Walters VanushiVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour): Thank you Madam Speaker for the opportunity to take a call on the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Community Participation) Amendment Bill. This afternoon we've been reflecting on two bills which have demonstrated the heavy process-element to achieving real justice and this is absolutely one of them. Whether or not you have a right to have a say in a room if you feel intimidated if it's too costly to travel to arrive at a hearing or you feel that the language is not accessible it is not justice to have that right on paper. And that's in part what this bill addresses.I would also like to thank the Minister of Justice for facilitating and stewarding this really important bill through the House. She reflected on the fact that we had 420 submissions. We heard from 80 people. There was a lot of interest in this room and quite a broad range of views. I'd also like to thank our advisors and the diligent team at the Parliamentary Counsel Office who navigated some of the quite technical changes that we did end up making.I'd just like to walk through some of the aspects of what the bill does. So the first thing is removing the ability to appeal provisional local alcohol policies (LAP) to the Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority (ARLA)—that is something that Opposition member Hon Paul Goldsmith also spoke to. But what he didn't mention is that it's not a total removal of appeal rights in their entirety. So he spoke to the fact that local councils aren't always going to get it right. I agree. Local councils are subject to having to work within the bounds of the law which is why there's still an opportunity for entities to take a judicial review to challenge whether those decisions have been made within the bounds of the law or not.The second is giving district licensing committees and ALRA discretion to decline to renew a licence if the licence would be inconsistent with conditions on location or on licence density in the relevant LAP. Mr Goldsmith spoke about this as well and I can assure you Madam Speaker and those in the room that we did pay very careful attention to the business owners—there were a number of them who presented to the Justice Committee. I did feel that they raised actually very good points.However the concept that we don't need to ask our institutions and our businesses to adapt to our growing and maturing understanding of the world is simply false. It's also not what we do. We've done it in the area of climate change where we're asking businesses to adapt today to what we know is the science. We're asking our businesses to do it in terms of ESG—environmental social and governance standards—where there are currently suggestions that businesses listed on the NZX should be reporting in this space as well. So it is absolutely the case that we should constantly be looking to research to science be reflecting on the modern world and then asking—yes business but all our institutions to respond in this space as well.The third thing is requiring territorial authorities to consult on a discontinued LAP if they choose to recommence its development six or more years after the date when initial consultation was completed. The fourth allowing any person to object to an application for a licence or renewal of a licence application.And then there are a series of others which look to accessibility provisions as well which would allow more people essentially to engage with the process through things like joining by audio visual for example and through things like ending the cross-examination of those people providing evidence where a lot of people would choose not to if they were made to go through that process.Here I would just like to reflect on some of the people who did choose to submit. And I'd like to do that for two purposes. One is to show the ambit of the submissions that we received but the second potentially is the chair of the Justice Committee to encourage people to use their opportunity to make submissions to select committees because they come to us in many different forms.So here's the first. The first is an example of a brief succinct but to-the-point submission from Clifford Hallett: Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Community Participation) Amendment Bill—Clifford says Yes." Now some people do just express their support for bills in that form and I would actually like to encourage members of the public when you do feel that you're in favour of a bill simply write "yes" and submit. It does make a difference. I think what we find as select committee members is those who often have amendments they'd like to propose which is a really good thing and those who are in hard opposition to a bill will submit. Those who are in support often choose not to. Submit "yes" like Clifford; fantastic.The second one is from Josiah Tualamali'i who submitted in detail in terms of his community in Ōtautahi. He bullet-pointed the effects that he's seeing in his community but also his sense of why people choose not to submit at the moment and his view of the future and what we could look like. And he done that in one page: one very effective page that I've printed out—that I printed out when we were listening to submissions because it was incredibly powerful. If you have a brief set of views about an issue: submit in bullet-point form about your experience.The third: a submission from councillor Sarah Thompson. Now she is a councillor at the Hamilton City Council who made their own submission as well. Sarah chose to submit separately in her personal capacity and she obviously has a wealth of experience with multiple hats on. I thought that was an interesting example of a submission because I suspect a number of people who are a part of organisations who religiously submit to select committee feel that they can't express their personal views. That is not the case; you have extraordinary expertise and Sarah's personal submission was beautifully done because it also attached a transcript of a cross examination that she and another individual had gone through which really gave us a sense of how aggressive it could get for some of these individuals from the community who were objecting.So again this is a very needed bill. I do think we've landed in a fair space between business and also listening to community values. I think we must always be looking to ask our businesses to rise to the challenges that we're facing in a modern world and the science that shows we need to take action. I commend this bill to the House."