Wong Pansy: Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Wong Pansy: Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:613;Page:10187] 
PANSY WONG (National) 
: 
I was disappointed that the Minister the Hon Rick Barker misled the public and the House to believe that this bill the Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) is in substance the same as the Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 3) which was discharged. The reason that the Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 3) was discharged was that one of the main provisions was to remove the monopoly trading right of licensing trusts and that reason was very simple. That bill contained a recommendation from the Liquor Licensing Authority which confirmed in 1997 that this monopoly trading right did not do anything to curtail drinking habits. In fact it recommended that the monopoly trading right be discarded. But instead of doing that the Commerce Committee at the time of hearing the submissions on the Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 3) understandably found it was controversial and the committee could not reach a decision. So instead of giving the House the opportunity to take a conscience vote or whatever to resolve this issue the minority Labour Government chose to discharge that bill and brought in the Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) which not only retained the monopoly trading right of the licensing trusts but went ahead and stated that not only are they protected but they can also compete in other areas. The Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 3) was going to create a level playing field where supermarkets and licensing trusts can all sell in each other’s area but in the Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) if there is a licensing trust nobody can sell in its area but it can go and sell outside it. So I am not too sure that the Minister has explained to the public why the Government wants to continue and create a very uneven playing field.  
The other provision as the Hon Rick Barker was saying is about allowing wineries to trade on Easter Sunday. So wineries are allowed to sell drinks and trade on Easter Sunday but we do not allow any other shops to open on that day—I find myself almost totally speechless! What is the logic of people being allowed to drink on an Easter Sunday at wineries when they are not allowed to engage in any other trading activity on that day? It defies logic. Only a minority Labour Government can work in such an illogical manner. Another provision which is even funnier is that 18-year-olds would not be allowed to enter licensed premises or purchase wine unless they were requested by the police to do so. I presume that this is to trick the winery operators and to check they are not selling wine to individuals under 18 years of age. I find that quite appalling. But apart from that anyone under 18 years old who entered licensed premises I presume would be prosecuted under this bill. People under 18 may not drink so they are not allowed to accompany their parents or their friends who might be 18 or older; they are simply not allowed to enter those premises. Well I think it is a very laughable provision.  
I also want to bring up an issue about Chinese or Asian cooking wine. Last Christmas we had a very ridiculous situation where I was approached by Chinese supermarket operators who were told they were not allowed to sell Chinese cooking wine because of the way the sale of liquor legislation operates. I brought the matter to the attention of the Minister but here today we have not heard a satisfactory explanation or a solution for it. So I am extremely disappointed that this bill the Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) managed to bring in other provisions but failed to resolve a very silly situation—everybody knows that Chinese or Asian cooking wine would not actually give a pleasant sensation should an individual choose to consume it. So I want the Minister to explain why he would not take the opportunity to amend that situation.  
When we think of it we can see that the Sale of Liquor Amendment Bill (No 2) is another very clear example of the minority Labour Government continuing to dictate to ordinary New Zealanders how they should live and what they are allowed to do on Easter Sunday. People are allowed to get drunk at a winery but they are not allowed to go shopping anywhere else. Once again this legislation demonstrates so well that the minority Labour Government simply does not trust or respect New Zealanders to be able to make up their own minds and make sensible decisions so National Party members certainly cannot bring ourselves to support this bill. I think this bill should be voted down and the Minister should be told to get his act together and look at the trading legislation. The Commerce Committee is examining a trading bill and I do not see why we should rush this. I think if we are talking about cultural appropriateness that this minority Labour Government should explain to me why Chinese cooking wine needs some sort of inspector or licence to supervise it before people are allowed to buy such an essential ingredient for their cooking.