KEY POINTS:
I suppose it was no surprise that the bill to lift the age of purchase and supply of liquor from 18 back to 20 was voted down. The Government's 11th-hour announcement of a review of underage drinking certainly helped sway the undecideds into voting for the status quo.
There are certainly problems with the number of young - and by young, I mean very young - people getting their hands on booze. And I don't blame the police and health professionals for wanting the age to go back up.
They're the ones that have to deal with the intoxicated kids who've given underage drinking such a bad name. But it seems absurd that 18-year-olds can't have a drink - legally - when they're able to do so many other things. And while some commentators argue we should raise the age at which teenagers can vote, have sex and marry rather than lower the age at which they can drink, I disagree.
Most young people are working and/or studying in tertiary institutions by the age of 18. They're paying taxes, living their own lives, running households and learning their way in life, and that includes learning to drink, and learning what's acceptable.
It's the country's attitude to alcohol that needs looking at, not just the attitude of our teens. And as with all our laws, why don't we start enforcing the ones we have and start prosecuting the young drinkers and their families, as well as the liquor outlets that supply them?
A bit more enforcement and a lot more accountability would go a long way to solving a problem that we shouldn't expect the Government to fix.
