Chris Maclean: Pub industry must stand up and be counted

One of the stories locally this week has been the one about the woman who spotted some youths smoking on a train station. She confronted them and told them off.

They responded by picking her up and throwing her on the rail tracks. Police are seeking the two men on a charge of attempted murder.

The issue of youth crime and anti-social behaviour is high on any agenda locally whether it is in urban or rural surroundings. Even more sensitive is such behaviour when it is fuelled by alcohol or drugs. It is small wonder that the licensed trade is constantly under the microscope. Many of the general public would make a simple connection.

Anti-social behaviour is bad.

Anti-social behaviour is caused by alcohol.

Therefore those who dispense alcohol are, therefore, the cause of the anti-social behaviour.

There. That was simple.

There is no doubt, in my mind, that many anti-social incidents are related to alcohol. But I would make three observations.

Firstly I would contest that the alcohol has necessarily been provided by an on-licensed premises. Yes, I would be a fool to deny that we have a part to play in many circumstances. But we, as licensed distributors of alcohol, know that if we allow someone drunk to remain on the premises or allow our premises to be a centre of drunken behaviour then we would be held accountable. The police would prosecute and we would lose our livelihoods.

Yes, I admit I have walked past a pub where a man, so drunk he was unable to stand, was physically carried out and placed, gently, in the gutter. That is indefensible. But if we have our house in order - and this is possibly where opinion divides - serving people until they cannot reasonably consume any more is not acceptable. But often the alcohol necessary to achieve such oblivion is obtained from other sources and not, as is often opined, for a public house.

The second point I would submit is perhaps more controversial. In order to achieve that level of behaviour necessary to cause universal offence I would suggest mere beer is unlikely to be the candidate.

It is one of my great regrets that Mild, the cornerstone of British beer drinking, fell out of favour. People could confidently drink eighteen pints of the stuff and walk home safely. (Indeed they could probably have driven home it was so weak ~ but I cannot countenance such behaviour).

Beer, I would suggest, isn't really the cause of the problem. If pubs only sold beer then I would suggest there would be far less of a problem and less of a link between drunkenness and pubs. Here, for example, I will serve a large vodka and tonic but I would not allow a straight treble vodka. To me the former is finer, the latter unacceptable. Alcopops, drinks that taste sweet and deceptively innocent, are a fine example of drinks designed to deceive people by their ease of drinking.

The third point is that somehow nowadays it seems perfectly acceptable for a person to get out of their face. Drunken behaviour, involving illness, vandalism and offensive behaviour isn't simply an accidental by-product of drink. It is the purpose of drink.

There is strong evidence that people are drinking less and drinking less often. But then, such is the way of statistics, when they drink, they drink obscene amounts. Then they claim their drink was spiked. There is a pattern.

Whenever drunken behaviour visits our streets it needs to be challenged. It isn't enough to claim it didn't emanate from your pub. We cannot tolerate such behaviour because it reflects badly on what we are trying to do but, more importantly, because it cannot be allowed to be tolerated.

We must not be seen to accept this behaviour. We must stand up against it. We must show we are responsible force for good in our communities.

In the meantime it would be nice if the police were there to back us up.