Public want time called on Alcohol Related Crime

The majority of the British people believe that the level of alcohol-related violence continues to rise. This is one of the findings of an opinion poll commissioned by the drink industry-funded Portman Group.

The MORI survey found that 61 per cent of the public thought that this violence was increasing on the street and 52 per cent thought the same thing was happening in pubs. Whilst people living in London, the south-east, and Scotland are the most likely to be victims of street violence, the Scots run the greatest risk in pubs. Women are almost twice as likely as men to suffer alcohol-related violence in the home (9 per cent as against 5 per cent).

Unsurprisingly, a majority of the public (57 per cent) see teenagers as the major offenders when it comes to street drinking. 28 per cent see young adults as the problem on the streets, 24 per cent weekend drinkers, and 23 per cent "down and outs": anyone other than themselves, presumably.

The survey - the third part of an exercise that began some months ago - shows that 70 per cent of the population still see drink-driving as a major problem. The Portman Group says: "Heavier penalties for persistent offenders, better enforcement of existing laws, more public education campaigns and random breath testing all attracted more public support than reducing the drink-drive limit." This statement must be viewed in the light of authoritative surveys which show that between 70 and 80 per cent of people want to see the limit lowered from 80 to 50 mgs per litre.

A few years ago the Portman Group was more anxious to show that there was no general link between alcohol and crime - and, by implication, with violence. When it published a report called "Low in Alcohol" in 1995, Professor Robert Solomon dismissed it as "beside the point" in this magazine (Alert, January 1996). The report, said Professor Solomon, "appears to be structured to achieve preordained outcomes". In the case of the present survey, there is no disguising the association in the public's mind between alcohol and violence, although the Portman Group's Director, Jean Coussins, wonders whether those who took part in the poll were right in their opinions - which rather suggests that there was little point in bothering with the survey in the first place. "This survey," says Miss Coussins, " tells us a great deal about what the public believes, although there is a dearth of reliable evidence to help us assess the accuracy of public perceptions when it comes to alcohol and crime." Given the volume which exists, how much more evidence does she require?

The industry campaign to influence the Government, in many respects already conspicuously successful, was reflected in the two other surveys which the Portman Group commissioned earlier in the year. In one, health warnings were the target: "The survey reveals that nearly twice as many people (39 per cent: 21 per cent) think shock tactics are more effective than long term health warnings." It is important to the industry, and presumably to the Portman Group, to convey the impression that alcohol problems are confined to a minority of misusers: "(63 per cent) see binge-drinking as a major problem. Yet when questioned about their own behaviour, only 5 per cent said they regularly get drunk." What these figures are intended to show is unclear. The are certainly compatible with the experience of therapists that truth and misuse of alcohol are usually strangers.

"The vast majority of respondents (77 per cent) understand the Government's advice that sensible drinking does not damage your heath." Some may think that this is a misleading statement since the question asked made no reference to Government advice and it is by no means certain that the 23 per cent - who, by implication, did not understand a perfectly simple statement - were not merely disagreeing with the premise on which it was based. Of course, the use of the word "sensible" weights the question. If one accepts that something is sensible, in the common meaning of the word, then how can it damage health?

In the second survey it is revealed that a "massive 91 per cent of the British public believe that a wider use of ID cards could help slash the scale of our underage drinking problem." The problem here is that too many young people are not being challenged when they attempt to buy alcohol, as recent research shows (see page 15). Compulsory ID is said to be wanted by 83 per cent of those questioned, although the question did not define what was meant by this term.

The Portman Group's assertion that there is a "dearth of evidence" linking alcohol to crime may well come as a surprise to the Government which has just launched its initiative against that very combination of cause and effect. The considerable body of evidence that exists indicates that, quite naturally, the public perception is sometimes inaccurate, as Miss Coussins implies. On the other hand, the underlying trend of the answers shows that the good common sense of the public tells them that there are considerable problems associated with alcohol use, as well as the pleasures on which the Portman Group prefers to dwell. It would be tragic if this kind of survey added to any false impression people had that the alcohol problem was confined to discreet groups: persistent drink-drivers, dependent drinkers, and especially the young.