That " Three Strikes " Law !

Stopping young people below the legal age to access alcohol from gaining supply has been a perennial problem for law enforcement.  For the first half of the twentieth century the age of "maturity "in Australia, which allowed citizens to both vote and consume alcohol - was twenty-one.

The Vietnam war and the conscription that went with it brought change.   It seemed unreasonable that when a young man attained his eighteenth birthday he could be subjected to a lottery, put in uniform and handed a rifle and sent off to fight a war - and yet the law said he could not vote for the parliament that imposed that law - and was forbidden alcohol.   The age of maturity in Australia was changed to eighteen.

Enforcing liquor laws is a state matter and compliance requirements are in place.  Bottle shops are supposed to require proof of age and liquor licensing police regularly visit hotels to detect under age drinkers. Penalties for non compliance are severe.

Scams to evade that law are legion. Forged documents that purport to prove the holder is of legal age are common and any person without proof of age is usually given the benefit of the doubt. Appearance is everything.  Many parents condone drinking by their sons and daughters and become their suppliers.  Parties held in private homes or on hired premises totally ignore these liquor laws. The annual "Schoolies " week of celebration is a well televised event of drunken revelry.

The laws in New South Wales come down heavily on pubs that turn a blind eye to under age drinking.   What is known as the " Three Strikes " law imposes the loss of a trading license for hotels that incur three convictions for serious offences under the liquor act - and that  cancellation lasts for three years.   During a period of license cancellation draconian restrictions are placed on trade and this imposes costs in excess of $8,000 a year.   The industry is lobbying to have those laws reviewed.

There is a disparity in how this law is applied to clubs as opposed to hotels.  If a club is convicted under the three strikes law the penalty is imposed on the licensee.   With hotels, the penalty is applied to the premises.   The industry is asking that in both cases the licensee be the appropriate person to shoulder the penalty.

The government would be wise to think carefully before adopting that strategy.  The victim in the spotlight is a big, popular north shore hotel that got caught with four seventeen year old girls drinking on its premises.  This hotel is part of a chain under the control of a man who owns a number of similar hotels and which involves multiple shareholders.   Should the penalty apply to its licensee, that position could see replacement by another person with little change to trading conditions.

Unfortunately, this same law applies to struggling little country pubs in towns with declining populations.   In most cases the licensee is also the owner, and license loss may be terminal to the business.

It seems that the law makers need to consider balance in applying penalties.  Selling alcohol delivers big profits and many high volume outlets disregard the law to favour their bottom line.  They will continue that policy if the penalties are weak.

Whatever laws are put in place, we can be certain that under age drinkers will continue to test the law. We have been unable to eradicate that in the past - and it would take an overly optimistic person to think that it can be achieves in the future !