Editorial: Privacy is not the issue

The cessation of the publication of drink-driving "name and shame" lists around the country is under review with administration costs looking to be the primary reason the lists have stopped.

Police are reviewing the practice nationwide with concerns around privacy and administration time/costs cited as the reasons for the review.

Our view is that privacy is not an issue.

It was debated back in 2008 when the lists were first published after the Advocate's sister publication, the Rotorua Daily Post, began reporting drink-drive lists and other papers followed suit.

The Northern Advocate was amongst several papers that appealed to then-Police Minister Judith Collins and, after her intervention, police began providing the information again in September 2009.

Ms Collins said at the time: "Good on" the Advocate and others for publishing the list, and she was surprised to hear police were not providing the information.

Ms Collins went as far to say that if laws prevented the lists being published, they should be changed.

The Northern Advocate will appeal to new Police Minister Anne Tolley to get the practice reinstated.

Along with privacy concerns, police have been open about the amount of work required to collate and validate the drink-drive information from district courts.

Our view is that privacy is not an issue - drink-driving information is freely available to any person who wishes to go and sit in a public courtroom during a sentencing. All we are doing is simply bringing the issue further out in the open.

As a country, we have a drinking problem that needs to be confronted.

In terms of the review, we assume police will compare drink-driving rates before and during the time periods that the lists have been published.

Overall though, what would it say about our attitudes to drink-driving if we were to stop the publication of drink drive lists because they are an administrative nuisance?