This bill will not have the effect it is supposed to have. There will always be violent idiots among us, as there always have been. Unfortunately, there is no way to legislate against these unsociable thugs. They will not stay home because of these laws. People will start drinking earlier, and instead of leaving pubs and clubs to grab a bite to eat and then take the opportunity to go home, they will not leave the allowed places. The idea of being deprived of the opportunity to return to a place will be enough to deter people from leaving that place. The laws are an attempt to regulate Australians` drinking habits, protect community and hotel workers and prevent alcohol-related violence, especially at night. However, the laws will almost certainly damage the bars, clubs, and concert halls that so many of us have come to know and love. We have seen it before in Sydney. They eventually introduced mandatory ID scanners in party districts, but even that measure was eventually changed when the government received feedback on how its laws operated locally.
The guidelines, first adopted in 2016 following the death of 18-year-old Cole Miller in a punch attack, include rules requiring licensed establishments to stop serving alcohol after 3 a.m. and the mandatory use of ID scanners in nightclubs. Plans to also introduce a 13-hour ban on late trading venues were scrapped in early 2017 following resistance from licensees. This knee-jerk reaction is another example of superficial thinking and an attempt to tackle a problem quickly in order to get perhaps goodwill, but certainly votes. There was no discussion of the lack of research to support lockout laws and their contribution (or absence) to reducing violence. It seems that we have not thought about what people will do between 2 a.m., when the last drinks will be called, and closing time. Does the government consider clients who turn to party drugs to reduce their alcohol consumption to be successful? In recent years, versions of lockout laws have also been introduced in Newcastle and Sydney, with Sydney`s in particular being criticised by community groups for harming the city`s nightlife. The Queensland Government`s controversial lockout bills have just been passed by Parliament and will be phased in from 1 July this year. These laws mean that you won`t be able to buy drinks after 2:00 or 3:00 a.m. if you`re in a designated nighttime entertainment area. From next year, you will no longer be allowed to enter the rooms after 1:00 am.
Initial laws required venues in party districts to stop letting new guests into their premises after 3 a.m., though they were allowed to stay open until 5 a.m. for people already inside. If the government, to be honest, were towards the people of the state, it would accept that most violence in the „party districts“ is caused at closing times or around taxi ranks. Lockout laws won`t stop mass gatherings outside venues, as all pubs and clubs will always close at the same time, and it certainly won`t stop the fear caused at taxi ranks. The obvious lack of consideration and common sense, as well as ignoring the negative impact on our local economy, businesses, jobs, etc., coupled with the complete exemptions for casinos, leads us to wonder what the government`s motivation really is. Are these laws simply a mechanism to smuggle partygoers into casinos? Secondly, it will lead to a mass exodus of drunk people pouring into the streets at the same time, all trying to use the same resources at the same time. Imagine for a second the scene in Fortitude Valley when the last drinks are called. Everyone takes the opportunity to have a quick drink or two before the bar closes and then what? It doesn`t make much sense to stay in a „pub without beer“ and so they all leave at the same time. The streets are now full of people who want to go home. Many will want to get taxis, but if demand cannot be met, it could lead to aggression at taxi ranks.
This is exactly what lockout laws should be fighting in the first place. These hasty laws beg the question: What happens if someone is attacked now at 10 p.m. while traveling to authorized places? Will we see any more restrictions? After its introduction in 2016, the state government struck down several aspects of the laws and ultimately did not conduct a hard 1 a.m. lockout in party districts.
