Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill

Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Labour—Manurewa) Link to this

I move, That the Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. First, I acknowledge most people in this House for the way in which this bill got to the House in the first place. I must acknowledge people like Judith Collins who helped me get the bill in without having to go through a ballot. I also acknowledge Pita Sharples, the leadership of the Green Party at the time, and, especially, my own Labour colleagues. This bill has been completely successful and even if it falls tonight it will have done the job it set out to do. I acknowledge that this bill went to the Social Services Committee on 2 July 2008—in the last Parliament. The report back from the select committee states: “We note recent announcements by the Government that it will introduce legislation that will address the issues covered by this bill.” I think that when one has a member’s bill accepted by the Government through the select committee process, one has to be pleased. I have been kept up to date by the chairwoman of the committee, Katrina Shanks, and I thank her. I also thank Simon Power, with whom I have talked about the bill.

This bill is about something we looked at even before the time when Mr Singh, who owned a liquor store in Randwick Park, was shot. But that highlighted the issue. I had been working with a young Manukau city councillor, Daniel Newman, over the issue of the explosion in the number of liquor outlets in South Auckland. But this bill is not just about South Auckland. It is about the number of liquor stores exploding all over the place and into neighbourhoods, and we see the results of that. Young people can get a dozen cans of ready-to-drink liquor for less than $20. It is a real problem; it is a huge problem. When I have people like Daniel Newman working with me to get a bill before the House, it is really worthwhile. When the bill came into the House it passed its first reading by 113 to 2. The two members against the bill at the time were Rodney Hide and Heather Roy. They were like mountaineers roped together and they did not want the bill because, I think, they thought it dealt just with South Auckland, which it does not.

We see booze outlets on every street corner. Dairies sell more alcohol than milk. We have seen the explosion in the availability of liquor in supermarkets. Of course, we have also seen the explosion that runs parallel with the increasing availability of liquor—the increase in domestic violence. Domestic violence, alcohol, and crime are all partners that are a scourge on our communities. I think that the cooperation across the House is Parliament at its best. It is very good that people support this measure. There will be a vote at the end of this debate, and, whether or not the bill goes any further, it has done its job and that is what is important.

The Law Commission has come out with a huge book—a report. Some people might use the report for a doorstop, but I suggest to them that they read it very carefully. I have changed my mind quite a bit over liquor. I used to be one of those people who thought that there should not be an age limit for the purchase of liquor, and I voted for 18 as the age limit. I have changed my mind; I think it should be 20. I am not going to go for the 18-20 split, 18 for licensed premises and 20 for off-licence premises, but so be it. But this bill has given people an opportunity to think about what is going on. My only disappointment is that because of the Law Commission’s report, it is going to take some time before a bill gets into the House. I see that as being necessary; I am not seeing that as a criticism. But it is unlikely that we will have new liquor laws in the term of this Parliament. We may do; maybe there will be cooperation where people want to see liquor laws changed dramatically.

Let us look at what has been happening. The key features of my bill really give local communities far more say. If people apply for a liquor licence, they will have to do a social impact report, and I think that is hugely important. The public will have more time to put in objections. At the moment, it is 10 working days. I think that should be lengthened, but however long the Government decides it should be, so be it. But we also want to have organisations like schools, churches, and kindergartens being able to say what the impact will be on them; at the moment they cannot. I think that when people start thinking about this, they will realise that communities are trying to take hold of the issue themselves. Yes, we have had people who have been hand-wringers, and who think this bill is likely to fall at this hurdle. Well, that is not a problem. We have people from the Labour Party, my very good colleagues from the National Party, the Māori Party, and the Greens all very sincere in their belief of what should happen. No one in New Zealand actually thinks that the law does not need to be changed.

Why did this bill cover only a small area? Well, I have been here a long while—some people say too long.

KATRINA SHANKS (National) Link to this

It is my pleasure to take a call tonight on the Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill. First of all, I congratulate the member George Hawkins on bringing this member’s bill to the House in 2008. This member has a huge heart. He saw an issue in his patch and wanted to make a difference. He saw the destruction that liquor was causing where he is, in South Auckland, so he brought a bill to the House to try to address that. The bill is quite narrow; it is in relation to licences and the number of outlets there can be in an area. The number of outlets that have appeared, popping up all over the place like mushrooms, is a concern for all New Zealand. George is absolutely right when he says that one can walk down the road, especially in the area where he comes from, and on every corner one can see liquor outlets that are selling liquor, in one form or another, and selling it very cheaply.

The Social Services Committee, which I chair, looked at this bill and we decided that we would not support it or recommend that it be passed by the House, for the simple reason that times have moved on a little bit. Liquor reform has come into place, and we have had the package that the Government has put out. It adopted 126 of the 153 recommendations from the Law Commission, and these recommendations cover the bill that George brought in. The select committee voted down this bill before its return to the House, for the reason that there will be legislation later on that New Zealand will debate that will cover these issues, and many other issues as well.

We all know that liquor and alcohol issues are not isolated just to liquor outlets. There is a much bigger discussion, which this country has already had, and we have had some clear signs from the people in this country that they are not happy with what we do with our liquor and alcohol, or with the way in which we drink in New Zealand. In fact, I have been out and about in Ōhāriu on that issue. I held a public meeting at which a cross-section of people in the community talked to me about what they saw were the issues with alcohol in their patch of Ōhāriu. It was interesting that one of them was a bar owner in the city—he owns a number of bars—but he was one of the biggest advocates for tightening up the opening hours. He said that he was happy for bars to be closed at 2 a.m., because after that time bars in the city make no money. He was happy to say that we should raise the drinking age to 20, because he did not want 18-year-olds in his bars and clubs.

It was really interesting. Where we thought we would have opposition, there was none. It was the sector itself that was sending clear messages back to me, in Ōhāriu, that people are happy for the provisions to be much tighter. There was a real cross-section of people at that meeting. We had a great discussion about demand and supply, and I feel that a lot of this legislation is hitting the supply side of the issue: restriction of the number of licences, restriction of the hours for drinking, liquor bans, and a restriction on the purchase age—the whole area to do with liquor and supply.

But if we want to talk about our drinking issues, we can see that it is not just a matter of supply but demand. It is the way we are drinking, the culture of drinking, and the way we accept binge drinking as acceptable. A couple of months ago I went out with the police in Wellington. They picked me up at midnight and dropped me off at 4.30 in the morning—it was a bit like a date. They showed me exactly what is happening in the city, in Wellington, in the early hours of the morning. It was pretty appalling, and we have to see it to believe it. At 3 o’clock in the morning people are still queuing to get into clubs; their night is still going, and they have another club to go to after the current one.

I saw the way in which girls, particularly, were drinking on the streets: falling over, feeling hilarious that they were all so drunk, and throwing up into rubbish bins—it was a great blast. Well, it is not a great blast. Actually, when we are doing that and we think it is really funny, then something is going wrong. And something is going wrong out there, with the way our youth in particular think it is great to drink like that. But it is not just a youth issue: it is a generational issue. I know that within my own age group, we still see people going out and getting wasted. But what signal is that sending to the youth of New Zealand? Not a very good signal, at all.

After having been out with the police and holding a public meeting, I am now on a crusade around my schools. I am going into social studies classes at my secondary schools and talking to students about drinking. I ask them what their views are on drinking, and I find they are really interesting. They are 14 and 15-year-olds, and some of them are already going out drinking, which is really interesting but a bit distressing. But the consensus coming out of those classes is that we have to do something about the way we are drinking. The students in the classes at the schools that I visited were OK with the drinking age being raised.

It is interesting to see that there is a lot of support for change in the way we are drinking and support for the alcohol and liquor reforms. Therefore, I am looking forward to seeing legislation come to the House in relation to the liquor reforms. I thank George Hawkins for the work he did in bringing this issue to the fore, back in 2008, when he was really concerned about what was happening in his communities. That is a sign of a very good local MP. So I say congratulations to him, and I thank the House for allowing me to speak tonight.

KELVIN DAVIS (Labour) Link to this

Te mea tuatahi māku hei tīmata kōrero, he tuku atu i ngā whakaaro ki wērā ngā tōtara o te Ao Māori kua hinga atu, arā, ko Tā Archie Taiaroa rāua ko Jim Nicholls. Nā reira e kourua, haere, haere, haere atu rā. Ka oti.

[To begin with, the first thing for me to do is to convey condolences to those tōtara of Māoridom who have passed away: Sir Archie Taiaroa and Jim Nicholls. So to you two, depart, farewell, journey on. It is done.]

About 2 months ago my brother was sworn in as a District Court judge at our marae, and his first week on the job was down in Wellington at the court around the corner from Parliament. On the Wednesday evening after 3 days on the job we had dinner at Parliament. Of course, I asked him about his impressions of his first 3 days on the job. He said to me that it was very sad, but if it were not for alcohol, he would be redundant. He said that 80 to 90 percent of the cases that he had seen in those 3 days were the result of alcohol-related incidents. I think we really need to reflect on the fact that a District Court judge is basically saying that he would be redundant if it were not for alcohol.

I am on the horns of a dilemma, because I am also Labour’s spokesperson on tourism, and the tourism industry and the alcohol industry are comfortable bedfellows. We have to realise that tourists come here and enjoy a drink—they enjoy the wine, the bars, and that whole scene—and it is an important part of tourism. We do not want to be killjoys. I was talking to a person in the tourism industry who said to me on the whole alcohol issue that I had to remember exactly who I am the spokesperson for. I am the spokesperson on tourism. I said to him that was right, but he had to remember that long before I was the spokesperson on tourism, long before I was a member of Parliament, and, in fact, for all of my life, I have been Māori. I have to balance up the effect and the impact of alcohol on Māori.

I will quote a few things from the Alcohol Advisory Council of New Zealand’s Māori action plan 2009-12. It said that 66 percent of Māori youth aged between 12 and 17 years identified themselves as drinkers. These people are not even legally allowed to drink, yet 66 percent of Māori in that age group already identify themselves as drinkers. Thirty-six percent of Māori surveyed were binge-drinkers, with Māori adults reporting that they had consumed on average 8.9 standard drinks on the most recent occasion they drank alcohol—so 9 standard drinks. Some people would have had one or two, and others would have had 15, 16, 18, or 19 standard drinks on the most recent occasion. Thirty-one percent of Māori adult drinkers reported getting drunk on the most recent occasion, with 16 percent reporting that they had intended to get drunk on that occasion. Worse still, 45 percent of Māori youth aged 15 to 17 reported getting drunk the most recent time they drank alcohol, with 25 percent—a quarter—reporting that they had planned to get drunk. Sixty-six percent agreed that it is acceptable to get drunk at parties; we just heard the member Katrina Shanks talking about how people go to Courtenay Place and deliberately get drunk.

This vulnerability of our intoxicated youth worries and concerns me. Most Māori drinkers reported having experienced some form of harmful or regrettable experience from their drinking in the previous 12 months. Added to that, Te Rau Hinengaro: The New Zealand Mental Health Survey also identified that the most common lifetime disorders among Māori were anxiety disorders, at 31 percent, followed by substance use disorders, at 26 percent. I would say that the anxiety disorders were contributed to in no mean way by the substance use.

The facts that I have just read out from that report are supported by my experience up in Kaitāia as an educator. I recall having a conversation with a policeman who told me that on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights the police go around picking up and dragging up intoxicated school-age students—primary school age, intermediate school age, and college age—from the alleyways and the car parks of Kaitāia. He told me how they have to drag them into the police car and half the time the kids vomit in the back. The police get them home to the parents, knock on the door—the parents do not know where they have been—and basically give the children to the parents, telling them to make sure they do not choke on their vomit. That is the reality of the situation in Kaitāia.

This policeman told me about one particular girl, who went to the school where I was principal, whom he had to pick up one night when she was totally comatose. I said that that girl’s family could not afford to buy alcohol and did not have the money for it. I asked how she got the money to buy the alcohol. He said to me that she does not buy the alcohol. She gives favours to the guy at a particular liquor store, and that is how she gets her alcohol. We have to be mindful. At the time this girl was 12 or 13 years of age, she was giving favours in return for alcohol.

The Law Commission report Alcohol In Our Lives: Curbing the Harm said: “There is little scope under the present Act for communities to have a say in licensing decisions.” The Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill, which George Hawkins has brought to the House, changes that. It gives communities the chance to have a say in alcohol licensing decisions. The report also says: “A common theme in the consultation was the disempowerment many people feel because the existing legal framework effectively discounts the views of the local community when making decisions about where and how alcohol is sold. Several people told us the category of people who can object to a licence application needs to be widened, but the real concern of many was that even though they lived in the neighbourhood there was no basis on which they could object to a licence application other than in relation to the suitability of the applicant.” This bill changes that.

The report says: “That the community had alcohol-related problems and locals did not want any more liquor outlets in the area was no basis for an objection. Community groups are increasingly expressing their concerns about alcohol and its impacts, as our consultation demonstrates. They want more say in decisions about where and how alcohol is sold, supplied and consumed in their neighbourhoods.” The bill that George Hawkins has brought to the House does exactly that. It gives the communities more say on where and how alcohol can be sold. Also, the bill “requires an applicant for an on-licence or an off-licence to carry out an evaluation of the social impacts on the community.” I ask how one carries out an evaluation of the social impact on a 12 or 13-year-old girl who has to give favours to somebody in exchange for alcohol. The social impact on her life and her family’s life into her future is immeasurable.

We as Māori have a bit to answer for ourselves. I was just talking to my colleague Stuart Nash about when our marae dining hall was opened in 1990 up north and we had 50 kegs of beer. We got through only 38 of them that night, which because of our attitude at the time we laughed about. That illustrates the attitude that we have towards glorifying alcohol. As I stand to speak now, I am embarrassed by that attitude from us as Māori, which allows alcohol to become such a big part of our lives. Hopefully this bill will go some way to changing that attitude, but it certainly gives communities the power to make decisions regarding alcohol within their communities. Thank you.

CHESTER BORROWS (National—Whanganui) Link to this

The Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill had its genesis in good, sound common sense. It is an attempt to overturn a jandal-slapping sort of sale of liquor bill from a previous decade. The fact is that the sale of liquor has been the subject of dog’s breakfasts of legislation for many, many decades, as people have sought to liberalise and somehow change New Zealand’s drinking culture and turn it into something it is not. Members who were involved in politics years ago will remember the votes that tried to turn the New Zealand drinking culture into something sort of cultural.

SUE KEDGLEY (Green) Link to this

We would like to congratulate George Hawkins on his Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill, which is tremendously worthwhile, and will give communities some say over where liquor licences should be granted. We will certainly be voting to support the bill.

I remember when I was a Wellington city councillor, back in the 1990s—

TE URUROA FLAVELL (Māori Party—Waiariki) Link to this

Mr Assistant Speaker, me mihi rā ki te mema ki a George Hawkins i tēnei pō. Kei te whakaae atu au ki tā te mema nei, ā, mō tana whakaaro nui ki te whakatakoto i tēnei pire ki mua i te aroaro o te Pāremata. Me mihi rā ki a ia, ko te tūmanako ia ka eke ki te taumata e wawatatia ana. Tata ki te kotahi rau tau kua hipa, i puta ēnei kōrero i tētahi o ngā rangatira o taua wā. Ko Tā Apirana Ngata tāku e kōrero nei. He kōrero e pā tonu ana ki tēnei o ngā pire. Anei tana kōrero:

[Mr Assistant Speaker, I congratulate the member George Hawkins tonight. I support the member and his great foresight in bringing this bill before Parliament, and hope that what he is seeking is fulfilled. Close to a century ago, one of our finest leaders of that period, Sir Apirana Ngata, gave a frank account relevant to this bill, and I quote: ]

“there can be no question as to the amount of damage liquor has done to the people of my race … Whether the Maori will in a generation or so become a hardened and seasoned drinker, like the incoming Europeans, I do not know … My position is clear-cut; and that is, so far as the supply of liquor to Maoris is concerned, from my youth until now I have and shall oppose it everywhere.”

Koinei tā Apirana Ngata. He nui taku pūaroha mō taua whakaaro. Ko ngā tatauranga e kī ana, tokotoru o ia whā tangata neke atu i te tekau mā waru tau te pakeke, kua tohungia he kaiinu waipiro, ā, hautoru o aua tāngata, kua tohungia he tino kino tā rātou inu waipiro. Nā ēnei tatauranga mātou e tino āwangawanga ana. E tino āwangawanga ana mātou mō ngā āhuatanga inu a ngā rangatahi, me te āhuatanga whakatairanga o tēnei ngāngara. E pūmau tonu ana mātou ki te whakapono, he nui ngā huarahi whakamāmā ake i ngā tūāhuatanga kino kua puta i tēnei mea te waipiro, e pāngia ana e Ngāi Māori. Ko tētahi huarahi kua kitea e mātou, ko te mahitahi ā-whānau nei.

Nō reira, ki te hoki ki tēnei pire, ko tā tātou ināianei, he rāhui i te tuku raihana hokohoko, i raro i te pire Sale of Liquor Act 1989. Me kī pēnei, e noho āhuareka ana mātou ki te whānuitanga o ngā whakaaro puaki kua whakatakotohia. I tērā wiki i mea atu te Kaunihera Waipiro, arā te Alcohol Advisory Committee, ki te Komiti mō ngā Take Māori, me pērā te tirohanga o te Kāwanatanga ki te kaupapa waipiro, ki tērā o te tupeka. E ai ki a Gilbert Taurua, kaiwhakahaere, strategic operations general manager, me whai tūranga teitei ake ngā take waipiro ki te taha hauora. E ai ki ngā tauira inu, nui tonu te waipiro ka unumia i roto i tētahi wā roa. He kōrero whai tikanga tēnei. Nā te iti o te utu, ngā āhuatanga whakatairanga, me te āhuatanga inu i roto i ngā hapori, kua noho kōhatu tēnei ngāngara me ōna kino katoa.

Nō reira i te putanga o te pūrongo e kīa nei, ko te Alcohol in Our Lives: Curbing the Harm, harikoa ana mātou i te mea i tohungia ngā huarahi āwhina ki te whakakore i te āhuatanga inu waipiro. Tautoko ana mātou i ngā momo huarahi pērā i te whakaheke taumata inu waipiro inā e taraiwa ana tētahi, te whakapiki i te tau inu, otirā te rāhui hoki i ngā whakatairanga, i ngā pānui hoki mō te waipiro. E whakapono hoki ana mātou, me werohia ngā kamupene waipiro, e pēhi kino ana i wā tātou hapori. I te ao tika, i te ao pono me kī, ka kore e kite i te waipiro i waenganui i ngā hapori. Engari, i tēnei ao kikokiko nei, me aro tātou ināianei ki te āwhina i wā tātou whānau, hapori hoki, ki te tiaki i a tātou anō, ā-hauora, ā, ki te whakamāmā i ngā kino o te waipiro.

Mōhio tonu ahau i te whakatau a te komiti mō tēnei rīpoata, inā ko tā rātou, kāore he take ki te tautoko i ngā mahi e kōrerohia ana i roto i tēnei rīpoata i te mea, e ahu pērā tonu ana te kāwanatanga. Hoi anō, kua whakatakētia te kaupapa a Minita Power i te mea, kāore ngā huarahi pērā i te tāke tāpiri e whakamahia ana ki te whakaiti i te inu waipiro. Ā, kua whakatakētia anō hoki te Kāwanatanga mō te kōrero noa iho mō tēnei mea te rāhui i ngā hāora mahi o ngā toa hokohoko waipiro. Nō reira, te āhua nei kāore ngā ture hōu mō te waipiro i te eke ki te taumata e tika ana, e ai ki te tā te tirohanga a ētahi.

Nō reira, ka tirohia anōtia e mātou te aronga o tēnei pire, arā ki te rāhui i te tuku raihana hokohoko i raro i te Sale of Liquor Act 1989. E rata ana mātou ki te tikanga, arā, kia tuku arotakenga ia kaitono, tuatahi mō te pānga o tā rātou tono ki ngā hapori, otirā te pānga ā-moni nei, a aha rānei ki te rohe e tohungia ana. Ka rua, ko ngā tāke mō te utu, me te pānga o te waipiro ki taua rohe. Ka noho ngā arotakenga nei hei mea kitenga mō te rahinga. Otirā, e tautoko ana mātou i tēnei āhuatanga i te mea, ka kitea ngā nekenekehanga o ngā hapori ki te whakatau, me ahu pēhea rātou.

Hai kōrero whakamutunga, nei au e noho whakahīhī nei, i te mea, i tae mai a Toi Te Ora, nō roto i tōku rohe o Te Waiariki, ki tētahi hui o te komiti whāiti. He rōpū hauora a Toi Te Ora. Ka āwhina tēnei rōpū i ngā tāngata toru rau mano, neke atu, i roto o Waiariki, me Waikato hoki, i Tauranga, i Whakatāne, i Ōpōtiki, i Kawerau, i Rotorua, tae atu ki Taupō. Ko tā Toi Te Ora ki te komiti, i tautoko rātou i te wāhanga hōu, 9A, mō ngā tono ā-raihana. E whakamārama ana i ngā painga me ngā utu, me whakamārama ngā raihana nei i ngā pēhitanga o te waipiro, ā-moni, ā-tāngata nei i te takiwā, ā, me tuku i ēnei kōrero ki te marea. Nō reira, nā runga i te āhuatanga o ēnei kōrero, otirā, ōku ake wheako hoki, me te hiahia o te Pāti Māori ki te rāhui i te waipiro, ki te manaaki i te oranga me te hauora o wā tātou whānau, e tautoko ana mātou i tēnei pire i tōna pānuitanga tuarua.

[That is what Apirana Ngata said. I have great sympathy for Sir Apirana Ngata’s view. According to statistics, approximately three in every four Māori over 18 years of age identify as drinkers, with about one-third of those identifying themselves as binge drinkers. These are statistics that concern us greatly. We are especially concerned about harmful drinking amongst youth, and heavy promotion of products designed to appeal to young people. We believe that much can be done to reduce alcohol-related harm experienced by Māori. We have found a method: it is a collective whānau approach.

So we come back to this bill. What we should do right now is to restrict the granting of on-licences and off-licences under the Sale of Liquor Act 1989. I have to say we are interested in the scope of the proposals. Last week the Alcohol Advisory Council told the Māori Affairs Committee that the Government should take a similar approach to alcohol as it does to tobacco. Strategic operations manager Gilbert Taurua said the harm caused by alcohol needs to be a higher priority in the health sector. He said Māori drinking patterns show that a large amount of alcohol is drunk over a long period of time. This was an important message. The prevalence of alcohol, its low cost, and relentless marketing have created a permissive environment in which excessive drinking has become normalised, bringing with it undue harm to our communities.

So the Māori Party welcomed the release of the report Alcohol in Our Lives: Curbing the Harm, which gave a very clear indication of the range of measures that could be initiated to address ways to help change the drinking culture. We support various measures, which include lowering drink-driving limits, lifting the purchasing age, and limiting liquor promotion and advertising. We also believe that an alcohol industry that has had an inappropriate influence on our communities needs to be challenged. In a perfect world, alcohol would not feature in our communities, but the reality is that it does, so we now must strive towards enabling our whānau and communities to take control of their health and limit the damage that alcohol can do in their community.

I know that the rationale of the select committee members in determining their report was to say that they thought this bill overlapped the Government’s work programme on alcohol reform, and as such they did not see it as needing to be supported. However, the package announced by Minister Power has been heavily criticised for failing to use devices such as excise tax to reduce alcohol consumption. There has also been criticism that the Government is merely tinkering around the edges with regard to restricting opening hours. Quite frankly, it appears to some that the alcohol reforms are a disappointment.

So we look anew at the aim of this bill to restrict the granting of on-licences and off-licences under the Sale of Liquor Act 1989. We are satisfied that every application for an on-licence must be accompanied by an evaluation carried out by the applicant—firstly, for the likely social impact relating to monetary and non-monetary costs on the area to which the application relates; and , secondly, taxing the costs and impact of liquor consumption in that area. These evaluations will be available for public inspection. Indeed, we support this because communities can determine with greater transparency what is in their best interests.

In conclusion, I am really proud that Toi Te Ora from my electorate of Te Waiariki came to a select committee hearing. Toi Te Ora is a health organisation that helps approximately 300,000 people in the Bay of Plenty and Waikato regions — Tauranga, Whakatāne, Ōpōtiki, Kawerau, and Rotorua, including Taupō. Toi Te Ora told the committee that it supports new section 9A for applications for on-licences to include an evaluation of benefits and costs. This evaluation should include the likely social impact of liquor consumption, and monetary and non-monetary costs to the area to which the application relates, and that these must be made available for public inspection. Based on this address, my personal experiences, and the desire of the Māori Party to be more vigilant in restricting alcohol use in order to take care of the well-being and health of our families, we support this bill at its second reading .]

Dr CAM CALDER (National) Link to this

It gives me great pleasure to rise and speak on the Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill proposed by my honourable colleague George Hawkins,

MP for Manurewa. I am privileged to be the National MP based in the vibrant and diverse electorate of Manurewa, and I have to report that there is a strong, united voice asking for help in reducing the ravages of alcohol there.

I have listened to residents’ views at many public meetings and sporting clubs, when visiting the RSA, and at the Sunday markets. It is a common theme. Responses to my recent surveys are clear. The pendulum has swung too far towards the liberalisation of alcohol laws. The residents of Manurewa know the statistics all too well. Many of them have suffered, directly or indirectly, alcohol-related harm. Alcohol is estimated to contribute to up to 1,000 deaths a year, and is a major driver of crime. Police say that alcohol is implicated in 30 percent of all recorded offences, 34 percent of all recorded family violence incidents, and 50 percent of all homicides.

This National-led Government is committed to reducing the level of alcohol-related harm in all our communities. We are listening to public concerns. The Government’s package for alcohol law reform is the first stage in our response and adopts in full or in part 126 of the Law Commission’s 153 recommendations. Our package aims to achieve three things: less alcohol-related harm, including deaths, family violence, drunken disorder, and accident compensation claims; a reduction in our binge-drinking culture, especially among young people; and a reduction in the number of alcohol outlets and their trading hours.

A key feature that has proved very popular with the residents of Manurewa whom I have spoken to, and I am sure with my colleague the Hon George Hawkins, is that the proposed legislation will give the local Manurewa community the right to decide how many outlets there are, where they are, and how long they are open for. When a decision is made to grant a licence, the objective of our law must be considered as well as the provisions of the local alcohol policy, and, crucially, whether the amenity of an area would be lessened should the licence be granted. We are giving local communities the choice to determine the outcome in their area. We will be giving parents more tools to manage their children’s access to alcohol, and requiring more parental and individual responsibility for supply to minors.

As my colleague Chester Borrows pointed out earlier, those ready-to-drink alcohol mixes that we call RTDs will be restricted to 5 percent for its alcohol content. I am delighted at this initiative. They taste like soft drinks, but they pack a hell of a punch. Ready-to-drink products will be required to be sold in containers limited to holding no more than 1.5 standard drinks. We will investigate a minimum pricing regime by giving retailers a year to provide sales and price data. If they are not forthcoming, then the Government will consider regulatory options.

I applaud my colleague George Hawkins for bringing this bill to the House some years ago in an effort to get the then Labour Government to address this huge problem of alcohol-related harm. As I have outlined, the National-led Government’s package of reforms is comprehensive and, in the opinion of the Social Services Committee, the package of reforms has actually overtaken this bill. The select committee has recommended that this bill not be passed, as far more comprehensive legislation is imminent. It is for this reason I concur with the select committee that this bill should not be passed.

STUART NASH (Labour) Link to this

Before I start my speech, Mr Assistant Speaker, could you please indulge me when I say “Good evening, sir.” to Barry Goggin. On the 9 September Barry retired as one of the parliamentary gallery staff after 17 years’ service. He is a fine chap, a very good bloke, and I hope he is enjoying his retirement, because it is well deserved.

I stand in support of the second reading of the Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill. The previous speaker, Cam Calder, who said he is based in Manurewa—even though he lives on the North Shore—has decided to vote against the bill. I am quite astounded by that, because he stood up and outlined the real problems faced by people in the electorate of Manurewa, and then proceeded to say he was speaking against the bill. That is not a good stance.

In my time tonight there are only two questions that I will pose, and then answer. First of all, I ask what sort of society we want to live in, and, secondly, I ask what sort of message we, as members of Parliament, want to send to our communities about alcohol. But before I discuss those questions, I compliment my colleague the Hon George Hawkins on bringing this member’s bill to the House. Mr Hawkins is an example of a Labour MP who understands his communities, who talks to his constituents, and who acts on the recommendations of those who come to visit him and offer their counsel. I congratulate George. He has undertaken wide and varied consultation on this bill. I congratulate him on seeking to amend the Sale of Liquor Act 1989. When George decides to leave this House—and I know he has a few more terms left in him yet—he will be sorely missed by his constituents, and he will leave huge shoes to fill.

But I remind the House that this bill does not relate just to Manurewa; it relates to the whole country. [Interruption] I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I understand that under the Standing Orders a member is not allowed to barrack in the way that Mr Quinn is doing, without sitting in his actual seat. If he really wants to interject in that manner, he should go to the back of the Chamber.

Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) Link to this

I rise to speak on the Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill, which is in the name of the Hon George Hawkins.

I understand that this bill was first introduced in 2008. There were 53 submissions and 34 submitters who wished to be heard. Ten of them were heard in the previous Parliament before the change to the most excellent National Government under John Key. Since that time the Social Services Committee has kept in close touch with the Hon George Hawkins. Its members were well aware that Sir Geoffrey Palmer’s Law Commission report was due to be presented, so they put the bill on hold pending that very comprehensive report.

I must agree with previous speakers that the pendulum has swung too far in New Zealand. Alcohol is now a $5 billion industry—a $5 billion industry. One of my concerns about alcohol is the effect it has on our children, and, in fact, on our unborn children—the effect of alcohol on children in utero and the number of children born with foetal alcohol spectrum disorder. The Law Commission report estimated that some thousands of children a year were affected by the disorder. This is an extremely worrying concern because those children will never have a chance to achieve their full potential. Often mothers and fathers have no idea of the implications of their drinking, which impacts on literally thousands of New Zealand children. So there is no doubt that the importance of this subject is enormous.

I congratulate the Hon George Hawkins on bringing in this member’s bill, which is generally focused on local communities having a say. There is no doubt that members of the South Auckland community have been particularly strong in their concerns about liquor outlets in their area. The Hon George Hawkins has listened to them. Their concerns were manifested in a march and rally at the Manukau City centre about 6 weeks ago. Representatives from all parties were there on that particular occasion, but I must admit that I do not think the Hon George Hawkins was there. [Interruption] He was there! I thought he was campaigning for the local board of Manurewa, but—

TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) Link to this

I am delighted to endorse and echo the fine comments and conclusions of my colleague the member for Hunua and, as other members have done at the outset, to acknowledge the considerable work of the member for Manurewa, the Hon George Hawkins, on this issue. I would also like to acknowledge my predecessor as the MP for Hamilton West, Martin Gallagher, who also demonstrated a determination during his time in this House to confront the problems caused by alcohol abuse in our communities. As some members will know, Martin is currently a candidate in our local body elections and looks likely, I should say, to bolt in. He has been a Hamilton city councillor before and, in fact, was deputy mayor before he was first elected to Parliament. I welcome the prospect that he will be back on our council and I look forward to working with him in our respective roles.

Martin and I both welcome this Government’s decision to implement the vast majority of the Law Commission’s alcohol reform recommendations, and it is very good to have his endorsement of the Government’s lead in this area. We are both especially pleased at the powers that will be given to councils to implement local alcohol plans. That is a very important measure that my constituents, our civic leaders, the police, our health providers, social agencies, and many others warmly welcome.

In light of those comments, and as we have heard from one or two members tonight, there may be some people watching or listening to broadcasts of Parliament this evening who are puzzled that this bill will be voted down tonight. So I want to stress, as other members have, that it is neither a slight on the member for Manurewa nor a signal that members are taking these issues lightly. On the contrary, it is because the problems the bill addresses are about to be presented to the House in a much more comprehensive measure, and for that reason only, the Social Services Committee, with Mr Hawkins’ agreement—it was good that he came to a select committee meeting recently and talked to us—is recommending that this bill should not proceed at this point. I commend the member for Manurewa for concluding that events have overtaken this bill and that his work is done. It is a sensible and pragmatic decision in the circumstances.

I look forward to discussing the measures in this bill, and many other related issues, when the Government’s response to the Law Commission’s report is introduced to the House in a few weeks from now. I agree with my colleague Chester Borrows that there are some ridiculous arrangements governing the sale of liquor in our communities at the present time and that we have major problems as a consequence. Almost unfettered access to alcohol is certainly contributing to our binge-drinking culture. In turn, it is exacerbating a major health problem that is a special concern of mine—I did not know that my good colleague Dr Hutchison was about to mention it as well, but I am delighted he has done so—and that is our nation’s significant incidence of foetal alcohol spectrum disorder. I try to raise awareness of that serious health concern in my electorate whenever I can, especially when I talk to school groups and younger audiences. It is a tragic fact that hundreds of babies are conceived each year to mothers who have consumed too much alcohol. In many cases, in fact, probably in most, the mother has no intention of becoming pregnant and drinks dangerously for some time before and after conception, in complete ignorance of the dangerous risk she is taking. It is a lethal error.

Foetal alcohol spectrum disorder is a lifelong disability that can have severe physical and intellectual consequences. It is a tragedy that we hear so little about it and that so few young people in particular are aware of the serious risk they take in drinking regularly and heavily while being sexually active. I hope and expect that the more comprehensive bill we will start considering in the House later this year will provide an opportunity for members to promote much greater awareness of foetal alcohol syndrome and a raft of other alcohol-related concerns.

There is certainly a strong desire in Hamilton for vastly improved alcohol legislation, and that is why I say to members opposite, who have been interjecting regularly throughout the evening, that it is important that the Government has taken the considered approach that it has. We have given officials the time they needed to convert the huge array of legislative reforms into workable legislation that will come before the House. The idea that we should rush the measure is likely to be a recipe for the mistakes that Parliament has made in the past when alcohol reform legislation has been too ad hoc and has dealt in a piecemeal fashion with parts of the problem. It is right that we tackle this problem comprehensively. That is what the Government’s response will be all about when the legislation comes before this House, and I look forward to debating those measures when it does. I certainly am committed to ensuring that we get it right this time and that we take a major step in the right direction to tackle our alcohol-related problem in New Zealand.

I conclude—I think I am the last speaker before the member has a chance to sum up—by commending the member for Manurewa once again for his work on this issue, and for his pragmatic decision in relation to this bill at this time. I look forward to all members of this House participating in a very positive fashion towards the implementation of a really improved liquor control regime later on this year. Thank you.

Dr ASHRAF CHOUDHARY (Labour) Link to this

I am really disappointed, particularly with those two doctors, Cam Calder and Paul Hutchison, on the other side of the House. They spoke so passionately about the Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill because they know at heart the damage that alcohol does to adults, children, and unborn babies. Anyone who has anything to do with drinking knows the harm it does. I am really disappointed in Cam Calder particularly, who pretends that he lives in Manurewa. He does not live in Manurewa. He opened an office there recently, but only George Hawkins, who is the local MP, and I actually live there.

Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Labour—Manurewa) Link to this

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I request a personal vote be taken.