\u2018Sly grog\u2019 and \u2018homebrew\u2019: a qualitative examination of illicit alcohol and some of its impacts on Indigenous communities with alcohol restrictions in regional and remote Queensland (Australia)

Michelle S Fitts,Valmae Ypinazar,Alan R Clough,Adrian Miller,Stephen Margolis,Simon Towle,Jan Robertson,Robyn Mcdermott,Chris M Doran

doi:10.1186/s13104-017-2691-9

Abstract

BackgroundIndigenous communities in Queensland (Australia) have been subject to Alcohol Management Plans since 2002/03, with significant penalties for breaching restrictions. ‘Sly grog’ and ‘homebrew’ provide access to alcohol despite restrictions. This paper describes how this alcohol is made available and the risks and impacts involved. In affected towns and communities across a large area of rural and remote Queensland, interviews and focus groups documented experiences and views of 255 long-standing community members and service providers. Using an inductive framework, transcribed interviews were analysed to identify supply mechanisms, community and service provider responses and impacts experienced.Results‘Homebrew’ was reportedly manufactured in just a few localities, in locally-specific forms bringing locally-specific harms. However, ‘sly grog’ sourced from licensed premises located long distances from communities, is a widespread concern across the region. ‘Sly grog’ sellers circumvent retailers’ takeaway liquor license conditions, stockpile alcohol outside restricted areas, send hoax messages to divert enforcement and take extraordinary risks to avoid apprehension. Police face significant challenges to enforce restrictions. On-selling of ‘sly grog’ appears more common in remote communities with total prohibition. Despite different motives for involvement in an illicit trade ‘sly grog’ consumers and sellers receive similar penalties.ConclusionsThere is a need for: (a) a more sophisticated regional approach to managing takeaway alcohol sales from licensed suppliers, (b) targeted penalties for ‘sly grog’ sellers that reflect its significant community impact, (c) strategies to reduce the demand for alcohol and (d) research to assess the effects of these strategies in reducing harms.

Highlights

Indigenous communities in Queensland (Australia) have been subject to Alcohol Management Plans since 2002/03, with significant penalties for breaching restrictions
Alcohol management plans (AMPs), involving local controls on the types and quantities of alcohol one is permitted to possess and consume, have been the principal measure used in government policies for reducing alcohol-related harms among Indigenous Australians, in remote locations [12, 13]
As recognised in other jurisdictions [36], Police in this study reported that in the majority of cases where individuals are apprehended with large quantities of alcohol, the necessary evidence implicating those individuals in any ‘sly grog’ trade often does not exist

Summary

Introduction

Indigenous communities in Queensland (Australia) have been subject to Alcohol Management Plans since 2002/03, with significant penalties for breaching restrictions. Alcohol management plans (AMPs), involving local controls on the types and quantities of alcohol one is permitted to possess and consume, have been the principal measure used in government policies for reducing alcohol-related harms among Indigenous Australians, in remote locations [12, 13]. Evaluation reports of such measures have commonly reported the availability and consumption of alcohol in defiance of controls. The availability, consumption and marketing of these forms of illegal alcohol have clearly added to the significant challenges faced by communities and policy makers to limit alcohol availability and reduce its harms in these populations

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion