Hard News: Save the King's Arms
217 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 Newer→ Last
-
Probly got some Kenny G on his playlist and all - for entertaining th laydies, y'understand.
-
As for the cops, Tom, they'd rather stop all drinking (as opposed to going back to the "swill") because they spend so much time cleaning up the mess. Same with ER doctors. They see the worst outcomes of drinking on a daily basis, so is it any wonder that they're not enthused about ever-longer opening hours and wider availability of alcohol?
Those groups will always have an exaggerated view of any problem because of their roles.
If they don't like the way things are, they can always take up another career, or move to Saudi Arabia (probably more jobs for ER doctors than cops over there).
Doing a neccesary job in the frontline doesn't give you the right to decide policy. Firefighters might want petrol banned, but it isn't going to happen.
-
Rich, they are entitled to contribute the benefit of their experience to the people who do decide the policy, though. Or would you rather that health policy was decided without the input of medical professionals? That the military had no say on defence policy? Coz that's what you're advocating.
As for fire fighters wanting petrol banned, can't see it. They'd probably rather see stoves and cigarettes banned, given their strong role in preventable fire deaths. If you're going to deride the inclusion of emergency services in the policy-making processes, at least have a clue about what might give them cause for concern.
-
As for the cops and DUI, I doubt you'll find much support for him within the police
I certainly hope not, Matthew. But one might think a fraking instructor at the Police College (presumably a senior officer of some experience and judgment) would not get grossly intoxicated with his students; and a bar on the grounds of the Police College itself would be more than usually scrupulous about obeying the law. I'm kind of cranky about the idea that those who are put in positions of authority should practice what they preach -- especially when they're bitching and moaning for increased powers and restricting the freedoms of others.
-
I'm a little out of touch right now, having spent half this decade out of town, but over the previous ten years I was in Sydney some 36 times and Melbourne not a lot less and always came back to Ak feeling a little smug about what we had to offer which was a more than a bar or two with listenable music coupled with endless RSLs churning out that faceless oz-rawk so beloved in the Great Southern Land.
Gotta challenge that, at least for Melbourne's sake. That may be true for suburban waterholes, but the central city offered a huge range of places that were open right through the night. There was plenty of rawk, sure, but down all the little alleyways you'd find curious little places which were trying something different, bars just with live bands or DJs, people dancing, chilling, stand up comedy acts etc. The inner suburbs also made for excellent places to go out, with huge numbers of restaurants and bars intermingled, not just sports bars, but also student bars, dancing bars, live music etc. You just had to search a bit, or know people who knew where to look.
I don't think alcohol-abuse is the entire problem in Auckland because the Ozzies were big boozers, and it just didn't seem the same. Something about the atmosphere in Auckland is just different - there's simply an air of desperation and aggro hanging over it all the time. I don't feel safe in Auckland at night.
I don't know why - I'm inclined to think demographic issues play a large part.
-
and a bar on the grounds of the Police College itself would be more than usually scrupulous about obeying the law
Yes, that aspect of it did surprise me. Having spent a week there for a course at the beginning of the month (in no way related to the Police, just taking advantage of their very good facilities for running residential courses), with participants retiring to the bar every evening, the bar struck me as particularly well-run and compliant. Maybe they got a big shake-up as a result of this case, but they have a prominent sign at the bar saying that there will be no stock-piling of drinks before close. They're certainly now doing far more to discourage binging (to the extent of not selling jugs of beer) than is expected of any ordinary public house.
-
But one might think a fraking instructor at the Police College (presumably a senior officer of some experience and judgment) would not get grossly intoxicated with his students; and a bar on the grounds of the Police College itself would be more than usually scrupulous about obeying the law.
Heh. Clearly you haven't spent enough time in police bars.
The suggestion to bring them under the licensing law is a good one. They'll become more responsible venues once a couple of them get stung with $10,000 fines.
-
Gotta challenge that, at least for Melbourne's sake.
Certainly -- Saturday night was Grand Final day, and one thing I noticed on my way back from dinner in the CBD where we were staying is that there were a lot of people on the street, a LOT of (relatively low-key) Police officers walking the beat and a pronounced lack of aggro.
-
Heh. Clearly you haven't spent enough time in police bars.
Heh, I recall a tournament I went to once where the police team made such arseholes of themselves during the partying that they were never invited back. I've got a vivid imprint of a friend of mine being hurled headfirst by two large coppers along a table still covered in glasses and jugs of beer.
-
police bars.
The suggestion to bring them under the licensing law is a good one.
Sorry, what?! They're actually not under licensing law? For fuck's sake! Does that apply to any private bar (such as sporting clubs and volunteer fire brigades), or is it something that's peculiar to the police? How long's that been in the law, I wonder?
-
a LOT of Police officers walking the beat and a pronounced lack of aggro.
This is one thing that I think is nice about the Auckland CBD. The cops are out on foot, and are approachable - as witnessed by a friend's photo on Facebook of her and some drunk mates with a nonplussed-looking police sergeant. Could do with more of them, to be sure, but within funding constraints they seem to be making the effort to do real beat patrolling in the city.
I remember when Newmarket got its foot patrols back, crime dropped significantly and permanently in the area around Broadway. There's a lot to be said for police officers being right there on the pavement with the general public. -
Sorry, what?! They're actually not under licensing law?
Yup, see the story that Craig originally linked to.
-
Interesting. Looking at the Act (section 5), the exemption applies to police and fire station bars (pretty much every volunteer fire brigade has a social club with a bar), bars at defence establishments, and prison officers' bars. So it's not just the police who are excepted, but it is a very narrow exception. And given the role of the police in enforcing liquor licensing law, it seems like a particularly unfair one.
Getting rid of the exception (for all of the above, not just the police) would cause much bitching and griping from the affected parties, I'm sure, but it's an exception that I just don't feel is appropriate. I could understand continuation of the defence one, given the nature of military discipline and the confined nature of defence premises, but the others just don't fit. -
I had some army mates and whilst it was certainly interesting that their bars appeared to be always open and incredibly cheap ($5 for a litre jug of rum and coke, and $1 beers) there was little attraction about having to drive out to an army base to enjoy them, nor was hanging out with drunk soldiers my bag. But there seemed little chance of any trouble, unless the police showed up (see my previous comment). Milling around outside, you were brought to your senses by some guy in a balaclava holding an assault rifle stepping out of the bushes and telling you that you were not allowed to walk this way.
-
I remember when Newmarket got its foot patrols back, crime dropped significantly and permanently in the area around Broadway. There's a lot to be said for police officers being right there on the pavement with the general public.
By a country mile. Especially as opposed to Orwell-esque cop-out surveillance cameras.
-
Milling around outside, you were brought to your senses by some guy in a balaclava holding an assault rifle stepping out of the bushes and telling you that you were not allowed to walk this way.
Guaranteed to sober most people up.
-
By a country mile. Especially as opposed to Orwell-esque cop-out surveillance cameras.
Or rent-a-cops who seem more interested in causing trouble than stopping it.
-
Gotta challenge that, at least for Melbourne's sake.
Like I said, a little out of touch as my experience was half a decade or more back and I'm aware things have changed. Melbourne has always been the restaurant capital of Australasia, and had a great bar or two but I spent a fair amount of time traipsing the clubs and bars of it's inner city, often lead by DJs or record company folks and whilst the the venues existed, we demolished them in what was on offer musically.
It was a standing trans-tasman joke in the record industry as to how few copies of the more interesting things that labels had to offer were sold in Australia....say a Massive Attack record or a reggae disc which would sell in the low hundreds Australia wide and in the tens of thousands in NZ.
I used to enjoy the better places in the city but was aware that out there it was an alien culture. The huge difference is that the in NZ what was on offer in here often penetrated, given a little time, rather deeply into the out there. We are a far more adventurous culture.
-
Or rent-a-cops who seem more interested in causing trouble than stopping it.
I've had interesting discussions with an ex-Matrix guard of my acquaintance, who strongly suggests that a lot of the Matrix officers (many of whom are or used to be ex cops) are in it for the chance to knock heads. Given that they're almost an underground arm of the police in Auckland (I've heard of Matrix guards being involved in vehicle pursuits, searches for burglars, and various other things), it's just fortunate that we don't allow them to carry firearms.
-
they are entitled to contribute the benefit of their experience to the people who do decide the policy, though
Yes, in the form of a properly argued submission to the Minister / Select Committee available through the proper channels. Not in the form of sensationalist media outpourings.
-
Milling around outside, you were brought to your senses by some guy in a balaclava holding an assault rifle stepping out of the bushes and telling you that you were not allowed to walk this way.
Yeah, a few pubs in South Armagh used to be like that.
-
@Simon, well I can't really comment of the quality of the music from an artistic POV. Just saying they definitely got a pretty cool mood going that can be hard to find in Auckland.
-
It was a standing trans-tasman joke in the record industry as to how few copies of the more interesting things that labels had to offer were sold in Australia....say a Massive Attack record or a reggae disc which would sell in the low hundreds Australia wide and in the tens of thousands in NZ.
My housemate took the radio to East Timor earlier this year, and I can't say I'm missing it. To echo Simon, B-Net is a cultural institution and NZ is vastly richer for it. If you're an emerging band in Australia, and not marketable as a prepackaged product for the majors, there is one man who will make or break you - the programmer of Triple J, Richard Kingsmill. His tastes are rather bland.
Having that music on NZ radio fosters a better live scene. You're much more likely to go see something at the KA if you've heard them on the radio.
-
Something about the atmosphere in Auckland is just different - there's simply an air of desperation and aggro hanging over it all the time. I don't feel safe in Auckland at night.
I don't know why - I'm inclined to think demographic issues play a large part.
-
I held off on commenting, either in my private or public capacity, on the flip-flop of Messers Bhatnagar and Banks on Council's Liquor Policy reivew. A wave seems to have diverted all attention.
However, in my private capacity I can say the following;
I once knew a guy whose father used to be a Red Squad member then a Chief Inspector before becoming a liquor licensing inspector. Back in the 90's if I bumped into him he'd tell me which bars he wanted to close down. Most of them were busy. The busier they were the more trouble would be blamed on them. The idea was that if someone got drunk at a bar and went out and caused a crime then it was the bar's fault. The police kept (and probably still do keep) these stats and supplied them to the council. So if your bar was popular and served a broad social group you were much more likely to be shut down. The police viewpoint on bars is very much about "policing" them. The council's viewpoint shouldn't be - it should be about delivering what ratepayers want. By employing cops as liquor licensing inspectors our viewpoint is being lost. If they want to shut a bar they will.
All true. I used to work in the District Licensing Agency (DLA) at Auckland City Council. There were and still are two Licensing Inspectors who are ex-cops, the third one rose through the admin ranks. It wasn't till about 2000 that a move towards 'policing' became the norm i.e. using stats gathered from intelligence (duh: asking the drunk where he had his last drink) and the DLA worked with Police to put pressure on these places.
To be fair it wasn't for the purposes of shutting them down - more for the purposes of complying with the Act i.e. not supplying liquor to drunks. Most bars complied after pressure, but there are some that don't seem to get the message.
Sticking my elected rep hat on I'll say the following;
The Mayor's decision to pull the policy (and note, this is by no means clear - Council staff are still saying 'make submissions!') could be seen as a response to Simon Power's musings about the Law Commission's report on Liquor Legislation. But I suspect that this is not the case. Ad-hoc decision making is a feature of most local government of whatever stripe.
However, to pull this policy debate ignores the real issue of liquor abuse in our communities. We could fiddle around with hours and the like, but essentially, the 'entertainment precincts' would have simply magnified to a very real extent the problem of liquor abuse in communities; no amount of fiddling is going to deal with that problem.
Either we acknowledge the problem and tax/restrict the hell out of it, or we pay for the consequences with police attending violent incidents, and doctors patching up drunk teenagers at A&E.
Tom said
Auckland DOES need a new liquor policy - but here is an idea, how about you take a holistic view of the matter - for example, look at things like at least ameliorating the worst of bad planning by offering to subsidise the retro-fitting of double or triple glazing and air conditioning in inner city apartments?
I would point out that if one tried to put into place such subsidy Council would never hear the end of it, and for good reason. The better route is via implementation of high built environment standards, but as we all know, high quality standards have never been a particularly strong suit of Auckland City developers, despite their union wringing their hands; they want to make their money fast and get out of there quick. Low standards suit them only and bugger everyone else.
C'n'R are, well, 'subsidised' by developers so it is unlikely they will ever institute high standards, and if City Vision try, they get billboards and Granny Herald thundering about nanny state and campaigns by Granny to toss out City Vision.
Matthew said:
The impression is very much of a bunch of political hacks who, fearing for their futures, are determined to try and ensure that their obnoxious utopia is presented as an option for Megatropolis when all the existing legislation from across the region is eventually rationalised.
There is an extraordinary amount of this going on. The ordinary punter in the street has not a clue about how their future city is right now being shaped - by officers and by elected representatives, but generally by an un-elected bunch of businessmen (with the token Maori businesswoman).
For example, the Auckland Transition Authority has called for tenders for provision of professional services. The tender call was for one week only. The services were for diverse work-streams, among those, rationalising seven district plans into one. You do realise that communities are shut out of this exercise? That you may find yourself with a development in your street that you never had a chance to discuss, let alone agree to. Are you not worried?
Rodney's gift of planning control is astonishingly under-handed - he's handed planning to corporate control, effectively.
Tom said:
I read some travel writer somewhere saying we don't do cities well in New Zealand, that the "real" New Zealand is out there in the provinces, as if real New Zealanders spend their lives doing bunging jumping hakas onto jetboats that are zooming across the surface of active volcanoes.
Yet Auckland occupies a pivotal and critical role in our nation’s cultural life. Auckland is our only proper city, and therefore is unique in being the only truly urban New Zealand experience in the entire universe. The obvious importance of this is completely missed in the policy making mix. The cultural and economic value of the bright lights of a large urban area in retaining and attracting desirable BYTs and fostering our cultural identity as something other than as a bunch of Ed Hillary mini-me’s is scorned or ignored, and to me this stunts our growth as a cultural nation.
All to depressingly true. The RMA, crafted by National party, deliberately shunned any recognition for urban areas, or for the elephant in the room, Auckland. That was a blend of Wellington's fear of Auckland, and neo-liberal view of an individual property rights to do whatever the hell (usually) he liked which reduced Auckland to equivalence with Alexandra, Ashburton and Waiouru. Doing whatever you liked is the same there as in Auckland. Therefore there is no need to acknowledge Auckland as an urban area unique to Aotearoa.
Matthew said in response to the question:
what the hell do you have to do to actually lose your liquor license in this country?
Good question. One that I think you'd need to ask the judiciary, not the cops. Revoking liquor licences goes through the courts - due process and other such commie nonsense - rather than being something that a given police officer can decide looks like a good idea on the night.
Actually it is very hard to lose your liquor licence. Very hard. The Liquor Licensing Commission has never ever revoked a licence. Conversely, it is ridiculously easy to get one.
Basically once you have one, you are set for life.
There ends my elected rep discourse. Whipping off said hat...
Post your response…
This topic is closed.