Degraves Lane in Melbourne’s CBD during the White Night festival. With no lockouts in place, Melburnians have no last call for drinks, unlike in Sydney and possibly Brisbane. Picture: Tim Carrafa
MELBOURNE was one of the first cities in Australia to adopt the controversial lockout laws that have seen Sydney labelled a nanny state, but they were so unpopular the Victorian Government quietly dropped them months later.
While Sydney has had the laws in place for two years and Brisbane is considering a trial, Melbourne is going in the opposite direction with around-the-clock public transport and festivals designed to attract people to the city 24/7.
It was yesterday recommended by a parliamentary committee that Queensland trial a clampdown on clubs and bars for an 18-month period.
The proposed laws, modelled on those in Sydney, would see last drinks called at 2am statewide, with shots banned after midnight.
Nightclubs can apply to have a 3am last-drinks extension, but then must impose a 1am lockout.
“We have measures in that bill which are about the safety of women and men going out into precincts in the early hours of the morning, and curbing the rate of alcohol-fuelled violence,” Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk said.
One-punch victim Cole Miller whose death has stiffened the resolve of the Queensland Government to restrict pub and clubs opening hours.Source:Supplied
In Sydney, the lockouts have been credited with cutting violent assaults by a third in the party district of Kings Cross and 26 per cent in the CBD.
But in an epic vent that went viral last week, chief executive of Freelancer.com Matt Barrie said the city’s night-time economy had been decimated with venues closing and vibrant neighbourhoods now empty.
“Sydney, once the best city in the world, has become an international joke. No wonder everyone’s apparently moving to Melbourne,” he said. “[NSW Premier] Mike Baird has turned Sydney into Detroit.”
Protesters in Sydney’s inner west suburb Newtown rail against lockout laws. Picture: Craig WilsonSource:News Corp Australia
The current debate in Melbourne, on whether to revisit the lockout laws, has something of an air of deja vu. In 2008, the merits — or not — of restricting when and where people could drink was the subject of furious debate when one of Australia’s first lockout trials took place.
In June that year, pubs and clubs in the Melbourne CBD, as well as in popular night spots including Prahran and St Kilda, were not allowed to let in any customers between 2am and 7am. Pubgoers who were already on the premises could stay but if they left for any reason, say for a smoke, they would not be allowed back in.
Prior to the lockouts’ introduction, then Victorian Premier John Brumby, said that inner suburban communities would see a positive change from the new restrictions.
“We do face a big challenge — this is a big issue and these measures will, I believe, make a real difference to our streets,” he said.
Melbourne's streets after the 2am lockout was trialled for the first busy weekend.Source:News Limited
‘PUNTERS WENT INSANE’
But on the first weekend of the new policy, the only difference was an increase in violence as police struggled to control the mayhem with several incidents linked directly to people being unable to get into clubs and bars.
Reveller Matthew Johns told the Herald Sun at the time: “I can’t remember seeing such anger and general messiness in the city before.
“It seemed once the lockout kicked in punters, bouncers and police went insane.”
Bar owners also lashed out at the lockouts with Augusto Braidotti, general manager of a slew of well-known and popular venues including Cookie and the Rooftop Cinema Bar calling the new regulations a “dangerous social experiment” which could give a boost to drug dealers as people looked for other distractions.
“It punishes fun-loving Melburnians and tourists and will make responsible serving of alcohol hard to monitor as punters are locked into one venue,” he wrote in the Herald Sun.
“The move will mark the end of Melbourne’s CBD as a 24-hour city and hand to Sydney the opportunity to copy our formula — successful one large cities go to great lengths to develop.”
A protest drew a crowd 10,000 and a report by KPMG, commissioned by the Brumby Government, found the lockouts were an abject failure and there had been an increase in assaults in the hours before venues had to shut their doors.
Three months later, in September, the lockouts trial was abandoned.
The Melbourne lockouts trail was abandoned after three months after protests and doubts as to its effectiveness.Source:News Limited
BAD POLICY, POORLY IMPLEMENTED
However, violence prevention expert at Deakin University, Professor Peter Miller, questioned if the 2008 trial was doomed from the get go.
“You can’t draw a conclusion from something that was so poorly implemented,” he told news.com.au. “It was a bad policy. In Melbourne they were talking about a lockout without anything else alongside it.”
In fact, Prof Miller questioned whether lockouts in isolation could ever be successful at reducing violence.
“There’s virtually no evidence for lockouts, but there is massive global evidence for restrictive access to alcohol earlier in the night. The longer you keep drinking, the grumpier you get, the poorer your decision making, the more likely you are to be a perpetrator and the much greater likelihood you are of being a victim of alcohol-related violence.
“There is a massive problem in Melbourne, we’re just hiding it a lot better,” he said. “If I was to put something in place in Melbourne I’d shut [venues] at 3am.”
It is a position backed by the chief executive of the Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education (FARE), Michael Thorn, who said Melbourne’s experiment was hampered due to the fact around 40 per cent of venues successfully applied for exemptions to the lockouts.
“The evidence is absolutely clear that even a modest change like cessation of service at 3am can have a dramatic effect on the number of assaults and emergency department presentations,” he told news.com.au.
“For every hour after midnight there’s a 20 per cent increase in violent instances so if you’re really looking at stopping the violence you’d say midnight and anything after that you’re trading off safety for people's privilege to drink. But it’s about balance.”
Just this month, a poll commissioned by FARE found 74 per cent of Queenslanders supported the proposed restrictions to late-night trading at the state’s pubs and clubs.
Protesters outside Queensland Parliament House protesting against the proposed new lockout laws.Source:News Limited
‘LOCKOUTS DID NOT SUIT OUR CITY’
Mr Thorne said FARE was actively in discussion with the Victorian Government over amendments to the state’s liquor legislation. But it would have to be convincing with Melbourne introducing around-the-clock transport on weekends to stimulate the night-time economy and even encouraging late night buskers and other entertainers in order to bring a relaxed atmosphere to the city’s streets after dark.
Adding to the uphill struggle, some powerful voices remain against lockouts and further liquor restrictions, including Melbourne Lord Mayor Robert Doyle.
“Melbourne is a complex, vibrant, 24-hour city. Over the years we have tried initiatives, such as two am lockout laws in 2008, that did not suit our city, our businesses or our people,” he said in a statement.
“In recent years, we have formed strong partnerships with licensees, support services, retailers, event co-ordinators and Victoria Police, and we are now much better at understanding which safety measures work for our city.”
From one end of the country to the other, there seems still little consensus on how to tackle late night violence without restricting people’s right to choose when and where to have a drink.
0 nhận xét:
Đăng nhận xét