Should the legal drinking age be raised to reduce road crash deaths?
|
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said on ABC TV on Monday night that he would personally like to see the legal drinking age raised to 21 after connecting high rates of P-plater road crash deaths to alcohol consumption. “If the evidence is there and it is capable of being proven that it works, then we (will) look at these things and make a decision,” Rudd said, when asked about the issue by a young person on the Q&A program. When the Prime Minister expresses concern about the huge impact of alcohol on the community, that is definitely a wonderful development. Rudd referred specifically to “high rates of P-plater road deaths [linked] to alcohol consumption”. Well, are they really high? Or did a few really tragic cases just manage to get enormous publicity on a slow news day? And even if there are high rates of P-plater road crash deaths caused by alcohol, is raising the legal drinking age the most effective way of reducing these deaths? The Prime Minister called for the evidence on this issue and he deserves praise just for asking to see the evidence. Most politicians decide policy on alcohol and drugs just on gut feelings. But the majority of the evidence on this issue is from the US where the legal drinking age was raised from 18 to 21 in the 1980s. President Reagan forced virtually all the states to raise their legal drinking age by withholding federal funds for highways until they complied. Alcohol consumption and road crash deaths did fall as a result (although cannabis consumption increased). Australia has much more effective national measures to reduce drink driving than the US. Also, we have had these for a long time. These measures include random breath testing and compulsory car safety belts. Most important, we also have probationary driving licences, essentially for young people, which require zero breath alcohol concentration when driving. This amounts to a finely targeted prohibition of alcohol. In contrast, raising the legal drinking age from 18 to 21 is, in reality, a poorly targeted prohibition with the likelihood of significant levels of non-compliance and consequently (possibly severe) unintended negative consequences. Also, raising the legal drinking age from 18 to 21 is fraught with political and ethical problems. Just imagine trying to defend this policy against concerns that a 20-year-old Australian is considered mature enough to vote and even die serving his or her country but not considered mature enough to enjoy a beer with the family at Christmas! Also, there are more effective ways for Australia to reduce road crash deaths due to alcohol, apart from raising the legal drinking age. Australia’s system for taxing alcohol is ripe for reform just on economic grounds, let alone public health and safety concerns. Alcohol taxes have a substantial impact on price. The higher the price of alcohol, the lower the consumption. Slightly increasing the price of alcohol is the single most effective prevention measure known. Price increases would be particularly effective in young people because they have lower incomes and therefore less money to spend on alcohol. The majority of alcohol consumed in a community by young people is drunk at high levels of risk of short-term harms. Even small increases would achieve a worthwhile benefit (and be easier to achieve and sustain). Large increases risk stimulating a black market. Also, alcohol is too readily available in Australia. We have too many outlets, the conditions for these outlets are too liberal and the drinks industry is too powerful (and the community too weak) in the licensing process. Expect the drinks industry to weigh into this debate soon with loud cries of “wowser” and “nanny state”.
|
|
|
|
12 Comments
“Also, alcohol is too readily available in Australia”
I don’t think that is true. If you go to the US/Europe/Any developed country, you can buy alcohol at Service stations, shopping centers, cafes, holes in the wall. Just about everywhere. and it’s available 24 hours a day.
Pricing is the best way to modify demand. Alcohol is not an inelastic good so you will find a decrease in demand through higher prices (especially amongst the young with less disposable income)
Regarding “Just imagine trying to defend this policy against concerns that a 20-year-old Australian is considered mature enough to vote and even die serving his or her country but not considered mature enough to enjoy a beer with the family at Christmas!”
That’d be pretty easy to defend, since Australians under the age of 18 are legally allowed to drink alcohol in a private residence, and even at licensed premises when having a meal while accompanied by a guardian - which covers the majority of Christmas functions. Since I learned this in Health class at high school years ago, it’s not exactly tough research to do.
Alcohol is too readily available to teen-age drivers; but are we overlooking a psychological problem, namely the awarding of P plates to kids who have barely learned to drive and immediately believe they are kings or queens of the road when they should be on L plates for at least 12 months after they pass their driving test and then only granted P plates when they have passed a second more stringent driving test?
Prohibition won’t work. Young people will drink whether it’s legal or not. Having spent time in the US, the higher drinking age there is treated as a joke by young people.
As to raising the price. Well it works to a point. Many of my friends at University on low incomes used to brew their own beer precisely because of the cost. With the rise of spirit based drinks, there exists a real risk of young people especially students moving to distilling their own drinks and the risk of poisoning when they inadvertently produce methanol instead of ethanol.
I doubt if anything will come of this. Rudd was just moving his mouth again. Besides the liquor industry donates huge amounts of money to both parties.
Too late to change the age back to 21. The liquor indsutry is just too powerful, here in Queensland, the Hotels Association has a lot of clout particularly within the Labor Party. Availablity must be restricted more, and earlier closing at pubs and clubs.
Scott - in Norway (at least when I was there some years ago) the only alcohol you can easily obtain is low-alcohol beer. Anything stronger has to be bought from state monopoly shops (Vinmonopolet), which are rare as hens’ teeth.
In Nova Scotia, Canada, during a trip there in the early ‘90’s, similarly any strong liquor had to bought from shops run by the provinicial government.
Those are two examples just from my (limited) overseas travel. How many others are there?
JOSHSOMETHING - when I was at Uni in the ’70s I knew a couple of guys who distilled their own liquers!
Drinking alcoholic beverages, even to excess, is approved behaviour in Australia. You see multiple advertisements promoting alcohol at all sporting and entertainment facilities. Young people are brainwashed to consider drinking to be manly, and as sophisticated and sexually attractive to potential sexual partners. Drink driving is still treated as a minor offense unless others are actually killed, then the road is blamed for not being safe.
Many years ago in Melbourne, police used to stroll through the car parks of hotels and liquor serving restaurants and put small luminous stickers on cars and breathalyser checkers would pull them over a couple of k up the road. A terrible outcry against this “unsporting” police behaviour stopped the practice. It was unsporting to breathalyze drinkers who wanted to drive on public roads and put members of the public at risk - testing for drink driving had to be random and not stacked against potential killers.
Advertising alcohol must be stopped, all sport must disassociate itself from alcohol, drinkers must not drive. And adults who provide under age persons with alcohol (except parents in their own home) must be regarded as criminals.
As a parent of a 16-year-old who has repeated missed seeing favourite bands because they only play licenced venues, the extra three years would kill me — let alone her.
The drinking age isn’t just about alcohol…
The real problem is the cars, not the alcohol. Perhaps we should raise the driving age, or have a 0.00 blo0d alcohol limit for under-21s or -25s.
And on the subject of drinking ages, why not have a look at the correlation of legal drinking ages and alcohol consumption patterns? In the US where the legal drinking age is generally 21 there is rampant binge drinking amongst teens - a visit to any college town is instructive. In Belgium where (in the 1990s at least) no Belgian could tell me if there even was a legal drinking age teens drank moderately for the most part. In Austria and Germany where beer and wine is legal from 16 and spirits from 18 (and not particularly heavily policed in any case) drinking amongst teens is likewise much more moderate than in the US or Australia.
As much as we may not like teen drinking - or any drinking - legislative solutions are sometimes counter-productive.
E