ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (11:16): I move:

That the Social Development Committee inquire into and report upon the adequacy and appropriateness of laws and practices relating to the sale and consumption of alcohol and in particular, whether those laws and practices need to be modified to better deal with criminal and other antisocial behaviour in public places arising from the consumption of alcohol, and any other relevant matter.

The reason for this motion I think is readily apparent to most members. There has been publicity, even today, about what is happening as a consequence of a minority of people (it is always a minority) misusing or abusing alcohol. Shortly, I will come to that commentary and report that was published today in The Advertiser.

We all know that alcohol is an important part of our community. I am not a wowser—I enjoy a drink, like many other Australians, and South Australians, in particular—I am certainly not on a prohibition crusade, but I am concerned about what has been happening (particularly late at night on weekends and in the early hours of the morning) involving violent behaviour by a minority, often fuelled by excessive consumption of alcohol. It is not only a problem in Adelaide but it is also a problem elsewhere. I saw a report yesterday, I think in relation to the United Kingdom where there has been a dramatic increase in alcohol-fuelled violence since they went to more liberalised 24-hour alcohol availability in some of their clubs and hotels.

In 2006, Queensland introduced a liquor amendment bill which provided for the introduction of a statutory 3am lock-out involving licensed premises. The idea was to stop people who had consumed a lot of alcohol re-entering premises and prevent what they called club hopping. It was to stop people who had had more than enough alcohol coming back into those premises or, indeed, going into other premises.

That legislation also provided for tougher controls in regard to licensees who were able to trade after 1am. Some of those requirements included: providing adequate crowd controller numbers; installation of closed circuit TV cameras; mandatory responsible service of alcohol training for all staff; restriction on frequency and duration of happy hours; and a prohibition on drinking competitions or activities that encouraged rapid or excessive consumption of alcohol. There was a package of measures in Queensland, as I say, as a result of that 2006 liquor act amendment bill. Victoria is looking to move down a similar path and so are other states and, as I indicated earlier, I would expect the United Kingdom to follow shortly.

I am not into the blame game and I am certainly not seeking to put the blame on hoteliers and club operators, but I think it is an issue that needs to be looked at objectively, in a sensible and calm way rather than with a knee-jerk reaction to what has been happening. I quote from article No. 18 published by the Australian Institute of Criminology (written by Gail Mason and Paul R. Wilson) headed 'Alcohol and Crime', which states:

From the time that Europeans first brought alcohol to this country it has rapidly become embedded in the lifestyle of a substantial proportion of Australia's population. Alcohol consumption, and especially that of beer, has on numerous occasions been referred to as the great Australian pastime. The popular image of Australia's beer-swilling, potbellied 'Norm' is in many ways an authentic caricature and indeed one that many Australians seem proud of. Drinking alcohol is frequently perceived as ordinary, everyday activity, while regular drunkenness is portrayed, at least by some, as one prominent trait of the stereotypical 'macho Aussie guy'.

The unfortunate reality, is, however, that these images create a mask which obscures the severe abuse of alcohol that has been happening in this country over many decades. The abuse has occurred in association with the dubious honour gained by Australia of having the highest rate of consumption of alcohol in the English-speaking world. There are many social, economic and political repercussions that flow from a high national level of alcohol consumption. The connection between alcohol and crime, and especially violent crime, is one that has been the centre of considerable discussion both within Australia and overseas.

The report goes on to look at the connection between alcohol and crime. Obviously, I cannot read the whole report, but I recommend it to members. Another study, published by the Alcohol Education and Rehabilitation Foundation and supported by the New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, paper No. 8, in particular, focuses on liquor outlet concentrations and alcohol-related neighbourhood problems. It is quite an extensive paper, and I will just quote a short passage, as follows:

A recurring issue for liquor licensing policymakers is the extent to which restrictions should be placed on the availability of alcohol in order to minimise alcohol-related harms in the community. In most Australian jurisdictions, including New South Wales, the liquor licensing laws allow for a range of liquor licensing restrictions to be applied, which in effect limit the availability of alcohol. Examples include placing restrictions on the hours during which licensed premises can trade, the type of locations where alcohol can or cannot be sold (e.g. not in petrol stations or supermarkets) or limiting the number of sellers who are permitted into the alcohol retail market.

That is just part of that very extensive paper. However, the point is that the evidence suggests that there is a very strong link between alcohol availability and antisocial—and, indeed, often criminal—behaviour involving a minority of people.

I wish to quote from an article in today's Advertiser on page 27, written by Nick Henderson, where he cites an increase in the incidence of disorderly behaviour in the CBD and serious and minor assaults. He points out that the number of arrests and reports relating to disorderly behaviour in the CBD has increased from 597 in 2005 to 762 in 2007, and the number of serious and minor assaults (excluding assaulting police, attempted murder and murder) has risen from 233 in 2005 to 314 in 2007. The police suggest that some of this is due to changes in legislation which now classifies threats as a form of assault. However, the local service area police superintendent, John Thomas, said:

Unfortunately, there are individuals that disregard their social obligations to behave in an acceptable manner that not only upsets others around them, but can have significant consequences.

Mr Thomas said some licensed premises 'didn't want to acknowledge the behaviour outside their premises is their responsibility'. The article also quotes the police minister (Hon. Paul Holloway) as saying that alcohol-fuelled violence was increasing. He said:

SAPOL is continuing to develop strategies and tactics to ensure these types of offences are being tackled in a targeted and effective way.

The opposition spokesperson, Terry Stephens, basically supported the thrust of the article. I do not think there is any dispute that we have an issue, and I think the Social Development Committee is the appropriate body to look at this matter and to hear from the various parties involved—the hoteliers, the liquor trades union and members of the public, if the committee so wishes. In my view, the committee should review what has been done elsewhere, have a look at what works and see how people can enjoy going out to a club or a hotel and having a drink without unnecessarily exacerbating or creating a problem of antisocial or criminal behaviour resulting from the unfortunate actions of a minority.

I do not have the answers. If I had the answers I would not be calling for an investigation and inquiry. The committee could look at what effect the Queensland legislation has had, whether it has been satisfactory and whether it could be improved. It could look at other measures elsewhere, but our continuing to pretend that there is not a problem or that it will resolve itself, I do not think is satisfactory. The fact that the committee would be looking at some issues—and it would take some time—would not prevent the government or the parliament from acting in the meantime on certain aspects of liquor licensing. Indeed, in my experience on committees, a committee can refer matters immediately to a minister if it believes urgent action is warranted on the basis of evidence presented to it.

I am told by many young people and others that they are increasingly concerned about being in the city late at night or in the early hours of the morning because of the behaviour of an element who consume too much alcohol. Anyone should have the right to enjoy themselves in the city and be able to walk around without the threat of being bashed. There is far too much violence associated with alcohol occurring in the CBD and it is time something was done about it. I gave notice of this motion a while ago, but since then I believe the Prime Minister has focused on this issue of concern; and I know the Premier of Victoria has focused on the issue.

Many members would read the interstate papers and they would see that almost every day a senior member of government in another state is commenting on this issue. Here in South Australia we need to get a handle on it; not engage in the blame game but, rather, come up with some positive ways in which we can improve the situation in order to ensure that Adelaide is a safe place where people can come on a weekend or any time, day or night, to enjoy a drink, but not feel threatened by the antisocial or criminal behaviour of a minority who seem unable to control their drinking.

Some changes may be required. We may need to adopt lock-out laws to stop club hopping and things such as that. It would be up to the committee to take evidence on that and to make recommendations. I commend the motion to the house. It is time the committee looked at this issue and, in so doing, improve the quality of life for all South Australians, especially those who want to enjoy a social life in the CBD.

Dr McFETRIDGE (Morphett) (11:28): I support this motion which goes right to the heart of my electorate. The electorate of Morphett includes the fantastic tourist area of Glenelg. In fact I have 106 restaurants and cafes within walking distance of my Byron Street office. I have some of the best hotels and pubs in South Australia. I have the end of the only functioning tramline which brings thousands of tourists to the Bay. If one looks at the tourist numbers that come to the Bay every year, it is about 2.5 million tourists—some people say up to 3 million tourists a year come to the Bay.

I had breakfast at the Bay this morning. It is fantastic. It is a safe place to be at all hours of the day and night. On the way into parliament this morning I was telephoned by a journalist from the Messenger newspaper because there is a petition circulating around Glenelg to have pubs put under curfew and to close. I was asked, 'What is your opinion on this?' I said, 'Well, what do you want to do? Do you want to close at 10 o'clock or 6 o'clock? It will not solve the problem.'

A report was prepared by the Australian National Drug and Alcohol Reform Commission—although I might need to correct the name of the organisation. That organisation released an extensive report about the responsible serving of alcohol. It details all the things that are desirable in terms of the conduct of licensees and restaurants in the responsible serving of alcohol. We have a code of conduct with all the licensees at the Bay. Every couple of months I meet with members of the council, the Liquor Licensing Commission, the police and all the licensees to discuss the issues that are occurring in the area. The issues of anti-social behaviour at the Bay in 99 per cent of cases are not because people are being poured out of pubs at three and four in the morning out of their brains on alcohol. It is not that. The licensees do conduct themselves in a very responsible manner.

What you do have are thousands of people coming down on weekends; and, unfortunately, in amongst those thousands of people are always those intent on mischief. A lot of those people bring their own alcohol with them, so shutting the pubs will not stop that. Those people then get in a state of intoxication, they misbehave and they cause angst for the local residents, for whom I have a lot of sympathy. The local residents come to see me quite regularly about anti-social behaviour at the Bay. Fortunately, in most cases, the police are able to get onto it very quickly. I commend the police based at both Glenelg and the Sturt LSA. We talk on a regular basis. We have a very good relationship. They are doing a terrific job in terms of their covert and overt operations (where they can be seen). They work extremely well.

There are always people who either come out of a pub and have had too much to drink or who have brought their own alcohol to the Bay, and they do cause problems. However, putting a curfew on the pubs and clubs is really not the answer. As I said, the responsible serving of alcohol is a significant issue, and it is being addressed very well by the Liquor Licensing Commission, the council, the police and, importantly, the licensees. They are aware—because I have raised it with them—of the position that is being talked about in Queensland. They are also very aware of the fact that they are in business, that they employ a lot of people and that they cater to a lot of tourists who do not want to be told they cannot have a drink after 10 o'clock, or midnight even.

People want to come to the Bay and enjoy South Australia being open—not shut down, not closed because some people had their letterbox ripped out. I have a lot of sympathy for those people, because it is very personal and it really just is unacceptable. However, shutting the pubs and the clubs is not the answer. The answer (which is something I have been championing for quite a while), besides the responsible serving of alcohol, is to have vigilant policing 24 hours a day. The police are doing a great job but, unfortunately, because of their tight resources they cannot be down there 24 hours a day. The Glenelg Police Station is a shopfront police station. It does not matter whether it is located at Moseley Square, really, as long as the police are out on the beat during the daylight times and any other particular times the police deem operationally worthy.

The policing does not have to be bodies on the beat. What it really must be is something which I have partly achieved but which I want to see expanded, that is, the live CCTV monitoring of that whole area. Any criminologist will tell you that it is not the penalty that deters people: it is the chances of getting caught. When you are out of your brain on alcohol, and possibly even drugs as some people may be, you may not be thinking about the consequences or even whether you will get caught; but, certainly, if you know that when you go to Glenelg you will be filmed on live CCTV and that there will be an immediate consequence for your actions, it would be a significant deterrent. That is what it is all about. It is all about the need to educate people in responsible alcohol consumption, which the pubs and clubs are doing, as well as the government through the health department.

Also, we need to make sure that the police are given all the resources they need not only to be on the ground when they are needed with quick response times but also to be able to have the evidence there to say, 'Well, you are the idiot who had too much to drink. You are the idiot who damaged the car,' or 'You are the idiot who damaged someone's letterbox.' I emphasise for the sake of my constituents and the people who may be aware of this issue that Glenelg is a very safe place. I have no problem walking around Glenelg late at night. I do it quite frequently. I will go back to my office to pick up gear. I walk down the back lanes towards my office and down Jetty Road. I have no problems doing that. There are a few idiots every now and again, but it is not a dangerous place. The Adelaide CBD may be a different matter, with gangs coming in from the outer suburbs and from who knows where—I should not say just the outer suburbs, but from anywhere—and causing mischief. The Bay is a good family place and it is a great place to be the local member.

I encourage the Social Development Committee to examine this issue, because I am not quite sure of the motives of those who are circulating this petition and some of the councillors who are really pushing this issue down at Glenelg. I am sure they are well-meaning, but I think they are misguided. I hope that the Social Development Committee can look at this issue and make sure that all the causes and effects and ways of overcoming the concerns—many of which are just perceptions, not reality—are looked at with a clear understanding that, if something needs to be done, it can be done.

However, we are not tilting at windmills or jumping at shadows, because certainly the shadows down at Glenelg are the palm trees on a sunny day, not the idiots hiding in dark alleys. Glenelg is a good place to be and I am proud to be the local member. I support this motion, because it will show that the publicans, the licensees at Glenelg, the council and the police are working very well to ensure that alcohol is not the root cause of all the issues that some people are trying to beat up down there.

Ms BREUER (Giles) (11:36): I actually oppose this motion, because I am concerned about this culture of alcohol, particularly with young people. I think that is the real problem and I think that we, as a society, need to do something seriously about controlling the attitude that young people have developed towards alcohol. As a baby boomer and a person who has had the odd drink in the past, I sometimes wonder whether this is as a result of seeing the amount of alcohol our generation drank over the years. I often think about my children coming along to parties with me and watching their parents and other adults drinking. It has now become so much part of our society and culture, and young people seem to believe that it is impossible to have a good time unless you write yourself off and become absolutely legless. I think we have instilled this into them.

When I was young my parents never drank. I do not ever remember seeing my mother have a drink in her life, and I think I saw my father have one or two beers, and usually he drank only half of it. We came from a family of strict Methodist ancestry, and it was not the culture to drink in our family. I must say that, in my youth, I made up for many generations of non-drinkers. So, we did not have that culture. I remember that the first time I ever drank I wondered what had hit me, because it just was not part of my culture. But, for young people nowadays, it certainly is, because they have watched their parents drink over the years and it has become a complete part of their lives.

This is aided and abetted by TV advertising where it is cool to drink this or that drink. Also, the types of drinks around nowadays, such as coolers, taste lovely, but they are full of alcohol and, after three or four of those, you suddenly think 'Whoa, I better stop drinking this' but, of course, young people do not: they keep going. They are encouraged also by the fact that they can drink all night, get up the next morning and, after a cup of coffee or another Coke, they will recover very quickly, whereas, when you hit the 40s and 50s plus, it is not that easy to recover the next day. I now suffer a two-day hangover if I manage to drink that much, but I am very careful these days because I know how much alcohol can affect me. However, when you are young, you can drink all night and get up the next day and go to work, and I know many people who have done that.

I think the problem is the culture of alcohol that is around. I think we need to seriously educate young people that they can have a good time without writing themselves off; that they do not have to go out and drink, and that they can control their behaviour. There is nothing wrong with having two or three drinks and becoming quite merry, but why do they have to write themselves off? Why do they have to become violent and get involved in fights, etc. Alcohol can cause damage to young women and, I guess, alcohol has been a factor in some pregnancies or STDs that have occurred over the years. The old story of 'He got me drunk, mum' still has some relevance: the more you drink, the more likely it is that you will do things.

I think the real issue is not so much the appropriateness of laws; I think the real problem is our attitude as a society to alcohol. It has become so much a part of our society that it is seen as acceptable to drink, and I think that is where the real issue lies. I oppose this motion.

Mr PISONI (Unley) (11:40): I really thought the member for Giles' speech was in favour of the motion, because the motion does go on to include practices relating to the consumption of alcohol. I agree with the member's comments; it is very cultural indeed. As a matter of fact, I was disappointed to hear the member, in her speech, boasting about how much she drinks—and that is the problem with Australian society.

Ms BREUER: On a point of order, Mr Speaker, I was not boasting about how much I drink. I drink very, very seldom these days.

The SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The member for Unley.

Mr PISONI: That is the whole point: it needs a cultural shift—and we can achieve that. If the government is prepared to invest in advertising and community education, it can achieve the same results it has achieved with drink driving.

I can remember as a young man hanging out with mates in the pub, and people would boast about how they could not remember how they got home, yet they drove themselves home. Now you would be absolutely embarrassed to admit to, or be caught, drink driving—and that is the cultural shift we need in South Australia for our young people to understand the implications of drinking alcohol. These days we know so much more about the implications of drinking alcohol at a young age than we knew when we were young. We know that the brain does not fully develop until the age of 25 and that excessive alcohol consumption—

The Hon. R.B. Such: If you're lucky.

Mr PISONI: 'If you're lucky,' says the member for Fisher. Excessive alcohol consumption permanently damages the brain. I find it ironic that at a time when we are giving our kids the ability to drive we are also giving them the ability to drink. A matter that has been raised at numerous school council meetings I have visited since taking up the portfolio of shadow education minister relates to parents who are concerned about parent-supervised parties their children attend. Often, when those parents go to pick up their children they find out that 15 and 16 year olds have been offered alcohol by the parents in the home. There is no law against it, and this is absolutely outrageous.

The argument we hear from the parents is, 'If we don't do it, they'll do it anyway.' I say this to those parents: 'If you treat your kids like adults before they are ready, they will never grow up. They need your guidance until they are ready to be let off the leash, if you like. It is our role as parents to raise our children to be independent individuals in the community who are able to make their own decisions and their own judgments.'

Another thing that I think has changed since we were kids is that when we were young alcohol tasted like alcohol. Now, of course, the taste of alcohol is hidden in 'cruisers' and other sorts of drinks. I say to those kids out there: 'If you are drinking those products, you are not old enough to drink. If you have a neat whisky or a beer and you enjoy that taste, you have an acquired or mature pallet and maybe you are ready to drink. But you are not ready to drink when you are drinking a raspberry cruiser. This is another problem we are seeing our young people being exposed to.

I recently attended an induction evening for my year 9 daughter at her high school, and we had a very interesting presentation from the school counsellor. He informed us that 20 years ago the danger period for young people experimenting with alcohol, cigarettes, drugs and other sorts of dangerous activities (which is what I should call them, because they are indeed dangerous activities) was between the school years 9 and 10.

Now that age has shifted between the school years 7 and 8. So we are seeing a growing problem of our youth being introduced to alcohol at a younger age, and this is being endorsed and condoned by parents and parent groups. I think we need this inquiry, and it needs to be a very broad one. We need to hear from stakeholders; we need to hear from parents. Why do parents think it is all right to offer alcohol to other people's children at the age of 14, 15 and 16? What does that say about our society? Does it demonstrate that that is an acceptable thing to do?

I would not have expected—I do now, because I know differently—my 14 year old daughter to have to worry about coming home drunk from a 14^th birthday party at a girlfriend's place. I would not have expected that to happen. This problem goes across all demographic areas in South Australia; it is not confined to one particular area or another. I believe that parents should acknowledge that they do have a parenting role and that it includes making some tough decisions.

Just because young people may say, 'We're allowed to do it at so-and-so's house,' does not mean it is all right; it does not mean that at all. I speak as someone who enjoys a Barossa Valley chardonnay (or grenache is one of my favourites) but I drink it in moderation and I drink it because I enjoy the taste of the alcohol, the wine itself. I do like to have my whisky straight but, again, in moderation. There is nothing wrong with those single malt clubs, but in this case I am referring to grown adults who enjoy drinking alcohol and who are not just out there getting drunk and exposing themselves to all sorts of other dangers.

The need to deglorify, if you like, drinking in our society and to educate our kids that they are entering a danger zone goes beyond just putting themselves in physical danger of being assaulted or involved in a fight or even a vehicle accident. I think that if the parliament adopts this recommendation it should ensure that it is very broad-ranging; that it is not confined to a pub-beating exercise; that it is not confined to an exercise of punishing the young; but that it actually broadens our way of looking at how we can change attitudes of both parents and our youth regarding the use of alcohol.

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE (Wright—Minister for State/Local Government Relations, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Volunteers, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister Assisting in Early Childhood Development) (11:48): As has been pointed out by probably all the speakers, drinking is pretty much an accepted part of the South Australian lifestyle. Most people drink moderately and enjoy the social aspects of drinking but unfortunately there are some who also experience the negative aspects of alcohol either through their own misuse or through the impact of other people's intoxication.

There is no doubt that the misuse of alcohol is no different from the misuse of any number of other things in that it comes with a cost: a social, health and financial cost which is borne by the South Australian community. The Liquor Licensing Act currently provides a number of mechanisms to control both the sale and consumption of liquor and addresses a number of the concerns raised by the member for Fisher in his motion. The member for Morphett talked about a code of practice down in the Glenelg area. He may, in fact, be referring to an accord operating down there.

A key component of the Liquor Licensing Act designed to minimise the harmful and hazardous use of alcohol is, in fact, a mandatory code of practice which applies right across the industry. This code outlines a range of practices relating to minors, responsible attitudes to the consumption of liquor, intoxication and disorderly behaviour, and highlights a responsible attitude to the advertisement and promotion of liquor. It comes with some significant penalties if the code is breached. Also, under the act a licensee can bar a person if that person commits an offence or behaves in an offensive manner or if the licensee is satisfied that the welfare of the person is seriously at risk as a result of the consumption of alcohol.

This government plans to extend these powers and, just yesterday, I introduced into this house a bill to allow the South Australia Police the power to bar individuals from licensed premises. Dry areas are also an important mechanism designed to assist the control of substantial crowds to ensure public safety as part of a broad level strategy to address public nuisance, preventing antisocial behaviour at a local level. Applications for dry zones can be for various lengths of time and, when combined with liquor licensing accords, precinct management groups and liquor management plans, can assist to promote the responsible service of alcohol and the management of alcohol related issues, including antisocial behaviour.

All licensees must establish and maintain practices to minimise undue noise and inconvenience to people in the vicinity of licensed premises and must be vigilant in monitoring sound levels and the behaviour of their patrons. This includes as they make their way to and from licensed premises, so licensees are clearly individually responsible for these things. The issue in relation to antisocial behaviour is not as simple as looking at the consumption of alcohol. For instance, significant antisocial behaviour caused by gatecrashing of parties is exacerbated by the availability of instant messaging services which allow information to be provided to a large number of people in a very short period of time.

In addition to legislative protections the South Australian Alcohol Action Plan, which is under current development, will set down strategies for reducing harm and promote the responsible consumption of alcohol. The alcohol action plan will also draw on the strategies outlined in the South Australian Drug Strategy, the South Australian Youth Action Plan and the Substance Misuse Strategy for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People. The South Australian Alcohol Action Plan will encourage a whole of government approach to addressing the problems associated with excessive alcohol consumption in our state.

The plan will be developed in consultation with various partners from across the government and non-government sectors. An interagency working group has already been established to develop the plan and to ensure its smooth implementation and evaluation. This working group brings together representatives from a number of agencies across government, including Drug and Alcohol Services, the Department of Health, the South Australia Police, the Attorney-General's Department, the Department of Education and Children's Services, the Department for Families and Communities, the Department for Correctional Services, the Department of the Premier and Cabinet Aboriginal and Reconciliation Division and the Office of the Liquor and Gambling Commissioner.

Priority areas that have been agreed upon are improving health outcomes among individuals and communities affected by alcohol, reducing the incidence of intoxication amongst drinkers, facilitating safer and healthier drinking cultures by developing community understanding about special properties of alcohol and through regulation of its availability, and enhancing public safety and amenity at the times and at places where alcohol is consumed.

With these factors in mind, the South Australian Alcohol Action Plan 2008-10 will set out the South Australian government's commitment to minimising the harmful consumption of alcohol and its related impacts on individuals, families and the wider community. The alcohol action plan will also draw on the strategies outlined in the South Australian Drug Strategy 2005-10, the South Australian Youth Action Plan 2005-10 and Substance Misuse, a South Australian strategy for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people 2005-10. The plan will also receive input from the already existing alcohol management reference group. Membership of this group includes representatives from non-government organisations as well as the alcohol industry representatives. South Australia Police also has representatives on the reference group and the working party. This gives the police the opportunity to provide input into strategies and policies to better deal with criminal and other anti-social behaviour arising from the consumption of alcohol.

The plan will be a blueprint for action. We want it to be a road map for progress and not just another report. For that to happen we need clear benchmarks and ways to evaluate progress. That is why the National Drug Research Institute is being contracted to benchmark and identify existing and new key performance indicators and data collections for the South Australian alcohol action plan.

The National Drug Research Institute based at Curtin University is well regarded nationally and is dedicated to conducting and disseminating quality research that contributes to the prevention of harmful drug use. Specifically, the National Drug Research Institute will be required to develop a set of core indicators of serious alcohol-related harm for both individuals and the community applicable to South Australia. It will use these indicators to establish key performance indicators and benchmarks that would be suitable to monitor the implementation of the South Australian alcohol action plan for both the general community and high risk groups.

The research institute will also identify existing datasets relevant to monitoring alcohol consumption and alcohol related harm here in South Australia. It will be required to determine data limitations and make recommendations for additional collection of any new datasets and analysis opportunities that may be relevant to assisting the development of policies and/or interventions. A preliminary report is expected in August 2008, with the full report due in October.

This government acknowledges that it has a role to play in encouraging a reduction in the harm caused by excessive drinking to individuals, families and our communities. I agree with the member for Fisher that the harm caused by excessive alcohol consumption is a real concern, and that is why the alcohol action plan is being developed specific to the South Australian context, and to take into account work already being done at a national level. This work is already well underway and is drawing on the advice of experts from across government and those with experience in the field. I see no reason, therefore, for the Social Development Committee to repeat the work that is already being done, and I oppose the motion.

Mr VENNING (Schubert) (11:58): We support this motion moved by the member for Fisher. I wonder whether it ought to be amended to include drugs. Hopefully, if the committee receives this motion it could consider drugs also, both illicit drugs and even pharmaceuticals, particularly the poisonous and potent mixture of all of them. Like the member for Giles, I also come from a strong Methodist background. How times change. I enjoy a good wine and an occasional beer and I represent the Barossa Valley and am honoured to be a Baron of the Barossa.

Responsible drinking is a most important thing and this motion is certainly worthwhile. There is nothing worse than hoon driving and irresponsible alcohol consumption. We have to be vigilant. Late nights, weekends, drugs, hoon driving, loutish behaviour and vandalism all go with this. I have had difficulty in some of my towns and it has been raised with me in Mannum and occasionally in the Barossa, although not often. Drugs can be a problem.

We also have the issue of certain drugs and we need to address that. I will wait to hear from the Hon. Ann Bressington in another place the issue of 5 nanograms as opposed to 30 nanograms of THC and take advice. We need to do more work there. The public will not tolerate bad, drunken behaviour. We must acknowledge and recognise the clubs and hotels that do the right thing: they make a good attempt and we must thank them for that. Most cases of loutish and hoon behaviour are not the fault of the hotel. I support the motion and I hope it is successful.

Mr HANNA (Mitchell) (12:00): I rise to speak in relation to the motion by the member for Fisher (Bob Such) for the Social Development Committee of the parliament to inquire into matters relating to alcohol. It is abused. The main concern I have is the patrons coming out of the premises around Westfield. It really needs to be looked at as to whether there is a better way of controlling the behaviour or, if not, then the source of those problems. There is antisocial behaviour, and the member for Fisher is quite right in wanting the committee to look at that. If we cannot at least get the parliamentary committee to look at that, then we have absolutely no hope of reform. I hope the government will not use its numbers to crush this.

Debate adjourned.