Rich Katherine: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Rich Katherine: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5442] 
KATHERINE RICH (NZ National) 
: 
 I know that the last speaker was probably very well meaning but I have to say that some of the points he made are misguided at best. The liquor industry is not out there to do Satan’s work. The liquor industry is not out there to entice young people to drink themselves into a frenzy. The liquor industry does not provide liquor to ice-cream companies with the express aim of trying to lure people into alcohol consumption. The liquor industry provides alcohol to ice-cream companies so they can produce ice creams that we as adults like to eat. Mr Benson-Pope sitting over there will be well aware of a company in the Dunedin area called the Gourmet Ice Cream Company which makes a wonderful range of alcoholic ice creams that eaten in moderation certainly do not affect the brain at all. 
The whole idea that somehow children will eat enough ice cream to have that effect indicates that the member from United Future has lived a very sheltered life. I ask him whether he seriously believes that a total ban on alcohol will make one iota of difference to the community. He should look at what banning alcohol did for Chicago in the 1920s. It did not change anything. It just drove it underground. 
It is very interesting to look down the long list of products in the schedule and note the changes. It is clear that none of the products that United Future members thought would be included are there. I feel sorry for those members because I think their arms have been twisted. They were convinced that supporting this bill would be a good thing for the community in terms of what it will do for young people. One of the aspects of the bill that has been made quite clear by members on this side is that the bill is nothing more than a tax bill. It will not make any difference to the amount that teenagers drink. If we look at the alcohol that will largely be captured by this legislation it is all the stuff that many senior citizens would be quite happy to consume. As mentioned before when I drink sherry and vermouth I am usually at my grandparents’ house and I quite enjoy drinking that with them. However it is quite laughable to think that those drinks would ever have been an option when I was in my teens and 20s. 
In terms of the real change that it is claimed the bill will make it simply will not deliver. It is interesting that cordials and bitters are included in the schedule. I cannot think of any alcoholic cordial unless the recipe for Jungle Juice or Refresh has changed over the years. As I said a number of these alcoholic drinks are consumed by senior citizens. It is a sad day for the Labour Party because not only is it adding a tax to a number of alcoholic beverages that are consumed by a lot of seniors but also it is spoiling their fun altogether by wanting to ban smoking in their Returned Services Associations and ban a whole lot of things that these older people are used to doing. 
I have a few questions about the schedule. There are some things that I am not quite sure about. I wonder whether the Minister could take a call and tell me what “undenatured ethyl alcohol” is. I am not sure what the undenatured bit means. I also do not know what “perry” is. It sounds a very unusual drink. Of course I am aware of “mead” but once again I have to say that I cannot think of any teenager going out on a Saturday night with a flagon of mead let alone a flagon of cider sherry bitters—or cordial for that matter. They are hardly the beverages of choice for enthusiastic teenagers.