Carter John: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Carter John: Customs and Excise (Alcoholic Beverages) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5432] 
JOHN CARTER (NZ National—Northland) 
: 
 I listened closely to the speech made by Gordon Copeland and although he was genuine and believed in what he was saying I say to him and to Peter Dunne if they really believe there is a bottle of something between 14 and 23 percent alcohol that one can buy for $10 or less please produce it. What is that bottle of which they speak? Because it is a mystery to me and I suspect that it is a mystery to most other people on this side of the Chamber. I ask Mr Copeland what this bottle is of which he spoke. I would love to have seen it produced. He is not the only one who has spoken about it. His other colleagues have also mentioned this bottle but I am not aware of it and those who have done the research and produced bottles are not aware of it. 
I think it is very important and if they have got that evidence we need to know because that would put a different slant on it. Until that evidence can be produced I say that the argument is flawed which brings me to the next point. If United Future the Greens and the Labour Party and the Minister in the chair Jim Anderton are genuinely concerned about youth drinking then why are we fiddling? All this is a fiddle. Why are they not addressing the matter of the drinking age? If they are genuine about it why are they not saying they will shift the age back from 18 to 20—or if they are worried about that then why not shift it back even further? If those members are absolutely genuine in what they tell us in this Chamber then would they not be moving to change the drinking age? I would have thought that instead of their coming down here and talking about some mystical bottle of drink that Jimmy can get at less than $10 or the fact that it is for the good of the young people they would have been talking about changing the drinking age—but not on your nelly! I say to Peter Dunne Gordon Copeland the Labour Party and the Greens please produce that bottle or talk about raising the drinking age. 
That leads me to the third point I will make which is this—and I say this particularly to Mr Anderton. If the Minister had said “Look we are going to increase the tax. This bill is about increasing tax but we also hope it will have some other benefits. It might discourage young people from drinking and it might have some other beneficial sides to it. It might encourage other investment in drinking but the purpose of it is taxation.” when he first read out his speech that would have been an honest statement. 
But unfortunately that is not what he said at all. He did not tell the Parliament that. The member in the chair came down and made a speech and said: “We are worried about young people. We are concerned about the drinking levels of young people. We are worried that they are abusing alcohol so what we will do to stop it is increase the price.” That is not what the Government will achieve anyway on the drinks that the young people drink and that was not an honest statement for that Minister to make in his introductory speech. 
Hon Jim Anderton 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairman. I have listened for some hours and I have let this go a number of times but I do not believe that it is appropriate for a member to accuse another member of not being honest. It has been said a number of times tonight and I object to it and ask the member to withdraw. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I accept that point of order. 
JOHN CARTER 
: Let me put it this way then. It would have been more honest if Mr Anderton had said that this was a tax bill—that would have been an honest statement because that is what this bill is. If he had said in his introductory speech “This bill is about taxing alcohol and we will get revenue of some $18 million.” that would have been an honest statement. Instead he chose to make other statements which in my view did not tell us what this bill does. He spoke about the fact that he wanted to stop young people drinking. That will not be achieved. This is a tax bill.