Colin Clarke, Ocean Shores
Hans Lovejoy’s article on the Dan Murphy’s ‘super grog shop’ is a classic example of how to confuse the issues when supposedly reporting events to the community.
For starters let’s look at how other countries such as France (regarded as a socialist-left society and therefore a place where our left-leaning denizens would be comfortable).
The French buy their alcoholic beverages in the same stores that they buy food and the like. Your beer and wine etc are merely products on the store shelf, just like anything else. Even more strikingly, when pulling into the petrol station in rural areas to purchase your baguette you can also buy beer and wine!
Do the French have alcohol-misuse or underage binge-drinking problems? Yes, they do actually, but no worse than here and probably less.
Where is the logic that substantiates the view that two liquor outlets are worse than one and three are even worse? If people are going to abuse alcohol they will do so no matter how many outlets there are.
So ‘15 year old Haley put it into context. Haley is often approached by spruikers from local bars and backpackers offering to buy her drinks.’
This has absolutely nothing to do with a retail liquor outlet; it is a problem for the nightclubs, and with the quite horrendous fines likely for staff selling alcohol to minors this is most unlikely. But then what is 15-year-old Haley doing out on the streets at night? This is a problem for her parents.
Let’s be honest, please. The problem for those opposing Dan Murphy’s is that it is owned by Woolworths. If this additional outlet in town were owned by a local person purveying your organic and gluten-free beers and wine (not yeast-free, sadly) they would be welcomed with open arms.