Rev. the Hon. Fred Nile, Christian Democratic Party MLC
The Christian Democratic Party will not oppose the bill. We support the positive aspects of the bill although we have reservations about its negative aspects. We will vote in favour of the bill.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [5.58 p.m.]: The Liquor Bill 2007 is probably the most radical liquor bill to be introduced into Parliament in the 26 years that I have been a member of the Legislative Council. There is a lot of pressure to reform drinking habits and create a better atmosphere in cafés, small bars, clubs and so on.
I can understand the pressure for these types of outlets, comparing Sydney with Melbourne. The fundamental question is whether New South Wales needs more liquor outlets? If the number of liquor outlets is increased does liquor consumption increase? Yes. Many young people engage in excessive alcohol consumption. People have questioned whether the legal drinking age should be increased from 18 to 21, as is the case in a number of States in the United States of America? John Thorpe is not normally an ally of the Christian Democratic Party but his assessment of this bill was probably the first criticism of it published in the media. Mr Thorpe said that the bill would lead to the possibility of 4,000 additional drinking venues in this State. He foreshadowed a "flooding" and "explosion" of alcohol on the streets of Sydney. At a press conference at the Slip Inn in Sydney Mr Thorpe denied he was simply seeking to protect the interests of his members—that is, hotels—whose businesses would be hurt by small bars. He said:
We are not worried about competition. What you have got to be concerned about, what I want you to get your head around, is alcohol is a drug. It is a drug that does have an effect on alcohol-related crime. Go and talk to the Crimes Statistician, Dr Don Weatherburn. He will tell you all about it.
He said in conclusion that the floodgates are now open, "We have massive problems now with alcohol-related crime. Now you have told me all about the Melbourne scene, how great it was". Mr Thorpe claimed that Melbourne is dealing with an increase of alcohol-related crime of 21 per cent. I have not verified his figure but I do know Melbourne has great social problems and is not the conservative, quiet city that it used to be. We know that as a result of gang wars, shootings and murders, Melbourne's image has changed.
This bill deals with a number of areas related to the sale of alcohol, and contains various reforms, some of which the Christian Democratic Party supports. The bill provides for a Casino, Liquor and Gaming Control Authority, which will deal with applications for liquor licences and extended trading hours; impose penalties and suspend or cancel licences in disciplinary matters. Applications for a review of a non-casino disciplinary decision of the authority can be made to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal. The director of Liquor and Gaming has virtually total say on all those issues and can determine noise disturbance complaints, impose or vary licence conditions, and can declare lockouts or curfews to reduce patron migration between licensed venues in problem areas. Those decisions can be reviewed by the Casino, Liquor and Gaming Control Authority, but I do not think the Government expects many appeals.
The Christian Democratic Party is concerned that the very efficient Liquor Administration Board is now shelved by this legislation. That board acted independently and made decisions but the Director of Liquor and Gaming is a bureaucrat—a one-man band—making decisions. Pressure will be put on the director by vested interests to approve their applications. Such pressure was not exerted on the Liquor Administration Board. The bill will provide that bars that do not provide gaming or sell take-away alcohol will be able to obtain a special type of hotel licence or an on-premises licence if they provide entertainment to patrons. The licence will cost $500. Toilet requirements will be determined by local councils. Patron numbers will be determined by business operators and local councils.
How many bars does the Government anticipate will apply for a $500 licence under that new provision? I do not believe the Government has drafted this legislation without making estimates on the impact of the bill. Restaurants will be able to serve alcohol without a meal, whereas previously the rule was that they must sell alcohol with a meal. If those restaurants—not hotels or bars—sell alcohol without a meal I believe they will be bars. Restaurants serving alcohol without a meal can apply for a licence at the new authority and only a small processing fee will apply. The Christian Democratic Party is pleased that the processing fee is small because the previous $15,000 fee prevented restaurants from affording to have musicians performing at night. The lower fee will allow musicians an opportunity to work in those restaurants.
For years John Wardle, who calls himself a working musician, has lobbied the Christian Democratic Party to provide opportunities for musicians to work in restaurants. How many restaurants does the Government anticipate will apply to serve alcohol without meals? The bill also provides for a new on-premises licence that will allow greater flexibility for a variety of businesses that want to serve alcohol. How many new on-premises licences does the Government anticipate will be applied for? Wineries will be able to charge for tastings, sell wine at approved wine shows and farmers' markets, operate a restaurant and motel, and licence a number of wineries in the same region, all under the one liquor licence. How many wineries, restaurants and motels does the Government anticipate will apply for that one licence? Boutique brewers and distillers outside the metropolitan area can now provide alcohol, charge for tastings and make cellar door sales to promote regional small business and tourism. That will provide a benefit to country areas that are suffering from the drought and revenue to businesses in the area. How many boutique brewers and distillers does the Government anticipate will apply for that licence? Restrictions placed on accommodation providers and motels selling liquor to guests will be removed by the bill. How many accommodation providers and motels does the Government anticipate will apply to sell liquor to their guests? The point I am making is that people who say that increasing the number of alcohol outlets will not do any harm are living in the clouds.
On top of that, bed and breakfast and farm stay operators will be able to legally sell alcohol to guests. How many bed and breakfast and farm stay operators does the Government anticipate will become involved in this opportunity? Finally, there will be new arrangements for surf clubs, retirement villages and so on, facilitating the availability of alcohol. Again, how many will be involved? I ask the Government to answer my questions. If it cannot provide answers today it should supply answers to the House as soon as possible. The Government has not taken into account that the number of bottle shops in the city is exploding. I understand that Coles and Woolworths have moved into this area as they see its potential for growth. So many more bottle shops will be built and opened in all suburbs.
On the positive side, the legislation does not change the standard hotel and liquor store trading hours and the hotel trading hours on Good Friday and Christmas Day, which I am pleased about. Also, there are no changes to the standard trading periods of 5.00 a.m. to midnight on Monday to Saturday and 10.00 a.m. to 10.00 p.m. on Sunday. However, the Government should consider increasing the trading hours on Monday to Sunday from 10.00 a.m. to midnight and reducing the trading hours on Sunday to encourage people to be with their families rather than in a hotel or bar. Another positive aspect of the bill is the provisions relating to community impact statements.
A community impact statement will gauge potential impacts of a new liquor licence and applications for extended trading hours. The new process will replace liquor social impact assessments. Statements will be prepared before liquor licence applications are made, and will summarise the results of consultation with local councils, police, health, Aboriginal representatives, community organisations and the public. My concern is that there seems to be a subtle shift in terminology from social impact to community impact. I hope that that does not mean that a community impact statement will be a watered down statement. I hope that a community impact statement will concentrate on the social impacts, which is obvious from the terminology. "Community" is a vague term. I ask the Government for reassurance that it is only a matter of terminology, that there will still be a strict social impact assessment within the community impact assessment process.
Liquor accords will still be available. They are a recent development that is working successfully to ban troublemakers from licensed venues for up to six months. That is a positive step. There are liquor accords between various hotels, clubs and bars. They can make their own rules and regulations to try to reduce the harmful impacts of alcohol. As for self-exclusion and restricted areas, people with alcohol problems can self-exclude from licensed venues, as can problem gamblers self-exclude from the casino and other places. I am not sure whether self-exclusion still has as much value as the ability to restrict a person or ban a troublemaker from attending a venue for six months. Such a provision would have much more impact. Of course, it depends on the willpower of the person covered by the self-exclusion.
Often there are reports that people still do not have enough willpower to resist the temptation of liquor and gambling areas. Perhaps a rule could be made to ban a troublemaker, not simply because they are a troublemaker but because of the harmful impact of excessive alcohol consumption on their health and the harm they might do to other people. The Minister will be able to recommend to the Governor that an area in which there is chronic alcohol abuse can be declared a restricted area for a maximum of three years, with greater controls on the sale and supply of liquor. That is a valuable power. In our briefing we were told that this provision does not simply target indigenous and Aboriginal communities, whether they are in the metropolitan area or in country towns. The provision should be implemented without discrimination, whether it is an indigenous community, an Aboriginal community or a white community. If problems are occurring the area can be declared a restricted area.
There will be new offences to reduce antisocial behaviour. It will be an offence for a drunk, violent or quarrelsome person who has been refused entry to or ejected from a licensed venue to attempt to re-enter the premises or remain in the vicinity of the premises. On-the-spot fines of $550 will apply for each offence, with maximum court penalties of $5,500. There will also be increased penalties for underage drinking and intoxication offences. Maximum fines for supplying alcohol to minors and intoxicated patrons will increase for repeat offenders from $5,500 to $11,000 and/or 12 months in jail.
Maximum fines for minors caught inside licensed venues or purchasing alcohol from a licensed venue will double from $1,100 to $2,200. Expanded powers will be available to ban irresponsible liquor products and promotions. The Director of Liquor and Gaming will have the power to require responsible consumption of alcohol messages on promotions that involve substantial liquor discounts. Finally, in terms of the impact on existing liquor licensees and registered clubs, there will be no reduction in liquor trading hours or other licence trading entitlements for existing licensed premises and registered clubs as a result of the reforms. Previously in the House I have said—I believe the Government must face this—that alcohol is our number one social problem. That was confirmed by a Federal inquiry a few years ago. Indeed, the cover of the report stated, "Australia's Number One Social Problem: Alcohol". It is not heroin or cocaine but alcohol.
Also, the Federal Government's National Alcohol Strategy for 2006-09, which was endorsed by the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy in May 2006, has been developed in cooperation with State and Territory governments in response to the serious impact that alcohol has on this country. In light of the National Alcohol Strategy, has this legislation been discussed at the ministerial council? Has there been any consultation with the representatives of the other States as to their response to what New South Wales is planning to do? The National Alcohol Strategy was supposed to come up with plans to reduce the serious impact of alcohol in our nation. Each year approximately 3,000 people die and about 65,000 people are hospitalised as a result of excessive alcohol consumption. The annual national cost of alcohol-related social problems is estimated to be $7.6 billion. The Federal strategy, which this State endorsed, has four priorities: intoxication, public safety and amenity, health impacts, and cultural place and availability.
I believe that those matters should be considered in more detail with the operation of this legislation. That is leaving aside the number of people who drink and drive, the accidents on our roads, the deaths that occur and the injuries that people sustain in accidents involving a driver under the influence of alcohol. In the past week relevant reports have emerged as we have debated this legislation. An article in the Daily Telegraph of 29 October stated:
Sydney's anger streak has reached critical levels following another weekend of alcohol-fuelled brawls with a bar trashed and drunks battling it out across a city block.
The rising violence comes as hospital emergency departments report being inundated with as many injured patients as they would in December, considered the peak fighting season.
Increased violence is already happening on the streets. I am concerned that the legislation will pour more fuel on the fire, pour more alcohol into areas where brawling is already of concern. Another report in the Daily Telegraph stated:
As one police officer bluntly put it yesterday—"it was just another weekend in the city". Three violent brawls within five hours of each other involving more than 70 people.
That doesn't include the bread and butter drunken fights, which another officer described as the "usual Friday and Saturday night punch-ups".
It was probably just luck that no one was seriously injured given that a knife and metal bars were used in one bar brawl.
That is a sample of the daily reports of alcohol-related violence in the city. The legislation we are debating will increase dramatically the number of alcohol outlets in the city. The impact of the legislation is unknown, and that is why I will support the Greens proposed amendment to have the legislation independently reviewed by the Ombudsman, rather than have the Government gloss over some of the problems that may occur or be influenced by revenue from taxation and other charges and not be as upfront as it should be. The Salvation Army has produced a valuable report entitled "Tackling Social Issues", which I commend to all members. Many female members of the House often refer to the impact of alcohol in domestic violence. Under the heading, "The link between alcohol and violence" the report states:
Alcohol is a significant contributing factor to violence in Australia despite strategies to combat the problem. Researchers have estimate that 47% of all those who commit violent crimes, and 43% of all victims of these crimes, were drunk prior to the event. A 2006 study confirmed areas with large clusters of pubs and licensed premises have higher crime rates, experiencing almost twice as many alcohol-related problems as areas with lower concentrations of licensed premises. Although both men and women are affected by alcohol-related violence, men under 34 make up the majority of hospitalisations for alcohol-caused assaults, with a similar profile found in alcohol-related road injuries.
The above statistics would strongly suggest that one way to reduce violent crime is to reduce alcohol consumption. By limiting alcohol intake, people can make a big difference to their communities.
I add to that: Reduce alcohol consumption by reducing alcohol outlets. The Christian Democratic Party will not oppose the bill. We support the positive aspects of the bill although we have reservations about its negative aspects. We will vote in favour of the bill.