Major player says proposed alcohol law misses mark

Media Release Embargoed till 4.30pm Thursday 17 March

Major player says Government’s proposed alcohol legislation misses the mark

Independent Liquor New Zealand chief executive, Julian Davidson, today told the Select Committee members who have been hearing submissions on the Alcohol Reform Bill that the proposed legislation does not deliver on the Government’s objectives of reducing harm, and they have failed to take notice of the advice of both the Law Commission and its own alcohol advisers, the Alcohol Liquor Advisory Council (ALAC).

In August last year, when the Minister of Justice, Hon Simon Power unveiled the Government’s integrated law reform package on alcohol as a response to the two year Law Commission study, he said the Government wanted to minimize alcohol-related harm and part of this required restricting ready to drink (RTD) products to 5% alcohol by volume (ABV) in containers holding no more than 1.5 standard drinks.

Independent is the biggest player in the New Zealand RTD market where RTDs make up around 12% of the total alcohol market by volume.

“The Government does not understand the RTD market, they have failed to take notice of the advice of ALAC and the Law Commission with their proposed ban on RTDs and our view is that they do not comprehend that RTD drinkers will move to higher strength spirits if their RTD products were banned,” said Mr Davidson.

“We have commissioned extensive consumer research which we have provided to the Committee’s advisers and highlighted the fact the Australian Government had the same result when they imposed increased taxes on RTDs. The shortsighted response by the Government targeting RTDs in fact runs counter to the advice provided by the Law Commission to reduce harm.”

The extensive research commissioned by ILNZ, shows that the largest consumer group buying RTDs is trades people not young people, up to 80% of RTD drinkers will substitute with spirits and community concerns about the prospect of substitution are very high.

This research backs up what happened in Australia and is consistent with a submission to the Committee by a significant group of off-license retailers from around New Zealand. They pointed out unequivocally that 80 percent of everyday customers who find the shelves empty of their favourite 8% RTDs would shift to buying and mixing full-strength spirits.

“The message has been given to this Committee by many submitters including from the health sector that the category of RTDs is no different to the category of beer, or of wine, or of cider, or of spirits. The position that ‘alcohol is alcohol is alcohol’ was accepted by the Law Commission.”

“The evidence keeps on mounting that targeting RTDs has no merit either in common sense, nor in legal terms and most importantly for the Government, misses the mark in reducing alcohol related harm. The proposed regulation will not change the drinking behaviour of young women, instead it will penalise drinkers of the 8% RTDs who tend to be your average tradesman in their 20s through 40s.”

In response to the myth that RTDs are cheap, Mr Davidson told the Committee that drinkers can purchase 39 standard drinks for $30 at 11.5% ABV (alcohol by volume) buying cask wine, whereas for the same $30, they can purchase only 17 of Independent’s RTD 8% ABV products – “RTDs are some of the most expensive alcohol products on the market”.

“The Committee seems to understand that RTDs are not a sudden aberration. They represent a sophisticated evolution in the alcohol market globally and occupy a niche that gives consumers a clearly labeled, clearly measurable and safe amount of standard drinks.

“Independent Liquor’s position is to welcome laws that stand up to fact and evidence. This proposed bill is flawed and misses the mark completely in terms of Government’s objectives. Imposing restrictions without regard to the weight of evidence is very bad policy and very bad law”.

ENDS

© Scoop Media