Moroney Sue: Alcohol Reform Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Moroney Sue: Alcohol Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 06 December 2012. Volume:686;Page:7293. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to take a further call on Part 6 of the Alcohol Reform Bill because I do have two amendments on Supplementary Order Paper 114 to this part. 
I invite that member Tim Macindoe who has just resumed his seat if he really does have a concern about foetal alcohol syndrome to put his money where his mouth is and vote for my amendment to compulsorily put notifications and warning labels on alcohol products. Will he do that? Because that is putting your money where your mouth is—not your money where your mouth is Mr Chair but Tim Macindoe’s money where his mouth is. I put politics aside and I voted for his amendment—on Supplementary Order Paper 280—to this same bill to increase the purchase age to 20. Will he vote for my two amendments that actually address the very issues that he was crying crocodile tears about in that 5-minute contribution? That is where the rubber hits the road. How he votes on my amendments will actually show whether he is genuine about the issues that he just spent 5 minutes talking about in this House. 
I am tired of hearing members of the Government go out in public and try to sound like they are addressing this issue in the most comprehensive way. When they come to Parliament they vote against very sensible and practical measures to fix the very issues that they claim they are concerned about. Well this is their chance to do just that. In my Supplementary Order Paper 114 I not only have proposed an amendment to require nutritional information to be on the labelling of alcohol products but also have proposed an amendment that would ensure that the health risks of drinking while pregnant are there on the label of the alcohol product. And if members of this Parliament like Tim Macindoe were genuine about their concerns they would vote for that amendment because that is one way we can attempt to address the issue. 
In fact the Fetal Alcohol Network NZ people pointed this out in their submission to the Justice and Electoral Committee. They asked as did a range of other submitters for this very measure to be taken. What did they have to say to the select committee? Well they said that overall their concern was that the Alcohol Reform Bill “is insufficiently robust and broad enough in its scope to reduce the significant harm that is concerning so many New Zealanders.” And they wanted us this Parliament to work “from the paramount principle of protecting children”—protecting children—“from alcohol-related harm which begins at conception.” That is what my amendment would help to assist with. 
They wanted us to recognise that harm from drinking during pregnancy poses a significant preventable and long-term risk to public health. We all know of the misery that that causes not only to the individuals whom it affects but also to the rest of us collectively because we all have to pay for those long-term risks to public health. The select committee also heard that more than 35 percent of women drink alcohol during pregnancy and that 10 percent are known to drink heavily during pregnancy. So we do have a problem that we must face up to. 
There is not one measure—there is not one measure—in this bill as put forward by the Government that attempts to address that very serious and very important issue. That is despite the crocodile tears and the speeches from Dr Paul Hutchison and more recently Tim Macindoe weeping and wailing about the issue of foetal alcohol syndrome. Do not weep and wail about it in the debating chamber. Use your vote. Use the vote that you have. That is the obligation that members opposite and all of us take up when we become one of those privileged 121 people who can vote on this issue. 
So if members opposite and all around the House are genuine about their concerns about the risk to children through no fault of their own of foetal alcohol syndrome and the risks of drinking while pregnant then they will vote in favour of Supplementary Order Paper 114. If they vote against it then all they are doing—all they are doing—is trying to sound brave and trying to sound concerned when the very real decision that they make in this Parliament is just to look the other way while this issue continues to get worse.