Page 5692 - Week 13 - Thursday, 18 November 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Canberra Liberals who have turned all of that into action. The Canberra Liberals have proposed a series of amendments to the Liquor Regulations that address at least some of the concerns of Canberra’s hospitality and liquor industry.
I foreshadow that in accordance with standing order 133 I will ask for the Assembly to order that the question be divided as to the individual amendments when it comes time to vote on them. And I will just go through all of the amendments that I have proposed.
The first amendment relates to section 16(1)(a) of the regulations and the examples given at the end of the section. Section 16(1)(a) requires that a RAMP, a risk assessment management plan, must indicate the kind of business to be operated under a licence or permit and gives, as one of four examples, a food and wine stall. It would be a rare occurrence that a food and wine stall would be a stand-alone business. Certainly the other examples of business types in this section are stand-alone businesses—clubs, hotels and taverns. Most commonly, a food and wine stall would be an activity within a licensed business.
Accordingly, the Canberra Liberals propose that the example of a food and wine stall be removed from this list of examples. It may well be still considered an example even though it is not stated as such but it should not be listed as a stand-alone business in the same way as clubs, hotels or taverns.
Amendment No 2 inserts a provision that makes it clear that a risk assessment management plan is not required of applicants for non-commercial permits. Certainly, if you read several provisions of the act together it becomes clear that a risk assessment management plan is not required for non-commercial permits. But the regulation lacks clarity in this regard and I propose this amendment to the regulation to make it abundantly clear, because I have been dealing with members of the community sector, not-for-profits, who are labouring under a range of misapprehensions on the basis of information provided them by the minister’s department in relation to this. The information is conflicting and I think it is time that we clarified this matter.
The third amendment exempts the need for a newspaper advertisement or a sign on the front of the premises when a private event is held on-licence for young people. A consequence is that such an event is exempt from the requirement not to end before the advertised time. Too often, we have read of young people’s private parties and functions being gate-crashed, often with tragic and certainly antisocial consequences. Advertising what is essentially a private event in the newspaper is an open invitation for gate-crashing. Putting a notice out the front of the premises is less of a risk but it only takes one person to notice it and use electronic social networking to spread the word.
Amendment No 4 deletes the provision that prohibits supermarkets advertising or promoting liquor in any area other than the liquor display area for the supermarket. This prohibition amounts to a restraint of trade because it prevents supermarkets from quite legitimate cross-promotion activities. This provision is unique to the ACT. Examples are promotions of chocolates and sparkling wine for Mother’s Day or
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video