The Wonkery

The Inquiry into Ready-to-Drink Alcohol Beverages by the Senate Community Affairs Committee, with public submissions due by 2008-05-30.

Hmmm.  Are there any alcoholic beverages that are not "ready-to-drink"?

Details

• Dates:
  • Referred to Committee: 2008-05-15
  • Submissions close: 2008-05-30
  • Report due: 2008-06-24
• Terms of Reference
• Contacts:
  • Postal: Committee Secretary, Community Affairs Committee, Department of the Senate, PO Box 6100, Parliament House, Canberra, ACT 2600, Australia
  • Email: community.affairs.sen@aph.gov.au
  • Voice: +61-2-6277-3515
  • Fax: +61-2-6277-3515

The inquiry will cover…

1. the effectiveness of the Government’s proposed changes to the alcohol excise regime in reducing the claims of excessive consumption of ready-to-drink alcohol beverages;
2. the consumption patterns of ready-to-drink alcohol beverages by sex and age group;
3. the consumption patterns of all alcohol beverages by sex and age group;
4. the impact of these changes on patterns of overall full strength spirit consumption, including any increased consumption of standard drinks of alcohol;
5. the evidence underpinning the claims of significant public health benefit in the increase of excise on this category of alcohol;
6. applicability of incentives to encourage production and consumption of lower alcohol content beverages;
7. the modelling underpinning the Government’s revenue estimates of this measure;the effectiveness of excise increases as a tool in reducing the levels of alcohol related harm;
8. the empirical evidence on which the government’s decision to increase the excise on ready-to-drink alcohol beverages was based; and
9. the effect of alternative means of limiting excessive alcohol consumption and levels of alcohol related harm among young people.

This will be an interesting inquiry to watch, because the government is relying on increasing consumption of alcopops as the major source of increased revenue in the budget, and because it has a focus on modelling and evidence.

There are, of course, other ways of decreasing alcohol consumption, but there are all less attractive to government because they don’t generate revenue:

• Increasing the drinking age;
• Dosing most between the ages of 16 and 25 with Disulfiram;
• Encouraging councils to create "dry suburbs" or curfews between 20:00 and 12:00;
• Allowing alcohol to be served only with meals;
• Fortifying food with thiamine to decrease the damage; or
• Giving a bounty (perhaps $5 a day) to anyone on benefits who can prove they have a zero blood alcohol on any given day (and funding the breathalyzers in convenient locations).

Mind you, I wouldn’t support some of the above suggestions, nor suggest they were practical.  However, it’s likely that very good suggestions will be rejected because of the short-term economic costs, even though the long term benefits of reducing alcohol consumption are huge.

See Also:

• Inquiry into Alcohol Toll Reduction Bill 2007, on due to report 2008-06-18, with submissions here.
• "<a href=”http://balneus.wordpress.com/2008/02/20/alcohol-toll-reduction-bill-gutless-or-token/”Alcohol toll reduction bill: gutless or token?" (Balneus, 2008-02-20)
• Other current Senate Community Affairs Committee inquiries
• "Tax, alcopops and low-alcohol wine" from Dr Faustus at The Killfile (2008-05-15) has some thoughts.
• "Tax alcopops - to extinction" - Peter Martin (2008-05-18)

Disclosure:

• I cannot drink alcohol because of epilepsy and alcohol’s interactions with my medication.