Legislation to ease alcohol restrictions over Easter, Anzac Day, and Christmas has passed its third and final reading at Parliament.
By Giles Dexter of RNZ
The bill amends the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act to allow premises that are already open on Good Friday, Easter Sunday, Anzac Day morning, and Christmas Day to sell alcohol under normal licence conditions.
Bottle shops will still have to stay closed, and supermarket alcohol restrictions remain.
The bill passed 66 votes to 56.
It was put forward by Labour MP Kieran McAnulty.
Speaking at the third reading, McAnulty told the House the bill would clear up the guesswork for hospitality staff in deciding what was a "substantial" meal to serve before someone could purchase alcohol, by removing the requirement entirely.
"What is even more ridiculous is that actually they're not required to eat the meal. They're only required to purchase it, and it can sit there while they drink, and it could also be argued that they can go and buy another substantial meal in order to keep drinking. That doesn't make sense. This bill clears that up," he said.
McAnulty said it was clear there was not a majority in Parliament to amend the Easter Trading laws themselves, something he himself was opposed to amending, and so he was not seeking to change them.
"All we're talking about here is businesses that can already open. This is not expanding access to alcohol. When we're only talking about those workers that are working anyway, this is not taking anything away from those workers that otherwise enjoy a guaranteed day off," he said.
At the Committee of the Whole House stage, and amendment from ACT's Cameron Luxton was adopted to ensure those venues could continue to serve drinks past midnight the day before the holiday.
Luxton said the provision would allow a business to stay open for its usual licencing hours, and not necessarily that they must remain open or stay open past the 11:59 deadline the day before.
"The amendment says that the premises for which an on-licence is held may remain open during the permitted trading hours that apply to the premises," he said.
McAnulty said Luxton's amendment cleared up an anomaly, and he was happy to support it.
Rather than the usual eleven speeches in response to McAnulty's first call, Assistant Speaker Barbara Kuriger allowed the debate to be split into 22 shorter calls, acknowledging the vote was a conscience matter.
Parliament treats votes on legislation involving alcohol as a conscience matter, meaning MPs are free to vote according to their personal feelings, or those of their constituents, rather than whipped as a party bloc.
It means McAnulty's Labour colleagues were free to vote against his bill, as Taieri MP Ingrid Leary did.
"I can't in good conscience continue to see bills come before the House that incrementally change small, nuanced parts of a wider architecture that urgently needs reform," she said.
ACT voted as a bloc in support, while all New Zealand First and Green MPs opposed the bill.
MP Kahurangi Carter said the Greens had a long history of fighting for alcohol harm reduction laws, and believed the entire Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act needed to be overhauled.
"The Green Party is united in our position that we cannot support this bill," she said.
New Zealand First MP David Wilson said he valued using those holidays for remembrance and reflection.
"It's not much to ask to take some time to reflect, to revere, and to respect, and then celebrate with friends and family," he said.
"A small degree of restriction for a few days to reinforce shared traditions and values is a very small price to pay."
His New Zealand First colleague Mark Patterson took it a step further, saying the House would be "crossing a Rubicon" with its vote.
"Will they vote to uphold their traditional New Zealand values, history, and traditions? Will they respect our Christian heritage, sacred Christian celebrations of Christmas, Easter Sunday, and Good Friday? Will they acknowledge the solemn commemoration of Anzac Day morning? Or will they sacrifice that heritage at the altar of consumerism and consumption?"
McAnulty's Labour colleague Lemauga Lydia Sosene said communities in her Mangere electorate wanted to keep those days sacred, and so she opposed it on their behalf.
However, in support of the bill, National's Greg Fleming said he did not believe the legislation affected the sanctity of those days.
Fleming, who co-founded conservative policy think-tank the Maxim Institute, said many years ago he would have opposed the bill, but he said it was a "considered, incremental, and mature step forward" for a healthy relationship for alcohol, and a healthy respect for differences, rather than being "fearful" of what it meant for sacred days.
ACT's Laura McClure said people's behaviour would not change just because trading hours did.
"Our licenced premises have to adhere to really strict rules when it comes to intoxication. One of the safest places you could probably have a few beverages in is a licenced premises."
National's Carl Bates, opposing the legislation, said Parliament could have instead clarfied the definition of a "substantial" meal in regulation.
"The idea that the only way to solve this problem is to remove the law, to take a step on that slop towards removing the importance of these days in New Zealand's history, and in its culture, is in itself absurd."
Speaking to RNZ before the third reading, McAnulty was hopeful it could get Royal Assent on Thursday, so it could be law before the long weekend.
SHARE ME