Duncan Leys, President, Bulletin 2024/8, October
At its 19 August meeting, the last before the Council elections on 14 September, City of Sydney Council unanimously voted not to renew the outdoor alcohol restrictions in many of the City’s parks, including all parks in Glebe–Forest Lodge.1 The Council believed there was no evidence the restrictions worked and that they unfairly targeted disadvantaged groups.
Outdoor alcohol restrictions in Glebe-Forest Lodge were either 24/7, seven days a week, time of day-based (‘timed’) or temporary (e.g. for special events such as New Year’s Eve). Timed alcohol restrictions applied to the Foreshore Parklands, including Bicentennial Park, Blackwattle Bay & Park, Federal Park and Sportsfield, Glebe Foreshore Walk West, Harold Park, and Jubilee Park & Oval.2 In this large swathe of foreshore, alcohol consumption was prohibited between 10 pm and 10 am, seven days a week (not including New Year’s Eve or New Year’s Day).
Under the NSW Local Government Act, councils can put outdoor alcohol restrictions in place for up to four years and must review them before establishing restrictions for a subsequent period. Post-review, Council met and approved ‘the establishment of alcohol-free zones and alcohol prohibited areas for a four year period’ in 218 zones located in Chippendale, Darlinghurst, Dawes Point, Elizabeth Bay, Haymarket, Millers Point, Newtown (part), Paddington (part), Potts Point, Pyrmont, Redfern, Rushcutters Bay, Surry Hills, Sydney (city), The Rocks, Waterloo, and Woolloomooloo.3 Suburbs within City of Sydney LGA with no recommended outdoor alcohol restrictions are Alexandria, Annandale (part), Barangaroo, Beaconsfield, Camperdown (part), Centennial Park, Darlington, Eveleigh, Forest Lodge, Glebe, Moore Park, Rosebery (part), St Peters (part), Ultimo, and Zetland.4 Consequently, Glebe and Forest Lodge no longer have outdoor alcohol restrictions of any sort. City of Sydney has a webpage about the changed alcohol restrictions.5
The restrictions in Glebe–Forest Lodge were implemented some years ago due to residents’ complaints about noise and anti-social behaviour. Before the current restrictions were introduced, residents and users of the foreshore parks had experienced loud and rowdy behaviour, rubbish and urination into the early hours. Residents who contacted the Glebe Society firmly believe the restrictions, once in place, were working satisfactorily. With the restrictions now lifted, they fear a return to the bad old days.
Having a drink in the foreshore parks until 10 pm and no later seemed reasonable and sensible to me. It is not seriously restrictive. As for the claim that there’s no evidence the restrictions were working – the fact that local residents could enjoy a largely peaceful existence proves the restrictions were working as intended. The Council’s website states that ‘outdoor alcohol restrictions apply in public streets and parks to help prevent alcohol-related anti-social behaviour and crime’. It is illogical that the low incidence of reported alcohol-related anti-social behaviour and crime in these parks is evidence that the restrictions were not working. On the contrary, it’s evidence that the restrictions are working as intended.
Glebe residents who contacted the Society also said it was not people from disadvantaged groups making noise and being anti-social but backpackers and visitors. Unfairly targeting disadvantaged groups may be an issue elsewhere but not in Glebe.
The Glebe Society wrote to all councillors opposing the removal of the restrictions from Glebe parks; however, we were not onto this issue as early as we might have been, and it was clear to me that the Council was not expecting our opposition. The proposal to review the current restrictions was not widely publicised and residents’ views were not actively sought. The inadequacy of community consultation was identified by Urbis in its review of the restrictions. The first of three recommendations in its report to Council is to ‘Take more time for consultation’ and elaborate:
Given the complexity of the issue, the associated social impacts, and the diverse perspectives of stakeholders, community members, and experts in relation to Outdoor Alcohol Restrictions, the City of Sydney should provide additional time for consultation prior to making a decision in locations identified as a higher risk for priority populations. …That consultation should be supported by information that clearly outlines the impacts and benefits of the current Restrictions and data on their efficacy.6
NSW Police opposed the reduction in alcohol-free zones, fearing a loss of public safety and neighbourhood amenity. The restrictions gave police the power to deal with anti-social behaviour by, for example, tipping out or confiscating alcohol being consumed in restricted areas, presumably reducing the amount of alcohol available for consumption by the offending drinker, disadvantaged or otherwise. I would think this intervention could help defuse a situation before it escalated to a point where police decided to make an arrest. Without the police having the power to limit alcohol consumption, outcomes for socially disadvantaged people may be worse than when the police had those powers. Further, enforcement of the alcohol restrictions could not contribute to financial disadvantage because there were no fines associated with breaching the restrictions.
Vibrancy reforms
We have also been getting our heads around the Vibrancy Reforms. These are ‘a cross-government initiative developed in consultation with key agencies, industry, councils and stakeholders to bring sector regulation in line with contemporary going out behaviours, improve government processes and encourage more people to go out, closer to home. The reforms include changes to liquor laws to support a thriving and vibrant night time economy’.7
Some of these reforms have been enacted, but we are yet to feel their effects. I suspect their impacts will be felt incrementally as ownership of venues changes and new owners see opportunities to expand their operating hours and services offered.
The common denominator – alcohol
Cutting to the chase, we are talking about alcohol, and I can’t help thinking about the communique from the National Cabinet meeting on 6 September reporting that the Rapid Review pointed the finger at alcohol, gambling and porn as factors in violence against women and called on these industries to address the roles their products play in causing family violence. The Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence (DSFV) Commissioner is advocating for ‘restrictions on alcohol sale, advertising and delivery time frames; restrictions leading to a total ban on advertising in gambling; and an examination of the density of electronic gaming machines and use of online gambling in relation to DSFV prevalence.8
Then, there are the effects of alcohol on community health; published studies are so varied and apparently contradictory that it’s difficult to know what the moderate position is. The only thing that can be said with any certainty is that none of the studies recommend that non-drinkers take up drinking for the good of their health.
Guided walks program
Something that can definitely be said with some certainty is that walking is good for your health. Two guided walks are planned for the remaining part of the year. On Sunday 13 October, we have a guided walk titled From Degradation to Revitalisation: Discovering Ultimo, to be led by Patricia Hale, a public historian and heritage specialist. While this walk is currently booked out, you could put your name on the waiting list, and you may be able to join us for what promises to be an interesting afternoon.
Our final walk of the year will be held on Saturday 2 November. Max Solling, our local historian, will lead us in exploring the layers of Forest Lodge’s history. Forest Lodge was once an idyllic bushland setting for the elegant villas of the well-to-do, which was transformed by an influx of industry whose workers lived in speculatively built terraces springing up on lots from the subdivision of the Forest Lodge Estate. Despite a further transformation of FL as industry moved out of the inner cities and the middle class developed a taste for late Victorian housing stock, FL has retained its character as a place of social mix and diverse streetscapes. More details. Book early, for Max’s walks are popular! More details.
Notes: 1. Minutes of City of Sydney Council meeting, 19 August 2024; 2. Urbis, Outdoor alcohol restriction review: insights and recommendations report, prepared for City of Sydney, 1 May 2024. (see Figure 1: Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Prohibited Areas); 3. Attachment B: List of Recommended Alcohol-Free Zones and Alcohol Prohibited Areas; 4. List of suburbs within the City of Sydney LGA, cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/guides/city-at-a-glance; 5. cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/public-health-safety-programs/outdoor-alcohol-restrictions; Urbis [ibid.]; 7. nsw.gov.au/business-and-economy/24-hour-economy/vibrancy-reforms; 8. Rapid Review of Prevention Approaches Expert Panel, 2024, 23 August, Unlocking the Prevention Potential Accelerating action to end domestic, family and sexual violence. pmc.gov.au/resources/unlocking-the-prevention-potential-executive-summary.
There are no comments yet. Please leave yours.