Collins Judith: Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Collins Judith: Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:648;Page:17155] 
JUDITH COLLINS (National—Clevedon) 
: 
 On behalf of the National Party I am very pleased to say that we will support the Sale of Liquor (Objections to Applications) Amendment Bill going to the select committee. It is very unusual in a matter like this to have party support as opposed to a conscience vote but I think that most people in this House certainly appreciate the fact that as the Hon George Hawkins has pointed out over-consumption of liquor has become a severe problem in parts of the country. 
Both George Hawkins and I are constituency members of Parliament for the South Auckland region. Randwick Park where a shooting recently occurred in a liquor outlet is currently covered by George Hawkins’ Manurewa electorate; with the boundary changes it will become part of the Papakura electorate. There is an area of South Auckland where there is an abundance of liquor outlets. There are probably not nearly enough childcare centres—only about 20 percent of young children in South Auckland go to early childhood centres. We have an abundance of very good people who live their lives the very best they can. We also have an abundance of graffiti taggers and we have an abundance of crime. But as I said we also have an abundance of people who do not indulge in those sorts of behaviours. 
The good people of our areas have told us that they wish to have a say in what goes on in their neighbourhoods. I know that some people feel that if we have liquor outlets all over the place then eventually they will run out of business or they will sort themselves out. It is very easy to take that sort of line unless one actually has to live with those businesses. Many of the people we see do not get much of a choice as to where they live. They do not have the ability to say “Look this area is getting a bit tough now. I think I’ll move out.” They often live in State houses or other accommodation in areas that are not nearly as advantageous as other areas. Their children go to decile 1 or decile 2 schools. For those who do not understand what that means I tell them that those schools are in areas where the population is made up of our poorest New Zealanders. 
They do not have much choice. What they do want a choice about is whether they have a liquor outlet in their area and what that liquor outlet will actually be like—whether it will be selling a bottle of wine or basically pushing alcohol on to young people who do not know how to handle it or themselves. I understand that some people do not appreciate that not all people have a choice about where they live. All of us here in the House can choose whether we drink. We can probably choose whether we live next door to people who wish to overindulge in alcohol but as I have said most of the people I am talking about do not have that choice. Good people in South Auckland often do not get those choices. 
When I first became the member of Parliament for Clevedon I visited the Counties-Manukau Police District Commander Steve Shortland. I asked him about the issue of P and its effect on our young people gangs and everything else. He told me that the worst issue he and the police officers in our area of Counties-Manukau deal with is alcohol and its abuse. Many of us can think back to the times when as students or whatever we did something silly because of alcohol but we are talking about people who kill others. We are talking about people who bash children and others who not only indulge in P but drink alcohol with it and who think that they should do whatever they wish to and blow anybody else. The police have told us that they would like to be able to have a bit of a say in this issue too. 
In the area I represent in Papakura the local council and the mayor Calum Penrose have been very forthright about wishing to have a say in what happens in their town. So they should because people will complain to them about a liquor outlet that sells alcohol to 16-year-olds and they will complain to them about a liquor outlet where street gang members hang around outside and terrorise the shopkeepers. The councillors cannot do anything about it yet they are blamed for the fact that we have laws that allow it to happen. 
Although we can always argue that it is against the law to sell alcohol to 16-year-olds I think we need to be a little bit realistic. Our police cannot even respond to burglaries. Just the other day one of my constituents had a home invasion where she and her husband had people come into their house and steal property. Fortunately the invaders left—they did not actually bash the couple which was something. My constituent rang the police who turned up 3 hours later apologising for the fact that they had been at two other calls and were not able to get there any earlier. She was very appreciative of the fact that they turned up. Frankly we cannot expect the police to wander around the streets checking people’s IDs to see whether they should be sold alcohol. 
Another concern that has arisen is that alcohol is now used as a loss-leader to get people into supermarkets. We have supermarkets in this country that currently sell alcohol at well below the price they pay the wholesalers for it. They do that because they want to get people into their shops. Well it does not take a rocket scientist to work out that if they are underpricing alcohol they are probably overpricing something else. The way I see it we need to say to the people who sell alcohol that we expect them to act responsibly and we need to be able to tell the communities that would like to have their say to have their communities back what they can do. 
I am fully aware that this bill is not perfect and I am sure George Hawkins would be the first to admit that. But we have a great deal of hope that the bill will be improved when it goes to the select committee—and I believe that with the support of the House it will. It will attract a great many submissions and it should come back to the House in a form that most members can support. This area is very difficult for people who feel that anyone should be able to go out and buy a legally obtainable product. It is actually not about that; it is about being part of the community. We talk a lot in this House about being part of the community and about expecting community involvement and the communities are saying they would like to have some more involvement. Many communities will not mind whether there are liquor outlets on their streets; they will not mind at all as long as people conduct their business properly. But there are certainly areas where people feel that their communities have been inundated with alcohol outlets and that they have never had a chance to say what sort of community they would like. 
I hope this bill will get the support of the House to go to the select committee that the select committee will have a good and robust discussion about it that it will get lots of submissions and that the select committee will not be dismissive of the communities’ needs but actually will take them very seriously. I commend George Hawkins for having the courage to bring forward a bill that to many people is not politically correct but frankly I think we need it. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Marian Hobbs) 
: Before I call the next speaker I just make the comment that the remaining eight speeches are 5 minutes in length.