LIQUOR LICENSING (MISCELLANEOUS) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 15 October 2013.)

The Hon. A. BRESSINGTON (12:44): I rise to speak to the Liquor Licensing (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill 2013. This bill amends the act to better equip the Liquor and Gambling Commissioner, his staff and police to address problem drinking and alcohol-related violence. Greater responsibility will be placed upon licensees to prevent excessive alcohol consumption occurring on their premises. The commissioner's powers to take action against licensees for inappropriate management of premises and to place restrictions on the sale of liquor when necessary for public order, public safety, health or welfare grounds, will be strengthened, and the objects of the act will be amended to specifically address alcohol-related violence and property damage.

The bill also introduces amendments to the act to streamline administrative processes and to reduce red tape on both the liquor industry and the government, such as the requirement that a responsible person be approved will be made more flexible so that approval will apply industry-wide; notice requirements will be made less onerous; the requirement that separate entertainment approval be obtained for oversized television screens will go; companies limited by guarantee will be given the right to hold club licences; and the processes by which dry areas are declared and educational courses are exempt from the need to be licensed will be made less onerous. The bill also proposes a number of minor technical amendments to the act to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of liquor regulation and to address out-of-date references to commonwealth legislation.

I note that the Hon. Tammy Franks has proposed amendments to remove the definition of 'entertainment' and to remove previous entertainment consents, other than prescribed entertainment, and this would provide a level playing field in the area of non-prescribed entertainment and open up the live music scene in this state. I also note that the AHA is supportive of this bill and is also supportive of the Hon. Tammy Franks' amendments as well. Having come from the hospitality industry some time ago, I must say that it is probably refreshing to see that the AHA and the government have landed on agreement on this bill. At this point, I offer my support to the bill, and I look forward to the committee stage.

The Hon. J.A. DARLEY (12:47): On 26 August last year, Jason Lindsley was violently attacked at a city nightclub. He was taken to the Royal Adelaide Hospital with a serious brain injury and kept in an induced coma in a critical condition for two weeks. He spent a further six weeks recovering from the incident at the Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre. Even after his release, Jason required months of intensive rehabilitation for the brain injury he sustained. This included reinserting the portion of Jason's skull that had to be removed following the assault. Despite recently returning to work, Jason continues to require physical and psychological treatment. In many respects, Jason was one of the lucky ones; his injuries were not fatal.

Not so lucky was 19-year-old Christopher Hatzis who, on 4 August last year, was stabbed to death following an altercation at an Adelaide nightclub. Also not so lucky was Henk van Oosterom, aged 39, who, on 4 September last year, was beaten and died after trying to break up a fight outside a Gawler hotel. Just four weeks later, on 8 October last year, Clint Hislop, aged 28, also died from injuries sustained after being punched after a night out at Glenelg. On New Year's Eve, Lewis McPherson, aged 18, was shot dead whilst walking to a party at Warradale. These incidents all occurred within weeks of each other. They resulted in the senseless injury and death of young men who had everything to live for. They resulted in the ongoing heartache and pain the families of those young men continue to live with.

Of course, these are not the only cases that have resulted in such senseless loss and suffering. Sam Davis's death, which dates back some four years, seems, in many respects, to mark the beginning of a crisis point. Members would know that, on 4 May 2008, at age 17, Sam, a budding football star, lost his life after being king hit in the back of the head at a party. Sam's mother, Nat Cook, and dad, Neil Davis, established the Sammy D Foundation which, amongst other things, seeks to raise awareness about harm-causing behaviour. It is unclear whether alcohol was directly linked to all of these cases. Nevertheless they highlight an increasing problem which appears to be plaguing our communities. They all involve violent altercations resulting in serious injury and death which occurred on a night out on the town.

This problem is not unique to South Australia. Just last month 60 Minutes aired a segment on the shocking death of 18 year old Thomas Kelly. Thomas was king hit and killed on his first night out in Sydney's Kings Cross. Thomas's death has also sparked outrage about how alcohol fuelled violence has spiralled out of control. Like Sam Davis's family, Thomas's mum and dad have also launched a foundation aimed at sparing other families from their grief.

There is no question that alcohol fuelled or alcohol related violence has reached a crisis point across Australia. Our doctors, our emergency services and our police have all confirmed that. Most of the cases just highlighted have confirmed that. The statistics have confirmed that. According to the South Australian government, there are approximately 12,500 hospital admissions and 600 deaths attributable to alcohol in South Australia each year; 53 per cent of injured persons presenting to hospital emergency departments between the hours of 10pm and 7am had consumed alcohol in the preceding six hours. In 2009 to 2010, alcohol was the most common principal drug of concern for which treatment was sought from Drug and Alcohol Services South Australia, accounting for 56 per cent of all treatment episodes.

According to the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC), conservative estimates suggest that in 2004-05 the total costs attributable to alcohol related crime in Australia was $1.7 billion. The social costs relating to alcohol related violence, which excludes costs to the criminal justice system, was $187 million and the costs associated with the loss of life due to alcohol related violent crime amounted to $124 million.

In 2007 approximately one in four Australians were a victim of alcohol related verbal abuse, 13 per cent were made to feel fearful by someone under the influence of alcohol, 4.5 per cent of Australians aged 14 or older had been physically abused by someone under the influence of alcohol. The rates of physical and verbal abuse by a person affected by alcohol were more than twice the rate for any other drug types. Recent research using the AIC's National Homicide Monitoring Programs database concluded that about half or 47 per cent of all homicides in Australia between 2000 and 2006 were alcohol related.

Again, according to the Australian Institute of Criminology, licensed premises are a high-risk setting for alcohol related violence with a significant proportion of assaults occurring in or within close proximity to hotels and nightclubs. Drinking establishments have been linked with much higher rates of alcohol related aggression and violence, particularly among males, than any other setting with over 40 per cent of all assaults said to occur in or around licensed premises.

There is said to be a strong correlation between liquor outlet density and the incidence of multiple forms of social disruption including homicide, assault, and child abuse and neglect. Not all licensed venues are problematic with the research suggesting that in any given area, a small number of outlets can be responsible for a disproportionate number of incidents of alcohol related harm. However, hotels and nightclubs are highlighted as the most problematic licensed venues for violence, particularly those with extended or 24-hour trading. These are national statistics but there is no suggestion that they apply any less to the South Australian case study.

The Late Night Trading Code of Practice is aimed primarily at dealing with these very issues. There is no question that the introduction of the code has caused quite a bit of disagreement and that a large number of young revellers in particular are strongly opposed to it. Indeed, there is a whole Facebook page called 'The new SA liquor licensing laws suck' dedicated to this very issue.

In some respects it is easy to see why so many licensees and young people are opposed to the code, given that some of the requirements include: the presence of a drink marshal at licensed premises that trade after 3am and have more than 200 patrons on their premises; restricting late night entry into licensed premises at 3am; requiring the use of metal detectors and closed circuit television systems; restricting the supply of liquor free of charge and the sale of what are commonly referred to as 'shooters' after 4am; and restricting the use of glassware after 4am.

I am advised that at present New South Wales and Queensland have lockouts and the Northern Territory has also flagged its intention to introduce similar measures. In fact, Queensland is currently reviewing its legislation with a view to scrapping the 3am lockout and imposing earlier closing times in an effort to curb alcohol-fuelled violence. The Newcastle experience has certainly highlighted the benefit of that approach, so much so that the chairman of the Newcastle and Hunter Region Multicultural Drug Action Teams, Mr Tony Brown, is reported as saying there is no going back to what he refers to as 'the bad old days'.

According to an article in the Newcastle Herald written by Mr Brown, prior to March 2008 and the implementation of measures aimed at curbing alcohol-fuelled violence, Newcastle had the highest rate of alcohol-fuelled violence in New South Wales, the highest drink driving charges and one of the highest rates of assaults on emergency workers. At the time, Newcastle CBD was attracting approximately 20,000 preloaded young drinkers every week from up to 100 kilometres away.

That same month a mandatory 3am closure, a 1am lockout and a package of liquor supply preventative measures were imposed against licensed premises. The results of these measures were quite remarkable. According to Mr Brown, they included: a 33 per cent reduction in alcohol related non-domestic assaults; a 50 per cent reduction in night street crime; a 26 per cent reduction in related hospital emergency department admissions; a reduction in preloading, the primary predictor of alcohol-related assaults; and a reduction in binge drinking.

Obviously, the changes in Newcastle go much further than what the South Australian government is proposing and there is some evidence that tends to suggest that a lockout with a reduction in late closing times as not as effective. That said, given the controversy that this matter has raised, I think it is fair to say that if the government proposed that South Australia move to earlier closing in the first instance, we would have absolutely no hope of getting agreement.

Turning now to the bill itself, which complements, if you like, the late night trading code. The government has proposed amendments to the Liquor Licensing Act 1997 to better equip the Liquor and Gambling Commissioner, his or her staff and police to address excessive alcohol consumption and alcohol-related violence. At the same time, the bill introduces amendments to streamline administrative processes and to reduce red tape on both the liquor industry and government.

In relation to the first issue, as already mentioned, the bill proposes to allow a code of practice to impose special requirements with respect to the supplying of free or discounted liquor on licensed premises between midnight and 7am. The bill also extends the powers conferred on the commissioner with respect to imposing conditions on licences so as to include public interest grounds.

In addition, the bill proposes to deal with the issue of offensive and disorderly behaviour by including a definition of intoxication and creating a new offence for such behaviour in or around the vicinity of licensed premises. Under the proposed changes, licensees will also be subject to more stringent requirements aimed at preventing excessive alcohol consumption at their premises.

In relation to disciplinary actions, the bill proposes to amend section 119 to clarify that the fit and proper person test applies equally to trusts or corporate licensees and to amend section 119A in order to enable the commissioner to vary the trading of a licensee. Where the commissioner believes disciplinary proceedings are warranted the commissioner will also be able to impose a condition on a licence or vary or suspend a condition of a licence. So as to ensure consistency with other proposed measures, the bill also amends section 121 so that a condition imposed by the licensing court upon a disciplinary finding may vary the trading hours fixed by or under the act. Perhaps somewhat controversially, the commissioner will, in his or her absolute discretion, be able to issue public order and safety notices where considered necessary or desirable to address an issue or a perceived issue of public order and safety, or to mitigate adverse consequences arising from an issue or perceived issue.

In relation to the second issue, that is red tape reduction. There are a number of other changes aimed at streamlining administrative processes and reducing the regulatory burden on industry and regulators. These include changes to the approval to hold a club licence, the approval of responsible persons, the requirement to display a licence, the restrictions on entry of minors into licensed premises, the definition of entertainment, the requirements relating to the sale of liquor in the course of educational courses, as well as requirements relating to wine regions and dry areas.

There is no doubt the bill, together with the late night code, represents a significant shift in the way we have previously dealt with the issue of excessive drinking in licensed premises. There is also no doubt, in my mind at least, that such a shift is warranted. Having said that, I am extremely disappointed that the government considers it fit to exempt the Casino from the late night code of practice. I am sure it will come as no surprise to honourable members that I will be proposing amendments aimed at addressing this deficiency.

I am also extremely disappointed that there is nothing to prevent the commissioner from exempting, on a case-by-case basis, gaming machine venues from the 3am lockout. To that end I will be proposing a further amendment aimed at preventing the commissioner from exempting gaming machine venues from specified provisions of the late night code of practice. I will also be proposing that the late night code of practice, and indeed any other code of practice that the commission establishes, be the subject of a review following the first anniversary of the commencement of those provisions, in order to enable this parliament to appropriately measure the effects of the changes.

I hope that the government, and indeed all members, will give careful consideration to my amendments. Members will note that there are two sets of amendments filed; I only intend to move the second set. I note that the bill and the code do not address the issue of the supply of energy drinks in licensed premises. As honourable members would no doubt be aware, there is a growing body of evidence to support the harmful, and in some cases lethal, effects that mixing energy drinks with alcohol can have. There is no question in my mind that this issue needs to be the subject of a review. During the consultation phase I did raise this issue with the Attorney, and I certainly hope that further consideration will be given to it.

In closing, I have given my commitment to the family of Jason Lindsley to do what I can to spare other families from the pain and suffering they have had to endure. There is no question that the alcohol-fuelled violence epidemic needs to be tackled head on and before it results in the senseless destruction and loss of any more lives.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. G.A. Kandelaars.

[Sitting suspended from 13:03 to 14:16]