Kedgley Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Kedgley Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:666;Page:13649] 
7. 
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: Why are the police Fire Service and Defence Force bars exempt from liquor licensing requirements? 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue) 
on behalf of the  
Minister of Justice 
: The exemptions for police Fire Service and Defence Force bars under the Sale of Liquor Act 1989 arose as a result of the hours location and nature of those jobs. All three agencies have their own internal processes and controls to manage the sale supply and consumption of alcohol on their premises in a way that the Law Commission report noted emulated the rules set down by the Sale of Liquor Act. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Does he agree with the police commissioner that “officers should face the same rules as everyone else” and that “If you are going to show some leadership around this issue then you should subject yourself to the same rules as everyone else has.”? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: The short answer is to refer to what I said in my primary answer—namely that these conditions are set out in the current Sale of Liquor Act because the conditions under which those bars operate are in many senses parallel to the conditions in the Act. But the Government has made it clear that it is more than happy for the select committee to give some consideration to this issue and if it feels that the view adopted by the Commissioner of Police should be adopted in respect of the police and the other agencies this Parliament can give some thought to that matter when the bill comes back to the House. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Does he agree that exempting the police the Fire Service and the Defence Force from liquor laws creates a perception of unfairness and the impression that they are above the law? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: I need to make the point again that it is not a question of their being exempted from the laws; they have their own procedures which actually follow very closely the law that is in place. As I say when the select committee has the legislation before it and gives consideration to this matter and receives submissions upon it it may well come to a different view. I point out to the House that there are currently only some 28 police bars throughout New Zealand and no new police bars have been put in place since 2005. So I suspect that in many instances the matter is taking care of itself. 
Rahui Katene 
: Is the liquor licensing exemption for the police Fire Service and Defence Force consistent with the decision made by the Minister of Corrections to exempt prison officers from the policy to ban tobacco in prisons? What is the rationale behind awarding special privileges to these officials to exclude them from policy reform in alcohol and tobacco control? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: I limit my response to the second part of the question. I think I have explained the rationale which is that these particular categories—the police Fire Service and armed forces bars—operate in a manner akin to that set out for other premises as laid down in the Sale of Liquor Act. That means that as a consequence they operate in virtually the same way as every other outlet. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Does the Minister agree with the Prime Minister’s statement that “our experience is that the they”—the police—“drink responsibly.”; if so is he aware of the series of well-publicised cases of police being convicted of driving while drunk after drinking for many hours in police bars? Does he agree that this behaviour undermines respect for the police and their ability to uphold the law especially the enforcement of liquor laws? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: I am aware of the Prime Minister’s statement. I am aware of the facts and the number of cases that the member is referring to. I make the observation that those cases probably fall in proportion to the level of cases in general society and I also point out that the penalties that offending officers receive often involve loss of employment—far more significant consequences than elsewhere. I think the public can have confidence that by and large the police and the emergency services operate to the highest of professional standards and that their activities are not alcohol-impaired. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Can he confirm that if police defence and Fire Service bars are exempt from the requirements of the Sale of Liquor Act they will be able to supply liquor at any time of the day or night including to intoxicated people and will be exempt from the requirement of all other bars in New Zealand to promote the responsible use of alcohol? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: I cannot confirm the exact nature of the member’s question. In all my experience of working with those groups they make a very high priority of ensuring that they promote responsible use of alcohol. They take very strict and dim views of their members who infringe in that regard and I have no reason to believe that that is about to change in the future. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Why does the Government believe it is important that Parliament should lead by example and give up its exemption but police who enforce the law should not? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: I think the situations are somewhat different. There has been a rather unusual focus on Parliament’s behaviour over the years. Parliament has decided that given the fact that we have one bar here which is open for only a limited number of hours each night it is probably just as well to put it under the general licensing provisions. I do not think we can draw conclusions from that decision in respect of those other agencies.