Kyoda.
I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page, a daily podcast presented by the New Zealand Herald. There are continued calls to tighten alcohol laws in New Zealand. The growing trend of online deliveries has made advocates worried, with a study finding a large portion of alcohol deliveries bypassed
ID checks. Meanwhile, Auckland's new alcohol policy starting December ninth, will reduce sales hours and titan regulations on new liquor licenses, and across the Ditch, New South Wales is looking to introduce new rules to regulate pre mixed alcoholic beverages, especially those with candy like flavors and colorful packaging. So should there be more restrictions around the sale and advertising of alcohol.
In New Zealand?
And Today on the Front Page we speak to the New Zealand Alcohol Beverages Council Executive director of Virginia Nichols to talk us through the industry's reaction to the tightening of laws around their products. But first we speak to Alcohol Health Watch executive director Andrew Galloway.
On where we should scale up restrictions.
First, First off, Andrew, do you think laws around alcohol are good enough in New Zealand.
That's a really big question, and in short, my answer would have to be known. I think we can look back at previous reviews that have recommended phasing out of alcohol sponsorship, marketing and advertising in twenty ten by the Law Commission. That was further picked up by others. There was a Ministerial forum in twenty fourteen that recommended the same and again in the Government Inquiry into Mental Health and Addictions in twenty eighteen twenty nineteen, which recommended that
they first two reviews should be picked up. So I think around that issue marketing, sponsorship and advertising, no, and more widely, we've just done a research project into remote and rapid delivery of alcohol, and again you'd have to say that our research highlights the fact that we probably don't have good enough regulation for that aspect.
Tell me about that research undertaken by Alcohol Health Watch into the delivery of alcohol.
What did you find.
Well, first of all, I mean there was a bit of interest and it popped up in the media twenty eighteen twenty twenty, but it really remote and rapid delivery grew rapidly when we had COVID and for obvious reasons, and rapid or remote delivery became quite popular for a range of commodities, but alcohol was one and it grew the amount of people using that facility grew, So we
had a concern at Alcohol Health Watch. One of my team members got wine delivered and it was just left on a doorstep, and really, her thought, is an alcohol policy researcher, was, I wonder how I spread that is. So we did a test and we tested sixteen companies, from big supermarkets to rapid delivery tech based companies to just general retailers, and the results are really alarming. Seventy three percent of alcohol orders did not request age verification
on delivery. All you have to do in most cases is tick two boxes and that satisfies the law that you've checked age. But as we know, if you're a young person under eighteen, you're probably not going to check the box if you want alcohol to say that you're under eighteen. So it's not a full brief system by any stretch. Forty nine percent of alcohol orders were left unattended to contact us at the door. And while contactless deliveries might have been okay during COVID, for obvious reasons.
We don't think alcohol, being New Zealand's most harmful drugs, should be left at the door of people's homes. We've got research from New Zealand which shows remote delivery extends a drinking occasion and that really stands to common sense. If you're if you're polished off a few and you can't drive to the bottle store, it would give you the opportunity to get more. And their research backs that are all one hundred percent of companies have wonderful policies
that say this is what we're going to do. Eighty seven point five percent of the time they broke their own restricted items policy. So it really did show when you have a regulatory system with no checks and balances, there is the potential for harm. And that's what we're concerned about. We're not saying it's not a service that shouldn't be available. I think we need to look across the ditch in Australia where you might have to scan
your ID and have it verified before it's delivered. You could have a period of time where there's a standdown so that we're not getting that extension of a drinking occasion leading to harm. So there's some simple things we can do. We're one of the few countries I think there were seventy one out of seventy three countries we looked at in the study that had rules around us, and we're certainly an outlier in alterio on New Zealand.
So that is another reason why we think it's time to look at the laws around alcohol.
We'll speaking of Australia, what do you make of the idea of restricting pre mixed alcoholic drinks? In New South Wales they're looking at new guidelines that will regulate alcoholic versions of soft drinks, for example, and ready to drink beverages, specifically, wanting to crack down on confectionery flavored drinks or colorful designs.
Is that something that we should look at here.
I think we should have the ability and I looked jealously at Australia and some of their ability to make regulations in state governments and this is New South Wales. The publicity on this has been really interesting. I don't think it struck a chord in the right way, but many people going, oh, now we've got the Health Agency kind of tasting products to make sure they're okay. For us, but again in Australia, alcohol very similar to New Zealand
is a big problem. What they found is they've had a product called hard Solo, which replicates a soft drink. We're not saying that these products can't exist, but it certainly had an appeal to minus and they considered the formal regulatory actions and to prohibit the class of liquor products.
And you know in New South Wales, the liquor and gaming have said there's a comment thary that highly popular softwarets among young people and the vulnerability of miners of alcohol related injuries and diseases really does give them cause to think about it. We probably do need in New Zealand some kind of check on a product before it
goes to market. So unfortunately we end up being a bit of a dumping ground, given how close we are to Australia, and given many of those companies of Global Bilson's dumped a whole lot of product that were basically ruled not appropriate in Australia, and those are great bubblegum and rainbow Sherbert flavored kind of vodka premixes that came on the shelf here and it got picked up by a community agency called Communities Against Alcohol. They made a
complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority. The Advertising Standards Authority chair noted that great Bubblegum and Rainbow Sherbert and the Facebook advertisements that happened about them, but there's no check on the way and before they put on the shelf, you know, they make reasonable decisions, but the system itself relies on complaints, so I've no one actually sees it that does something about it. These products can be on the market for some time.
So we did a very simple study. What we did is that we record one hundred and twenty five university students. We just asked them to scroll their goal on their favorite social medias for thirty minutes and text screenshots for whatever Alco advertisement they've seen and then send.
It back to us.
So the result is very shotkick because the majority of these young people they see at least one advertisement in the thirty minutes period and on actually on average they see one advertisement every two three minutes. This is very Shotkicks result.
Auckland Council has adopted its local alcohol policy for the city, coming into effect on December nine. It'll mean bottle shops and supermarkets across the region won't be able to sell alcohol after nine pm. At the moment you can buy it up to eleven pm. What difference do you think those couple of hours will make.
The evidence tells us that the more available alcohol is, the more harm that's caused. And when we had so I'm old enough to remember, and I worked in Oakland Council when we had twenty four our licensing and that was a disaster, really having people out drinking when people are coming to work or trying to go to work, or people are opening businesses and people are still out enjoying the late night economy that has kept going into the next day was not a good mix of uses
of a CBD. So I'm pleased we don't have twenty four our licensing. But when that changed, and that changed as a result of the sale and supply of alcoholic twenty twelve, which in post national maximum house, there was a significant impact on alcohol harm. So even just that reduction from twenty four hours to four am, which is still pretty late for un licenses, that saw a significant reduction in crime and a significant reduction in alcohol related presentations.
That very same three of research tells us that we will see a reduction in things like crime alcohol related presentations to emergency departments. From the modest change from eleven pm to nine pm for retail sale in Auckland. One thing we are concerned about is the remote delivery may office gate or limit some of those benefits. The imputus for government to do something around remote sales is probably also compounded by the fact that there might be a loophole well.
The annual Ministry of Health, a New Zealand Health survey released last month showed hazardous drinking or harmful alcohol consumption among adults has actually declined by four point seven percentage points in the past four years to sixteen point six percent. Do you find that there is a decrease in hazardus drinking among adults?
I agree, I mean, I think those statistics are great and it's not to say we don't have a problem anymore, but it's certainly hitting in the right direction. Chelsea, and I think, not wanting to dismiss the celebration, if you like,
we could have on that change in behavior. If you look at those rates of sixteen point six percent of people reporting having consumed alcohol hazardously in the last year, that's actually an increase, So it's about seven hundred and twenty thousand adults as opposed to six hundred and seventy thousand last year. So while we are seeing that rate come down, and it has come down significantly over that five year period, it was a small rise to seven
hundred and twenty thousand from sixty seventy. So I think it's kind of plateau and of the view that we still need to implement some further policy. So we're talking about hazardous drinking and harm can occur even at moderate levels. We're talking about cancer, We're talking about disease that can occur at really low level. So I think the more we manage to cut down not only consumption of alcohol itself but hazardous drinking, the more we all stand to benefit.
It's difficult, isn't it, because it's a fine line between targeting problem drinkers but also not inconveniencing those who like a temple every now and then.
Right, that could be well a line that you hear a lot, and it's a line you hear a lot from the alcohol industry. When we look at minimum Munit price, which has been imposed in Scotland very successfully and let's be honest. They've imposed minimum munit price because Scotland can't put up excise taxes. They're part of the Westminster system, so they don't have the sovereignty or the ability to impose excise tax but they did put in a minimum
munit price. Minim immunit price lifts the price only of the really cheapest alcohol, and that's the alcohol we know appeals most to young people and it appeals most to dependent drinkers. So they've seen a thirteen percent reduction in alcohol related death. So I think it's often a line you hear from alcohol industry that we don't want to
impose more restrictions on the responsible drinkers. But actually, if you apply alcohol policy, well, you can limit the most harmful drinking while really not acting on people who are enjoying it moderately, loately and with less or no harm. And the other thing I think that is worth noting
is there's really high public support. I think the public are quite aware of the issue that is alcohol, and there's public support for things like banning alcohol sponsorship at sporting events or making sure that the alcohol industry isn't involved in developing government policies. Or increasing the price. To be honest, there's reasonable public support on increasing price, so I think there's public support for it. There's a wealth of evidence in terms of the health burden and the
social and economic cost of alcohol. I think we really do have a solution to reducing the burden on both police emergency services, hospital time and also impacting positively health and well being of people in Alda.
Thanks for joining us, Andrew and Chelsea.
Great to be here again.
For the industry side of this argument, we're joined now on the front.
Page by New Zealand Alcohol Beverages Council Executive Director Virginia Nichols. Virginia, how does the alcohol and beverages industry respond to those calls for tighter regulations.
Yeah, I think the alcohol industry believes the current regulations, guided by the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act for most regions are adequate to manage harm while allowing responsible businesses really to operate. I think that's the important thing there. There's a whole lot of other areas that the industry doesn't just have the actual legislation itself. Really, it's got many other areas as well. For instance, the Advertising Standards
Authority has some pretty good. It's a voluntary code throughout the code for advertising promotion of alcohol that's been recently updated and that covers content and placement of all marketing. And the code also ensures that the content of advertising doesn't have strong or evident appeal to minors or encourage a responsible consumption of alcohol, and it's all about timing and placement, not to use anyone who appears to be
under twenty five years of age. And we've also got a voluntary industry code for the ready to drink beverages which is RTDs, again ensuring that those below the legal purchasing age don't see those products. So there is a lot of legislation that's actually legislation and regulation that's out there. It's a highly regulated industry.
Have you seen those guidelines being looked at in New South Wales?
They could see restrictions there around those pre mixed RTD drinks.
Could something like that happen here?
Well, it is happening here, So it's really different. The New Zealand market's very different to the Australian market. As I say, we're very well regulated both with our legislation under A Section two thirty seven rarely. You can't a person commits an offense if in the course of carrying on a business that person, for instance, promotes or advertises alcohol in a manner aimed at or that has or is likely to have special appeal to minors, which is
a situation in Australia. That plus, any new product that's launched in New Zealand as well has to go through a pre vetting system and that can be done with the Association of New Zealand Advertisers. What the Advertising Standards Authority then does if there is something that's occurring that is not appropriate with advertising, someone can complain to the Advertising Standards Authority. There aren't a lot of complaints for alcohol. If there are, most of them are actually agreed before
they have to go to the particular committee. So again, and as to say, there is a voluntary industry code for RTGs and cans. So the legislation in New Zealand is actually very strong in this regard.
In Auckland, from December ninth, you won't be able to buy alcohol from a bottle shop or a supermarket after nine at the moment it's eleven.
Will that couple of hours make any kind of difference.
Do you think, Oh, look, I don't think so at all. Really, so this is the new lap, the Auckland lap, I think I think, as I say, it needs to be balanced really with an understanding about how we're drinking, and we've already spoken about. I really think that there it has to be evidence based and is there evidence for instance, to if you like close a bottle store or a supermarket, you know, selling alcohol at nine? Is there something which tells us this suddenly becomes a dangerous hour And there
actually is no evidence which actually says that. I think all it's going to do is inconvenience consumers. Really, I think the push really for tougher restrictions such as reducing the number of alcohol stores and limiting operating ours, needs to be based on evidence that these measures will make a material difference in reducing harm. We don't see the
clear evidence. We haven't seen any of it. For instance, a recent police study actually showed that majority of our CCOL purchases are made around six pm, not during the later hours that have been targeted. I mean we would support in more sort of nuanced approach really that considers all stakeholders, retailers, consumers, police, counsels and social agencies really working together. I think we have to consider as well. Really, I mean retailers as well are operating in a highly
regulated environment. They are adding more and adding more restrictions without evidence, can place unnecessary strain on businesses, particularly in what's really challenging sort of economic conditions, and many retailers support that. Sales between nine and ten frints, it's a minimal and closing stores early may inconvenience and I'm sure it will inconvenience responsible drinkers such as shift workers, without
addressing hazardous consumption. Really, I think the focus should be on quality of operators and ensuring they're well supported by robust policy and strong community engagement, rather than reducing still numbers or hours.
What do you make of the rise of delivery services like the likes of Uber Eats selling alcohol?
Should there be some more safeguards around that?
So? I think first up, there there is an increase in online delivery. I think some of that's occurred, particularly since COVID. First of all, I think I should mention that the survey that Alcohol Health Watch has done is only just gone up in the journal today. We haven't been able to actually review the document, but at the moment the law does not require ID checks before you deliver at the house. However, we do support a strengthening in this area, and in principle our retailers, so our
retailers are both supermarkets and the bottled stores. They believe the same licensing requirements that apply to alcohol sale and supply in stores should apply to online purchases and delivery. But it's also still going to be important too just to get more feedback from the industry, review the survey, consider a way forward which includes feedback from retailers, consumers, police counsels and social agencies.
Yeah, because in Australia they've kind of gotten around that by doing things like scanning IDs when they're delivered.
And stuff like that.
Right, so I think we need to really have a look at this area and work out the appropriate processes that we need to put in place to strengthen really this area. But at the moment, there is no requirement to have an ID check when you get to the house. Most responsible retailers have a system, if you like, of when the order is placed understanding and knowing that this person is above eighteen. But I think when a person gets to the house. We really need to look at the processes that occur then.
Twenty years ago, drinking was cool. Now the cool kids are those who recognize the harm.
The change really has come from young people themselves.
It seems young people are more knowledgeable about the risks of alcohol abuse and risks their ambition.
Young people seemed pretty much enjoying life day to day, whereas today's young people were more peture focused.
Those who are drinking are still often indulging in the time hon it way.
Bin drinking is still the typical drinking style and often young people who are drinking heavily in this age group have got other issues going on.
The New Zealand Health Survey shows that Kiwis are taking part in hazardous drinking less now, doesn't it?
It absolutely does. It shows really that there's a cultural shift in the way Kiwis are drinking and has it a drinking of harmful Alcohol consumption amongst adults was similar to last year and it's declined four point seven percentage points in the last four years, which is great to sixteen point six percent and the largest decrease and has it iss drinking over the past five years was among
young New Zealanders the eighteen to twenty fours. I mean that's declined by thirteen point two percentage points, which was at thirty five point eight percent and is now at twenty two point six percent. It's still higher than what we want, but the trending is really exactly where we want it. The stats New Zealand alcohol consumption per capita has also declined by twenty nine percent since nineteen eighty six.
And as I say, and as I mentioned, when we compare our drinking with other countries in the OECD, Keywis are drinking less than the OECD average, which includes less than the US, UK, Australia, Germany, France and Ireland.
When it comes to the alcohol industry, do you think there are misconceptions I suppose around the alcohol industry being unwilling to change.
Perhaps I think that there are some of those misconceptions out there, but there's also an understanding by consumers that the industry has really changed over time. We are drinking differently. Why are we drinking differently? Yes, the industry is providing new and interesting products such as no and low alcohol products, but we as a society as well have actually changed our requirements of what we want, what's acceptable to drink, how we should be drinking, the support we put around
each other. I think there can be some misconceptions about the industry, but the industry is very interested in how we can reduce harmful drinkers. Nobody in the industry wants harmful drinkers.
Would the industry be open to something like say, minimum unit pricing.
Overseas that for instance in Australia At the moment in the Northern Territory they are actually saying that actually hasn't worked and they're looking at other options. In Scotland, although they've re put it in so this means that we will all pay and that means eighty four percent of responsible drinkers will pay more, and the thought that this may reduce hazard as drinkers. The research is, and the
research out of Scotland is this has not worked. What happens is that responsible drinkers drink less and has it a drinkers sadly still continue to consume the alcohol that they want to need. Sadly.
Thanks for joining us Virginia great.
Thank you very much.
That's it for this episode of the Front Page. You can read more about today's stories and extensive news coverage at enzdherld dot co dot nz. The Front Page is produced by Ethan Sills and Richard Martin, who is also our sound engineer. I'm Chelsea Daniels. Subscribe to the Front Page on iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts, and tune in tomorrow for another look behind the headlines.