September 9, 2014
by Anne Miller
It was a magnificent day at Cherbourg for the recent rugby league grand finals.
Orange and white balloons tied everywhere left no confusion as to whom the local residents were supporting.
The sun was shining. The stands were packed. Marquees lined the oval. The ground was picture-perfect.
The football was fantastic.
So why I did finish up the day feeling so dispirited? And why did I miss taking photos of the U14s presentations after the Kingaroy Red Ants won?
The answer was the same. I was pulled over by police on the road into Cherbourg so my car could be checked to see if I was carrying alcohol.
Now, please don’t misunderstand me. The police were doing their job, enforcing the law. They were friendly and polite.
It’s the reason they were there at all that disturbs me.
Why does Queensland have laws that determine that certain people who live in a certain place are only entitled to drink a certain sort of alcohol?
The maximum amount of alcohol that a person can carry in Cherbourg Shire is one carton (30 x 375ml cans) of light or mid-strength beer.
No wine and no spirits are allowed.
Residents can be – and regularly are – charged if anything other than light or mid-strength beer is found in their homes.
According to a State Government website, the maximum fines for possessing illegal alcohol at Cherbourg are:
- First offence – 375 penalty units (currently $42,693),
- Second offence – 525 penalty units (currently $59,771) or 6 months imprisonment,
- Third or subsequent offence – 750 penalty units (currently $83,387) or 18 months imprisonment.
Vehicles found carrying alcohol above the set limits can be confiscated.
The fact that the Murgon and Cherbourg Magistrates court lists are regularly filled with the names of people charged for breaching these regulations is testament to what many Cherbourg residents feel about the laws.
They resent them. They try to get around them. They get caught …
The penalties imposed are nothing like the maximums set out in the legislation, but there’s a hidden cost. A criminal record hinders career prospects, bars you from certain types of employment and may prevent you from gaining a visa to travel overseas.
This is a hefty cost to pay because you like to drink “super” rather than “light” beer. Or may like a glass of wine, or a can of rum and coke …
The aim of the Alcohol Management Plan is to reduce alcohol-related violence.
But why should the residents of Cherbourg be singled out of special treatment in this respect?
It’s not as if alcohol-related violence doesn’t occur in Murgon, Wondai or Nanango. Kingaroy has a less than pretty record on many Friday and Saturday nights …
There are certainly residents in Cherbourg who have a problem with the grog. There are also residents in Cherbourg who don’t …
The only difference between the residents in Cherbourg and those in other towns in the South Burnett is simple.
They are Aboriginal.
No government would dare enact similar laws against the residents of Nanango or Kingaroy.
The majority of the residents in these towns are not Aboriginal.
The legislation that pulled me over the other weekend and made me miss my photos (sorry Red Ants!) differentiates solely on the basis of race.
It is racist.
How can any of us live with this?
You are absolutely correct and it’s a typical broad brush approach to solving a problem. If you can’t fix it easily, legislate against it. If you check the pubs in Murgon and Wondai and possibly other towns, there is/was a liquor accord in place restricting the quantity for a “take away” sale of alcohol, I would suspect that this would be applied at the discretion of the licensee yet seen to be towing the liquor and gaming line by placement of appropriate signage.