Campbell Roberts: Is this one business we don't want to grow?

Photo / Christchurch Star

Opinion

Most businesses look to grow and they do this either through expanding their market or capturing market share. This is as true for the liquor industry as for any other.

By all accounts, the liquor industry has grown its market quite successfully given that per capita consumption increased 10 per cent over the past decade.

But alcohol is not an ordinary item of trade. If the consumption of liquor was unproblematic such growth would not be a source of concern but, as we all know, alcohol is wrecking lives and families across New Zealand.

It seems reasonable to suppose that any increase in the consumption of alcohol will lead to an increase in the problems that are caused by alcohol - problems such as domestic and street violence, road deaths and unwanted pregnancies.

The liberalisation of liquor laws that commenced with the Sale of Liquor Act 20 years ago has meant that the supply of liquor has largely been determined by the liquor industry and by the market.

Communities have had little or no influence over whether or not they have a liquor store or a pokie bar in their neighbourhoods. Such decisions are made by local council bureaucrats who have few, if any, tools to stop licences being granted.

The result has been a proliferation of liquor stores in neighbourhoods to the point they are as common as the corner dairy. In fact, some liquor stores are the corner dairy.

The changes to liquor laws being proposed in the Sale and Supply of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill are merely tinkering with the problems associated with the use and abuse of alcohol. This bill focuses attention on the drinking behaviour of young people as if they are the only ones with a drinking problem. It also creates more bureaucracy with the concept of local liquor plans.

The bill, for example, introduces the increasingly popular three-strikes approach to licensees caught selling liquor to anyone under 18 years of age. If you are convicted of selling liquor to minors three times, you will lose your licence to sell liquor.

This is not much of a deterrent when you consider the chances of being caught in the first place. An ALAC survey of youth drinking indicated that 11 per cent of 16- and 17-year-olds had purchased liquor at least once, yet in 2008 just 154 people were convicted of selling liquor to a minor.

The bill also aims to provide local communities with more say over the sale of liquor through the introduction of local liquor plans. These plans will be drawn up by city and district councils to control where and when alcohol can be sold.

While the idea is a worthy one, it represents another example of a responsibility being shifted to local councils, which may lack the resources to fight the inevitable legal challenges of the liquor industry.

Instead of having to rely on laws that aren't enforced or on local efforts to address a national problem, we should be looking to the Government to provide clearer directives over how, where, when and to whom liquor is sold. This would allow for a consistent approach and greater certainty for both the liquor industry and the public.

For example, we could have regulations that ban the advertising of liquor, set closing times for off-licences and impose far stiffer penalties for businesses that flout the law. This could be done without the need for local liquor plans.

Just as few New Zealanders would argue we should ban liquor entirely, few New Zealanders would accept our relationship with alcohol is entirely benign. There will always be a need for some level of regulation over the sale and consumption of alcohol, so the key question is where to draw the line between individual choice and social control.

Having this line determined by the practices and preferences of the liquor industry, as it is now, is a recipe for little or no social control and increased social harm.

Collectively, the liquor industry will always aim to have more people drinking more, with little or no regard for the social costs. The current approach to regulating liquor is fundamentally flawed because it ignores this dynamic and leaves it to the liquor industry to act responsibly.

While some operators within the liquor industry are socially responsible, many aren't. This means that most liquor businesses operate in an environment where they must cut corners and lower standards in order to survive.

Unless some basic standards are imposed and enforced, this slide will continue and families and communities will pay the highest price.

* Major Campbell Roberts is director of the Salvation Army's social policy and parliamentary unit.