Tonight’s Panorama – at 8.30pm on BBC1 – features reports on a huge increase in violent attacks in bars in Oldham – and what the Lib Dem council there is doing about it.
Yorkshire Street is the main drinking area in Oldham which had a 200% increase in serious violent incidents in the first four months of this year.
That’s a stabbing or an assault with intention to kill on average every Friday and Saturday night.
But the Greater Manchester town has come up with a unique way of fighting back the recent spike in alcohol-related disorder.
The council believes promotions such as 2-4-1s, drink as much as you can for £5.99, and free shots, have fuelled an atmosphere of violence.
So it decided to review the licences of each of the 22 bars and clubs that sell cut-price drinks.
They have been told that if they want to sell alcohol at less than 75p a unit – about £1.88 for a strong pint of lager – they will have to change the way they operate.
The specific plans make interesting reading:
Oldham council has come up with a model of how its bars could be forced to work if the minimum price is not adopted.
Under the new conditions, drinkers will not be allowed to approach the bar and must wait in a post office style queuing system instead.
Customers would also only be allowed to buy just two drinks at a time and outlets could be made to provide extra door staff as well as paying for police officers to watch over the bar.
Any bars or clubs that refuse to follow the council’s new blueprint, could lose their licences.
I’m a little surprised that the Licencing Act is flexible enough to lawfully let one council make changes like that in how pubs and bars operate. All my own limited experience of sitting as a sub on licencing panels suggests that councils don’t have a great amount of discretion when it comes to what and what isn’t allowed.
But what do you think? Are the measures from the Council a sensible and pragmatic response to a real problem, or an over-zealous bureaucrat’s approach to a statistical blip? And will Panorama make a balanced argument or a one-sided polemic? Tune in to find out – and post your thoughts to our comments thread.
(hat-tip to Costigan Quist for tweeting about this this afternoon.)
Share:
23 Comments
Oldham council is now partly Libdem controlled – One of our councillors appears prominently on the programme so I am told.
Sorry Alex – should have read your first paragraph – Doh !
Thanks for the citation.
There really is no balanced argument to be made unless you believe in unbridled interventionism. Anyone claiming to be a liberal should be denouncing these plans. The council has NO RIGHT to violate private businesses like this.
KRO – you touch on the libertarian vs social liberal argument that is frequently played out in places like this blog and Lib Dem spaces on the internet. Because what you’re advocating is unbridled libertarianism. But from the converse perspective, what RIGHT do the businesses in question have in creating public disorder by selling alcohol at knock-down prices and then unleashing dysfunctional, drunk and violent people into the public streets?
The argument that society has some right to intervene on the private rights of publicans has already been played out in various licencing and smoking regulation; questions remain as to how far they can go.
And different media have given different perspectives about just what is going on. Basically the bars seem to have been given a choice between charging a minimum amount for booze or going to ridiculous lengths instead. Unsurprisingly, they’ve pretty much all decided to raise booze prices with one business trying to challenge the new rules in court.
Glasgow City Council have tried several restrictions in an attempt to cut down on binge drinking and violence. The first major one to stick was a to effectively ban happy hours. Each drink price must remain the same from opening to closing on each day, so you can have an offer for the whole of their opening hours on a Wednesday but not just from a subset of their opening hours such as 1700-1900. It does seem quite effective at stopping the ridiculous offers that encourage drinkers to sling as much down their neck as possible in a couple of hours whilst still allowing premises to entice customers out on quieter nights during the week.
The more recent initiative is to encourage venues open after midnight to serve all drinks in plastic cups. All bottles are decanted, and pints come in squishies or washable plastic depending on the venue’s preferences. Some venues choose to serve plastic all day, others switch to it after midnight. There are some venues, presumably with no history of violent customers who are not pressured towards this but it’s pretty universal in city centre establishments.
I have no idea where the authority to impose these restrictions come from. It may just be the threat that the licensing board has more than enough cause to shut down places because of their history of incidents. In Glasgow there are two companies who own a large number of the pubs and clubs in the city centre so the pressure may be on them to implement these policies across the board even if individual venues have no history of trouble.
In my view, the main problem remains the imposed 0200 curfew and 0300 closing. The fights which result in serious injury are still more likely to happen when every reveler is forced to head home at the same time, flooding into the crowded streets where the little bravado fueled face-off in the club can boil into a violent argument when the queues for the taxis are long and the night cold.
This sounds far too fiddly and at-one-remove from the actual problem to be a good solution. And one always suspects authoritarian knee-jerkery around alcohol. I’ll watch (slightly irritably because I have one entirely blocked ear and it’s surprising how debilitating this is).
I read a report once about measures being taken in Bournemouth which sounded very sensible – staggered closing times, alcohol-free 4am cafes to eat and sober up in, chocolate handed out in the street to people coming out of bars etc. Mind you, I imagine knifings in Bournemouth were not a weekly occurrence.
Chocolate handed out to late-night drinkers? Mmm, tempting…
I was impressed too.
Yup, this is annoying me a bit. There’s no attempt to link the alcohol with the violence. In fact, the figures suggest just the opposite. In 2008, levels of violence were much lower in Oldham, apparently. In the first quarter of 2009, the number of incidents went up dramatically. Hm, so let me think, what massive development might have occurred in the last quarter of 2008 which might make people frustrated, angry, and inclined to drink a lot and lash out…
Oh christ, it’s Phil Woolas now.
That post office queueing idea is so laughably unworkable that I wonder if it has been designed like that deliberately. It makes sense. If you make it so difficult and expensive for cheap alcohol bars to enforce, they’ll probably just cave in and accept your higher price fixing instead. Certainly any bar that tries to run that system will be out of business in a couple of months.
Alex, forgive me if I’m wrong in saying (but I’m not) that the businesses don’t cause the mayhem through selling the alcohol, the individuals cause the mayhem by consuming said alcohol in ridiculous quantities. The onus here is being placed firmly on the landlords/ladies who are not even partially to blame. Debenhams sells knives. I don’t go out on violent knifing orgies. Ann Summers sells dildos… uh… draw your own conclusion from that one.
This Panorama on Minimum pricing for Alcohol in Oldham must become the focus for putting in place new policy from local Councils with greater insightful leadership into how to curb and save more young persons from becoming legless on weekend `binges’ and destroying their livers and female fertility .
I make these comments:
1.It was revealed that as a result of the new access to Bar sales of alcohol i.e.only 2 drinks at one time and queueing like in the post office and the end of cheap 2-4-1 promotions etc. by Pubs and Clubs has reduced violence and police incidents by 20% in Oldham.
2.It was also revealed that the paradox is that if the Authorities do succeed at reducing consumption and concominatly the deployment of police time and number of violent incidents related to excess from `boozing’ on the streets : the gap in consumption rates amongst young regular `binge’ drinkers is still compensated by the cheap drink and unhelpful attitude at the local Supermarkets.
3.There must be Government regulation into minimum pricing for cheap alcohol in Supermarkets, like Tesco where dry cider can be bought at 14 per unit cost.It is possible to get absolutely `ludo’ on as little as £2..50 at that price and is not comparably to a local Bar where an avereage pint of strong larger costs £1.88.
4.Prof.Ian Gilmore the leading alcohol expert has predicted that if young people and especially women continue to increase their appetites for `binge drinking’ then they will expire before their parents and most will develop serious liver damage and women will risk child birth.
5.The Panorama programme was filmed in the Bars and Streets of Oldham but in Glasgow, where I would suggest they also look at the social problem of alcohol poisoning of middle aged men and their family life. In Glasgow East the alcohol problem should be the subject of targeted much greater understanding and then practical help to those oppressed.But the problem to a greater part is how to turn mentality and the tap off and calm the legions of `binge drinkers’ into common sense and alcohol outlets.Better Ad campaigns would be good start and at present their are none.
6.Should there be a new Government fed campaign on `Dangers of Life Limitation and Enjoyment of Health’ from Alcohol, as this Government has done precious little to either understand or curb the alcohol dehumanising fuel that is currently blighting and serving as the dominant driver in so many young lives and in so doing destroying so many members of the current young generation and tomorrow`s parents.
Having now seen the programme, they did certainly paint a picture of a number of unintended consequences coming together in Oldham – a) the loss of the right to determine locally whether there are already enough bars; b) the increase in the number of bars meaning a sharper need to be competitive c) competition forcing the price of alcohol down to silly levels d) consumption increasing (but without any more profit for landlords) e) “the wrong sort of people” being attracted from a wide area (the part I am least happy with!) f) the wrong sort of people having consumed the wrong amount of wrongly priced alcohol led to a much higher propensity for the wrong sort of behaviour.
Whilst individual landlords might not be responsible for individual acts of violence, a clear picture emerged of a correlation between a high number of cheap bars densely located, and a high number of serious violent and sexual assaults, all in the very same place. We all know that correlation does not imply causality but in this situation in Oldham, it’s tempting to see the link.
Having seen the programme, the Oldham solution did seem quite elegant. The choice given to landlords was either turn your bar into the sort of person no-one in their right mind would want to go to, or raise your prices to the level of all of your close competitors. Taking the price competition out of the market frees up the bars to develop other, less damaging niches rather than simply being cheapest.
You are right that personal responsibility did seem completely lacking in some of the clientele out on the pish. But given that there are already penalties in place for those caught misbehaving, what other options are there for encouraging greater responsibility?
I’m sure I heard a bit that said one of the bars dropped its prices and started a price war – and that the violence started pretty soon thereafter.
There was a wider problem with cheap supermarket alcohol starting a night off.
If the statistics show that the policy works, then it must be right.
Whist we wait and see what the outcome is, my best hope is that the policy works and that the Lib Dems get the credit they deserve.
Alex – But downpricing the alcohol is another consequence of recession, alongside increases in propensity to violence – we’ve all seen “Credit crunch lunch” menus and the like springing up everywhere over the last six to nine months. The bars in Oldham were no different – they reacted to economic circumstances, knowing people couldn’t afford as much. So we can’t say that the greater violence necessarily resulted from the cheaper alcohol, but we can say that both most probably resulted from the recession. The recession has hit places like Oldham like a sockful of cement. It’s a medium sized town with a lot of manual workers and little natural economic life of its own because it largely depends on an overflow of demand from Manchester which has now dried up. It’s the sort of place I would *expect* to see social outcomes of the recession manifesting themselves first. I would suggest the drinking is really incidental.
“There was a wider problem with cheap supermarket alcohol starting a night off.”
Yeah, this bit puzzled me. I was starting off a night out with Sainsbury’s own-brand vodka in the 1990s. This isn’t a new development.
Well done Oldham LibDems. This is a really good example of the sensible use of the licensing laws. Sometimes the Government gives Councils wide powers which they are frightened to use (the power of scrutiny of the NHS is another one). The rep from the booze sellers who appeared on BBC1 agreed with the fact that the Council had negotiated with the trade rather than just imposing rules and they had been given options. Selling less at a higher price is not necessarily all bad for the trade!
Once again well done, even if BBC1 forgot to mention it was a LibDem Council (now there is a surprise!)
“we’ve all seen “Credit crunch lunch” menus and the like springing up everywhere over the last six to nine months.”
Not all of them have involved price cuts though!
Actually, I’m quite glad the BBC didn’t mention that Oldham is a Lib Dem council. This sort of nannying imposition of prices simply ends up penalising the majority again for the sake of the minority – especially where supermarket prices are imposed.
Councils do have powers to examine the problem and deal with it, short of price manipulation. Licences can be withdrawn or suspended – and although I know the argument that “you’re dealing with people’s livelihoods” will come through loud and clear, if you’re breaking the law by serving to someone already drunk or who is under age, then hard luck.
Most importantly, what this sort of thing doesn’t do is properly address the social reasons as to why this is going on. Why, for example, do we have this binge drinking culture in the UK which isn’t so apparent in France or Spain? Why is it that, for so many people, having a good time = getting so pissed you can’t stand up? Until these issues are addressed, then I don’t really think binge drinking will disappear – people will just pay for it.
I have said before that rowdiness and violence on the street is not the be all and end all of binge drinking, and it is unhelpful to focus totally on young people getting sloshed. Relatively few drink related hospitalisations are down to the sort of pub and club culture seen here.
That said there are problems with late night pub & club drinkingthat need tackling.
I also, er, have the programme stored on my Freeeview+ (aka a PVR) and it’s yet to be watched.
As somebody who lives in Oldham, I think both the council and the Panorama programme missed a very important issue.
The biggest problem in the town is drugs mostly cocaine and amphetamines, i would bet that most of the violence shown in the programme involved people using drugs as well as alcohol.
The drinking culture isn’t new and young people have always got drunk on nights out in the town centre, but add the drugs to the mix and the violence happens more often and becomes increasingly more extreme.
The entire focus of the programme blamed the violence etc. on the availability of cheap alcohol and whilst that has a part to play the reporting of the issue narrowed in as if this was the only cause, but it is certainly not the entire story. I may have missed it but in the entire half hour I did not hear the drug problem in the town mentioned at all.
These ideas are just plain stupid.
I accept there is a problem with binge drinking, it can get pretty bad here in Cardiff but this is unworkable.
NOBODY will go to a pub where your watched over by POLICE and made to queue like sheep for a drink,
Pubs are offering cheap drinks because they are struggling, the extra costs of staff and police
added to the loss of sales due to people not attending these pubs will drive them all out of business.
I think this is the real agenda by Oldham council. kill of city centre drinking for good.
what they don’t realise is that the city centre will become a ghost town ay night and free to anyone who wants to make trouble.
I believe the real elephant in the room or the Pub or Club Bar, is for someone to explain why are so many vast armies of British youngsters are now so intent on taking lessons in apprenticeships in permanent Alcoholism and ‘ beetling to the nearest public alcohol drink counter, every weekend, to go on `binge drinking’ episodes : and not choosing to do something else, that brings about a more responsible and mature healthy lifestyle?
Surely, the main point is that this is not happening either in France,Spain ,France and Scandinavian Countries, where neither Alcohol Abuse or Dietary Obesity is occurring on this scale,that is now causing an alarming increase in UK Diabetes 2 rates and is stretching local A and E`s with a new teenage wave of youth alcohol abuse admissions, each weekend!
Alex, sorry I’ve just seen this thread again. It’s simple though, isn’t it?
To all your points; cheap alcohol does not mean you are FORCED to purchase and consume it. Some pregnancy tests are cheap, but you don’t see me buying them all and binge-pissing. Cocaine is £1 a line, but you won’t catch me doing it (try as you may!) and pencils are relatively inexpensive… but I don’t purchase 20,000 in a go and create big art attacks!