Young Greens Statement for Keep it 18
Firstly, I'd like to start by acknowledging the work done by the Law Commission on their report. >From what I have
had time to read it is a very thorough document and takes seriously the huge problems with alcohol we have in New
Zealand. It takes a strong evidence-based harm minimisation approach. This should be commended.
I am concerned that Simon Power has moved so quickly to rule out raising the excise tax – ruling out proposals as part
of the Law Commission package should not be taken lightly.
It cannot be ignored the effect alcohol has had on many young people's lives. I can think of serious injuries caused in
my peer group from excessive drinking, and I know there have been many deaths around the country. It is clogging up our
emergency departments at weekends. There are also the impacts which are harder to measure, such as on brain function,
liver function and so on from those who have engaged in binge drinking.
I also know of many older people who drink excessively. Eighteen and nineteen year olds are not the problem. Drinking
is, as the Law Commission have acknowledged, a cultural issue in New Zealand. We associate it with a good time,
something to do when we're bored, something to loosen us up in awkward social situations.
One thing is clear: we need to reduce the abuse. The Young Greens and the Green Party will seriously consider any
evidenced-based harm minimisation policy. Alcohol needs to be seen to be and treated as the harmful drug that it is.
Although it will take time to consider the 500 page report properly, in principle the Young Greens support many of its
broader recommendations. We support restricting advertising – look at what this measure has done with smoking. We
support restricting accessibility of alcohol. We support greater community control, greater education and more
resourcing for rehabilitation.
The reason why we don't support raising the drinking age is that it is a very discriminatory solution against young
people. It does not address the cultural issues of drinking in this country. A higher drinking age is inconsistent with
other laws, and therefore would be flouted.
I am reminded of how I felt in 2008. I had just travelled around South America by myself, was just about to run for
Parliament in New Zealand, but when I got to Ontario in Canada, I was told I couldn't have a beer. Imagine how you would
feel as responsible adults if you were told by the Government you couldn't drink.
For the record, I turned 19, the drinking age there, one month after I left. And I could just cross province lines into
Quebec anyway, where the drinking age was 18. And many did. This example again shows how ineffective drinking ages are,
unlike some of the other measures proposed by the Law Commission.
We need to reduce the abuse. We need to restrict alcohol supply and advertising, increase education and treatment
accessibility, and community control. Raising the drinking age is not part of the answer. We should keep it 18.
ENDS