Hutchison Paul: Alcohol Advisory Council Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Hutchison Paul: Alcohol Advisory Council Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1579] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) 
: 
 Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker for the opportunity to speak on the Alcohol Advisory Council Amendment Bill. I note that this bill is about simplifying and bringing into line the levy paid to the Alcohol Advisory Council (ALAC) with the excise duties that are otherwise collected. It is interesting after the somewhat partisan contribution from the Hon Ruth Dyson to see that the legislative history began with the introduction of the bill on 11 December 2007—a long time ago. It was quite fascinating to hear Ruth Dyson say that surely this bill is non-contentious and could go through expeditiously. Why did the Labour Government not get this bill through the House if it was to simplify legislation? But no that was not the way of the Labour Government because after all its legacy is one of cementing in an enmeshed and entwined conglomeration of bureaucracy over the last 9 years. 
It is refreshing that a new National Government has come into office taken up this bill in the first few months and is passing it with alacrity as it should have been passed by that somewhat lazy Labour Government over those long 9 years. It is very refreshing that there is bipartisan agreement on this bill because clearly it is sensible and the sector was supportive of it. The sector had concerns of course about various technical aspects but I did note it was generally very supportive and helpful in terms of ensuring that the technical aspects were progressed. 
It is important to make mention that the bill is not intended to contribute to reducing alcohol-related harm but instead it aims to simplify the calculation of the levy. The Government of course is extremely concerned about alcohol-related harm in New Zealand. However this bill is purely a technical amendment to simplify legislation. I note that ALAC does some tremendous work in its role of reducing harm from the use of alcohol and its various other efforts in terms of education and research. The council is dependent on the $12 million that it receives each year and I understand that about a third of it comes from these levies. 
The aim of the bill is to bring the levy-setting regime into line with the excise-setting regime and I think it has done that very comfortably. I note that in the schedule there is now quite a clear description of what percentage of alcohol by volume in most item classes relates to the rate. It is important that the method for determining the variable rates is set out in the schedule for a given financial year. The variable rate for a class is the average alcohol content by volume of all the liquor of that class that was imported into or manufactured in New Zealand in the preceding statistical year. 
Four major problems noted by ALAC were that the levy-setting mechanism was outdated ready-to-drink beverages did not exist at the time the law was introduced proof litres have not been used to measure spirits since 1986 and the current levy-setting mechanism was extremely complex. Although the current Act allows the levy to be set by the Minister of Health by  
Gazette 
 notice there is no process for Cabinet to be involved which is inconsistent with many of the other levy-setting approaches. 
There is no doubt that the proposed regime is up to date and very simple to calculate. There is no doubt— 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Why are you filibustering Paul? 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: It is very important that members opposite realise the virtues of this bill which at last has been taken up by a forward-looking National Government. 
Further the new regime is flexible enough to allow for the emergence of the new types of beverages that do not easily fit into any liquor class in the current system. The definition of “wine” itself was something that was important for the committee to consider because “wine” has many definitions. The  
Oxford Dictionary 
 describes it as an alcoholic drink made from fermented grape juice or as a fermented alcoholic drink made from other fruits. But the verb is slightly different; apparently it is an Indian dance with gyratory movements of the pelvis. Maybe that it is an after-effect of the wine but it is very important that the definition is clearly made. Hence the bill repeals previous definitions and replaces them with one definition that of “wine” which means “the product of the complete or partial fermentation of any fruit (including grapes) vegetable or honey and—(a) includes—(i) cider perry”—if members have not heard of perry it is wine from pears—“and mead; and (ii) fortified wines such as sherry port and fruit or vegetable-based liquors;”. But the definition does not include beer or spirits or any liquor containing more than 1.15 percent volume of alcohol. It was important to make sure that those definitions were clearly incorporated into the bill. 
It is also very important that there is minimal impact on those who pay the levy and indeed the sector has agreed that that is the case. As I said before the sector has been very helpful with the evolution of this bill and very supportive also of ALAC. Price changes will be very small. The estimates are less than 1c for a bottle of wine a six-pack of beer or a four-pack of “RTDs” and less than 2c for a 750 ml— 
Hon Members 
: What’s an “RTD”? 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: Well I have already told members about “RTDs”. They should remember; they should think back and see whether their attention spans are more than 60 seconds. It is a shame that the members of the previous Labour Government not only failed to pass expeditiously legislation that was necessary but have also lost their retentive memory spans—they are less than 60 seconds. I tell them that “RTD” means ready-to-drink—you know an alcopop. They might not have heard of that either; they should come into the new millennium. But it is important to point out that price changes will be very small—less than 2c for a 750 ml bottle of spirits. 
The new schedule addresses the concerns raised by New Zealand Winegrowers about the clarity of what rates will be applicable to particular products and ALAC will continue to receive the necessary funding to continue its work: research dissemination of information educational programmes and innovative treatment programmes. So it is with much pleasure that I support the second reading of this bill.