The woman said she had been at a close friend’s tangi out of town with her son on Tuesday – his ninth birthday.
They returned home in the afternoon and he went to play with friends across the road while she prepared dinner.
She said she had no idea that he had taken off to the skate park, about a kilometre away.
She understood a woman, aged in her mid-20s, gave her son the alcohol at the park.
“I don’t know her. I know of her,” she said. “I think they thought it would be funny.”
Police said he consumed eight pre-mixed bourbon and cola cans and two liqueur shots.
He came home about 6pm stinking of Lynx deodorant and behaving strangely.
“We were like, ‘Oh my god, he’s drunk’. Then we sorted him out and put him to lie down and that’s when the police turned up.”
She co-operated with police and has ongoing support from Child Youth and Family.
She said the young man who claimed to be the boy’s “big brother” in the video, and said it was “all good” that he was drunk, had since apologised to her.
She said she rarely drank alcohol and had never given it to her son, but would educate him about its dangers.
If she has never given alcohol to her son, then it is unfair to hold her directly responsible and she does seem genuinely shocked.
A reservation I have though is that I highly doubt that is the first time the nine year old has drunk alcohol. He had something like 18 standard drinks. If you’ve never drunk alcohol before and you weigh only around 30 kgs, then you’d be vomiting and passing out after just a few standard drinks.
So while I hope this is something that happened as a once off and with no family involvement, I am a bit cynical.
UPDATE: The Herald reports on a photo showing two more of her children with alcohol. The cynicism may be justified.Tags: alcohol
Labour have said:
“There is something very wrong about any adult thinking that it’s fun, entertaining or appropriate to get a child drunk. This attitude is a wake-up call about the culture of drinking and youth drinking, that is going unchallenged right across New Zealand,” said Sue Moroney.
“The Labour Party challenges this damaging culture – we must change attitudes and support families to do their best for our next generation.
“It will also be a test of the Government’s alcohol law change of December 2013 which made an offence of supplying alcohol to a minor, without parental consent.
It never used to be an offence to supply minors with alcohol, only to sell it to them. The law changes should mean a very easy prosecution if the suppliers can be identified.
“Labour supported the Government’s alcohol law reforms, but criticised them for not going far enough.
“Amongst the amendments proposed by Labour was the outright banning of RTDs such as the one supplied to the Hamilton boy. Unfortunately, it was voted down by the Government, as were Labour’s other amendments to improve the law.
Is Labour really saying or implying that the problem is that the nine year old was drinking 7% RTDs instead of 5% RTDs? I mean, seriously? Isn’t that somewhat desperate. The nine year old shouldn’t be drinking any alcohol full stop.
Or are Labour saying that a 40 year old builder in West Auckland should be banned from drinking a 7% RTD because someone illegally supplied one to a nine year old? On that basis all alcohol in NZ would be banned.
“The Government failed to implement all of the recommendations of the Law Commission on alcohol law reform which Labour said were needed to challenge the damaging drinking culture in New Zealand.
Actually the proposal to restrict RTDs to 5% was not recommended by the Law Commission. One reason the Law Commission cited was substitution, and indeed the likely impact would be those who like 7% RTDs would then swap to self mixing their own drinks which tends to involve a strength of 13% to 20%.
“I am mindful that Fairfield is a community that wants more for its young people. While young people are still on holiday, parents must be vigilant. Greater access to youth programmes will go a long way to getting kids off the streets and finding productive ways to utilise their holiday time,” said Nanaia Mahuta.
So the problem was not enough local youth programmes. yeah, right.Tags: alcohol, Labour
The man who filmed a drunk young boy at a skate park says he would not have released the video if police had acted hard and fast, and communicated that to him.
Bradley Goudie, 18, uploaded a video online which showed a nine-year-old boy at Fairfield Skate Park in Clarkin Rd on Tuesday afternoon with a can of Cody’s Bourbon and Cola – 7 per cent alcohol.
The boy, who struggles to stand and slurs his speech, says “I’ve been drunk before”. He also says he was given alcohol by his aunt.
Goudie, a professional scooter rider, said he was so shocked by the apparent drunkenness of the boy that he turned his camera on him and exposed what he considered one of the biggest issues in New Zealand – underage drinking.
Actually the proportion of people aged under 18 who drink has been dropping massively in the last few years. However this case is shocking and those who supplied him with the alcohol must be prosecuted and his custodial parent should probably lose custody. There is no way she could not know he is getting drunk.
Alcohol and Drug Assessment and Counselling clinical manager Roger Brooking said authorities needed to take action over the incident.
“The police should be called and that kid should be taken off his parents or whoever’s looking after him and be placed in the care of social welfare.”
He said whoever gave the boy alcohol should face criminal charges.
I agree. Sadly it is probably already too late for the kid. If you are getting drunk and possibly stoned at age nine, then it is an uphill battle.
Child Matters founder Anthea Simcock said a crime had been committed and appropriate action should be taken.
The boy had been returned to his mother, who police said was “extremely distraught” to find her son in such a state.
But the boy’s father, who the Times has chosen not to name, said he wants his son to live with him.
The man had been going through a custody battle with his former partner and hadn’t seen the boy in six months.
He said it was “heart-wrenching” to see the video of his son online yesterday. “What I want to do is get my kids and pick them up.”
Either the mother knew what was happening, or she has picked the wrong people to look after her son.Tags: alcohol, child abuse
Thirty five people were fined for breaching liquor laws and dozens of others warned on New Year’s Eve alone, but police and Wellington City Council say the new rules are working well.
New liquor laws that came into effect on December 18 include a 4am closing time for bars, 11pm cutoff for supermarkets selling alcohol, and fines of between $250 and $2000 for breaches of the liquor ban.
The council has drafted a local alcohol policy which extends opening hours to 5am, but the policy has still to go through an approval process – and police are planning to appeal against it.
Inspector Terry van Dillen said the police view was that a 3am closing time for bars and a 9pm cutoff for off-licence liquor sales would be ideal.
“We believe 3am is a good figure – if people want to party, they can party from 9pm to 3am, they’ve just got to change their views from partying from midnight till 7am.”
I wish the Police would stick to their jobs and not try to become like the Mutaween. It is not their job to decide people must stop dancing in town by 3 am.
I’ve often been in town after 3 am. You may be at a function until around 11 pm, and then want to head out with a few friends to carry on talking and drinking. We’re not being rowdy, not drunk, not causing problems – just enjoying some drinks and conversation. On other occasions we may mix that in with some dancing, which you know is legal and okay to do after 3 am.
Tags: alcohol, Police
Radio NZ report:
The University of Auckland surveyed 1700 Maori students nationwide on their health and well-being in 2012. …
The report shows the number of Maori youth who drink alcohol at least once a week has more than halved in the past five years – something which comes as a surprise to Alcohol Healthwatch director Rebecca Williams.
The survey bucks the trend of many other reports but, nonetheless, any indication of a move away from alcohol consumption should be celebrated, Ms Williams says.
Ms Williams is wrong. Almost every report shows youth drinking is declining and has been for some years. The ALAC surveys have. Youth 2007 and 2012 surveys. This latest survey. The youth drink driving stats. They’re all said that youth drinking is heading in the right direction.
Yet for some reason the taxpayer funds Alcohol Healthwatch and others to spread moral panic about youth drinking and to try and create a crisis to justify their existence.Tags: alcohol, Alcohol Healthwatch
Do you know how many calories you’re drinking? Drinks – both alcoholic and sugary – have been in the spotlight recently.
Alcohol has been because Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) is looking into whether or not alcoholic beverages should have energy (kilojoules or calories) shown on their labels. Alcoholic drinks contribute about the same energy to an average Kiwi diet as sugar does – about 5 per cent.
Many health experts believe showing the energy (kilojoule or calorie) content on alcoholic drinks would have a moderating effect on how much we drink.
I have no doubt it will. I drink a lot less now, since being more aware of the calorie level of different drinks.
I can see this meeting a lot of resistance from the alcohol companies. They will argue the same old “personal responsibility” line that makers of other unhealthy foods do.
The difference is, of course, that at least with most of our foods we can actually see the nutrition content on the label, so we can make a (more or less) informed choice.
With alcohol, it’s completely up to us.
All for informed choices.Tags: alcohol, calories, food labelling
The Herald reports:
Labels revealing how costly a glass of wine or beer could be in terms of weight gain could soon be on the way, as the Government explores making them mandatory.
Alcohol manufacturers already label drinks with standard drink measurements and some voluntary health warnings.
Now, the Government is considering adding another requirement – labelling the number of kilojoules each drink contains.
I am 100% in favour of this. If we want people to make informed choices, then knowing the energy level of what we eat or drink is the best way to do that. Almost all other food and drink sold has calorie counts – it has been strange that alcohol does not.
Personally I think including such information would have a significant impact on how much some people drink. I know I drink far less now, knowing how much weight you put on with a few beers or wines.
Food Standards has commissioned a cost-benefit analysis on the concept, including looking at how energy labels might change buying and consumption.
Eric Crampton is less enthused, and has some sensible suggestions about how to reduce the burden of any regime:
- Exempt small-batch products;
- Exempt imports;
- Require vendors selling exempt products to put up a notice somewhere saying “The alcohol in one standard drink provides 290 kilojoules.”
Bob McCoskrie blogs a Herald article:
Young adult drinkers dependent on the bottle are nearly 10 times more likely to have had 10 or more sexual partners within several years than people who don’t misuse alcohol, a new study shows.
If this news gets out, I’d say it will encourage many more young people to drink more, if it means they are ten times more likely to have sex with more partners!!
Tags: alcohol, sex
Eight schools in the Central North Island are competing in the Super 8 voice of change where they create music videos to promote a change in the binge drinking culture that some students have. A very good initiative as having your peers get creative to send a message is probably far more effective than having adults lecture on alcohol.
Here’s one of the entries from Napier Boys High. I may blog some of the others also. You can vote on Facebook for who you think should win.
This particular video has 2,280 likes and 398 shares so is obviously reaching a large audience. Again, a smart little initiative.Tags: alcohol
Kate Chapman at Stuff reports:
One-way doors from 1am and shutting bars from 3am is the best to curb alcohol problems in Wellington, police say.
Why stop at 1 am and 3 am? How about 11 pm? or we could bring back 6 pm closing – I mean that worked so well in the past.Tags: alcohol, Wellington City Council
I was one of those who strongly opposed the recent attempt to increase the alcohol purchase age from 18 to 20. A hysteria had been generated about drinking in NZ, and especially youth drinking – and many blamed the change in the purchase age in 1999.
The reality is that a number of surveys had shown that youth drinking had declined, not increased, since then. Once these facts got out to MPs, I think it helped the majority of them make the sensible decision not to scapegoat 18 and 19 year olds.
One of the significant pieces of research is a study done by Auckland University every few years of almost 10,000 secondary students. Their 2000 and 2007 studies showed a significant decline in youth drinking during that period.
Well last week the 2012 study came out, and the data was fascinating. It showed beyond any doubt that there had been significant drops in the number of school students who drink, and who drink regularly or binge, since 2000.
That is a seismic shift. It totally blows away the myths about youth drinking having got far worse, based on anecdotal stories and media horror stories.
- The proportion of students who have drunk alcohol has dropped 25%, or around a third from 2000.
- The proportion of students who are current drinkers has dropped 25%, just over a third from 2000
- The proportion of students who drink regularly (weekly) has dropped 9%, just over one half from 2000
- The proportion of students who have binge drinked (five or more in a session) in the last month has dropped 18%, or just under a half from 2000
Also of interest:
- The proportion of students who have driven after drinking has fallen from 7.8% to 3.9% – a drop of a half.
- The proportion of students who have been in a car with a driver who has been drinking has fallen from 27.8% to 18.4% – a drop of one third.
On the non alcohol side:
- The proportion of students who have smoked cannabis dropped from 38.2% to 23.0%
- The proportion of students who smoke tobacco weekly dropped from 6.7% to 3.2%
- The proportion of students who have had sex dropped from 31.3% to 24.4%
The Press reports:
A policy limiting bars’ opening hours would reduce the amount of alcohol Christchurch people drink by as little as 1 per cent, according to a city council report.
The draft Local Alcohol Policy would also cost the region more to implement than it would save in alcohol-related healthcare and police services. It could also deter bars and licensed premises from rebuilding in the central city.
Those are among the findings of a report commissioned by the Christchurch City Council that compares the costs and benefits of the draft policy.
The district-wide policy proposes a one-way door rule from 1am in the central city and a blanket 1am closing for suburban licensed premises in a bid to help curb the city’s alcohol-related issues.
The hearing of submissions on the policy begins today and is expected to last four days.
The report concluded the economic costs of the policy would outweigh the economic benefits.
In other words, the policy will achieve almost nothing, but impose costs on businesses and remove choice for residents.
It is good the Council agreed to do an economic analysis of their proposed policy. Hopefully they will listen to their own report, and not give into the wowsers.Tags: alcohol, Christchurch City Council
Thomas Lumley at Stats Chat blogs a quote from Professor Doug Sellman:
The ethanol in alcohol is a group one carcinogen, like asbestos
Now I have to say I had no idea what a group one carcinogen is, but Prof Sellman makes it sound like something very very nasty and fatal.
Prof Lumley explains:
Many of the readers of this story won’t know what a “group one carcinogen” is. Given the context, a reader might well assume that “group one carcinogens” are those that carry the largest risks of cancer, or cause the most serious cancers. In fact, all it means is that an additional hazard of cancer, whether high or low, has been definitely established, because that’s all the IARC review process tries to do.
So it is a fancy name for some risk, not high risk.
Some group 1 carcinogens, such as tobacco and hepatitis B, are responsible for large numbers of cancer deaths worldwide. Others, such as plutonium and diethylstilbestrol, are responsible only for small numbers of deaths. Some group 1 carcinogens cause aggressive, untreatable tumours; for others, such as human papillomavirus, disease is largely preventable by screening; still others, such as sunlight, sometimes cause serious disease but mostly cause relatively minor tumours.
The phrase “group one carcinogen” is only relevant in an argument over whether the risk is zero or non-zero. Its use in other contexts suggests that someone doesn’t know what it means, or perhaps hopes that you don’t.
I am sure Prof Sellman knows exactly what it means.Tags: alcohol, Doug Sellman
The Dom Post editorial:
The eight Wellington city councillors who voted to ban off-licence alcohol sales after 9pm in the hope of curbing the harm from people guzzling booze before they hit the pubs have overlooked one very important point – their targets are not stupid.
Unlike the Councillors arguably!
The move will not stop the pre-loaders from getting a head start before they go out for the night. If anything, it is likely to see them start drinking excessively earlier in the evening, causing more problems than it will solve while penalising every responsible drinker from one end of the city to the other.
Yep, it will. Many don’t start drinking at home until 10 pm or so but if they have to go buy the alcohol before 9 pm, the parties will simply start earlier and last longer.
Councillors who support the proposal, adopted by eight votes to seven, say it will help prevent people pre-loading at home or side-loading – avoiding paying bar prices by ducking out of pubs to buy takeaway alcohol or to consume previously hidden caches.
The desire to tackle those problems is laudable. Pre- and side-loading are undeniably factors in the excessive levels of intoxication that are a blight on Wellington’s nightlife.
However, simply banning off-licence sales after 9pm will solve nothing. It is absurd to believe it will be beyond the wit of those who pre- and side-load to get organised enough to visit off-licences before they have to stop selling alcohol.
Yet, it will disadvantage someone doing their household shopping late at night, who can’t buy a bottle of wine with it.Tags: alcohol, Dominion Post, editorials, Wellington City Council
Kerry McBride at Stuff reports:
Wellington city centre bar owners are looking at legal action to fight plans they say could kill Wellington’s nightlife.
Wellington City Council officers have presented a briefing to councillors on the draft local alcohol policy, suggesting a precinct approach to trading hours, with different hours allowed for different areas.
Three “entertainment precincts” in Courtenay Place, Cuba St and the waterfront would be allowed licences until 5am, while other inner-city bars would have to shut at 2am.
Suburban venues and a “high risk” zone around Newtown would be restricted to midnight closing.
At present, 3am licences are standard for inner-city bars, with some “best practice” owners able to apply for later licences.
A group of 14 bar owners, representing more than 30 venues, is now investigating an injunction to stop the proposal reaching the council table.
Matt McLaughlin, who owns three bars, said the industry was sick of being pushed around by the council when off-licences and people drinking at home then going out were the real issue.
“It’s not fair because we are not the main problem. We’ve had a gutsful.”
Bryce Mason, owner of Sandwiches in Kent Tce, said the policy would be the death of his bar, which would fall outside the main entertainment zone, restricting him to a 2am licence.
Sandwiches closing at 2 am would be ridiculous. The concept of different times for different zones is not a bad one, but the areas can’t be arbitrary. To have Sandwiches close at 2 am and bars 50 metres up the road closing at 5 am is nuts.
Steve Drummond, from The Green Man pub, said kicking people out of bars at 2am would create huge problems in the streets, and force more people into fewer venues.
It would destroy some businesses, but “we are not going to stand by and let that happen”.
if some bars close at 2 am, it won’t mean their customers will go home. They will go up the road.
Councillor John Morrison said the restrictive hours would completely change the bar scene of Wellington and make events such as the rugby sevens impossible to host effectively.
“The hospitality industry is vital here, it’s our lifeblood. It’s completely contrary to the economic goals of the city to shut things down like this.”
A 2 am closing after the Sevens would be nuts.
The whole CBD should be treated as one area. May be very sensible to have some suburbs on different hours, but bars that are within walking distance of each other should be treated the same.Tags: alcohol, Wellington City Council
The Ministry of Health has just published a survey of NZers and alcohol. The results are interesting, compared to five years ago. I think they show again how exaggerated the moral panic around alcohol has been.
- The proportion of NZers who have had an alcoholic drink in the last year has dropped from 84% to 80%
- The proportion of 15 to 17 year olds who had a drink in the last year has dropped from 75% to 59%. This shows how absolutely wrong it would have been to increase the alcohol purchase age to 20. The current age of 18 is leading to fewer young people drinking than in the past.
- The proportion of adults who have “hazardous” drinking has dropped from 26% to 22% for men and from 11% to 9% for women.
- The proportion of 18 – 24 year old drinkers who are hazardous drinkers has fallen from 49% to 36%.
- The more deprived the area someone lives in, the less likely they are to drink, but if they do the more likely they are to be a hazardous drinker. 11% of adults who live in the least deprived areas are hazardous drinkers compared to 18% of adults in the most deprived areas.
These results are very consistent with other surveys in recent years.Tags: alcohol, drinking age
The Press reports:
Christchurch bars should have a one-way door policy after 1am, with all bars closing by 3am, police say, a day after the city recorded a surge in street-related crime and disorder.
The Christchurch City Council is working on a draft local alcohol policy (LAP) for Christchurch – a provision of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.
A preliminary policy was discussed by the planning committee yesterday, with deputations made by the police, medical officer of health, Health Promotion Agency, Hospitality New Zealand, District Licensing Agency, Foodstuffs New Zealand and Progressive Enterprises.
Through the LAP, the council can regulate certain aspects of liquor licensing such as opening hours for licensed premises, controlling the location of licensed premises and making re-entry restrictions to bars early in the morning.
Canterbury district commander, Superintendent Gary Knowles, told the council yesterday the central-city bars should have a one-way door policy after 1am and all bars should shut by 3am.
1 am is way way too early. Hell many people only head into town around midnight.
One way policies may also have unintended consequences. Rather than walk around town and sober up a bit, you’ll stay drinking at the bar you are already at.
Also if a group has split up, it means they can’t reunite.Tags: alcohol
The Telegraph reports:
Sources have confirmed that the Coalition will not attempt to implement the Prime Minister’s plan for a 45p per unit minimum price.
Is that all? Labour MPs here were talking $2 a stand drink minimum price!
Mr Cameron had argued that making drinks more expensive would curb problem drinking, while several ministers argued that the minimum price would only serve to penalise responsible drinkers. The minimum price was also opposed by the Treasury, where officials argued that it would reduce tax revenues at a time when the public finances remain strained.
One Treasury source described the Prime Minister’s plan as “a remarkably stupid idea”.
Government insiders suggested the Chancellor is considering using the Budget to impose higher taxes on some drinks and argue that doing so will address problem drinking.
There is an interesting debate about the merits of minimum pricing vs excise taxes. Our current excise tax regime is lopsided and not all alcohol is taxed at the same rate.
A spokesman for the Wine and Spirit Trade Association said: “Minimum unit pricing would penalise responsible drinkers and treat everyone who is looking for value in their shopping as a binge drinker.”
Yet it is Labour and Green party policy. Beware.
Eric Crampton blogs on the alcohol crisis:
The volume of alcoholic beverage available for consumption in New Zealand fell 3.3 percent in 2012, Statistics New Zealand said today. The decrease was due to a fall in the volume of beer, down 20 million litres. This fall was partly offset by a 4.3 million litre rise in the volume of wine.“Although the volume of alcoholic beverages available was down more than 3.0 percent, the amount of pure alcohol fell only 0.6 percent,” industry and labour statistics manager Louise Holmes-Oliver said. “This was due to change in the types of beverages available.”An increase in the volume of higher-alcohol beverages such as wine, spirits, and spirit-based drinks accounts for the smaller fall in pure alcohol available. The volume of high-alcohol beer (over 5.0 percent) also increased. In contrast, all other beer categories available for consumption have decreased.The volume of pure alcohol available for consumption per person aged 15 years and over fell 1.7 percent, to 9.3 litres in 2012.
RTD alcohol availability on the rise
Although the volume of alcohol available for consumption fell 3.3 per cent last year, ready-to-drink (RTD) spirit-based drinks are still on the rise.
Latest Statistics New Zealand figures show pre-mixed RTDs were up 78,000 litres, rising 0.1 per cent to 62 million litres.
The overall downturn in alcohol available for consumption was due to a fall in the volume of beer, which dropped 20 million litres, a decline partly offset by a 4.3 million litre rise in the volume of wine.
Martin Johnston at NZ Herald reports:
The liquor industry must be shut out of alcohol policy-making and implementation, to prevent manufacturers from undermining efforts to reduce the harms of alcohol, says an international grouping of public health specialists.
I’ve observed there tend to be two types of public health lobbyists. The zealots tend to regard their work as a holy crusade and the industry they specialise in as the enemy. They get focused more on attacking the industry rather than the merits of specific initiatives.
Do not engage commercial or vested interest groups, or their representatives, in discussion on the development of alcohol policy.
yes the zealots think Governments should not even talk to or engage with businesses that will be impacted by Government decisions. They are saying the only people the Government should listen to are themselves. And you know what – I guarantee you they are all being funded by taxpayers so they can lobby Governments with their own money!
The authors of the statement of concern say voluntary codes were often violated and a complete ban on alcohol promotion was preferable.
Nice to have the agenda out there. This means no happy hours, no Tui billboards, no online Wine retailers, no sports sponsorships, no advertising etc.Tags: alcohol, health ****s
The Alcohol Reform Bill passed its third reading yesterday. There’s actually a lot of significant changes in it, even though the wowsers are wailing that it doesn’t bring in minimum pricing, so a bottle of wine would cost at least $16.
The SOP by Lianne Dalziel was supported by most of Labour, all the Greens and NZ First. So expect the price of a drink to skyrocket under a change of government. There is a glimmer of hope though – Shearer, Mallard, Hipkins, Woods, Cosgrove and Faafoi voted against Dalziel’s minimum pricing amendment.
So what are the major law changes:
- local alcohol policies can be set determining maximum trading hours in their area and limiting the location of licensed premises. This sensibly recognises that the needs of Wainuiomata may be different to Courtenay Place.
- stronger rules about the types of stores eligible to sell alcohol and restricting supermarkets and grocery stores to displaying alcohol in a single area.
- express consent from parents or guardians before supplying alcohol to a minor
- new liquor licensing criteria, making licences harder to get and easier to lose
- stronger controls on alcohol advertising and promotion
I think the most important change is that it is now an offence to supply alcohol to minors, without parental consent. Previously it was only an offence to sell it.Tags: alcohol
Charley Mann at The Press reports:
Those who enjoy a glass or two should ignore the ”badly overstated” warnings about alcohol over the festive season, a University of Canterbury academic says.
The flurry of alcohol warnings ahead of Christmas were overstated and incorrect, said economics lecturer Dr Eric Crampton. ”Nobody warns us about the warnings.”
“And there’s danger in that … since some of the warnings are either false or badly overstated.”
Crampton said health warnings on alcohol focused ”exclusively” on curbing the harm experienced by heavy drinkers but ignored the enjoyment for moderate drinkers. This risked doing more harm than good, Crampton said.
”It is hard to open the paper without finding dire warnings about alcohol’s costs to the country. But how often do we hear that drinkers earn more than non-drinkers?
“Or that light drinkers have lower mortality risk than non-drinkers? Or that light-to-moderate drinking predicts better ageing outcomes?
Fundamentally alcohol is very different to tobacco. Tobacco kills you, even in moderation. Almost everyone who smokes wants to give up smoking. Very few moderate or light drinkers want to give up alcohol.
Hence the focus should be on heavy or binge drinking, not on demonising alcohol overall.Tags: alcohol, Eric Crampton
Claire Trevett reports:
Andrew Little’s amendment had apparently time-travelled all the way from the 1920s and proposed off-licences shut at 8pm rather than the proposed 10pm.
The explanation for this early “lights out” was such a masterpiece of delicious, pious absurdity that it requires repeating: it was because people buying alcohol any later than 8pm were likely to be already a bit tipsy “and may not have the judgment and self-control necessary to make cogent decisions”.
Good God. The woser factor out in full force. We weak humans need protecting from ourselves because at 8 pm we’re already “tipsy”.Tags: alcohol, Andrew Little