The Melville community protested a bottle store in Hamilton. Photo / Paora Manuel
The Melville community protested a bottle store in Hamilton. Photo / Paora Manuel
OPINION:
The review of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act announced in late 2022 by Justice Minister Kiritapu Allan is explicitly targeted at empowering communities to effectively combat alcohol-related harm.
The first phase of the review will address district licensing, an area of regulation that has frustrated communities since its inception.
Flawed from day one, the local alcohol policies, which were intended to allow communities to set their own rules to reduce alcohol-related harm, instead became an expensive exercise in demonstrating the power of the alcohol lobby.
The key failure of the local alcohol policies has been through the appeal process – a feature of the original legislation that has been manipulated by those who profit from alcohol sales to prevent community autonomy in setting their own rules around the availability of alcohol.
All across Aotearoa, local councils have been unable to implement local alcohol policies, and in some cases they have abandoned their attempts to do so in the face of legal opposition from supermarkets and alcohol companies, which would require significant use of public money to fight.
The intent of this review is to be applauded, with the goal of explicitly enabling communities to enact alcohol harm reduction measures such as preventing alcohol stores outside schools, reducing hours of availability and limiting the density of liquor suppliers.
However, as a public health organisation with a long history of supporting communities to have their say on alcohol related harm, Hāpai te Hauora is only cautiously enthusiastic about this phase of the review. While this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to create real change, it is still only a small step forward in the context of the recommendations of the 2011 Law Commission report on alcohol harm.
Without iwi and hapori Māori explicitly involved in the decision-making process, there is a real risk that this review will end up on the ‘missed opportunities’ pile, along with the original legislation.
As the population group who suffers the most from alcohol related harm, there is no logic in having a decision-making process that excludes Māori, and by extension, Māori knowledge of what works for our people in alcohol harm prevention.
Hāpai Te Hauora has first-hand experience of this, after being declined the ability to stand in support of a licensing objection in Waikato. Hāpai was told that we have no connection to the area, despite being the public health entity part-owned by Tainui.
When the second phase of the review is announced in March, community advocates including Hāpai Te Hauora are hopeful that alcohol marketing will be a key focus – removing the method by which alcohol companies influence successive generations into believing alcohol is an essential part of New Zealand culture and that alcohol harm is inevitable, when we know it doesn’t have to be.
