Communities given greater powers to reduce alcohol harm
The Government is fixing alcohol legislation that has been used by the alcohol industry and retailers to stop local communities from putting in place rules around the sale of liquor in their area, Justice Minister Kiri Allan announced today. The amendments to the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 will remove the ability to appeal local alcohol policies (LAPs). The current appeal process is costing councils and ratepayers millions in legal fees, as alcohol companies and supermarkets have thwarted efforts by local councils to limit the sale of alcohol in their communities. “The law isn’t working as intended. Local communities should be able to set their own rules to reduce alcohol harm, but are being blocked at every step by the booze industry,”
This is what I’ve come to understand as an Alt-Left Marxist Anarchist, that the State’s Jackboot is endless and all powerful but too often it is trained on the throats of the common citizen.
We need to use the Neo-Gramscian Counter-Hegemonic method of turning the State’s Jackboot on the Corporations, the 1%, the banks and the speculators to fund the environmental, social and Degrowth economic infrastructure required for radical climate change adaptation.
There are also some products, like gambling, tobacco, prostitution and booze that we agree to legalise as a civil society because leaving it unregulated allows organised crime to move in and cause far more social carnage.
We should include a sugar tax as well!
We accept their products are addictive and have social damage, which is why we regulate them with the Jackboot of the State on their throat!
In short, the Booze Barons should get a bashing!
Slash their advertising, get them out of supermarkets, immediately curtail their bottleshops, make them donate to Alcoholics Anonymous and just because they need to know who is in charge, extract a vice tax that comes off the top of their profit margin to help pay for the true damage their product causes.
The profit margins of these legal drug pushers should be taxed so that the end user isn’t punished, but the corporation behind them are.
Stopping these booze pimps misusing the legal process to extend booze licences is an outrageous abuse of power they should never have had in the first place, but it’s just the start.
Get that booze out the of bloody supermarkets!
We are a nation of bloody alcoholics and we’ve made getting booze as easy as possible when it’s a product that can cause enormous damage.
Fuck convenience, you want a drink, work for it.
We need to be kinder to individuals and crueller to corporations.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media.
Unfortunately, with the pandemic folk embraced the habit of buying online, with alcohol ordered by smart phone and couriered to the front door. Getting it out of the supermarkets would be a major first step in curtailing excessive drinking for the non- smart, and it does irk to see opportunistic immigrants enriching themselves at the social and economic expense of the locals who let them in.
Well, I am pretty sure the immigrants don’t set the rules. Wouldn’t taking booze out of the supermarkets actually drive business to those outlets that probably do less to check the age of who they are selling to? At least supermarkets are incredibly anal about checking (well at least the ones I go to).
Wheel I have to say that I was absolutely delighted when a student at the checkout asked me for ID, I couldn’t thank him enough.
The young guys who used to hang around outside liquor outlets looking for an older person to do their purchasing, sometimes with unsatisfactory results, may be the ones now having supplies couriered to them, I don’t know, and nor do I know if that process involves age checks.
The bugbear may be Shipley getting the drinking age lowered, theoretically to morph Kiwis into sophisticated Continentals. That hasn’t worked. But your point about outcomes from alcohol-free supermarkets is a good one.
And supermarkets do not set up in the poorer neighbourhoods alongside high seling Lotto shops/dairies.
The availability of alcohol for sale is not the same thing as excessive drinking.
It is a big step forward and a decision which hasn’t been taken lightly, which is good because it shows the concern surrounding the issue of alcohol.
The harm caused by alcohol would easily justify alcohol being triple or quadruple the price. It won’t be. Therefore it is good that alcohol retailers will lose the ability to appeal local council decisions pertaining to the sale of alcohol in individual geographical areas throughout the country.
The cost of legal fees faced by councils over this, thus far, has been very expensive for them and it couldn’t go on too much longer the way it was. It was unfair that alcohol retailers had an appeal process because decisions were being made by different councils with the concern of residents at the forefront of their minds.
Government funding for alcohol rehabilitation services having been declining since 2008, this latest decision to drop an appeals process is the right one, and will probably most benefit areas of low socio-economic status.
An interesting Stats NZ chart here:
https://i0.wp.com/www.kiwiblog.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/alcoholconsumption.png?ssl=1
What it says: Alcohol consumption was steadily falling until a) The purchasing age was dropped from 20 to 18 and b) They started selling booze in supermarkets.
The statistics actually say that alcohol consumption went down
1 late 1980’s – mid 1990’s because of Rogernomics
2. mid 1990’s – market rents
Stuff all other impacts, up or down
And why only to 2011?
Yes, Andrew and who dropped the age and who allowed for it to be sold everywhere literally?
covid is pa. Yes. It was that dreadful woman from Ashburton who said let’s introduce hormone-laden teenagers to alcohol, and she has a lot to answer for in one or two other areas too.
But legalize pot which is implicated in mental health issues eh Chloe.
This is a victory for some Karens and millennials and other non drinkers who use MDMA and weed so fuck the boomers drug of choice.
Won’t do anything to reduce the real harm from alcohol, but does open the door for more social engineering when they attack alcohol sponsorship of sport- physical team sport being another pet hate of the woke.
Blah, blah. Relative to alcohol, pot does way less harm and it’s nothing to do with one being illegal and one being legal. Chloe S has been arguing for decriminalisation to treat any ill affects of pot use as a health issue. She’s not inconsistent on this.
Consistently hypocritical I agree.
I want to buy alcoholic beverages when I want or need to.
I don’t have a drinking problem, from a young age I have always been able to control my drinking.
However I do remember a time when one couldn’t by booze on Sundays! Which annoyed me, because problem drinkers always, always, always have access to booze. But I couldn’t pick up 1/2 a dozen beers and a bottle of wine gor an impromptu Sunday arvo BBQ
You just had to know where to go …
Multiply qualified NZRN (retd) writing: the most significant drug/poison in N.Z. has always been & remains ALCOHOL. Wherever I walk, I see males with beer-belies. They will get 1) Diabetes, 2) heart conditions, 3) Strokes & therefore be an increasing burden on Vote Health.
I maintained an extensive wine cellar for many years. When I was diagnosed with Mutiple Sclerosis in 1983, I stopped intake of alcohol in any form. Many nurses live alone & drink alone. Therein lies many developing health problems country-wide.
Agreed locals should determine the booze sale policy in their area without being deep-pocketed out of their democratic choices.
However, the rest of the article seems to have been written by a druggie, wowser. Alcohol in supermarkets is bloody convenient. The buying power of supermarkets means the booze cost is lower and leaves me more money for food and soap. We can see what a super tax on cigarette addiction has done for the ram-raided dairy owners – surely we don’t want to make that situation any worse.
This country was “founded” on blokes working in the bush or gold prospecting for a month then coming to town and blowing all their pay on a binge of booze and dancing girls. The World War One, soldiers were shipped home just in time to vote and save the nation from prohibition. It’s unfortunate that there are some on the left who would like to ban a working man from having a beer.
?
bro ?
Booze Barrens should pay really high taxes for social Carnage. That tired old 80’s drop Steinlrger needs to be removed from rugby shirts. But ultimately peeps need to drink in moderation and keep exercise up.
pointless – just tax it and move on – same with all drugs.
Comments are closed.