Editorial: Leadership required on liquor law reform

OPINION: When it was finally published following two years of work, the Law Commission's extensive 500-page report on alcohol reform contained 154 recommendations.

Chairman Sir Geoffrey Palmer might have been dreaming when he urged that these measures be adopted en masse rather than subjected to political cherry-picking.

However, to the majority of people working in the alcohol-damage business, the commission's strategy represented a coherent, meaningful way out of the mire that has developed in the 11 years since the drinking age was lowered to 18. Initially, hopes were high that the Government would have the political courage to follow this roadmap. Sadly, not so.

With haste bordering on recklessness, Justice Minister Simon Power tossed out one key recommendation aimed at cutting consumption through a price rise by increasing excise duty. Now, the Government suggests another of Sir Geoffrey's pleas is about to be ignored, with Prime Minister John Key saying it was "likely" that the drinking age would be decided on a conscience vote rather than on the more usual party-voting lines.

In principle, it can be argued that every measure which comes before Parliament should be decided this way. However, relying on politicians' consciences can be problematic. As Sir Geoffrey pointed out in May last year, conscience voting was responsible for the current mess, so what confidence can we have in our MPs to do better this time?

Sir Geoffrey put it this way: "All sorts of changes can be made to a bill when a conscience vote is held because the House is in a state of free-for-all. Standard party-based voting will produce laws that are more consistent and durable." His stance was backed at the time by the Police, NZ Drug Foundation and Alcohol Healthwatch, among others.

Conscience voting produces fine speeches and, often, poor law. It encourages politicians to take their personal stories to the debating chamber – and it also gives greater opportunity than usual for industry, and other, lobbyists to influence our decision-makers.

This tends to produce greater "tweaking", compromise and watering down of legislative intent as the process of turning bills into law grinds on.

Mr Key's administration is enjoying a dream run in the polls. In part, this has because he and his Cabinet have been careful to pick their battles and generally to avoid doing anything too controversial. Even potentially problematic policy, like increasing the rate of GST, has been tempered and balanced by personal income tax cuts.

However, it will be unfortunate if the Government does opt to use the convenience of a conscience vote cop-out rather than showing it has the courage and conviction to display the sort of leadership that liquor reform warrants.

Difficult? Of course. To follow the commission's blueprint would be to penalise "responsible" drinkers in order to curb the binge-drinking antics of the few, to take drinking "privileges" back from 18- and 19-year-olds deemed old enough for virtually anything else and to tack back against a general trend of increased social permissiveness.

Sadly, there is plenty of evidence that this is what is required. True leadership is not always easy.

- © Fairfax NZ News

Newest First

Oldest First

webbie   #2   06:53 pm Aug 20 2010

It's standard practice in this country and around the world that editorials are the opinion of the newspaper, not an individual. It's an editorial, not a personal column. A few newspapers have opted to start signing their leaders. For now, the Mail is with the majority that do not.

Rodgerf   #1   01:30 pm Aug 20 2010

Once again we have an opinion piece without a name attached----What are you worried about--putting your name to your opinion is standard courtesy---Are you worried that once people know who you are you'll be known as that moron with the half baked ideas? you won't be you know,but people might respect you for having the gumption to put your name to your thoughts--Your editor must have a briefcase full of his workers balls by now.

Ad Feedback