There is also real indication to depict that declining supply and drinking time could assist in solving the binge drinking, as resulted in Finland, Sweden and Norway. (Lords Hansard text, 2005) Moreover, the Interim Analytical Report indicates that increasing amounts of consumption has been coupled with the increase during the last 25 years in accessibility. It continues to visualize that applications for on-licenses of alcohol have enhanced by 145% over the last two decades. The connection between enhanced accessibility and harm is in someway recognized. But despite suggesting for the regulations on this enormous expansion in supply, the 2003 Act makes the alcohol industry depend on a 'voluntary social responsibility scheme'. The Government is profoundly pressurized by the alcohol industry that promotes income as well as jobs. Therefore, any approaches that are not agreeable to or threat the profit of the alcohol industry have been discarded. Those related to the alcohol research or public health apparently do not exert the same impact in Government circles as that of the alcohol industry, alternatively the approach would have perceived quite varied, and inconvenient indication would not have been isolated from it. (Drummond, 2004, p. 377)
The alcohol industry seems to create about £30 billion annually for the Exchequer and provides employment to about 1 million individuals. Probably this has given rise to the oversight of many other facts. To illustrate, from 1960-2002 the consumption of alcohol in the UK has almost doubled. (Luty, 2005, p. 401) Alcohol now entails an overhead of over £20 billion annually to the tax payer by means of the aggregation of work, health, crime as well as social disorder associated costs: the largest published figures in current years. This is an expense of an average of about £2500 annually for each individual drinking over secured amounts in the nation. This evaluates against the £30 billion which the alcohol market generates every year. Alcohol has been resulted in 30,000 hospital entries as well as 22,000 premature deaths per annum, and about 70% of hospital entries to the a&E centers during the peak periods. The Government is not desirous of doing anything that would isolate the voting pubic and exerting restrictions on the drinking of the country could risk performing that. Hence it is really easy to fiddle at the side of the issue, instead of tackling it efficiently. (Drummond, 2004, p. 377) but a BBC poll brought out earlier this year indicates that about 67% of the persons consider that the Licensing Act would enhance trouble, with 62% depicting it would entail Britain a difficult location to live in. It is clear that there are serious considerations regarding such proposals. (Lords Hansard text, 2005)
To conclude, it may be said that this study has addressed the prospective influence of the Licensing Act of 2003 evolved with regard to the drinking in UK as well as the nature of variation that is anticipated to occur from expanded opening hours. The study reveals that the initiation of 24-hour licensing due to the 2003 Act, has failed in its attempts to deal the ever enhancing amount of alcohol issues, however it has also even facilitated the enhancing trend. The Licensing Act of 2003 is a mockery as well as a mess, and an administrative shambles; however a destructive and imprudent measure that would entail in increased crime as well as disorder, increased costs on the health service, and increased levels of young lives being affected by ailments and handicaps.
Drummond, Colin. D.2004. An Alcohol Strategy for England: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.
Alcohol & Alcoholism, 39(5), pp.377-379.
Goodacre, S. 2005. The 2003 Licensing Act: an act of stupidity? Emergency Medicine Journal, 22(1), p.682.
Ghodse, Hamind G. 2005. Addiction at Work: Tackling Drug Use and Misuse in the Workplace.