Street drinking in Lewisham consultation

[admin]

Lewisham Press Release just received:

Tackling street drinking in Lewisham

Plans to trial a borough-wide Designated Public Order (or Drinking Control Zone) have been given the go-ahead by the Mayor, Sir Steve Bullock.

Before the pilot can be put in place, Lewisham Council must conduct a public consultation so that people have an opportunity to express their views.

The Designated Public Order will give police a discretionary the powers to stop people and confiscate, demand and dispose of any alcohol within the boundaries of Lewisham borough.

The DPPO is not a ban on alcohol consumption in a public place, and does not make drinking in a public an offence, but is a measure that can assist in tackling problematic street drinking linked to anti-social behaviour. The intention of the DPPO is to provide police with a tool to address alcohol-related disorder in a quick and effective way. Failure to comply with a request from the Police to hand over alcohol can result in arrest and/or a fine of up to £500.

The DPPO would be reviewed following a 6-month trial period.

Mayor of Lewisham, Sir Steve Bullock, said: “Lewisham Council has worked closely with Lewisham Police, the community and stakeholders.

“The difficult issue of anti-social behaviour brought about by street drinking needs to be tackled and the implementation of a pilot borough-wide DPPO will enable us to review its effectiveness and look at our options, once the results have been analysed at the end of the pilot.”

Borough Commander, Detective Chief Superintendent Jeremy Burton, said: “The use of this power is not directed at stopping people drinking responsibly in public; it is a further tactic in our drive to reduce anti-social behaviour associated with alcohol abuse and misuse. We will continue to work with Lewisham Council and our communities in combating alcohol related disorder and I look forward to the results of this pilot.”

Before the implementation of any DPPO, the Council is required by law to consult with the public. To take part in the consultation go to www.lewisham.gov.uk and click on the ‘Check our active consultations’ and then ‘Lewisham Designated Public Place Order’.

Alternatively, comments can be emailed to communitysafety at lewisham.gov.uk .

The consultation ends on 27 August.

[michael]

The Designated Public Order will give police a discretionary the powers to stop people and confiscate, demand and dispose of any alcohol within the boundaries of Lewisham borough.

No mention of 'in public places'. This means that the police will have the powers to confiscate alcohol from my fridge or from Sainsburys whenever they want to 'dispose' of some.

[Robin Orton]

Michael said:

This means that the police will have the powers to confiscate alcohol from my fridge or from Sainsburys whenever they want to 'dispose' of some.

Don't think so, unless Michael is implausibly naughty in the privacy of his kitchen . The consultation document says (my underlining):

The order does not ban drinking in public places but enables police officers to ask people to stop drinking where they have reason to believe that alcohol-related nuisance and annoyance is likely to occur. In addition an officer has the power to ask that person to hand over the alcohol in their possession.

These powers are not intended to disrupt peaceful activities. They are only used to tackle nuisance or annoyance associated with drinking alcohol in a public place.

It is not a criminal offence to drink alcohol within this designated area. An offence is only committed if a person refuses to obey a police officer’s request to stop drinking.

[poppy]

As far as I recall, other parts of the borough had some sort of ban, will these still be in place or will they be removed and all areas subject to the same rules?

I think if this is not the case we will still get street drinkers from other areas coming to Sydenham because they might see it as a soft touch and if there is a stronger ban in Penge they might head up here too.

[bensonby]

The "bans" that are already in place in parts of the borough and elsewhere are not "bans" they are drinking-control zones, exactly what is being proposed here.

The legal power is under s.12 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001.

That allows a constable in uniform to seize any alcohol on a person who is or has been, or he reasonably believes will be, consuming alcohol in a designated public place and can tell them not to consume alcohol in said place.

Failure to comply with the constable's direction is an offence.

It is an entirely discretionary power...



will it work? Well, Rushy Green has been a "designated public place" for ages....are there any street drinkers there?

Do you want it? - well, do you want police officer's arresting alcoholics for drinking or would you like them to turn up when your burgled/mugged/assaulted?

Is it worth processing some of these people for, say, four hours in Lewisham's Custody when we all know that they'll be at it again tomorrow...

[michael]

I'm glad to know that the consultation document is worded better than the press release which refers to 'any alcohol within the boundaries of Lewisham borough'.

[Eagle]

Street drinking is a curse. Surely people should drink in licensed establishments only.

[Bram]

Bensonby:

Whether I want

police officer's arresting alcoholics for drinking or would you like them to turn up when your burgled/mugged/assaulted?

depends partly on whether said police officers use apostrophes correctly when entering it in their notebooks. Is there a literacy test at Hendon? Or is that just for applicants for British citizenship?

[bigbadwolf]

Do you want it? - well, do you want police officer's arresting alcoholics for drinking or would you like them to turn up when your burgled/mugged/assaulted?

Bensonby,

I'm sure you're fully aware that we'd rather the MET's resouces were focused on arresting and convicting violent criminals. But then I'm equally sure you're just falling back on an age old ultimatum, as usual.

I, for one, know that there are acceptable levels of public drinking. Sharing a few cans in the park with friends whilst being reserved and courteous to fellow members of the public. The "street drinkers" under discussion don't fall within the above description. No, they're at the other end of the spectrum. Not the timid loners who sit on a park bench staring into the distance whilst sipping on a few cans of Kestral. No, the people who are a niusance are the band of chavvy cider slaves who camp out in some public thoroughfare with bottles of the cheapest bottles of Cider/battery acid who have drunk themselves stupid by noon. They then proceed to beg, bother and accost any passing member of the public they think will cave in to their demands.

All that we ask of the people we pay to Police our streets is that they take a tough line with the persistent offenders who are in the same spot, day in and day out, for years. Bringing the tone down and creating a tense atmosphere wearever they choose to settle for the day. That means taking their alcohol off of them and pouring it down the drain. Not, like i saw several days ago, hanging about and genially chatting with them and swapping a few jokes.

[Eagle]

Did you say the Gentlemen of the Law were casually chatting to these oafs when they should be arresting them.
I do agree with minimum pricing for alcohol but the figure being discussed at 50 pence a unit is to low. Even Wetherspoon Penge charge GBP 1.95 a pint that is 2 units.
Price per unit should be Minimum 75 pence.
This will not in the least concern any Pub visitor who will still be paying a lot more.
I remember a time when you could only buy alcohol in Pubs or off licenses which had strict opening hours . Should we not return to those days.
Used to Old Man West on corner of Newlands Park and Sydenham Road and he did not open 24/7.

[bensonby]

Bensonby,

I'm sure you're fully aware that we'd rather the MET's resouces were focused on arresting and convicting violent criminals. But then I'm equally sure you're just falling back on an age old ultimatum, as usual.

It is a oft-used argument but it's one that demonstrates a truth: one of simple arithmetic.

Do you have any idea how many police constables are on duty at any one time available to answer calls in the London Borough of Lewisham [population 250,000,000]?

Coupled with that do you know, even roughly, the volume of calls that are made to the police in the borough in any 24 hour period?



Now, combine this with the fact that it takes approximately 4 hours (on a good day) to process a prisoner for even the most minor offence.

It simply comes down to the question of do you want police constables to be responding emergency calls or do you want them to be nicking people for not surrendering their drink? It is, unfortunately, often a toss up between the two. There simply aren't enough police officers to provide a reassuring proactive patrolling presence and an effective response capability: with impending cutbacks this situation isn't going to get any better. In any case, would you be willing to pay lots more tax for many more police officers?

They then proceed to beg, bother and accost any passing member of the public they think will cave in to their demands.

As I've pointed out many many times - but to which no-one seems to aknowledge - these are already offences....why are new illiberral powers needed?

The last governmen have introduced many many new offences in law - have they had any wonderful tangible results? As I mentioned above, there is a drinking control zone in Rushey Green, are there any fewer street drinkers there now?

Powers and laws aren't some kind of panacea against the ills of society: They certainly aren't when there aren't any more resources employed to enforce them.

[michael]

Do you have any idea how many police constables are on duty at any one time available to answer calls in the London Borough of Lewisham [population 250,000,000]?

Coupled with that do you know, even roughly, the volume of calls that are made to the police in the borough in any 24 hour period?

I think statistics should not be completly trusted from somebody who thinks that the population of Lewisham is greater than that of the USA.

[bensonby]

Apologies. The population is, of course, about 250 thousand. Not 250 million!

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[JeeBee]

Price per unit should be Minimum 75 pence.
This will not in the least concern any Pub visitor who will still be paying a lot more.
I remember a time when you could only buy alcohol in Pubs or off licenses which had strict opening hours . Should we not return to those days.

Lets not return to the days of 11pm pub closures and the like, they belong to another age.

However pubs should be forced to provide adequate seating for patrons (none of these 'drink loads whilst standing' bars - people who stand have to hold their drink, so they drink quicker, so they buy more drink). Also pubs should be forced to offer cheaper soft drinks as an alternative.

Minimum pricing per unit will force some of the cheaper brands off the market, and make cheap super-strengths unviable (which as they taste nasty, isn't a bad thing). I think starting at 40p/unit (£1 for a 500ml can of 5% lager, £1.60 for an 8% super-strength), then going up 5p every year for four or five years will suffice to get the system in place smoothly, eradicate supermarket cheap deals (~50p/can multipacks), and so on. At 60p/unit it would be £1.50 for a can of 5% lager, which is getting a bit high, but probably okay in four years' time.

A balance has to be found - it's not about punishing the people who want a few drinks in their own home after work (regardless of their earnings), it's about reducing under-age drinking and excessive consumption in the street. Of course the latter people drink because their lives are totally crap, I think I'd want to drown my sorrows in their situation.

[Eagle]

Michael the population of the USA is estimated at 310 million , not below 250 million.

What was wrong with 11pm closing and 10.30 on Sundays . Do people really need to drink all night.
I think good old Tony B made a big mistake bringing in this all night culture, one of many mistakes he made. I will not be rushing to Waterstones for his book signings.

I appreciate the Police are busy and have a lot of ground to cover but one poster was stating that some Police Officers were standing chatting with them in a friendly way rather than disposing of their alcohol and giving them a caution. This would not have required extra Police time.

[michael]

Eagle,
My apologies.
I was going to write more than 3 times the population of Britain or more than the population of Russia but by the time I had been through all the permutations I ended up with the simple comparison of approximately quarter of a billion people. As you point out the population of the USA (which was closer to 250,000,000 when I was at school) is now well over 300,000,000.

All the suggestions about adding cost to drink - how long until crack is cheaper than a hit of alcohol? At the very least there will be a crime wave as alcoholics find it easier to steal a litre of vodka than to buy a can of special.

The whole point of this initiative is to allow police to confiscate alcohol without any paperwork and the use of prison cells. On the whole I think this is a good thing, but is depends how much power we are willing to give police without any safeguards. Arbitary powers for the police are not always a good idea.

[Eagle]

Thanks Michael I agree with most of your comments.