Changing the alcohol culture in Australia

Alcohol in Australia is often said to be of great cultural importance, and it is used in many celebrations, commiserations and ceremonies. This cultural connection with alcohol is now well entrenched within mainstream Australian society, and alcohol forms a significant element in the Australian sense of national identity.

In late 2010 , Clancy Wright, Youth Strategy Officer of the Australian Drug Foundation, undertook a Fellowship, awarded by the Australian Churchill Trust (http://www.churchilltrust.com. au/), to investigate methods for initiating a cultural change around alcohol in Australia by means of legislative reform. He did so by conducting a range of meetings with key organisations and individuals throughout the UK and Ireland.

Here Clancy Wright summarises what he learned from his trip to the UK:

From my investigation I came to understand that three key components are required to achieve the ultimate goal of legislative reform. These are:

Cooperation

Cross sectoral involvement and investment from sectors impacted by alcohol, or whose work influences consumption, to achieve symbiotic outcomes. Such sectors could vary depending on the issue being addressed but could include domestic violence, mental health, childhood development, and housing.

Reinvigorated alcohol debate

Changing our approach to the alcohol debate is essential if community support is to be realised. Communities are often ill-informed, unwilling to accept responsibility and out of touch with the real impacts of alcohol. These must be tackled by empowering the community to decide for themselves what, and if, alcohol reform is needed.

Leadership

During my Churchill Fellowship I met with a collection of individuals who best represented the role leaders play in achieving desired outcomes. Leaders are integral to achieving cross sectoral support and provide the mechanism for engaging effectively with specific communities.

Whilst alcohol harms are particularly high in the UK and Ireland and legislative reform has not been achieved there are many lessons from projects and examples Australia could learn from.

The Scottish Alcohol etc. (Scotland) Bill which included minimum pricing for alcohol was passed late last year - but with the exclusion of a minimum price. I watched as the parliament discussed the proposed legislation and whilst the opposition’s arguments may have been thin, they unfortunately were representative of the broader Scottish community. A possible generalisation, but one which was echoed by many key stakeholders involved in the push for the pricing reform. The Alcohol etc. (Scotland) Bill obtained quick political support from the ruling Scottish Nationalist Party but little care was taken to educate the public or include and engage relevant sectors outside the alcohol and other drug (AOD) field. Had populous support been garnered and cross-sectoral pressure been applied the opposition parties would have had a vested political interest to support the legislation. Progressive social legislation will be unlikely to be achieved in the UK, Ireland or Australia until broad community support and subsequent political motivation can be generated.

Community Action Blackburn, is a project funded by Alcohol Focus Scotland but developed, managed and now owned by the Blackburn community. The project was established to assist Blackburn in addressing the levels of alcohol harm in the community. When the project began, community engagement through the form of street-based interviews was difficult and respondents were not engaging. The finger was pointed towards the original project name: Alcohol Action Blackburn. Upon the name change to Community Action Blackburn, and a slightly different approach, the interviewers were able to effectively engage with the community. The exclusion of alcohol, as an issue, from the interviews enabled the interviewees to more comfortably discuss the problems within their community. Subsequently 95% of the problems identified were impact by alcohol. The level of impact varied, however, the Blackburn example, once combined with others, demonstrated a strong community desire to address alcohol harms and impacts but a reluctance to do so under the banner of alcohol.

From this it can be seen that the UK and Ireland have much to teach the Australian AOD sector. Simultaneously, the effective community-based work of Australia would enhance much of the work in the UK and Ireland.

Arguably, one of the most effective and important alcohol projects in Australia was the Living with Alcohol program conducted in the Northern Territory. Implemented in 1992, it included a five cent levy on standard drinks. The levy, too small to result in consumption change, funded an array of community based initiatives to address consumption and harms throughout the Northern Territory. The initiatives focused on treatment, rehabilitation and mass media education programs targeting drink driving and responsible service of alcohol. The Living with Alcohol program resulted in ‘reductions in estimated alcohol-caused deaths from acute conditions (road deaths 34.5% other 23.4%) and in road crash injuries requiring treatment (28.3%) ’. After four years of implementation of the program, other levies and legislation pertaining to blood alcohol content driving levels were introduced and disturbed the measures of the program. However, and this is particularly relevant to the current discussion in the UK, per capita consumption fell and subsequent harms reduced because the resulting financial gains of an alcohol levy funded programs to address alcohol consumption.

Newcastle, a regional town in NSW, implemented an intervention in 2008 to reduce night-time assaults, including the implementation of a lockout policy for the area. Lockouts relate to the refusal of entry to any patron to a venue after a pre-determined time; the venue will remain open but no patrons can enter or re-enter. Lockouts have been attempted several times in Australia and the Newcastle example is the most effective.

A total of 10 strategies were introduced including:

• 1:30am lockout
• earlier closing times
• the restriction of particular drinks
• increased management planning and compliance

As a result there was a downward trend (29%) in night time assaults and a decrease in assaults linked to the 15 venues included in the period, compared to venues within Newcastle exempt from the measures. Importantly there was also no geographical displacement of assaults to other venues exempt from the measures.

Effective programs and models for initiating a cultural change around alcohol exist in different forms in both Australia and the UK and Ireland. At the community level these nations have had mixed results, but an enhanced level of understanding of each others’ work and successes would be conducive to more effective cultural change projects now and into the future.

Whilst Australia may be further behind in its work to achieve a legislated minimum price for alcohol, the lessons and examples from the UK and Ireland will assist in the continued development and hopefully the realisation of this goal.

Clancy’s full Churchill Fellowship Report can be seen on: http://www. churchilltrust.com.au/fellows/detail/3462/
clancy+wright