Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Sales on Anzac Day Morning, Good Friday, Easter Sunday, and Christmas Day) Amendment Bill

I move, That the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Sales on Anzac Day Morning, Good Friday, Easter Sunday, and Christmas Day) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Justice Committee to consider the bill.

In a week’s time, people will be going to bars and restaurants and the supermarket, and they will be able to purchase alcohol like any other day of the week. And then the following day, they won’t. And then the next day, they will. And the following day, they won’t. The question has to be asked: why? Why is it that on Easter Sunday and Good Friday there are different rules that regulate how alcohol can be served than any other day of the year? In fact, there are 3½ days: there’s Christmas Day as well and there’s Anzac Day morning, but given the proximity to Easter, I will focus on that.

It seems that this rule is in place because it always has been, and that’s not really a good reason to have a rule. On every other day of the year, the distribution of alcohol is essentially determined on health grounds. The rules by which a liquor licence is decided and the conditions under which an establishment can serve alcohol is heavily influenced by health considerations. But it’s not on these days.

If I wanted to go to the pub on Good Friday, I would have to buy a meal to have a drink. The same applies to Easter Sunday. Why is that? Why is it that hospitality workers have to concern themselves with monitoring what people eat in order to do their job that they are more than capable and highly skilled at doing every other day of the year? This bill will address that.

Cameron Luxton: It’s because Labour voted, as a bloc, down a bill that would have fixed it.

Hon KIERAN McANULTY: Now, I expected this. I expected the ACT Party to heckle this, because I understand they’re disappointed that Cameron Luxton’s bill got voted down. I get it.

This is an example of all the other attempts to change these rules. Every other attempt has gone beyond what Parliament is willing to accept, because it’s not actually as simple as liquor licensing rules with all the other bills that have been put forward. They’ve looked at trading laws and they’ve looked at labour laws. This bill does neither of those things—it is about the sale and supply of alcohol, and that’s it.

In preparation for this debate, I looked through the speeches of Mr Luxton’s bill. There were broad ranges of concern and opposition to it. The Labour Party didn’t support it because we don’t support any changes to what is, essentially, for most workers, guaranteed days off. We also don’t support any changes around labour laws in that. There were also concerns by members of Parliament that liberalising alcohol laws is bad for the community. I don’t agree with that and will explain why this bill doesn’t do that in a moment. There were also concerns by members because of their personal religious beliefs, which I respect but I’m going to touch on that first.

Easter is a Christian holiday. I am Catholic—I’m not a very good Catholic, but I’m still Catholic. I attend Mass at Easter and at Christmas. At no point in my religion—and, in fact, most; the vast majority of Christian religions—does it prohibit you from drinking alcohol on Good Friday or Easter Sunday. I’m not going to eat meat on Good Friday. Would this Parliament support a ban on serving meat in this country on Good Friday? Of course it wouldn’t. But exactly the same logic applies here.

On Easter Sunday, when I leave Mass, I will have hot cross buns. Then I’ll have lunch and I’ll crack open a beer. I’ve done this every year since I was 18—and, if I’m honest, probably a couple of years before that. But what is wrong with that? If these rules are determined on religious grounds, yet the religion that has led to the holiday doesn’t prevent the consumption of alcohol, what is the logic behind this? There is none.

I respect those that hold views that would lead them to not want to consume alcohol on those days—absolutely respect that. But what about those people that don’t hold those views? Why should they be prevented?

The same goes for Anzac Day morning. There is a restriction on the serving of alcohol on the morning of Anzac Day. But what this has led to is that RSAs have had to apply for special licences to serve rum in the coffee to veterans. Surely that is considered counter-productive?

On Christmas Day, the same logic applies, although I’ll put this to the House: if members wish to send this to select committee and they have reservations about Christmas Day, I’m happy to negotiate. We’ve got to be pragmatic. I have no problem with it, but when you look at all the other examples of attempts to change these rules that have failed in this Parliament, we’ve got to try and meet in the middle.

Cameron Luxton: Oh, what!

Hon KIERAN McANULTY: If members have an issue on Christmas Day—Cameron Luxton just needs to get over it. His bill was different, and it didn’t have the support. This bill is completely different to what he put forward. I put it to him that if he really wanted his bill to pass, support this one. But don’t begrudge me because yours didn’t pass.

This bill here is actually going to fix an anomaly in the law. This bill doesn’t affect businesses that cannot open. That’s a really important point. The intention of this bill is to assist those businesses that are already legally able to operate, to operate under normal conditions. It is not the intention of this bill to allow off-licences to operate; it is not the intention of this bill to allow retail businesses that can’t operate, to open. It is solely focused on those businesses—supermarkets, restaurants, and bars—that can already open but have to operate under perverse rules.

Why do I say it’s perverse? Well, think about this: how many times have you been at the supermarket the day before Good Friday and seen people stocking up on alcohol because you can’t buy it the next day? I’ve done it and then I’ve had it sitting there for ages because I’ve bought too much—I would wager many of us have done it. So these rules, they encourage stockpiling.

The bizarre thing about the rules that require people to buy a meal before they drink is you’ve got a window before the meal and a window after the meal. Now, I would hazard a guess that the people that take advantage of that drink more in that small window than they would have done if they were just allowed to go to the bar and buy a pint. It’s just logic. “Shivers, we’ve only got a couple of hours here. We may as well make the most of it.” That is actually a perverse outcome. When the hospitality workers who are working anyway and will be under no further compulsion than they already have in the law—they’ll be working anyway, but they have to do their jobs in a different way than they would on any other day of the year. That makes absolutely no sense.

Let’s consider this: we are a country that, in many ways, relies on tourism. They fly from all corners of the world to come and experience our beautiful country, and then they walk into a pub, and they get told they can’t buy a beer unless they buy a meal, but they don’t want a meal so they walk out. That is counter-productive.

This bill is very simple. It just addresses the anomaly in the liquor licensing laws. It doesn’t touch on labour laws, and it doesn’t change the trading laws—that has been tried and it hasn’t got there. It doesn’t make sense that we will continue to operate in these bizarre circumstances where you can go to the supermarket, you can buy absolutely everything except a six-pack of beer or a bottle of wine. If they’re already operating, why on earth can’t they just operate like they normally would?

This is a pragmatic change. It’ll be welcomed by the hospitality industry, which have had a very difficult few years. It won’t be opposed by workers because it actually allows them to work under the same conditions that they are trained to do every other day of the year. But what it does allow is for New Zealanders to continue on and have the choice that they’ve always had. If they want to observe their personal religious beliefs, this country respects that and they can still do that. But if others wish to make a choice, they can do so that they would on any other day without undermining those beliefs or actually their own.

This is not the most important issue facing the country, but this is members’ day. There are many other things that I would like to achieve in Parliament: workers earning a living wage being one, a New Zealand head of State is another example. But here is an opportunity for the country to have a discussion at committee stage that we’ve never actually had, and see if New Zealanders think these rules make sense. I commend it to the House.

The question is that the motion be agreed to. Members, because this is a conscience issue, you will need to seek a call.

It is indeed a pleasure to rise and speak once again in this House on the matter of alcohol over Easter, just this time it includes a couple of extra days. The honourable member who spoke previously also talked about a bill that was previously voted down in this House and that the ACT Party and I, as the sponsoring member, thought would achieve great things in this country, allowing people to trade and consume alcohol over Easter in a way they see fit. And, to address some of the issues that the honourable member who just spoke mentioned, one of the issues, he said, was that visitors come to New Zealand and they are surprised they can’t get a drink. Well, they’re also extremely shocked when they find out that this particular town or that particular town has got closed shops and that workers have been forced not to work because of the changes—

Steve Abel: Have you been to France lately?

CAMERON LUXTON: I’m sorry, I missed that heckle. I’m very interested in the lobbying efforts from the honourable member who’s just resumed his seat. His lobbying efforts, I must say, I didn’t see come to my office. Did they come to anyone? No, the ACT Party didn’t get it. I guess they just thought that a party like ACT, which believes in freedom and choice, would just support such a bill. But, then again, I guess maybe he just thought, “Look, the lobbying has already been done. There’s been a hardworking and humble member of this House that’s been out meeting people in the community”—workers who want to be able to have the choice, people who are sick of the issues that come with, as the honourable member mentioned, a different type of rule regime for some specific days of the year.

A humble and hardworking MP of this House has been out in the regions, different parts of the country, gathering support for a change like this, engaging with the interested parties, representative bodies, peak bodies of industry which are affected, talking to workers, hearing the stories. So I suppose the lobbying efforts from the honourable member who’s just resumed his seat weren’t required in that regard. But I will be supporting this bill. It is a conscience vote—

Rachel Boyack: Oh, there we go!

CAMERON LUXTON: I’m sorry, was that not made clear enough for the members on the other side? I will be.

I’m just pulling out my phone for a moment because I just wanted to read something from the Hansard. It’s kind of interesting because what we had was some members make some contributions that—well, we’ll just put it out there and read what it is. This is from the Hansard. Referring to my speech around the Easter trading bill, she talked about the possibility that people who have a negative, I think she called it, relationship with alcohol would go and hoard alcohol: “The research suggests that that’s not actually the case, sir. What happens when there is an issue with alcohol is that an alcoholic will buy more alcohol if there is availability. So if you have shop hours extended for alcohol sales, they will actually go and buy more alcohol at that time. It’s a strangely opportunistic relationship that they have with alcohol.” That was Helen White.

I’d like to compare that to the lobbying efforts from the honourable member who’s just resumed his seat, which amounted, in my case, to a PR—a press release, for those not in the political world—“This will prevent the need to apply for a special licence to serve alcohol to veterans on Anzac Day services.” That is to be endorsed and laudable, but it also goes on to say, “It removes any incentive to stockpile alcohol before Easter.” So, from the Labour Party benches, we’ve had two contradictory arguments put forward and then advanced once again by the honourable member who’s resumed his seat. The member had said there is no good reason to restrict people’s choice over these days. Well, I agree entirely. It’s funny that some restrictions that the honourable member thinks are worthwhile on New Zealanders’ lives—

Hon James Meager: What’s changed?

CAMERON LUXTON: —what has changed?—are worthwhile, but other restrictions aren’t. And I agree with the honourable member that, in this particular case, it makes no sense; the evidence doesn’t work out. The theological argument the honourable member put forward doesn’t mean that we need to be banning alcohol on that day. But we knew this already, didn’t we, James Meager? We knew this already, didn’t we, Carl Bates? We knew this already, didn’t we, Dan Bidois? Members who went about this House lobbying on behalf of common-sense changes to the rules so that New Zealanders can enjoy their Easter weekend in the way they see fit—the honourable member who’s just resumed his seat, I believe, voted down such a change.

So you have to wonder when the honourable member says, “Why, why, have we still got this situation? How could this possibly be? How has it taken so long? I guess it’s just something we ended up with.” Well, what we know, Mr Speaker, and those of us who have been in this House for more than a couple of months, is that an opportunity like this already did happen. There was an opportunity to make that change. Members across the House were given a conscience vote on the issue, and the honourable member who’s just resumed his seat chose to vote against that change to Easter trading. In his speech—we have to give the honourable member his fair argument—he said it was to affect workers’ rights and trading hours, but then to go on and say it makes no sense that you can’t go to a shop and buy what you want at the same time as saying we’re not going to allow shops to open, and then say it affects workers’ rights because workers should have a day off but then vote against the bill that gives every single worker the choice to have a day off, which doesn’t currently exist—I mean, it’s—

Hon James Meager: They’re anti-worker.

CAMERON LUXTON: Yeah, drinking is not working, I guess. This bill goes further than my bill, which would not have gone near Christmas or Anzac Day. I think there is a fair argument about Anzac Day. Christmas Day, the honourable member also touched on, and I think he raises a point there. There isn’t a big cry in the community for trading and alcohol sales on Christmas Day. Look, if it’s the will of the public and the House thinks that it’s a good idea to open up the trade, the ACT Party supports opening up choice. I think that that’s something we should do, but I give kudos to the member for acknowledging that not all New Zealanders think that is a good idea. And I certainly experienced that in the lobbying that I did out in the community, in the businesses, in this House, talking to other members across the House, to try and get some sanity to our laws. We did hear that Christmas is an issue.

I guess the word “bizarre”, which the previous member used in his speech, the honourable member used in his speech, does feel a bit like how I feel right now. The bizarreness of hearing the honourable member who’s just resumed his seat say, “How has it got to this point? How has this sensible change not already been made?”, and then looking in the voting records and seeing certain members who are sitting in the Opposition seats right now—a full list of names that voted No on a conscience issue to fix this very problem. It does feel bizarre. It does feel like the twilight zone. But, look, in my final remaining two minutes, I won’t delve into the historical sayings and happenings of the honourable member who’s just resumed his seat. I would like to actually say what a good situation this will lead to for New Zealanders who want to choose how to spend their days.

When they look at a rule put in by this House, it has to be backed up with evidence. If it relies on tradition, there has to be a solid grounding of tradition. If it relies on evidence to maintain a law, there should be solid evidence to maintain a law. And, as the honourable member had put out, there just isn’t that sort of evidence and tradition to maintain this. What we need to do is fix up the things that are getting in the way of New Zealanders’ lives, fix up the hurdles in every part, like this Government does. Whenever we can find a problem, we get on with fixing it. The honourable member has gone about finding a problem, sometimes supporting certain elements of it, sometimes not, but he’s taken this to the House. As the honourable member has said, it’s not been a major issue. It’s not one of the major things facing this country, but it is a small inconvenience in the lives of New Zealanders. It’s something that members’ day is designed to fix. So I look forward to using my conscience vote to vote in favour of this bill brought by the honourable member.

I call Teanau Tuiono—but just before we start the clock, this is a conscience vote. I’d like to make it as fair as possible, not across party lines. If members would like to indicate to me which way they are going, for or against, it just gives me a chance to endeavour to make sure that the debate is balanced. It’s totally up to you, but feel free to approach and I’ll try to balance the debate between for and against. It’s up to the members. I’ll just make that suggestion.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise to speak on the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Sales on Anzac Day Morning, Good Friday, Easter Sunday, and Christmas Day) Amendment Bill. I want to acknowledge the member the Hon Kieran McAnulty for bringing a bill to the House. Members’ days are always interesting days when members get to have their say and to propose different legislation.

Well, this is awkward because we won’t be supporting this bill, at least I won’t be. I do say that with the utmost respect because I do enjoy watching the Hon Kieran McAnulty on the Breakfast show and that, so on and so forth, having political fisticuffs with members opposite, and also appreciate his skill in the House around being very precise and surgical in terms of his arguments as well. But I also, funnily enough, agree with the comments of the last speaker, Cameron Luxton, in terms of the similarities of the issues that were canvassed when that member attempted to do something in this area as well.

I guess the issue for me in general is—and maybe it’s because I’m a bit old fashioned; that’s certainly what my kids say—that Anzac Days, Good Friday, Easter Sundays, and Christmas Days, these are times that we need to be able to put tools down. These are times that we need to be able to relax. We need to actually make sure that we get that balance right. If we’re going to have a big tutū around with the holidays then that, in my opinion, disrupts that balance.

I do hear the point that was made earlier that, well, actually, people are rostered on and so on and so forth. But if you make it a day where people can actually purchase alcohol, that will mean that more people will have to get rostered on to serve people. That’s what that means. That means that more people will have to come in to work as well. Everybody that has worked a low-paid job knows that it’s very, very hard to turn the boss down. It’s very, very hard to turn the boss down when they come and have a chat to you saying that they want you to come in on a shift. Maybe that’s on Anzac Day in the morning, maybe that’s on Good Friday, Easter Sunday, or, far be it, Christmas Day, because all of a sudden people are selling alcohol here, there, and everywhere.

Our position is that it’s important that we actually focus on making sure that we get that balance right. The Greens have seen these types of bills before and our position hasn’t changed. We didn’t support the member Cameron Luxton’s bill when he brought that to the House. I do—as I think I did when we were in this House earlier discussing his bill—acknowledge the work that he did going around the House and trying to canvass those ideas. That’s a commendable thing to do. But, having said that, after having those discussions, we still got to the same place, got to the same position, that we have with this bill as well. That is that we need to make sure that we get the balance right. We need to make sure that what we do doesn’t actually end up having our low-paid workers having to give up family time, give up community time, and being rostered on to work to serve alcohol, essentially.

So the Greens, we do support workplace democracy, collective organising, and fair pay, but we also support time for life outside of work. People I think said, from both sides of the aisle so far, that, actually, you don’t have to hoard a whole lot of alcohol. You can be a bit sensible. Just get a six-pack if that’s what you want to do as well. Get it on the Thursday. We still need to make sure that we can focus on those holidays in terms of their real importance and intentions, so many of us in the Greens will not be supporting this bill.

It’s a pleasure to rise and take a contribution in this debate on the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Sales on Anzac Day Morning, Good Friday, Easter Sunday, and Christmas Day) Amendment Bill.

New Zealand has changed from when I was a teenager. Back in the days, I think you couldn’t actually trade on a Sunday. I think TV2 was the only channel, and that ended at 9 o’clock when the little kiwi came on. A lot has changed since the 1980s, and New Zealand will continue to change. I believe that this is an evolution, this is a manifestation, of that change and that is one that I will be supporting today.

The New Zealand that I want to see in the future, as we change, is much like the past: a liberal society where, broadly speaking, we allow individuals, businesses, and workers the right to choose; where we allow people the freedom of religion and the right to observe their religious practices; and freedom of choice. I think those values are longstanding values in New Zealand society and those are the values that I want to be at the forefront in the future. This bill is consistent with those values.

I am also a Catholic, I should say, and, like the member that’s brought this bill to the House, the Hon Kieran McAnulty, I’m not a very good Catholic, but I’m one that understands the necessity of the days that are under question.

Ryan Hamilton: Good confession.

DAN BIDOIS: I’m not going to make a confession today—as my colleague Ryan Hamilton wishes that I do—but this bill is consistent with the values that I want New Zealand to be in the future. It is good policy.

As the member spoke, you know, we’ve got Anzac Day coming up, and, for some bizarre reason, we’re having local RSAs have to apply for special licences to serve alcohol in the morning. That just strikes me as bureaucratic, nonsensical, and not consistent with the spirit of the day and the spirit of our society. I’ve got businesses in my electorate that would love to trade on those days, and workers that would love to work on them. The previous speaker spoke about the rights of workers, and workers ultimately have the right to say no. I remember back when I was an apprentice butcher on $6 an hour and I could choose to work stat days, I could choose to work extra days if I wanted to, to get ahead. And if I didn’t want to, then I could say no and that business would go to another worker. So that is very much consistent with this good policy.

I think just, you know, around the world, looking at—I’ve had the fortunate privilege of living in different contexts. I’ve lived in France, where often there’s no businesses open on a Sunday. I’ve lived in America, where you can get a brand new suit at 10 p.m. at night. I just think that this is consistent with where we’re heading as liberal democracies, free-market societies—we give employers and employees the right to choose.

But I do want to touch on something, and that is the partisan politics of this House. Because this is the second time this year that this House is dealing with this question. And I walked through the Ayes, only to be met with a block vote from Labour on the Noes. And I wish to acknowledge my friend Cameron Luxton, who brought a bill very similar to this to the House and it was voted down. What annoys me is that we get caught up in partisan politics, and that gets in the way of good policy. It’s all very well to say, “Well, it’s good policy, but we can’t support it because it’s from the Opposition.” And it is on that basis that I stand here saying that I’m happy to support this because I think it’s good policy.

I don’t really agree with the member on a lot of other issues, but on this very issue I can agree with him. So I look forward to sending this bill—hopefully—to select committee. I do think it’s probably gone a little bit further than the bill that we considered just a few months ago, so I’d be curious on what New Zealanders have to say, and I’ll make my judgment on the future direction thereafter. But I commend this bill to the House.

Just before the next call, those members challenging each other to confessions, the Standing Orders do not allow absolution.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Thank you for the opportunity to say a few words in this conscience vote. I will be a member that will be voting against this bill due to my community, but I want to acknowledge my colleague the Hon Kieran McAnulty, who has come here this evening with this bill. I’ve heard his arguments, but I maintain the view of my local community in Māngere, and so I just want to elaborate further as to my reasons for voting against.

In Māngere, we have a population of just under 70,000, and we have a proliferation of alcohol outlets, mainly off-licences. For the past decade, I have been one of the members of the community where, in a previous role, we had to get out to the community and talk to our community as to why these problems are occurring.

I’ve heard the arguments for the bill and I want to acknowledge my colleague because he does have a point, and I’ve heard from across the House that we’re evolutionary and we’re changing in New Zealand. However, in some communities, alcohol is a really major problem, and in my community, over 60 percent of our population are under—they are the youngest population in Aotearoa. We have a large youth population, where the number of off-licences is a problem. However, we do have some very responsible licensed places, and with regard to this bill, with the sales on Anzac Day morning, on Good Friday, on Easter Sunday, and on Christmas Day—Māngere has the largest amount of churches. We have a large religious community, who want protection around the religious festivals such as Good Friday and Easter Sunday.

We have a community where some of them are quite young because they have come from overseas—mainly Pacific Islands—and some of our ethnic communities have grown. So, on that note, it is important for me, as the member representing my local community, which has very strong views and very firm religious views—we have faiths of all different communities. It is not just Pacific and not just our Māori community but also our ethnic communities that are really growing in our local area. These religious days, and particularly Good Friday, Easter Sunday, and Christmas Day—and I’ve had a couple of groups who have said to me, “Why is New Zealand looking at this and keeping talking about this law?”, because, in their view, they have migrated to this country, and you have over 360 days of the year when you can access alcohol. They ask why we cannot have the protections on these specific religious days.

I think that Anzac Day is quite different because we need to celebrate our veterans and remember and commemorate the service that our veterans have done for this country. However, because that’s part of this bill, there is a firm view from my community that we need to stand up, and even if it gets voted against or the bill goes to the next process, that’s one thing.

However, from my local community in Māngere, I wanted to put forward their view due to our youth population, who very much support what their elders are saying. So, on that note, it is important to put those views across.

I’ve heard other views in terms of why they’re voting against, and obviously there are firm views around trade laws and also employment. However, in my local community, this is really important. We have a very diverse community, and they celebrate a lot, particularly on those religious days of Good Friday, Easter Sunday, and Christmas Day. For some families in my local community, those are very sacred times, given that AI and technology is a 24/7 thing. Families look to those specific days on which to come together to celebrate the religious holidays and to be together on those days.

I thank you for the opportunity. I do want to recognise my colleague the Hon Kieran McAnulty, because even though we don’t agree on some things, we are still colleagues, and I am really happy to be part of the Labour Party because we are a broad church. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Firstly, I want to commend the previous speaker, Lemauga Lydia Sosene, for her contribution, because, actually, it’s really refreshing to hear alternative views being proposed by members of the Labour Party. The reason I say that is that I think back to the Easter trading bill from my friend and colleague Cameron Luxton in December 2024, and I remember the Labour Party voting 34 votes No as a block. That was really disappointing—

Hon Willie Jackson: Don’t carry grudges.

TOM RUTHERFORD: Mr Jackson says, “Don’t carry grudges.” Actually, I’m just laying out the history of what’s transpired prior to this bill being brought to the House. The reason I’m doing that is that the member, when introducing this bill in his first speech, played at the heartstrings of members and said, “Vote with your conscience. Vote with what is right.” And I ask: where was that four months ago in December when Cameron Luxton brought a very similar bill to the House to be considered, when members of the Labour Party, the Green Party, and New Zealand First all voted collectively as a block in one way and did not allow their members to use their right and use their conscience to vote either for or against? I do that to provide some lie of the land.

I think back also to a bill in 2023, when Nicola Willis brought her parental leave bill to the House. It allowed parents to take parental leave together to allow them to have some time together.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O’Connor): You’re getting a wee way away from the bill.

TOM RUTHERFORD: I’m coming back to it, Mr Speaker. And what transpired at that time is again the Labour Party voted as a bloc and voted down that legislation.

The reason I set the scene—

Ingrid Leary: Get over it.

TOM RUTHERFORD: Just let members have an opportunity. I will be voting in favour of the legislation going to select committee.

Arena Williams: We don’t want your vote.

TOM RUTHERFORD: Arena Williams says, “We don’t want your vote.” That says a lot about the arrogance of that side of the House—to make statements and say, “We do not want your vote.” That is exactly what Arena Williams said. That is absolutely disgraceful for members on the other side to make those kinds of comments on a conscience issue.

One thing that makes me extremely proud to be a member of the National Party is that we are genuinely a broad church. When we had similar legislation in December 2024, some members in our party voted for it and some members in our party voted against it, and that’s what makes this a fantastic party to be a part of.

What happened at the time? Thirty-four votes opposed from the Labour Party, voting down Cameron Luxton’s—

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O’Connor): Three minutes and I don’t think I’ve heard any mention of the bill yet.

TOM RUTHERFORD: I actually have mentioned the bill, Mr Speaker.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O’Connor): Not to my satisfaction.

TOM RUTHERFORD: OK. Well, I will carry on, then. One of the reasons I have a hesitation to support this bill beyond the select committee and why I’m only supporting it to that stage at present is because alcohol is one of the biggest causes of harm in our communities across the country. I am in favour of the liberalisation around giving people the opportunity to have a choice. I do agree with the member the Hon Kieran McAnulty when he talks about what happens on Anzac Day and how many of our RSAs across the country, if not all of them, have to get special permits and licences to allow them to operate and sell alcohol when you could just simply make a small legislative change like this bill’s doing. But, at the same time, I also have the worry around the impact that alcohol and liberalising it even further will have on our communities across the country.

Hon Willie Jackson: Make your mind up.

TOM RUTHERFORD: So that is why, Mr Jackson, I’m supporting it to the select committee. I’m interested to hear from constituents and people across the country about their views and whether they are in favour of it, whether liberalising the legislation is something they think is really important or not. I respected the previous point made by Lemauga Lydia Sosene where she stood up and said on behalf of her Mangere community that she knew how they felt towards this issue. I respect her for taking that view as an electorate MP and standing in this House and saying, “I know my community won’t support this legislation.”

So I will be supporting the bill in its first reading and its referral to the select committee. I will be interested, if it gets to that stage, to hear the feedback from our community, but I want the record to show what has transpired prior to us getting to this point in time.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise to personally give my position on the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Sales on Anzac Day Morning, Good Friday, Easter Sunday, and Christmas Day) Amendment Bill. Now, my personal position has not changed since the previous bill that we spoke on, by Mr Luxon, in that I will not be voting for this. Now, there’s a number of reasons, but one thing I do want to put on the record is that New Zealand First have exercised their conscience vote, as we did in the last bill, and it just so happened that eight members individually said no. So I just wanted to put that on the record for my colleague.

Look, when I look at this piece of legislation, I ask the question, “What is the problem that we’re trying to fix here?” I look at the problem and then I go, “OK, by solving this problem, is it going to create another problem? And what is the trade-off?” So I was thinking in those terms and I was thinking about a lot of the NGOs who I go and speak to, like the Salvation Army Bridge Programme. I asked all of them about not only the previous piece of legislation but also this one: “What are your views?” They have said, “The last thing we need is another outlet, another avenue for people who have drug or alcohol issues to be able to have easy access.” During these times—holidays, Easter, Christmas—are times when they notice the mental health issues really do accelerate and it’s the loneliness that kicks in. It’s a reminder that maybe they don’t have a family. It’s many things that trigger people. They have seen that to be able to have more access to alcohol does not serve them or the community. So I’m listening to that issue.

You know, we talk a lot in the House about health and how we can take pressure off our health system, our mental health system, our physical health system. I reflect on what could happen on Christmas Day if someone who has drunk too much gets in the car and drives to get more alcohol, and I think of the possibility of loss of life. And, yes, one weighs it up, but, you know, one loss of life is too much for a family. I think of these instances when thinking about how I am going to speak to this bill. It does happen. I know someone who lost a brother on Christmas Day, and the pain never goes and it’s a reminder every Christmas Day. So I just wanted to bring some of those scenarios to the House.

Do I have to confess that I’m also a Catholic? Probably not, being of good Croatian stock. My grandmother couldn’t read or write, but, man, she knew how to pray the rosary. So, of course, being brought up in a very religious life—one that I’m very grateful for, might I add—Good Friday, Easter Sunday, and Christmas Day are massive celebrations for our family, for our community. I’m very involved in the religious communities, Catholic and others, and I know that this is something that they do not want. They want to do everything to maintain family, to maintain the sacredness of those days. In the most recent census, 30 percent of people identified as Christians. So, in my communities, people who I speak to about this, they say, “No, it’s not something we want.” It’s not that we don’t want it, but we want to do everything we can to preserve our family unit, and this is one way that we see we can maintain that and not let anything else get in the way.

Good Friday is, for many of us, a time of fasting and abstinence, and it does have meaning. So, you know, these are just some of the things that I wanted to add as to why I personally will not vote for this. I honour the members who brought these bills to the House. Your contributions were very valid. However, thankfully this is a conscience vote and that is my say. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Rachel Boyack—although I will indicate before we start that there is one slot, that if anyone approached me to speak against the bill, they would get preference for that one last slot left, after two people have indicated already.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Let me begin: I am an Anglican, and so I might take a couple of moments to correct some of the Catholic thinking in the House—kindly, kindly. But, look, while I will be supporting this bill, I do have some reservations, and so I’ll talk about some of those as we go through.

I want to address some of the claims that have been made in the House, just briefly, about block voting. Hopefully, the House will be noting that Labour is treating this as a conscience issue. Labour did actually treat the previous vote as a conscience issue; it just so happened that we all shared the same conscience—a bit like New Zealand First! I see New Zealand First laughing. I’m struggling to find from memory any conscience vote where New Zealand First haven’t all shared the same conscience; the same for the ACT Party, and the same for the Green Party. But somehow it’s a problem for the Labour Party, but anyway. We did all walk through the same door; we didn’t block vote.

So I’ll get to the bill, because I don’t want to spend three minutes correcting all of those interesting contributions. I’m going to talk around some of the reservations that I do have. I have a reservation around supermarkets. Talking to the police, talking to hospitality organisations, one of the concerns around alcohol harm is the ability for supermarkets to sell alcohol. In one of the districts in my electorate, Nelson, there isn’t trading on Easter Sunday; in the Tasman District, there is. So we have a situation where each district has different rules. The concern I have is that those supermarkets that can open would then be able to sell alcohol. Actually, I’m not convinced about liberalising the ability for people to go to a supermarket to purchase alcohol. I do have a concern around that particular issue in relation to alcohol harm. Where I don’t have as much of a concern is if people have chosen to go to the pub for a meal and want to have a beer; they’ve gone to get a bowl of chips and want to have a glass of wine—being able to do that without that hospitality provider having to apply for a special licence. So that’s where I think that the member raises a really valid point.

I do have some disagreements with the member around how we treat Christmas Day versus Easter Sunday. Certainly in my world, Easter Sunday is actually the most important day of the religious calendar. So, for me, I’d be less likely to go out for a meal on Easter Sunday, compared to Christmas Day. It is ultimately around the resurrection day. I wouldn’t drink on Good Friday and I definitely wouldn’t eat hot cross buns on Easter Sunday, because—

Hon Kieran McAnulty: What do you do?

RACHEL BOYACK: —I have rules around these things; I am an Anglican, Mr McAnulty.

Where I think the member makes some very valid points, and that I think most of the House would agree on, is around Anzac Day. I have a tradition every Anzac Day: after the Dawn Service, I go back to the Nelson rugby club, I have a good yarn, and I shake the hand of a very good man from Nelson rugby, by the name of Kerry Strange—his son was Labour MP Jamie Strange. I always have a good yarn with Kerry, who is standing behind the bar serving the veterans. I have a strong view that on Anzac Day we should be doing what we can to make sure our vets are having a good time—without harm, of course. So I do think that including Anzac Day is a really valid part of this bill.

This bill specifically addresses alcohol access and the sale and supply of alcohol; it doesn’t address the other matters, which is why I’m happy to support it. But I do have some reservations. I’m not convinced enough to continue supporting it through the process, unless it perhaps had some changes or some further discussion. I would want to see the rules around supermarkets looked at really closely, because I’m not as convinced around that; I’m more convinced around the ability for people to go and have some family time at the pub together on these days. Again, still with some reservations. So I commend the member and I do commend, at this stage, this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s my pleasure to take a call on the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Sales on Anzac Day Morning, Good Friday, Easter Sunday, and Christmas Day) Amendment Bill. I want to acknowledge Kieran McAnulty for getting this bill drawn. This is a very important conscience vote issue tonight. I also want to acknowledge my colleague Cameron Luxton. He actually probably needs a drink at this point. It’s been a bit frustrating for him listening to some of the convoluted arguments tonight where people could have just supported his bill back in December and we could have dealt with that.

Rachel Boyack, actually, we’re concerned about supermarkets too, because some supermarkets don’t have the choice to open on some of these trading days and there are inconsistent rules, as you pointed out. But my concern is not whether they should be able to sell alcohol or not.

I will be supporting this bill, and I will be pleased to do so. I’ll be doing it for two reasons. One is because ACT is the party of freedom and choice. As we’ve already heard tonight, what this bill allows is people to make a choice about whether they consume alcohol on these days or not. They’re not being forced to. They don’t have to go out and do anything they don’t want to. It’s just going to provide them choice.

So anything that moves the choice vote forward a bit further I’m in support of, and I think I can say that a lot of my ACT colleagues will be in support of, because that’s what we want to do. We’re here to actually free up New Zealanders’ lives, allow them to make the choices that they want. We would like them to actually have more choices around when they could go to all the shops over these holidays, but we’ll work at this one point at a time. I mean, Mr McAnulty might want to consider a scope amendment, which, again, I would certainly support.

The second reason I’ll be supporting this is I actually come from Queenstown; obviously a premier tourist destination in the South. Again, we have lots of overseas visitors coming in, wanting to enjoy the abundance of activities that they can undertake. They also obviously want to consume some of our wonderful wine down there and again, we’re going to make sure that they have the opportunity to do that when they are here on these important holidays. So giving those international visitors a consistent experience again is another reason to support this bill. Again, I wish we could be doing that for some of the other trading areas because again, we do know we have an issue around what shops can open, particularly in tourist areas like Wānaka and Queenstown, and yeah, who can open and work.

But I do think this bill is worthy of going to a select committee and having a discussion. We certainly welcome the fact that we’re actually able to provide a bit more choice and freedom for Kiwis. Again, it’s been good to hear some of the arguments against this bill tonight. I do want to say I’ve sat here respectfully listening to some of the people who won’t be voting in favour of it. Again, I think there are some valid arguments from their perspective as to why they won’t be doing that. It was good to have that back and forward across the House. But, really, if you want a party that actually is looking at increasing the freedom that New Zealanders have to actually make choices about how they want to live their own lives, this bill does advance that. So that’s why I will be supporting that, and I commend it to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I feel like we’ve learnt many things tonight. One of them is how many bad Catholics there are in the House—self-described “bad Catholics” and we respect you for your honesty and your self-deprecation.

I feel remiss because the member who has put this bill up, the Hon Kieran McAnulty, is, among other things, an excellent cricket player and I’m sad to miss him on Friday when we will be taking on Seddon—and Cameron Luxton. Look at this, what is it with people who want alcohol liberalisation and cricket? There’s some connection going on there—

Tom Rutherford: I’ll be there.

STEVE ABEL: You’ll be there? Tom will be there—another one.

I’ve been talking to some of the good Catholics on this. I’m not a Catholic myself—or a Christian, even—but I have been talking to some of the Christians, and they have told me that that particular holiday is of quite significant importance to them: one of the holiest of the holidays.

There’s a few elements to this that I think are significant. One is the: is there nothing sacred? Have we reached a point where we want to not only have TV advertising on Christmas Day but we also want to sell alcohol on every day of the year? I sort of take the point that was made earlier that you can buy your beers on the day before if you want to have a drink—there’s no prohibition on drinking, and nor should there be.

I also hear the point of the author of the bill that they are simply seeking that those establishments that are already open on the day should be allowed to sell the alcohol. I take that point; I think that’s a sound point and worth consideration. I even will myself, of occasion, find myself in one of those establishments thinking, “Oh, it’d be good to have a drink, but there’s a curtain over the alcohol cabinet”—because it’s prohibited. And in an instant, I go, “How annoying that is.”, and the next instant I go, “But I also support the principle that we should keep some days where there is not”—

Mike Butterick: Oh, you’re conflicted, Steve?

STEVE ABEL: Pardon me?

Hon Member: You’re conflicted!

STEVE ABEL: Oh, I mean, I am conflicted, and I think it is good to be conflicted in this world. And this is why I hugely value the principle of the conscience vote. The conscience vote is a great thing; I wish we did it more often.

I also take the point of the member opposite—Tom Rutherford—that it is a pity when we end up with this bloc voting situation because it would be great if we did more genuine and authentic conscience votes. Your one, Mr McAnulty, on the question of our republicanism, perhaps, would be an interesting one to bring to the House, because I would hope the members opposite would consider that and perhaps be willing to vote for it. More so even than this bill.

That is one part of it—the consideration of the importance of those days to certain constituents, you know, who are religious, and we should celebrate people who want to express their religion. I don’t have a problem with talking to the Christians or people of any persuasion religiously.

The other consideration, which I think is a big one that determines the position of Green Party members on the whole, is the impact on workers. Now, anyone who has been in a situation of needing to do the day job for a crust, been a retail worker, been somebody who’s worked in an establishment that sells alcohol or food or—

Cameron Luxton: Hospitality.

STEVE ABEL: —hospitality—you name it. Hospitality, that’s right.

Hon Member: I’ve been there.

STEVE ABEL: Yeah, I’ve pulled beer in London and all over the place. Too many places to think of.

The point is that, as my colleague Teanau Tuiono pointed out, when you get called by the boss to come in, you come in because you need the hours. It is good that we have these odd days of the year when that is not going to happen. I actually think it’s a big part of the consideration in this matter: that we should preserve some days when those workers who are the least paid in our society don’t have to turn up to work because it happens to be—for those of us who are not religious—a remnant of that Christian tradition in our society where it just happens that this Friday is a traditional holiday; a holy day to people who are Christian. And no disrespect in that, but it means you won’t have to pull beer on that day. That is a good thing. That is the preservation of that principle that was established in the earliest tenets of religion: that you worked six days, and on the seventh day you rested. I think we retain that by saying there are certain days of the year you don’t work.

I’ve got a final joke for you, Mr Speaker. What do you get when you pour mulled wine down a rabbit hole? Hot, cross bunnies. And we don’t want that. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I won’t be voting for this. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I think members’ days are a special element of our parliamentary process, where, due to luck of the draw—literally—members have the opportunity to put forward ideas and have them discussed in the House. On the whole, they are generally done in good humour and good heart, and so, in that vein, I want to thank Steve Abel and Todd Stephenson, Rachel Boyack, Tanya Unkovich, Tom Rutherford, Lemauga Lydia Sosene, Teanau Tuiono, Dan Bidois, and Cameron Luxton.

I particularly want to acknowledge Cameron Luxton. He got under my skin a little bit during my speech. There was a fair bit of constant heckling which I think went a little bit far, but I actually get it. You’re frustrated because, in your view, you put up a similar bill and it didn’t get across the line, and it’s possible—who knows—this one might. So I actually acknowledge that frustration.

The fact is, though, that, as has been expressed by my friend and colleague Steve Abel and others, there are genuine concerns around adjusting and changing the labour laws and the trading laws on these specified days, and that is deliberately why this bill focuses solely on the sale and supply of alcohol. Its intention is to only apply to those businesses that are already operating, that are already allowed to operate, and those workers that are already working.

I actually introduced this bill to the ballot many years ago. It was only withdrawn when I became a Minister, and I reinserted it again when I was no longer a Minister. I’ve been waiting for the opportunity to have this specific debate, that has been deliberately drafted in this way so that we can try and find a compromise. It has been drafted in this way to take into account those of us that have no appetite at all to change labour laws on those days. It takes into account those that have expressed concerns around opening up trading on those days.

Actually, I believe I’ve put forward a case that warrants further explanation around the merits or otherwise of having restricted alcohol laws that still allow access to alcohol but under inconsistent conditions, and whether or not that actually has a counterintuitive outcome. We can actually only do that at select committee.

I want to acknowledge and thank everyone that has contributed to the debate. There are some that I don’t agree with, but I fully respect your position. That is the beauty of a conscience vote, be it a personally held view or a true demonstration of a commitment to their community. Like Tom Rutherford, who, incidentally, I want your vote. Don’t listen to Arena, who’s voting against it. I want your vote, and I’m grateful for your support to select committee.

There are things that I am fully open to explore here. If it turns out that if the bill progresses, as I mentioned in my speech, with Christmas Day and it won’t pass, I’ll take it out. The whole point of this is to find a pragmatic way to address these unusual and inconsistent liquor licensing rules. I’m open to ideas. I’m open to suggestions.

I would’ve actually been able to lobby members of the House, but it’s not supposed to have come up tonight. We had two bills withdraw, which meant it’s now here. So I got caught off guard a little bit, but I will acknowledge the work that you’ve done, Mr Luxton. Because of the conversations you’ve had, it has allowed people to get their head around this aspect of the bill, which is roughly a third. I remember when we discussed your bill; it was in the corridor out the back, and you asked, “Will Labour”—

Cameron Luxton: It was in Copperfield’s actually.

Hon KIERAN McANULTY: Oh, well, there you go—I remember the main bit. I was talking to you about your position. I said if it was just on the alcohol, you’d get a good chunk of us, but it’s not, and therefore you’re not going to get our support. But good on you—good on you for putting it forward, and good on everybody for putting their bills forward.

This is the second bill that I’ve had the opportunity to debate—the first bill passed. I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this and explore it further at select committee. There are likely to be aspects in this that I’ve overlooked. It’s a member’s bill—like every other member, I haven’t had the benefit of officials to look over this. I’ve made it really clear in my speeches the intention of this so that when we get to select committee, if it doesn’t meet that intention, let’s change it in the hope that if the clerks were to consider amendments, which I will be certainly open to, they will see what has been put down as an argument and a proposition tonight is the intent of this bill: to allow those businesses that can already and do already open operate as they do in all other days of the year, and those businesses that can’t operate, they stay the same. Thank you for your considerations.

Members, I have determined that the subject of this vote will be treated as a conscience issue. In this case, I know there are members who want a personal vote, and I am prepared to accept one. This is the process that we’re going to follow: I’m going to put the question, I’m going to announce the result. At that stage, any member can ask for a personal vote. The question is that the motion be agreed to.

Just before I announce adjournment, for all those bad Catholics who announced tonight, there will be confession afterwards out the back.

The question is, That the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Sales on Anzac Day Morning, Good Friday, Easter Sunday, and Christmas Day) Amendment Bill be considered by the Justice Committee.

Bill referred to the Justice Committee.

The House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. tomorrow. Good evening.

The House adjourned at 9.55 p.m.