Henare Peeni: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Display of Low-alcohol Beverages and Other Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHenare Peeni: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Display of Low-alcohol Beverages and Other Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 15 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9731. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PEENI HENARE (Labour—Tāmaki Makaurau): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. Thank you very much for this opportunity. I rise to make a short contribution to the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Display of Low-alcohol Beverages and Other Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill. As a father and as a family man you roll into the supermarket and you are always mindful of what your children will see. I think some of the members this evening have raised very good points about a broader look at the amendments that could be made to make this bill a better bill to make sure that the original intention of this particular piece of legislation will meet the requirements as expected in our community. What those are really about is minimising the harmful effects of alcohol in our communities.Some of the members—and the member Alfred Ngaro has mentioned it this evening in his contribution but I am mindful of the proliferation of the number of alcohol outlets in particular in South Auckland—particularly in my electorate of Tāmaki Makaurau and in the good electorate of Manukau East the electorate of my colleague Jenny Salesa. Many of the communities have spoken out against the proliferation of these alcohol outlet stores. I think about those communities when we consider that large supermarket chains—large supermarkets where you can go and purchase alcohol—tend to get these kinds of amendments through by successful lobbying. Although I appreciate that when you go into a supermarket you do not want to be inundated with advertisements about alcohol and you want your children to enjoy the experience of shopping without having to see these things it is important that we do have specific areas for the sale of alcohol in supermarkets. But I do want the House to reflect on what this means in the communities in particular in Tāmaki Makaurau and in South Auckland.The Labour Party does support this bill. In my contribution I want to pick up on some of the points made by my colleagues on this side of the House. One of them—and I think the main one about this particular bill—is that the health consequences arising from this bill should be considered. We on this side take that very seriously because as my colleague Carmel Sepuloni mentioned in respect of the previous bill in front of the House our offices deal with the consequences of alcohol addiction and drug addiction and the problems that ensue in communities. They come into our office where we have to deal with our good constituents and we try our best.It is relatively minor and relatively technical this particular amendment but it does highlight a greater need. Some of the contributions this evening have mentioned the greater need and that is about the advertising of liquor in general. We know that the Labour view when the first piece of legislation went through was that we needed to seriously consider the harmful effects of alcohol sponsorship of sports teams. For some reason—it is just a Kiwi thing. You go to a game of rugby and you have a beer and a hotdog and chips. Although most of us have enjoyed those times I think that if we are really serious about this as an issue moving forward into the future it is important that we make sure that these pieces of legislation are substantial—that they deal with the issues fairly and finally in one hit. It does not mean that we keep coming back to tinker with these types of important pieces of legislation.Far too often in this House in my short time as a member that is what we seem to be doing—coming back here and tinkering with substantial pieces of legislation when of course because of the expediency agenda of this Government pieces of legislation are missing these things. They are missing what the Government might see as small oversights but really in the bigger scheme of things if it had been done properly and if it had been done right at the beginning then we would not have to be here wasting the time of the House. Instead we could be considering—