A group looking at controls on alcohol advertising in New Zealand says legislation setting out clear direction is needed.
In May last year the Government ordered a review of the self-regulatory framework for alcohol advertising after a health select committee recommendation.
The steering group's report released yesterday found
that the self-regulatory system compared well internationally but was lacking in several areas.
The steering group decided full regulation through a statutory body was not needed, but it wanted its proposed legislation to ensure advertising did not conflict with the need for moderation in drinking, and that exposure of children and young people to advertising be minimised.
The legislation should also set out sanctions for serious and persistent non-compliance.
"These changes would move New Zealand from a voluntary self-regulatory model to an enforced self-regulatory model that requires participation of all industry operators."
The steering group said it did not find sufficient evidence to show if further restrictions on sponsorship by the alcohol industry were needed.
It had concerns about the exposure of youth to alcohol and said further research on sponsorship was needed, and that organisations should be encouraged to take voluntary steps to reduce exposure of alcohol products and brands to young people.
Associate Health Minister Damien O'Connor said the report's recommendations had serious implications for the sale and supply of alcohol to minors, which was also being reviewed.
That review is expected to be completed by July. The Government would then consider both sets of recommendations in tandem, Mr O'Connor said.
The public has six weeks to make submissions to the Health Ministry on the report.
Changing Direction
The steering group reviewing alcohol controls wants:
* The system to be underpinned by legislation that sets out clear policy goals.
* All forms of commercial promotion and marketing communications to be included.
* The Government should have the opportunity to influence the regulatory process and outcomes.
* There should be enforcement powers in cases of serious or persistent non-compliance.
* A body responsible for administering the system should have formal powers to investigate potential breaches rather than rely on complaints.
* There should be systematic, independent monitoring, audit and research of the processes and outcomes.
- NZPA
