Donald Rod: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Donald Rod: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5416] 
ROD DONALD (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I want to take just a very brief call— 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Take your whole time. 
ROD DONALD 
: Thank you Mr Prebble. I am concerned that the burgeoning number of listeners will be concerned by what Mr Mark was saying before—that this bill is all about ready-to-drinks. The bill clearly states in the explanatory note— 
Ron Mark 
: I didn’t say it was all about it; I said that’s what they have sold it on. 
ROD DONALD 
: No the Government has not sold it on that because the explanatory note clearly states: “The 14-23% range of products predominantly consists of light spirits fortified wines and sherries.” It goes on to talk about light spirits. 
I suggest that people like Mr Mark have a look at what the Distilled Spirits Association stated in its submission to the Alcohol Advisory Council (ALAC) on this issue. It very clearly defined light spirits and it did not refer to light spirits as having anything to do with ready-to-drinks. So those members with all the bottles on their benches—and I do not know who did the drinking but— 
John Carter 
: That’s what the Minister said in his introduction.  
Hansard 
 recorded it. 
ROD DONALD 
: Did the Minister say that? I missed the Minister’s speech. Well I refer all members both from the Opposition and the Government to what the Distilled Spirits Association says in its submission to ALAC about light spirits. I referred to some of it in my first reading speech. It very clearly defines light spirits by saying that it is a market-coined term it is a loose term and it is not legally defined. It goes on to state that a proper and alternative name would be “general alcoholic beverage or diluted alcoholic preparation” and that those drinks “should in no way be confused with a traditional distilled spirit”. As I said in my speech they are in effect watered-down ethyl alcohol or flavoured alcohol containing small amounts of sweetener.[ 
Interruption 
] But they are formulated to just below 23 percent. The industry’s definition of light spirits is formulated to just below 23 percent and “so designed to benefit from the anomalies in the excise system”. 
The submission stated: “A crucial difference denoting between spirits and light spirits is New Zealand’s food law requires a spirit to contain a minimum of 37 percent of alcohol. The association underscores the fact that there is no official definition of light spirit and as a category it should for policy reasons not be confused in any way with traditional spirits and liquers.” The association went on to say—and this is the industry—“Anecdotal evidence has been presented that light spirits are primarily consumed and targeted to young people. It appears the market is growing primarily because of some very low retail pricing. An excise shift could help address and achieve the harm minimisation objective.” I think it is quite extraordinary that the industry is actually calling for a change in the excise yet National ACT and New Zealand First are opposing it.