The problematisation of alcohol in the Northern Territory: what did Alcohol Mandatory Treatment seek to address?

Background

Alcohol is a highly politicised social issue in the Northern Territory (NT) of Australia, with a history of reactive and frequently-changing policies. While alcohol causes very real health and social issues, the policy responses have often not been evidence based. This raises questions of ‘problematisation’ and how policies themselves define and influence the ‘problem’ of alcohol. We use Alcohol Mandatory Treatment (AMT) as a case study to explore this. 

Methods

Applying a critical policy studies approach, we undertook line-by-line coding of the legislation, amendments, and associated second reading speeches and debates. Analysis was guided by Bacchi’s What’s the Problem Represented to be, an analytical strategy which frames policies as themselves part of the ‘problematisation’ process. This approach allows for policy interrogation through six interrelated questions. Each document was read several times to allow consideration of the different elements of each question.

Results and Conclusion

AMT problematised public drinking as alcohol dependence. Those who will be impacted by the policy are consistently framed as vulnerable. This produces harmful political subjectification effects that have implications for making people a particular type of ‘governable subject’. This is similar to national policy framings of people who inject drugs and allows minor ‘risks’ to others (i.e. disturbance) to be elevated above the right to personal liberty for these ‘governable subjects’. Other drivers of public drinking (i.e., housing) are silenced in this formulation. As there are no clinical pathways to access AMT, this formulation further silences evidence-based signs of dependence.