24-hour licensing has led to sharp rise in binge drinking

The introduction of 24-hour drinking has led to an increase in heavy alcohol consumption, a major new study has found.

Analysis of official health data by researchers at Lancaster University found that the likelihood of people ‘binge drinking’ has increased significantly since the extension of licensing hours.

In 2005, Tony Blair’s Labour Government introduced licences for all-day alcohol consumption, claiming they would create a continental style ‘café culture’ in the UK.

Binge drinking

The study, presented to the Royal Economic Society, analysed data from 2003 and 2009, before and after the changes came into place.

It found that drinkers were 36 per cent more likely to consume almost six pints in a single night after the changes came in.

The likelihood of drinkers consuming over 16 units in one night – the equivalent of almost half a bottle of whisky – rose by 29 per cent.

Under the 2005 changes pubs and clubs can apply to stay open until 5am. By 2010, over 60 per cent of premises had been granted extended licences – around 79,000 in total.

Failure

Critics of Labour’s 24-hour drinking laws included the police, councils and the NHS.

A 2008 survey by the Local Government Association revealed that nearly one in three NHS Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) reported an increase in alcohol-related incidents after the new laws came into force.

Seven in ten police authorities, PCTs and councils said 24-hour drinking had either increased, or failed to change, levels of alcohol-related incidents.

And councils said that £100 million in taxpayers’ money had been paid out to implement the changes.

Review needed

In 2013, the Labour Party’s former spin doctor, Alastair Campbell, said the changes brought in under Blair’s administration should be reconsidered.

Campbell told Total Politics magazine he “never quite bought” the idea that the UK would become a café culture like France or Italy.

Calling for an in-depth review, he said: “The licensing regulations don’t have to take in the impact on public health. They should.”