In Melbourne Australia, where this is written, we are served by 2 dailies, the Herald-Sun and The Melbourne Age. Not only that, but we have another broadsheet, The Australian. So, unlike a lot of places in this world, we have access to plenty of writers and hopefully, plenty of different voices.
So these are some of the headlines in today’s papers:
Exposed: Grog online too easy for under-age teen, Mark Russell, The Age
Safety rethink as pedestrian toll stays high, Reid Sexton, The Age
Don't drink it all at once
Mark Russell doesn’t mention how many times The Offending Retailer has been taken to court, prosecuted and fined, although we are left with the guess that this number is zero.
There is a lack of aggression on the part of Mark Russell, which is probably couched in a belief that no harm is really being done. If correct, this could not be further from the truth. An accompanying, motivated editorialist might be asking why does it take a newspaper to try out this sort of testing behaviour? What are the licensing bodies doing to earn their pay? Have they been stifled by their minister? Should a hand sitter or two be immediately sacked?
What is desperately sad is the 3.5 billion dollars this corporate conglomerate pulls from liquor sales every year.
Unless any evidence appears to the contrary, the elephant in the room is still wandering about. In this instance the fact remains that too much alcohol consumed in Australia is consumed in a dangerous fashion. Too much over too short a period of time, demonstrating a massive cultural disconnect between the ‘science’ of this drug with its general consumption patterns.
The shareholders of this conglomerate are beneficiaries of binge drinking, alcohol related violence and pedestrian deaths and injuries. They benefit from future illnesses and diseases including cancer that will surely come as every year of the binge drinking mentality prevails, unchallenged by government interest or controls. Alcohol is Australia’s 3rd Biggest Killer. Proving conglomerates can and do kill.
The other pachyderm to consider is the British Medical Association’s (amongst others) identification of too many liquor outlets making alcohol ubiquitously available. This is clearly and demonstrably associated with higher alcohol consumption with the resultant increase in dangerous and deadly outcomes.
Mark doesnt appear to ‘get’ the concept that what he is discussing here is an evil distribution of a substance that is ‘…a toxic and addictive drug that should be carefully regulated and controlled.’ Nothing in his article starts at this much needed touchstone.
All the research and best NON BRIBED minds in at least 2 continents point to the direct and immediate need to wind back distribution channels.
There is nothing to be gained by adding online distribution channels other than more pain and suffering. A real government would tell this soulless conglomerate and their boardroom buddies to stick to the groceries. That at least is vaguely honest work.
Reid Sextons piece again, sits in a silo of silo thinking. None of the protagonists mentioned in his story showing any idea of the overall context in which their common interest sits.
Inspector Parr, Bruce Corben, VicRoads and the TAC appear oblivious to the wider issues of the massive increase in unhealthy alcohol consumption that is happening now.
They note the increase in pedestrian deaths and injuries and it’s less offensive to recommend a reduction in speed limits isn’t it? Let’s make the road safe for addicted and affected members of the public to cross the road on all fours! That’s keeping their silos tidy!
What a great idea, wait for this to happen
Over at the Herald-Sun, we have these headlines:
Blow .02 and be a ‘bloody idiot’, Stephen Drill and Peter Rolfe, Herald Sun
Brit’s drug ban, Nui Te Koha, Herald Sun
The motorist 05 Campaign has succeeded so massively in overturning a dangerous and ugly culture of drink driving because it satisfied the 3 basic conditions for success:
- It clearly and unambiguously sets an easily understandable rule not to be transgressed;
- The consequences for transgressing this rule are proclaimed widely and are understood by all;
- There is an efficient mechanism for enforcing this rule and the consequences are carried out.
This is why unWise Drink-Step-Watch-Back programs will never succeed in mass behaviour change. They fail all three conditions for success. Big Liquor only sponsors programs that fail. If Big Liquor is sponsoring your program, look about for reasons why. The answer may not be to your liking.
Which brings us to the last reference, Britney Spears. Who knows if this report is accurate. It is ‘entertainment news’ afterall!
But, if true, if Britney can hold it together, it should ensure a trouble free tour.
All three conditions are met with flying colours.
- She sets out easy to understand rules – no drugs including alcohol;
- She tells you whats going to happen if caught – The Sack;
- She then sets out an efficient process for catching transgressors – Random Drug Including Alcohol Tests.
Although an insurance or underwriting concern could be at the heart of the measure, Britney’s tour may clean up a few people’s lives in the process of making money.
She wins an honorary membership to The Pedestrian 08 Campaign. Whatever that is. Lucky Girl!
If only the AFL and the Carlton Football Club had listened to Britney, they would not be in the mess they are now.
If only the State of Victoria will listen to Britney and follow her example, our streets may be cleaned up, an enormous amount of crime avoided, and the number of victims piling into our accident and emergency departments, our gaols and our morgue will surely decrease.
