taser all the thugs into submission. No warning. No second chance. You act violently, you get fried.

    • Jasper says:

      04:12pm | 27/08/09

      Gee Brian, I’d like to see you utter that opinion if it was one of your relatives who received that treatment.

    • XvIGarryrok says:

      01:52am | 03/05/12

      We Work . Looking Do you want to dive to Sea sex fantasy - we have a good   a surprise.  erotic games close.  Affiliate has become to take part in the shooting of a Web camera to all who wish to who wants to.
      Online Web Cam Show - <a >best web cam</a>

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

ToryShepherd

What about Weet-Bix? “@Slate: How to make pork-infused veggies: http://t.co/ZYOOxVVT

Lucy Kippist

@christoforpaine sorry! Actually thought I already was... Weird?

Lucy Kippist

@dreshubby you wont know until you try!

Malcolm Farr

Carbon tax?RT @danielsutton10: Terrifying number: Hewlett-Packard cutting 27,000 jobs worldwide to save $3 billion. #tennews#tenbreakfast

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Animal experiments won’t cure me from cancer

Animal experiments won’t cure me from cancer

Lying on a cold table in an unfamiliar place and undergoing a core biopsy was probably one of the most…

If you want to get promoted, laugh at the boss’s jokes

If you want to get promoted, laugh at the boss’s jokes

Red alert, ladies. Making jokes about your ability at work is not funny particularly at board level.…

Need someone to do your dirty work? Try God.

Need someone to do your dirty work? Try God.

Punishing the baddies is only fun in the movies. In real life it’s messy, expensive, and fraught…

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

242 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter