Henare PeeniPEENI HENARE (Labour—Tāmaki Makaurau): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. Thank you for this opportunity. I rise to speak in the third reading of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Display of Low-alcohol Beverages and Other Remedial Matters) Amendment Bill. Just as the member Mr Bishop leaves the House I note that he spoke about the facts around the drinking culture. Well what we do know is that just recently you may be aware there was a thing called Crate Day. I am sure Mr Bishop was one who trotted down to the local liquor outlet and grabbed himself probably a crate of Tui—he looks like a Tui man. It is probably one of the lighter beers out on the market. I have no doubt Mr Bishop would have trotted down to the liquor store grabbed a crate and probably joined some friends who are probably in the same age bracket and he would have indulged in a crate of beer. Now post - Crate Day hospitals across the country and in Waikato and in my electorate of Tāmaki Makaurau have made it very clear that Crate Day has to go and that outlets who advertise a day such as Crate Day are actually causing great harm in communities. They are saying that the A & E departments in Waikato Hospital and in Auckland Hospital were inundated with people of all ages who were completely intoxicated who had to have their stomachs pumped and who were at serious risk of choking on their own vomit. Some of them got violent towards the staff in the A & E who were there to help them: doctors nurses and ambulance drivers and officers. This is the culture we are talking about. If the member wants to refer to some facts I suggest he listens to those who are on the front line of dealing with some of these issues and not simply read a report on the internet. But we do rise on this side of the House to support this bill. The member mentioned some of the—his word was oversight". Actually the words we want to use on this side of the House are "unintended consequences". We seem to have been coming back into the House rather regularly of late and mentioning unintended consequences which is to the point that my esteemed colleague here Mr Su'a William Sio mentioned about the need to make legislation that is transformative—that actually goes all the way or goes further than what this bill intends to do—to making sure that we protect our communities while also offering the opportunity for our members of the community to enjoy an alcoholic beverage. One of the parts of this bill actually says that without overexposing the general public to alcoholic beverages in the aisle at your local supermarket this particular bill will allow them all to be situated in the one place and that is common sense. That just makes sense to us. Why would you walk down with your child—I have got young children myself. I will be holding their hand walking down the aisle and if they are not dragging me to the confectionary aisle they certainly spot out the drinks and they know what they are. So this kind of bill is a common-sense smart way forward. Does it address all of the harms of alcohol? Probably not. It does tidy up however some of the unintended consequences or in Mr Bishop's word "oversights"—oversights from the 2012 legislation. The rest is technical amendments. We understand that. The definition of a "working day"—Minister Nicky Wagner in the place of Minister Amy Adams described that well enough. We will not labour that point. But what it does do is it actually just tidies up and makes it very clear for the general public the definition of the "working day". My colleague Mr Su'a William Sio talked about the ability to gain an on-licence an off-licence or a special licence. The bill talks about the ability of those companies that qualify under the Companies Act to be able to do that—they are able to gain an on-licence or an off-licence. I mentioned in earlier debates on this particular bill how I understand that but if you look at the kinds of companies that qualify under that particular Act one has to wonder well why we would allow such open access to having an on-licence or an off-licence? We have made that point throughout the process of this bill. I understand that for the purposes of holding events and the supply of alcohol to consumers—I understand that. But let us be very clear that in opening it up to the Companies Act what we are actually saying is that in that definition we are allowing a wide range of companies access to this and that is of concern to me. That is of concern to me. It touches on some of the points that Mr Su'a William Sio spoke about with regard to our vulnerable communities. Companies in vulnerable communities are exploiting a bill such as this by gaining an on-licence or applying for an on-licence or an off-licence to supply alcohol and that is a concern. That is a concern in my electorate of Tāmaki Makaurau across the electorates of my colleagues here and of course in the great township of Onehunga. But that is a concern and my fear is that when we are able to have a review at some point in time—hopefully in the near future—we will look back at this to see what kinds of companies have applied for these types of licences and we will be able to get some data that will inform us. And I am going to pick that it is going to actually tell us that maybe we gave far too much room here—far too much scope for companies to be able to apply for those. So those are some of the concerns we have. Of course we do support this bill. Like I said they are sensible steps forward—we understand that—and we are more than happy to support the bill into legislation. But in my final closing point I do just want to express our disappointment at the fact that this particular bill just does not go quite far enough. It does not meet the recommendations of the experts and those who are able to crunch the data whom Mr Bishop referred to who made clear recommendations that a major overhaul and reform was needed in this particular space. But for now in the third reading we will support this bill. Kia ora tātou katoa."