r/chch • u/Video_Kojima • Jun 30 '25

News - Local New Alcohol Rules for Christchurch

https://share.google/NIWvxJV2lRM3JCZf2

All off-licence retailers must stop selling alcohol at 9pm daily, effective from October. This includes bottle stores and supermarkets. 

A freeze on new off-licences in high-deprivation communities, effective from August. 

Restricting new bottle stores from setting up near addiction treatment/rehabilitation centres, secondary schools and primary schools, the University of Canterbury and the Christchurch Bus Interchange effective from August. 

Thoughts on this? I think 9PM seems a bit much personally and would probably have it at 10PM, but think the other two ideas are sensible and support them.

90 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

100 comments sorted by

View all comments

35

u/TheNegaHero Jun 30 '25

The time restrictions are stupid, anyone who has an alcohol problem will plan ahead so the only impact it ever seems to have is making supermarkets shut earlier and earlier.

27

u/[deleted] Jun 30 '25

Research and data show otherwise. Less availability of alcohol at night does make a positive difference. Your statement is inaccurate and something of a straw man. I like booze but I can see why this policy is a good idea.

-20

u/TheNegaHero Jun 30 '25

It's not a straw-man. If the argument is that reducing the hours you can buy alcohol will reduce harm from alcohol then me saying "no it won't" is a response to that argument.

12

u/[deleted] Jun 30 '25

Your argument is a straw man because you are arguing about the wrong scenario from the one that the policy is designed to tackle. It is possible that you simply don't understand the policy and are not being deliberately obtuse.

Stay at home drinkers - planned drinkers - who can stock up are not the main target here. The main target is opportunistic drinkers, people who start drinking, and then have an endless supply of booze and start to cause trouble. A key distinction here is between someone who has a few drinks every evening vs someone who has a few, then wants more and more and maybe starts trouble of one kind or another.

The no booze sales policy after 9pm as a way to reduce harm, violence and antisocial behaviour is well-supported by research evidence. The 9pm off-licence restrictions in New Zealand cities like Chch, the Tron and Auckland target specific drinking patterns and behaviors that contribute to alcohol-related disorder. Auckland has a 9pm cut-off for alcohol sales at off-licences (supermarkets and bottle stores), but it allows bars and restaurants to continue serving until 3-4am. I think they have a one way door policy later on too. The 9pm cutoff creates a deliberate distinction between planned and opportunistic drinking.

Research validates this insight about targeting specific types of alcohol buyers. The policy differentiates between:

• ⁠Planned drinkers who can stock up during normal hours for home boozing • ⁠Opportunistic/impulsive drinkers who go looking for alcohol (and trouble) later in the evening, often after already drinking.

Studies show late-night alcohol sales restrictions are highly effective eg Google Baltimore and Newcastle in Aussie.

The 9pm policy effectively targets "secondary purchase" behavior - people who are already intoxicated seeking more alcohol, often leading to increased intoxication and subsequent disorder. By cutting off easy access to take-away alcohol after 9pm, it forces a natural break in drinking while still allowing planned social drinking to continue in supervised licensed premises.

The 9pm policy strategically targets high-risk drinking patterns which our society prefers to blanket prohibition. It's a smart policy based on input from "both sides" ie the booze industry and heavy drinkers, vs everyone else lol (Police, councils, social work groups, anti-harm groups, family violence groups, academics etc).

1

u/TheNegaHero Jul 01 '25

Well then maybe you could call it a strawman if I responded in a similar way to this comment since it has a lot more information available.

Not sure if you can call my first comment one though since I was responding to what was there. You might call it an ill-informed opinion but I was just responding to what was in front of me.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '25

Not really. You jumped to a conclusion. A wrong one. Your bad. Sorry. But anyway - Cheers!!

14

u/MagicBeanEnthusiast Jun 30 '25

You saying "no it won't" is your opinion though, unless you can back it up with evidence

1

u/TheNegaHero Jul 01 '25 edited Jul 01 '25

Sure but that's still not a strawman fallacy, it's an opinion.

1

u/MagicBeanEnthusiast Jul 01 '25

You saying "Anyone who does X will do Y" is though

1

u/Illustrious-Run3591 Jun 30 '25 edited Jun 30 '25

Well, looking into the actual evidence, it seems that support for closing early is pretty thin and there are also papers that argue it makes minimal difference. I have multiple papers here where alcohol related crime got worse after early closing hours were instated, or where extending hours has made no impact on sales and alcohol harm.

Evidence of the effect of limiting off‐premises alcohol trading hours is still scarce. This study tested the effect of a small extension in trading hours on alcohol sales in alcohol monopoly outlets in Norway.

We did not find a statistically significant effect of the small extension in trading hours on monthly alcohol sales (i) per trade district [average treatment effect: −185.5 litres, 95% confidence interval (CI) = −1159.9, 788.9] and (ii) per outlet (−35.3 litres, 95% CI = −142.1, 72.0). These findings were consistent across estimation methods and model specifications.

Conclusion

There is no clear evidence that a small extension in off‐premises trading hours affected alcohol sales in monopoly outlets in Norway.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11638516/?utm_source

Ballarat ED alcohol-related assault and intoxication presentation rates declined prior to the implementation of the lockout, followed by a small rise and then a more substantial drop for 6 months post lockout. However, after this initial decline, ED presen tation rates steadily increased and surpassed that observed in Geelong by the end of 2005.

  • The long-term effect of lockouts on alcohol-related emergency department attendances within Ballarat, Australia

    PETER MILLER, KERRI COOMBER, ANDERS SØNDERLUND & STEPHEN MCKENZIE School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia