Swarbrick ChlöeCHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green—Auckland Central): E te Māngai tēnā koe. Tēnā koutou e te Whare. I agree with at least one thing that the member Damien Smith just said which is that this should not be being passed under urgency. That of course has been one of the primary points that the Greens have been making throughout the readings today.We've obviously canvassed this a lot over the past kind of hour and a bit. There's three key reasons that the Greens are standing in opposition to this today—and I note that we're not the only party doing so; Te Paati Māori is as well of course which we hold the proxies for. The first point is to note that the special licences process as outlined in the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 works. There's not next to any evidence that anyone has surfaced throughout this debate that shows that it hasn't. I totally take on board the point around streamlining that process but that is again a different argument.The second is that if we are going to continue having this ad hoc approach under urgency then there is a real need to look at this in context and say perhaps this heralds the need for a permanent change worthy and due of proper scrutiny of the House—hopefully not occurring under urgency—if we are to continue to deploy at least three times this kind of amendment under urgency in relation to these massive sporting events which are not unpredictable by their very nature.And of course the third thing is that unlike members of the Opposition in particular who have consistently said—as the Hon Paul Goldsmith did just before—that this is just a simple thing that New Zealanders like to do and that we don't need to have an in-depth debate about drug harm I disagree. Because what I feel continues to happen is that we chip away at pieces of law for one-off events like this and we sweep under the rug the broader macro context of what it is that we're dealing with when we're dealing with these substances and the opportunity that we have to put in place evidence-based drug harm reduction. I do need to raise it because again it was the point that was hammered home by the Hon Paul Goldsmith that this is just a simple thing that New Zealanders like to do. It'd be remiss of me not to make a parallel to another substance which is just a simple thing that New Zealanders like to do which actually registers based on national metrics outed again—I believe it was either the University of Canterbury or the University of Otago looking at the drug harm in this country—that alcohol is the most harmful substance on a macro scale and cannabis sits substantially below that.To that effect to the Hon Paul Goldsmith and members of the Opposition if it's just about being a simple thing that New Zealanders like to do well 635000 New Zealanders consumed cannabis last year alone—that's approximately 15 percent of the population. And we heard throughout the Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill debate—obviously the referendum—that members of the Opposition didn't want to see people locked up for that personal use. Well 180 New Zealanders were sentenced to prison for cannabis possession last year alone. So if we want to talk about logical consistency then we need to apply that logical consistency to drug harm in this country because this stuff does not happen in a vacuum.We obviously heard from the member of the ACT Party Damien Smith; I wrote it down here that Talking about drug harm is part of another agenda." No again this stuff does not happen in a vacuum and we've got to be grown-ups—in this space least of all—to look evidence in the face and to say that we can do better and create better laws and regulations that reflect evidence. To respond to the point that was raised by Dr Emily Henderson that "we need to enable Kiwis to watch our national game" again I'd say that this bill actually doesn't enable Kiwis to watch our national game. It enables Kiwis to drink while watching our national game in licensed premises.The basis of this bill is about enabling greater access to alcohol and that's kind of the basis of it. These premises can still open if they choose not to serve that alcohol to serve a coffee or a bacon butty as the Hon Paul Goldsmith was talking about—those will still be on the table for ya if this law was not passed.But once again for the reasons I've outlined throughout all of the readings of this legislation the Greens just can't in good faith and on an evidentially consistent basis support this legislation happening in an ad hoc manner. Thank you."