Search

Introduction: Police-issued barring notices are currently used in Western Australia in response to alcohol-related disorderly and anti-social behaviour. This paper examines the type, severity and trajectory of the offending behaviours associated with served barring notices., Method: WA Police Force de-identified the data for 3815 individuals who had received one or more police-imposed barring notice/s between 2011 and 2020. The offence category associated with each barring notice was examined to explore the overall breakdown and whether/how offending categories change for recipients of subsequent barring notices., Results: For single and multiple barring notice recipients, the most common offence categories were fighting/physical violence and public order offences. Within a subset of the data, non-anti-social offences also spiked. Aggressive behaviours predominate for recipients in metropolitan areas, compared with public order offences in regional locations., Discussion and Conclusions: For recipients of multiple barring notices, behaviours do not become more serious but neither do they moderate to any notable extent. The low number of repeat barring notices (5%) may suggest an overall beneficial effect on recipient behaviours but more analysis is needed to examine the potential confounding effects of factors, such as fly-in/fly-out workers, policing and locational differences., (© 2024 The Author(s). Drug and Alcohol Review published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australasian Professional Society on Alcohol and other Drugs.)

Objective: With same-day online alcohol sales increasing, there is a need to study their regulation. Test purchasing of alcohol home delivery was conducted to measure compliance with regulations for identification checks and unattended deliveries in two Australian jurisdictions (Perth, Western Australia, and Geelong, Victoria), which have differing regulations., Method: Alcohol orders for same-day or rapid (<2 hours) delivery on Friday and Saturday nights were made by research assistants ages 18-24 years in Perth ( n = 34) and Geelong ( n = 29). An observation checklist was used to record the delivery interaction, with a specific focus on checking photo identification at the time of delivery and whether deliveries were left unattended., Results: The average time from order to delivery for rapid deliveries was less than 1 hour in both sites (Perth = 50 minutes; Geelong = 36 minutes). More than 20% of deliveries were made without an identification check in both sites (Perth = 24%; Geelong = 21%)., Conclusions: This pilot study showed that alcohol can be delivered to the home within 1 hour, and not all deliveries include an identification check at the point of delivery. These findings indicate a need for policies that empower regulators and police to undertake "mystery shopper" monitoring to reduce potential harms and improve compliance with alcohol delivery policy.

Introduction: Variation in alcohol availability is an important driver of levels of consumption and harm, with recent increases in online alcohol home delivery use expanding availability. There is limited research on the impacts of these changes and the characteristics of consumers who use alcohol home delivery., Methods: This study presents findings from an online survey (n = 465) of Western Australian adults who had purchased alcohol for home delivery within the past 6 months. Analyses compared high-risk and low-risk drinkers on use of, and exposure to, alcohol home delivery., Results: Compared to low-risk drinkers, high-risk drinkers were significantly more likely to make more frequent online purchases (odds ratio 5.42), utilise same day delivery (odds ratio 2.91) and purchase through specialised online-only retailers (odds ratio 2.69). High-risk drinkers also reported receiving deliveries while intoxicated more often (odds ratio 11.62), and ordering alcohol for delivery to continue a current drinking session (odds ratio 7.47). High-risk drinkers also received advertising for alcohol home delivery more frequently (odds ratio 1.60) than low-risk drinkers. High-risk drinkers also ordered larger quantities of alcohol than low-risk drinkers (M = 49 vs. 32 standard drinks)., Discussion and Conclusions: Findings from this study indicate that these services are popular with high-risk drinkers and potentially undermine other policy efforts to reduce drinking. Within Australia, stronger legislation (such as mandatory delay between order and delivery) and monitoring (e.g., test purchasing for compliance) are recommended., (© 2023 The Authors. Drug and Alcohol Review published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australasian Professional Society on Alcohol and other Drugs.)

Introduction: Individuals who engage in problematic behaviours within Australian night-time entertainment precincts can be banned from entering certain locations. Bans are expected to deter recipients, and prospective recipients, from further inappropriate behaviours. The collective effect is intended to reduce crime and increase community safety within entertainment precincts. This article explores key informant perspectives regarding the enforcement of two patron banning mechanisms (police barring notices and prohibition orders) used across Western Australia., Methods: Interviews were conducted with 54 participants, including licensees, venue staff, WA Police officers, ID scanner representatives, and Registered Training Organisations., Results: Few participants opposed patron banning in principle, but most identified limitations within the current operation of both provisions. Concerns were expressed about the effectiveness of enforcement, linked to questions about the way in which banned patron information is currently shared and the practicalities of identifying recipients of bans. Suggestions included improved data-sharing protocols and the wider use of ID scanners., Discussion/conclusion: With improvements to operational processes-particularly more effective sharing of banned patron data, and consideration of networked ID scanners-there is clear potential to improve the enforcement and increase the effectiveness of police barring notices and prohibition orders. This study is part of a wider project which has examined the use and effects of patron banning in WA. Additional findings are presented in further papers., (© 2023 The Authors. Drug and Alcohol Review published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australasian Professional Society on Alcohol and other Drugs.)

Introduction: To explore whether receipt of either of two patron banning provisions currently used in Western Australia-in response to alcohol-related disorderly and anti-social behaviour-is associated with changes to subsequent offending., Method: Western Australia Police de-identified the offender records and associated data for 3440 individuals who had received one or more police-imposed barring notice/s between 2011 and 2020, and 319 individuals who had received one or more prohibition orders between 2013 and 2020. The number of offences recorded for each recipient before and after the first notice/order were examined to understand the potential effect of both provisions upon subsequent offending., Results: The low number of repeat barring notices (5% of the total) and prohibition orders (1% of the total) points to their general success. Analysis of offending records before and after receipt/expiry of either provision indicates that both have a generally positive effect on subsequent behaviours. For all barring notice recipients, 52% recorded no further offences and for all prohibition order recipients, 58% recorded no further offences. There was a less positive effect for the sub-set of multiple ban recipients and prolific offenders., Discussion and Conclusions: Barring notices and prohibition orders appear to have a generally positive effect on subsequent behaviours for the majority of recipients. More targeted interventions are recommended for repeat offenders, for whom patron banning provisions have a more limited effect., (© 2023 The Authors. Drug and Alcohol Review published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australasian Professional Society on Alcohol and other Drugs.)