3News » Home
Full Story

Which alcohol recommendations were rejected?

4 comments | Post Comment email Email printer friendly Print    Text Size:
aA
aA
aA
The Government today accepted 126 of the 153 recommendations made by the Law Commission (file pic)

The Government today accepted 126 of the 153 recommendations made by the Law Commission (file pic)

Mon, 23 Aug 2010 3:29p.m.

In April the Law Commission presented the Government with 153 recommendations on reducing the harm caused by alcohol. Today the Government said it would accept 126 of them.

But it has:

  • Rejected exempting the Defence Force, Police and Fire Service from licensing legislation, though it has removed the exemption for the House of Representatives, meaning Parliament is now subject to liquor laws.
  • Rejected increasing the excise tax on alcohol by 50 percent and on low alcohol products up to 2.5 percent alcohol by volume.
  • Rejected giving licensees, managers and licensed door staff powers to confiscate false evidence of age.
  • Rejected introducing a cost-recovery regime giving police the power to serve a notice of debt on anyone who, because of intoxication, is driven home, placed in temporary shelter or put in a police cell.
  • Rejected allowing on-licences to be able to remain open until their normal closing time on prohibited days and then not opening for another 24 hours. This was rejected because it would require an amendment to shop trading legislation.
  • Rejected supermarkets being required to keep alcohol in one place on their premises to restrict exposure and normalisation of alcohol for young people.
  • Rejected it being an offence for anyone under 20 to drink or possess alcohol in a public place unless accompanied by a parent or guardian. The Government chose to keep the age at 18.
  • Rejected increasing the minimum age for people employed to sell alcohol from 18 to 20.
  • Rejected reducing the maximum fine for a breach of the liquor ban from $20,000 to $500.

NZPA

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Comments [4]

Alex
23 Aug 2010 6:15p.m.

I think the idea on the supermarkets would have been a good idea. It still allows alcohol to be sold on the premises - it just confines it to one area and possibly allows only those who can legally sell it (18+) to do so. A lot of supermarkets employ youths who must alert their supervisor at every alcohol sale and it's a downright nuisance for everyone.

Duggie
23 Aug 2010 5:03p.m.

The bottom line here is that our politicians are in the pockets of the liquor industry and afraid of the solid kiwi drinking - good bloke.
The refusal to accept the hard facts re the lowering of the blood alcohol level is the best example. Based on statistics gleaned from our mates over the ditch (in Australia)the road toll in NZ would drop by between 75 and 100 per annum, if the limit was reduced to 0.5
Apparently such a saving of lives is not important when it risks offending the good kiwi country bloke or the liquor industry support for the National led Government.

David
23 Aug 2010 4:40p.m.

People have to remember that alcohol isn't the problem, and never will be, it's the lack of personal accountability that creates issues.

Longtack
23 Aug 2010 4:36p.m.

Here's one of the recommendations: 150. Agree that the offence of making a verbal false representation of age be repealed; So what that means is that a youth can now lie about his/her age and get away with it. Where's the down-side for being dishonest, and consequently putting the retailer at risk!?

Post a comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide here
Name:
Email: (Won't be published)
Comment:



3News Video 3News Audio