King Annette: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
King Annette: Alcohol Reform Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 October 2012. Volume:685;Page:6076. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Labour—Rongotai) 
: 
 Can I say to my colleague Iain Lees-Galloway who has just resumed his seat that I agree that Supplementary Order Paper 121 is not the only important Supplementary Order Paper to the Alcohol Reform Bill. In fact there are some very good ones which I intend to support. But it is a Supplementary Order Paper that has been put forward by Hone Harawira and deals with I think his passionate concern around the age at which alcohol can be bought and consumed. In that spirit I am going to support this amendment. 
I am one of those who have never changed their mind in terms of what the drinking age should be. I was the Minister of Health who voted to retain the drinking age at 20 based on what I believe was good health background and evidence. In every vote since I have not been persuaded that we ought to change the age. 
This particular provision deals with our looking once again at the age and the Ministry of Justice reviewing it in 5 years’ time. I think that is a very good suggestion indeed because the last review we had of alcohol as my colleague Lianne Dalziel pointed out took 12 years. It went to the Law Commission. It was a major piece of work and took a considerable amount of time. The only concern I have is that the Law Commission was not given the opportunity to write this bill because I am sure that if it had written this bill we actually might have had a more comprehensive one than this and many more of its recommendations would have been agreed to. But it took 12 years for that review and I do not believe we should wait another 12 years or longer before we look at particular issues. Lianne Dalziel has already signalled that there may be other issues that ought to be up for review in a shorter time frame. What this amendment does is say that we will relook at ages for purchase and sale on licensed premises within 5 years of the commencement of this Act. It is not the big bells and whistles of the Law Commission; it is done by the Ministry of Justice. 
Why I support it is because you do need to base your policy on ongoing evidence and research and things do change. I am very persuaded by Dr Peter Gluckman the Chief Science Advisor to the Prime Minister who is constantly telling the Government that it ought to provide policy based on research and evidence. I think that in the next 5 years there will be considerable research gathered. For example the World Health Assembly now issues a global status report on the harm of alcohol and its first major report came out last year. It arose out of a global strategy from the World Health Organization because nations wanted to look at strategies and approaches to reduce the harm of alcohol. In fact my understanding is that New Zealand was one of the hundred nations that supported a global strategy on alcohol and one of their recommendations was to raise the age for sale of alcohol. So I would like us to be always looking at what the latest evidence is and what the research shows in terms of changing patterns the impact on health and the different issues that arise out of the consumption of alcohol. 
I also think the public would like us to relook at the age issue in 5 years’ time. They would support as we saw in a poll last week the age being 20 years. I know that many here voted for that. I know that others voted for the split age. I know that others voted for 18. I accept people’s votes; I just wish other people would remember how they voted. But the public— 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Brain fade. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Brain fade. Well what does it come from? This is what we need greater research on. Does brain fade come from too much consumption of alcohol? 
The public have made it clear that they would like the age to be 20. I think that with the ministry undertaking this review of it in 5 years’ time we can base decisions on the latest research and evidence and not just licking—