Editorial: Time right to ban fireworks

Photo / Ben Fraser

The Government says tightened fireworks regulations have brought down the number of related injuries and fire incidents over the past six years.

The number of ACC claims for injuries has reduced from 557 in 2007 to 493 in 2013, while the number of fireworks-related fires is down from 265 in 2007 to 187 in 2013.

Environment Minister Nick Smith says the downward trend is encouraging but Kiwis are on a good behaviour bond. "Any significant increase would trigger a revision and the consideration of tighter regulations," Dr Smith said.

In other words, and as is the case in many varied areas of life, idiots have the potential to spoil everything for the rest of us.

But to be fair, why are we bothering with fireworks in the first place?

Have another look at those numbers - should nearly 500 injuries and nearly 200 fires be seen as a good thing?

(This particular government statement didn't mention how many animals are affected by fireworks on an annual basis.)

Here's another number - 26,000. That's how many people have signed a petition calling for a ban on the public sale of fireworks.

A poll on the Rotorua Daily Post website asking if fireworks should be banned from public sale shows 75 per cent of respondents saying "Yes".

It's inevitable that the ban will come within years. Even the Prime Minister says change is near but he is reluctant to bring in a ban now for fear of being accused of running a "nanny state".

Actually, now would be the perfect time, Mr Key. It's three years until the next election, so you don't have to worry about a backlash at the polls, and it's a whole year until fireworks are set to go back on sale.

Having acknowledged that a change is not only likely, but also warranted, you may as well start the process of banning the public sale of fireworks now.

Surely, Mr Prime Minister, you can handle a bit of "nanny state" name calling in the name of fewer injuries, fewer fires and fewer hurt and distressed animals?