Dyson Ruth: Alcohol Advisory Council Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Dyson Ruth: Alcohol Advisory Council Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1578] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 First of all I commend the acting Minister Anne Tolley for that extraordinarily well-read speech and I express my slight regret that the Hon Tony Ryall has not been able to join us in this particular part of the debate. 
This Alcohol Advisory Council Amendment Bill was introduced to the House— 
Hon Anne Tolley 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sorry to interrupt the member’s speech but she is an experienced member and she knows that under the Standing Orders she cannot comment on the absence from the House of any particular member. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: Speaking to the point of order Mr Assistant Speaker I say that I understand the point the Minister has made but that was not what I said. I said that the Minister of Health was unable to join us in the debate. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: It is a fine point and the member raising the point of order could normally be entitled to draw that conclusion but it is not the only conclusion that could have been drawn. Let us be fair: people have raised these issues before and Ruth Dyson did not specifically say the person was absent from the Chamber. Now that the member has raised a point of order I think that her conclusion was the only conclusion one could have drawn but it was not necessarily so at the time. The member will continue her speech. 
Could I just say there seems to be a bit of confusion on the drill sheet. I should have said to the House before I called the Hon Ruth Dyson that the question is that the motion be agreed to. Just for the sake of precision I mention that that is the question before the House. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: Mr Assistant Speaker it gives me great pleasure to speak to the motion that you have just put before the House and it is one that Labour will be supporting strongly because the Alcohol Advisory Council Amendment Bill was introduced to the House by the previous Labour-led Government. I commend my friend and former colleague the Hon Damien O’Connor for introducing this legislation. 
As Minister Anne Tolley indicated this bill is a technical amendment bill. There are no party politics involved in it and as such our speakers will not be taking up the time of the House but we are a little concerned that if we were to do what the public would think appropriate and just say: we do not oppose this bill we agree with the Supplementary Order Paper that is about as technical as it can get; we contributed strongly through the select committee there is cross-party agreement on this; and then sat down I would be very anxious about the health and well-being of the Government whips. I can imagine that Chris Tremain and Nathan Guy would be scrambling around for a bit more work to put on the Order Paper because once again no bills have been introduced into the House. The only issue we are debating tonight is yet another bill that was introduced by the previous Government. Would I wish ill health and the wrath of Gerry Brownlee on those two young men? The answer is no to both of those questions. I wish them good health and an easy life but I fear that despite my good wishes they are not about to get them. 
As I said earlier this bill is primarily technical. It provides for an updated levy system that is fair that is simple to calculate and that everyone understands. Minister Anne Tolley went through the details of that at quite some length as did the Health Committee even though it heard only six submissions. That should be an indication of the fact that the industry the key health players the New Zealand Customs Service and the legal advisers all agreed with the basis—and in fact the legal writing—of this amendment bill. Advice was received from the Ministry of Health the Customs Service and parliamentary counsel in addition to the six submissions. It does not sound to me like it was a very contentious process. 
The report from the select committee outlined the reasons for updating and changing the rating regime: to ensure that the rating fairly reflects the alcohol content and to ensure that the public are supportive of it. This is a very common-sense move introduced by the Hon Damien O’Connor in his capacity as a previous Associate Minister of Health. The then National Opposition supported the first reading of the bill. I am delighted that this bill is one of the many bills introduced by the previous Labour Government that remain on the Order Paper— 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: Time for a change! 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: I am not sure how much of a breather we will be giving the Leader of the House and those Ministers because this bill is another example of legislation that was introduced under the previous regime. We will continue to support the bill nevertheless and I commend its speedy progress through the House.