@15 PAAC is unincorporated, and there is no formal procedure …

Comment on Grog stats may be useless as they do not include online and mail orders by Vicki Gillick.

@15 PAAC is unincorporated, and there is no formal procedure for becoming a member, although members must (naturally) support the aims of the group. These can be found on the website: www.paac.org.au
PAAC maintains a list of approximately 75 supporters with whom we are in frequent contact. About 30 of these people are actively involved in PAAC activities, most of them representing local non-government organisations including churches, unions, health services, service providers and community groups.
PAAC conducts monthly ninety-minute meetings, the details, agenda and minutes of which are circulated to our mailing list members.
Vicki Gillick, PAAC Policy Co-ordinator (part-time)

Recent Comments by Vicki Gillick

NT a ‘bully state’ with new criminalisation of drunkenness
How will the Alcohol Protection Orders – APOs – work? Why do we say that these will re-criminalise public drunkenness through the ‘back door’ and turn the clock back 30 years?
We haven’t seen the legislation yet and we won’t until June according to Minister Dave Tollner. But this is what we know from his public statements:
Alcohol Protection Orders will issued to people charged (but not yet convicted) of an offence where alcohol is involved and which carries maximum penalty of at least six months in gaol. There are many such offences, including most drink-driving offences, property offences, disorderly behaviour and assaults. APOs will be separately issued – that is, not by the officer who charges the person with the original alleged offence – and they will have to be issued by a Sergeant or someone of higher rank.
If a person breaches their APO, for example, if they drink anywhere (including at home), are drunk in public, enter licensed premises whether or not they drink alcohol there, buys or possesses alcohol, they will be in breach and face penalties of fines or prison sentence for the breach. This is regardless of whether they have at this stage been convicted of the original offence. If police find a person in circumstances that constitute a breach, they will be charged with that breach. It will be a stand-alone offence but APOs themselves will ‘fall away’ if there is a finding of not guilty on the original charge. A charge of breaching an APO would not.
Example:
I am charged whilst drunk with a property offence with a maximum penalty of three years’ imprisonment.
I am bailed on the property charge to appear in court three weeks later and will be saying I am not guilty.
I am also given – separately – an APO because of the alcohol-related property charge.
While on bail for the property charge I have a beer at the pub. A police officer sees me, checks out my details and I am charged with breaching the APO.
I go to the pub again but don’t drink alcohol, but am charged with a second breach for being on licensed premises.
I am found not guilty on the original charge but I still have to deal with two charges of breaching the APOs, one by having a beer and another by just being in a pub.
This is how the NT Government is re-criminalising public drunkenness, or in this case, not even drunkenness but merely having a drink or being on licensed premises – a backward step through the ‘back door.’


LETTER: The Banned Drinkers Register did NOT work
@4Geez Steve Brown, is that bloody !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! key stuck down on your machine – maybe from being thumped too often?


LETTER: The Banned Drinkers Register did NOT work
That pretty well sums it up Hal. We keep getting the knowingly false line that police statistics “prove” that the BDR didn’t work, when we know that these are just one data set that should not be used alone to assess the BDR. How about a proper evaluation, at least, looking at hospital and other relevant data? In the meantime anyone with eyes to see can observe the slide in social amenity as the police struggle to cover each take-away outlet in Alice every day. Hope all those who were so inconvenienced – according to the NT Government – by showing ID are similarly put out by the sad sight of more drunken people, broken glass and general disarray in the town.


Sick of waiting for a music scene, they made one
Looking forward to it Hugh Man. Might have to represent the family with Dektron the boy heading off! Break a leg.


Mood change in council on grog issues?
NT Licensing Commission decisions (and reasons for decisions) can be found on its website:

http://www.nt.gov.au/justice/commission/decisions.shtml
Go through the alphabetical list to find the one you want to read.


Be Sociable, Share!