Beaumont Carol: Alcohol Reform Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Beaumont Carol: Alcohol Reform Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 September 2011. Volume:675;Page:21207. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CAROL BEAUMONT (Labour) 
: 
 I start by commenting on the contribution of the previous speaker. 
Simon Bridges 
: Don’t you know my name? 
CAROL BEAUMONT 
: If the Alcohol Reform Bill I say to Simon Bridges was going to get passed in this term we might actually say that progress will be made but the reality is that this bill has been delayed and now effectively kicked for touch and we will not see any change for a considerable period of time. 
I will start my contribution by acknowledging the Hon Lianne Dalziel. Lianne Dalziel whom the previous speaker was commenting on in a somewhat disparaging way has been passionate about this issue and has worked on it for an extremely long time trying to get real change. As Associate Minister of Justice Lianne Dalziel asked the Law Commission in August 2008 to review the law on the sale and supply of liquor. She requested that the Law Commission provide robust evidence on which to base a new set of alcohol laws which is always a good place to start. Lianne Dalziel also introduced into the House the Sale and Supply of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill. She has continuously worked on this issue since that time trying to ensure that we get robust evidence-based changes to law. I really want to say that she has done a great job in that regard. 
This issue causes a huge deal of harm in our society. I am a member of the Justice and Electoral Committee which heard the submissions on the Alcohol Reform Bill and one of the things that really sticks in my mind is a piece of research that was reported in  
The Lancet 
 the journal of the British Medical Association. It talked about and compared different types of drugs. The interesting thing about alcohol is that it is the only drug that causes more harm to others than to self. In other words alcohol abuse is bad for individuals who are abusing it but the harm that that abuse causes to other people—whether they be partners children or strangers—is huge and significant. That harm can be due to people becoming more violent. A lot of family and sexual violence certainly has alcohol involved. It can be due to people failing to be able to adequately operate machinery and cars and I will come back to that point thereby causing accidents and harm to others. I think that is very important when we are looking at alcohol. 
I agree that it is more complicated than dealing with tobacco because there is no safe level of consumption of tobacco. With alcohol probably most of us in this House would agree that there are many people who drink in a way that is not harmful. They enjoy drinking and do so in a responsible manner. But that does not undermine the extent of harm that is caused in our country by alcohol abuse—certainly 30 percent of all police-recorded offences 34 percent of recorded family violence and 50 percent of all homicides. ACC estimates that almost a quarter of all claims are alcohol-related as are 70 percent of emergency department presentations for injury. Those are just some of the statistics. I think that is really important. 
This bill has probably caused me the most reflection. It has made me think of my own use of alcohol and about how through different ages one can see alcohol abused on a daily basis. Probably all of us know of or are around people who abuse alcohol regularly. This is deeply ingrained in our culture so I do accept cultural change is required. 
I want to acknowledge a few other people. I acknowledge the chair of the Justice and Electoral Committee Chester Borrows—I think he did a really good job and he is a very fair chair—and the other members of the committee. We were all engaged around this issue and we all reflected I think very seriously on the points that were raised. I certainly want to acknowledge the work of the officials. They had an enormous workload. We asked many many questions and they found the information and really tried to respond effectively to what we were asking them so I want to put on record my thanks. The bill that is before us for its second reading is undoubtedly a better bill than the original legislation. But I particularly want to thank the submitters. There were nearly 9000 submitters. We heard 90 hours of submissions and they were powerful. Whether they were from individuals from community groups from medical experts or from everybody else in between they were powerful submissions. 
Our community recognises that we have a problem with this issue. It is something on which people want to see real action taken. I think of groups like the Glen Innes Drug and Alcohol Action Group which made a very powerful submission I believe to Sir Geoffrey Palmer and to our select committee. I think also of people in the community like the Oranga Society which has been working with its local community to try to have fewer alcohol outlets in the area and to challenge liquor licences. I want to acknowledge them. I also acknowledge individual submitters like Gemma Bergin from Royal Oak who came to our select committee because she lives right next door to an off-licence. She has a young baby. That off-licence often has very noisy surrounds and individuals who are intoxicated hanging around causing disruption to her and her family. Her partner was physically assaulted when he tried to quieten down one group. She came to the select committee and told us her story and there were many other personal stories. 
There were some very very sad personal stories as well. Probably the most powerful submission came from the group of parents of adult children with foetal alcohol syndrome. They had adopted children at a point when that syndrome was not well understood and they had to spend many years trying to figure out what it was about their children that just did not make sense and why those children could not develop attachments could not behave responsibly and had real trouble taking responsibility for their actions. That was a very powerful submission. So I thank the submitters for their time and say that it is very sad that we have not lived up to their expectations. The Government will not be providing the comprehensive response that they sought. I think that is a real tragedy given that this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity as people have said. 
I think there are probably not that many times where Parliament has the opportunity to move on social policy because there is huge community clamour for us to do so. Often Parliament is legislating and there is fundamental opposition in social areas. I take the smoke-free legislation as an example of that. That legislation was very brave and the world as we knew it was going to collapse because of it. In the case of alcohol the community clamour is for much more significant change than we will be getting. I have acknowledged that this is a better bill than the one that was introduced but I think there is still a long long way to go. 
I think it is worth noting that it has been 24 years since the last full review of alcohol laws. We have the opportunity with the Law Commission report  
Alcohol in Our Lives: Curbing the Harm 
 to take a response that is both comprehensive and evidence-based and we will not be doing that. Nobody here would say that we should not be balancing the rights of individuals to enjoy alcohol while minimising harm but there are issues around pricing. Others have spelt out properly that pricing is a major issue when people abuse alcohol. Heavy drinkers and young drinkers are particularly influenced by price the commercialisation of alcohol and its accessibility and the lack of restrictions regarding advertising. 
I have to say and Charles Chauvel mentioned this that it is truly a tragedy that we are not dealing with the issue of the blood-alcohol level for driving. The public are saying to us to drop the blood-alcohol level to 0.05 grams like most other Western countries. The evidence is absolutely clear and many of us now know thanks to the efforts of journalists and others that one can drive a car perfectly legally while drunk in many many cases. It is absolutely appalling that the Government is allowing that to continue. The number of fatalities caused by alcohol is just a disgrace. I personally feel that one of the biggest problems with this legislation is that we are not dealing with that issue. Yes it is about culture but legislation can send a very very clear message. In this case we are missing the opportunity to put forward legislation that will send that clear message that will deal with the issue comprehensively not in a piecemeal fashion and that will really honour those in the community who have asked us to take serious action. Certainly what will be seen from this side of the House if we get the chance— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: The member’s time has expired.