LICENSEES in Glasgow now face some of the world's toughest restrictions on the sale of alcohol after two stores were permanently banned from serving people under the age of 21.
The city's licensing board is understood to be the only one in Scotland to impose an over-21 sanction in cases where stores have previously fallen foul of the law by selling to under-18s and where it believes there is a problem with teenage drinking.
The use of the power from the Alcohol Etc (Scotland) Act 2010 means that problem premises in Glasgow can now be hit with draconian restrictions on the sale of alcohol.
America's minimum drinking age is 21; Cameroon has the same age threshold for off-sales. Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Sri Lanka also ban consumption and purchase to the age group while in Sweden, Finland and Norway strong alcohol is restricted to over-20s.
The action was taken on two specific shops after teenagers sent out as test purchasers were sold alcohol without being asked for ID.
A spokesman for the licensing board said: "There is a strong connection between the sale of alcohol to people who are underage and anti-social behaviour.
"Where an off-licence has been found to fail a test purchase, the licensee responsible can therefore expect a robust response from the board. In these cases the board decided upon a two-pronged approach, which included a period of suspension of their licences
"In the circumstance it was also concluded that imposing a condition which permanently bars these shops from selling alcohol to anyone under 21-years was also necessary and appropriate."
The SNP attempted during its last term in office to introduce a blanket over-21s policy for off-sales but this was defeated in Parliament. It is now planning on introducing a minimum price for alcohol, a proposal which has also been taken up by the Coalition at Westminster.
There has been a question mark over the ability of licensing boards to impose a new minimum purchase age for off-sales alcohol. The Alcohol Etc (Scotland) Act 2010 states that while licensing boards cannot impose blanket bans on sales to under 21s, they can do so on a case-by-case basis.
Leading licensing expert and Glasgow-based lawyer Jack Cummins said: "In my experience licensing boards haven't rushed to embrace the Scottish Government's out-of-the-blue suggestion that they can raise the off-sale purchase age in appropriate circumstances.
"Normally, under-age sales are visited with a warning or a suspension. However, I'd be surprised if there was a challenge to the Glasgow practice unless the restriction couldn't be justified in a particular case."
In the first case a 16-year-old was sold a two-litre bottle of Strongbow cider without being asked for identification or being challenged as to their age at a Shopsmart on Pollokshaws Road. A 20-year-old staff member has been reported to the Procurator-Fiscal.
In a second sting another youth was sold four cans of Strongbow Cider without being asked for identification, with a 21-year-old staff member reported to the Procurator-Fiscal at Glasgow.
Another operation last December in the east of the city saw a youth sold cans of cider at Ally's on the Gallowgate without being asked for identification.
Again, no other venue in the area failed.
Although alcohol was not sold to an under-age youth in the next operation a few weeks later, the fact that Ally's had its licence suspended previously saw it banned from under-21 sales permanently.
Glasgow City Council leader Gordon Matheson said: "My administration has recognised the destructive influence of excessive drinking, particularly amongst the young people of Glasgow and when we launched the Joint Action Group on Alcohol last year I promised we would be bold, innovative and tough when tackling this issue.
"I fully support the board's position on this matter.
"It is utterly unacceptable for anyone to be selling alcohol to underage drinkers given the terrible toll this can have both on those communities forced to put up with anti-social behaviour and of course on the young people themselves.
"The full force of the law must be used to continue to tackle this problem."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article