Brownlee Gerry: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Brownlee Gerry: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5452] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 I think Ken Shirley hit the nail on the head when he spoke in his contribution earlier of the deep embarrassment that Government members started to feel when it was revealed that alcopops and other ready-to-drink alcohol mixes freely available to young people these days are not covered by the bill. Ever since that time we have heard all sorts of fake sanctimony about the whole binge-drinking culture that frankly I do not think exists to the extent that those members want to claim. Alcohol is a problem for a very small percentage of the population alcohol has always been a problem and alcohol will continue to be a problem regardless of a bill like this. 
It is an utter nonsense for this Parliament to put forward a view that because the tax on a bottle of 23 percent alcohol rises by between $4.75 and $6.75 that will suddenly see an end to binge drinking. The argument is that if people pay higher prices for their alcohol they will not binge drink. Everyone in this House has to know that that is a total nonsense. Any suggestion that this bill has been moved primarily for health reasons is rubbish. It is without doubt a straight revenue grab—albeit a small amount—that will satisfy some of the demands of minor parties that support the coalition in this House. 
Those members should hang their heads in shame at the effect that this tax grab will have on elderly New Zealanders who as many of our colleagues have said do occasionally enjoy some sherry some Madeira or perhaps some port. In many cases they will now have to pay $7 or $8 a bottle more. This Government has repeatedly said that it does much better by our elderly. This is a Government that crows about how much superannuation has gone up under its watch. I want to tell New Zealanders that for every dollar this Government has given elderly New Zealanders in their pensions it has taken $2 back with some of the pernicious tax moves in its absolutely appalling management of this country’s economy. One does not have to go very far to see examples of that—outrageous power prices high increases in food costs extra petrol tax extra tobacco tax for those who still enjoy that habit on occasions and now a very large tax increase on what might have been a quiet Sunday evening tipple. 
The argument run by Mr Anderton was quite nonsensical. He suggested that the habit of binge drinkers or those who have any problem with alcohol is in some way price-sensitive. I suggest that for many young people who start to experience those problems this issue is about access to the drug that causes their problem. I am absolutely sickened by the number of Labour members who have made great speeches in this House about how the problem of binge drinking and bad practice with alcohol can be solved by raising its price. They are the same members who just a short time ago voted to lower the drinking age. How much better it would have been if this House had had a proper process and proper public consultation around the issue of limiting access to alcohol for younger New Zealanders. That would be a fair thing to do and would have created an environment where a whole community could have been party to a wider educative process. However the idea of simply slamming the House into extraordinary urgency to put on a little bit of extra tax and dress it up as somehow being a health move is just totally outrageous. 
I tell Larry Baldock and other members of United Future that I accept that the sentiments stated in their contributions were very genuine. However when we hear things like: “Last time the Government did something like this Lion Breweries made massive profits.” one sees that there is a misunderstanding of what this bill is all about. Lion Breweries do not make the stuff that is being covered by this bill. Ninety percent of that stuff is made by a New Zealand - owned company that employs 200 New Zealanders and is now likely to close. If those young people make choices about the alcohol they consume on the basis of price they will now be driven to beer wine and also to those different ready-to-drink mixes that are currently available. It is said that the industry will make a degree of profit where misery is involved but the vast majority of New Zealanders who consume alcohol do so responsibly and do not have problems in their lives. Increasingly it is just a hallmark of this Government that the failings of the minority are suddenly made to be the tyranny of the majority by all sorts of laws that are designed to restrict and impinge upon everyday freedoms. 
One of the ridiculous aspects of this bill is the effect it will have in increasing the costs of food items like ice cream liqueur chocolates Christmas cakes and preserved fruit. All of those items are very viable export earners for New Zealand. They are tested in the domestic market and they get their start by making progress in the domestic market. Anyone who suggests that binge drinking is contributed to by ice cream with a small alcohol content liqueur chocolates Christmas cake or preserved fruit has to be almost preserved fruit themselves. [ 
Interruption 
] The junior whip for the Labour Party says that is nonsense. That person should read what is in the bill. 
Finally some advice for all those Labour members: next time one of their senior Ministers comes to caucus and says that they will be up all night saving the young people of this country by pushing through an excise bill they should just read the bill before they say yes.