Page 201 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 10 February 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The government is working hard to ensure that the cost of a risk-based licensing framework on the ACT liquor industry does not operate in such a way as to diminish the social amenity of Canberra’s vibrant nightlife. The solution depends on working with industry by involving them in the solutions. The government’s amendment to this motion emphasises and draws attention to the level of common agreement between the Greens and the government in addressing effective solutions to this important community issue.
The government’s amendment also recognises the government’s ongoing efforts and commitment to maximising both social amenity and community safety. For example, the government has already reformed the body that oversees liquor licences. In February 2009 the ACAT became operational, introducing a new model for overseeing liquor licences and other regulatory issues in the territory. The ACAT has great flexibility in deciding which regulatory measure to impose in response to licensee misconduct. The government has also funded new inspectors to increase the capacity of the Office of Regulatory Services to monitor and encourage compliance with territory legislation.
The government has announced a detailed reform agenda, and I would like to touch on a number of these matters. I have already mentioned risk-based licensing. Risk-based licensing provides us with a greater capacity to properly reflect the costs that higher risk premises impose on the broader community, whether that is in terms of increased policing resources, costs on health care, costs on transport—costs on a range of other areas. Risk-based licensing will be a key measure for the government’s reform. The government has already outlined how it believes that framework should be implemented.
I will be undertaking detailed discussions with industry stakeholders in terms of the detail of that new licence fee structure. I acknowledge that there are some concerns from industry about the level of fees and what it may mean for some licensees. I will work to achieve as constructive an outcome as possible, recognising that nobody likes fees to go up but nevertheless working to ensure that we get as much agreement as possible and trying to get a constructive outcome on that.
I have mentioned transport briefly. That is something which I note the Greens have also raised. The government takes the very strong view that this is not just a matter for the community in terms of taxpayer-funded services. Go to any other metropolitan area around the country and you will see that, as a condition of their licence, licensed venues must provide courtesy transport for their patrons. For example, I had the pleasure to visit Newcastle over the Christmas-new year period. Newcastle is an urban centre similar in size to the ACT in terms of population. I visited a licensed club. I was able to get to and from that club on a free courtesy shuttle bus provided by the club. That meant that my family and I could go out and enjoy the night. We had relatives with us and we were able to have a few drinks and get home safely. We did not have to worry about driving. We did not have to worry about all of those issues.
I believe there is a very clear onus on licensees to contribute to the transport solution. They should not simply say it is a matter for government, because licensees in
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video