Brownlee GerryHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National): The National Party is not supporting this bill. We did support and we introduced in Government the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act. This is an amendment to that bill with the interesting brackets in it (Community Participation)".Throughout the debate all through today we've heard Labour members particularly talking about "community community community". Well I asked the Minister during the committee stages to please define "community". And he didn't because he can't because this bill makes it possible for anyone anywhere in New Zealand to oppose any application for either a new licence or a variation anywhere in the country. If anyone thinks that that somehow is representative or a way of representing the views of the community they're wrong.I've been really surprised by the way Labour members have approached this. If anyone doubts in this country that the sentiment of the Temperance Union has died they've only got to listen to the debates today.What is particularly irritating is that most of those facilities throughout the country operate without a problem. Of course there are problem outlets but there are problem outlets in almost any activity in the commercial sector and frankly the Government sector. So that's what should be dealt with—not this blanket approach to putting a sword of Damocles over any operator anywhere in the country as this provision does.I make that point because if we're going to talk about the word "community" then surely that large majority of people who live in our suburbs who live in our cities who live in our rural areas who just assume that "Of course there's going to be a local pub; of course I can buy a wine at the local cafe if I want to; of course I can go down to my neighbourhood tavern." They assume it's going to be there and they assume that it's going to be operating properly and they assume that there is a body out there keeping an eye on how that operation is undertaken.We have the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act which is a very voluminous piece of legislation that puts massive duties on anyone who operates in those types of outlets and they are very seldom abused.So here we have really a bill that's salving what is I think a very loud group in some communities who are saying "We can't have these things." It is as I said before the Temperance Union sentiment on steroids. I think it's a great shame because it assumes that anyone who opposes these things is from the community when the vast majority of people in the community just assume the law is there to give them the opportunities that they might occasionally want to avail themselves of.As for the Green comments today I was staggered by that. How that Green member can stand up here and talk about the damage and harm from alcohol and then have a sentiment and a history and a policy to legalise marijuana is absolutely beyond me. It just has to really show that there is a particular bias against the operators of these sort of establishments. I will conclude comments there simply saying that this is bad legislation it is selective legislation it is pernicious; it does not look at the problems of alcohol harm and why that is prevalent in some communities and not in others. It is the sort of legislation that makes people feel good but will make very little difference to outcomes. Does anyone really think that if a number of bars in New Zealand were just down to the same level as cigarette outlets for example that people would just say "I'm not going to any more. No more beers on a Friday night for me."? No they'll go to somewhere where it's available.So understand what "community" means understand what society is deal with the problems in it; don't start putting restriction on choice on everybody because of a particular bias that someone might bring to this House."