Southland licensing trust leaders have accused Act MP Simon Court of attempting to sidestep local democratic processes with his bid to abolish alcohol licensing trusts. Photo / 123rf
Southland licensing trust leaders have accused Act MP Simon Court of attempting to sidestep local democratic processes with his bid to abolish alcohol licensing trusts. Photo / 123rf
Southland licensing trust leaders have accused Act MP Simon Court of attempting to sidestep local democratic processes with his bid to abolish what he calls the “monopoly” status enjoyed by alcohol licensing trusts.
Court argued the trusts create a “monopoly” that limited consumer choice and inflates prices.
In Southland, the Invercargill Licensing Trust (ILT) and Mataura Licensing Trust were established in 1944 and 1955, respectively, to manage alcohol sales and reinvest profits into local communities.
Over the years, these trusts have channelled millions into community initiatives, including ILT’s major contribution to the zero fees scheme for tertiary education.
Act MP Simon Court opposes liquor licensing trusts in Southland. Photo / Supplied
ILT reports it has given over $217 million back to the Southland community since its founding, with around $8m distributed annually to over 300 local organisations.
Court argued that licensing trusts hinder economic growth and job opportunities, citing rising overheads and an over-reliance on revenue from gambling machines, rather than alcohol sales.
He claimed licensing trusts in Auckland and Southland do not significantly reduce alcohol-related harm, while limiting residents’ options and the potential for local entrepreneurship.
“The Invercargill and Mataura trusts should no longer control alcohol access,” Court said.
“Southlanders deserve the same choice and freedom available in the rest of the country.”
Chris Ramsay, chief executive of ILT, said the proposed reforms were misguided and Auckland-centric.
Ramsay refuted Court’s characterisation of licensing trusts as “monopolies”, stating that while trusts do hold exclusive trading privileges, calling them monopolies is inaccurate.
Gore, Southland where liquor licensing trusts operate. Photo / George Heard
“We’ve got a trading privilege, but the monopoly label is misleading, and I certainly don’t want to downplay the benefits our structure brings to the community.”
He noted the ILT had contributed $9m annually in donations to the community.
“This is money that wouldn’t otherwise be available without the trust’s trading model,” he said.
Ramsay argued that the proposed reforms stem from a lack of understanding about the significance of licensing trusts in regions like Southland.
“The comments made in support of this bill are incredibly Auckland-centric. I don’t believe [Court] has much understanding of the connection we have here in the deep south,” he said.
Ramsay pointed out that local residents already have the power to decide whether licensing trusts retain their privileges through petitions and community polls.
A recent attempt to initiate such a poll in West Auckland failed due to insufficient support, a fact that Ramsay suggested shows strong local support for trusts.
“This particular MP seems out of touch with his own community’s beliefs about the trust.”
Responding to Court’s claim that 80% of ILT’s profits come from gambling, Ramsay said Court had not done his homework.
“Our trading businesses generate 100% of our profits. Between $6m and $8m in before-tax profits is generated annually, of which $3m to $3.5m goes back to the community, with the remainder reinvested into our business.”
Ramsay asserted that Southland’s licensing trusts operate effectively and responsibly, and he dismissed the need for legislative change.
“[Court] is attempting to circumvent community-driven mechanisms already in place, which are fit for purpose,” Ramsay said.
Southland’s Mataura Licensing Trust (MLT) general manager Mark Patterson said the bill disregards community choice and Southland’s long-standing support for licensing trusts.
Court’s bill was a “backdoor attempt” to override local control, as past efforts to dismantle the licensing trust model through community referendums had failed, Patterson said.
“In Gore, we faced a poll in 2003 and won 55% to 45%.”
He also disputed Court’s claims that the licensing trust model stifles local entrepreneurship, pointing to new private businesses like Amigos, a licensed restaurant recently opened in Gore.
Patterson said MLT did not operate as a monopoly, as claimed by Court, highlighting the numerous licensed sports clubs, RSA establishments, and private clubs already present in the area.
“We support them financially, and they wouldn’t exist without us,” he said.
Patterson also questioned Court’s familiarity with Southland, saying that most of his criticism has focused on licensing trusts in West Auckland.
“No one here knows who Simon Court is, but he’d certainly be known if he came down here,” Patterson said.
Patterson said that a democratic process already exists under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act, allowing communities to hold a referendum if they wish to dissolve a licensing trust.
“All that’s needed is 15% of eligible voters to sign a petition and a 51% vote to pass,” he said.
“I’m just disappointed that it’s reared its ugly head. I think that this Government, given what they’ve inherited from the Labour Party, have got more to worry about than four very successful licensing trusts that are well-managed, well run, and have given away over $300 million to stakeholders.”
Ben Tomsett is a multimedia journalist for the New Zealand Herald, based in Dunedin.
