 | NORML Press Releases: NORML's Submission on ''Alcohol in Our Lives'' |
 Submission on “Alcohol in Our Lives”, the July 2009 issues paper of the Law Commission regarding reform of New Zealand’s Liquor Laws
About NORML NZ Inc.
NORML New Zealand was founded in 1979 as an independent non-profit incorporated society that campaigns for an end to marijuana prohibition.
NORML supports the right of all adults to use, possess and grow their own cannabis. We recognise that some commercial market for marijuana will always exist, and we therefore call for ways to best to control that market. Our aims are:
To reform New Zealand’s marijuana laws
To provide neutral, unbiased information about cannabis and its effects
To engage in political action appropriate to our aims
To inform people of their rights
To give advice and support to victims of prohibition
Access to alcohol via a system of regulated sales provides NZ with one possible model for the regulated sales of some currently-illegal drugs such as cannabis. Our submission on the paper “Alcohol in Our Lives” is made with the intention of showing how this model could be improved and maybe adapted, with the ultimate aim of achieving a more consistent and fair system.
NORML supports the responsible, adult, use of psychoactive substances, whether alcohol, cannabis or other drugs, without advocating their non-medical use. We reject in advance the notion that this submission is pro-alcohol or pro-drug, merely because we advocate treating all NZ users of such substances with consistency, equity and justice.
1. Does the level of alcohol-related harm we are experiencing justify a new approach
to the law?
NORML notes that alcohol is a poisonous, addictive substance that can kill its users. Cannabis is the safer alternative, by comparison. However, while alcohol-related harm does not call for a prohibitionist response, there is a need for regulations which reduce the glorification of alcohol by the alcohol industry, particularly advertising, promotions and sponsorship designed to attract young people to drink.
2. Do you agree that getting drunk is considered acceptable drinking behaviour in
New Zealand?
There is a culture of alcohol abuse (misuse) that needs to be resisted and re-directed.
3. Do you think the risks associated with heavy drinking are well known? If not,
what more could be done to make people aware of them?
Government action has an important role in changing the culture. New Zealand campaigns against drink-driving are an example of successfully using a mix of legislation (eg. compulsory seatbelts) and advertising to achieve a massive reduction in the road toll over 30 years, despite large increases in both driving and alcohol consumption.
4. Do you think the cumulative lifetime risks associated with drinking are well known?
If not, what more could be done to make more people aware of them?
See above.
5. Is the management of intoxicated people an acceptable use of a large part of the
New Zealand Police resources? If not, what are the alternatives?
-
6. Is the balance in the current law between individual responsibility and providing
an environment that is conducive to moderate drinking the correct one? If not,
what changes could be made?
-
Licensing
7. Do you agree with the current system of four types of liquor licence?
The four types of liquor licence should be retained and the present exemptions removed.
8. Should the criteria for licences change and, if so, what should the changes be?
The community should have more control over the granting of a licence, and more ability to reject a licence or impose conditions on the exercise of the licence. As noted, the model of community control has relevance for the licensing of cannabis cafes or dispensaries (cf the Netherlands).
9. Do you think the Liquor Licensing Authority should be retained as the regulator?
The Liquor Licensing Authority should be retained, and its objectives should be spelt out more comprehensively.
10. Do you think local views should be taken into account in respect of licences in
that area?
See above.
Hours
11. Do you think the hours that restaurants, bars, and clubs can be open should be
restricted? If so, what should the hours be?
Alcohol-related problems are common in the vicinity of many late-opening bars and clubs but not late-opening restaurants. NORML supports responsible adult use of alcohol and prefers measures to promote that rather than simply to restrict hours.
12. Do you think the hours that off-licence premises (including supermarkets and liquor
stores) can sell alcohol should be restricted? If so, what should the hours be?
Responsible, adult, use of alcohol could be achieved by other measures than simply restricting hours of sale. Sales restrictions of this kind could lead to pre-emptive additional purchasing (and consequent additional use).
13. Should we continue to have specific days on which alcohol cannot be sold?
NORML supports the current restrictions.
Age
14. At what age should a person be able to purchase alcohol in New Zealand?
NORML supports the current age of access to alcohol of 18, and advocates that 18 be adopted as the age at which responsible, adult, use of substances such as alcohol or cannabis is accepted or tolerated. Denying access to under 18s is justifiable on public health grounds; only by means of formal, legal, regulation can access be successfully limited to an acceptable degree and NORML supports a firm approach. On the other hand, denying access to 18 year olds would be unreasonable and would undermine respect for the law. Only by the exercise of individual responsibility regarding alcohol (and drugs) will young adults learn to deal with it (them) in a responsible manner.
15. At what age should a person be able to drink at a pub, club, bar or restaurant?
See above
Supply Controls
Individual and parental responsibility
16. Should it be an offence for anyone other than a parent or guardian to supply alcohol to someone under the purchase age?
-
Types of products
17. Do you think there are any alcohol products that should be banned?
-
18. Do you think the rules about supermarkets and grocers selling liquor should continue
as now?
-
Tax/price
19. Do you think the availability of cheap alcohol is contributing to alcohol-related harms?
Cheap alcohol, such as via discounting, certainly leads to increased use. However, there needs to be some caution on this issue. It would be possible to reduce alcohol-related harms in some vulnerable sectors of the population (such as teenagers) without reduction in use overall.
20. Does the difference in price between alcohol bought from retailers such as supermarkets and liquor stores and alcohol bought in a bar or restaurant influence
where you drink?
-
21. Do you think there is a case for increasing tax or setting a minimum price for alcohol
in order to help reduce the amount of alcohol consumed by young people and
heavy drinkers?
See above.
Advertising
22. Should the way alcohol is marketed (including advertising, promotions, and sponsorship) have greater restrictions? If so, what restrictions are appropriate?
NORML supports a system similar to the French ban on advertising, promotions and sponsorship to protect the public and guide NZ towards a more moderate alcohol culture.
Treatment
23. Do you think there is a need for greater emphasis on treatment for people using
alcohol in a risky manner?
NORML advocates treatment as an option rather than punitive enforcement, whether for the risky use of alcohol or illegal drugs.
Penalties
24. Should there be increased penalties for serious breaches of the liquor laws?
The alcohol industry has a consistent record of opposing outside controls – penalties need to be greater.
25. Should there be greater use of infringement offences for minor breaches of the
liquor law?
NORML advocates treatment as an option rather than punitive enforcement, whether for breaches of the laws on alcohol or illegal drugs.
26. Should the Police have greater powers to close down bars where there are breaches
of law occurring?
-
Liquor in public places
27. Should liquor bans be retained?
-
28. If so, how can the liquor ban provisions be improved?
-
29. Do you think an offence of drinking in a public place, rather than the liquor ban
system, is preferable?
-
30. Do you think it should be an infringement offence to be drunk in a public place?
NORML does not support such laws that infringe individual rights and are often enforced in a discriminatory way.
31. Do you have any further comments or suggestions?
NORML notes the hypocrisy involved in accepting that a dangerous drug can be used, sold, supplied and promoted because it is part of New Zealand’s culture; while at the same time the estimated 300,000 to 500,000 adult New Zealanders who use cannabis each year face severe penalties for use, and extreme penalties for sale and supply.
There needs to be a fairer, more consistent treatment for these substances and the adults who choose to use them.
The prohibition of cannabis hasn't prevented people from using cannabis. Ending cannabis prohibition in much of Europe, Australia and the United States has not caused increases in cannabis use, but has achieved dramatic savings in law enforcement as well as improving the effectiveness of drug education and treatment services.
After twenty years of regulated supply, teenage cannabis use in the Netherlands is dropping - a result of normalising cannabis use and limiting sales to adults. Other illicit drug use in the Netherlands has also dropped as they broke the black-market connection between cannabis buyers and other drug sellers.
The evidence shows "liberal" models of controlling drug use don't increase rates of experimentation, whilst repressive models don't deter or prevent use - but they do create all sorts of other harms.
The minimisation of drug-related harms is therefore best achieved through regulations, education and treatment, while an emphasis on punitive sanctions will continue to increase harms to drug users, their families and communities.
Phil Saxby
President
NORML NZ, PO Box 3307, Auckland,
Aotearoa/New Zealand
|
|
|
|
| |
| Login |
|
You can register for some special extra features. | |
|
