Warning On End Of Auckland's Alcohol Licence Freeze
The LAP, which outlines the location, amount, and trading hours for alcohol businesses in the region, was implemented last September.
Drafted in 2013, it took 10 years to get it approved after it was tied up in legal battles.
Dr Grant Hewison, a lawyer who works with Community Against Alcohol Harm (CAAH) in south Auckland, was concerned that parts of the LAP was losing its relevance, today.
Presenting to the Safety and Regulatory Committee of the Auckland Council this week, Hewison warned that a raft of new liquor licenses could be on the way.
"The temporary freeze in the priority overlay areas will stop next year."
Hewison added that assuming there would remain a high bar to new licenses may not be a robust enough position.
"My concern is that that may not be sufficient to really address the ongoing proliferation that we're still seeing outside of those priority overlay areas in parts of the region," he said.
The LAP came into effect in two stages - the first change was September 16, 2024 which included a two-year freeze on new off-licences in the central city and 23 other suburbs with the highest alcohol-related harm.
He urged the committee to consider reviewing the LAP, before the two-year freeze lapsed.
"The freeze will end in 2026 so you have a small window of opportunity looking to extend it.
"I really encourage you to take some advice from your officers and have a briefing on how this temporary freeze operates, and the consequences of it being lifted."
He also urged council to look into protecting neighbourhood centres better, in what he called was a 'technical error' in the LAP.
According to the LAP, there was a rebbutable presumption for off-licence outlets in neighbourhood centres. Neighbourhood centres are commercial centres within residential areas.
"Unfortunately, the drafting of the neighbourhood centre in the LAP links it to the Unitary Plan, as notified in 2013."
He said the LAP only protected neighbourhood centres that existed in 2013 under the Unitary Plan.
"Since then, we've had developments of paddocks and fields ... new neighbourhood centres that aren't protected by the LAP."
He said the the consequence of that was that the District Licensing Committee recently approved three new liquor outlets in new neighbourhood centres.
"I don't think the community and yourselves ever intended that the LAP only protected neighbourhood centres as they were in 2013."
He pleaded for council not to wait for six years to review the LAP, but to act sooner.
"I think its urgent, and there is provision under section 95 of the Act to make amendments to a LAP to correct what is essentially a minor technical error."
Hewison said a lot of work went into the drafting of the LAP, but it was now relatively an older document.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
4 hours ago
- Scoop
Why Has A Bill To Relax Foreign Investment Rules Had So Little Scrutiny?
While public attention has been focused on the domestic fast-track consenting process for infrastructure and mining, Associate Minister of Finance David Seymour has been pushing through another fast-track process – this time for foreign investment in New Zealand. But it has had almost no public scrutiny. If the Overseas Investment (National Interest Test and Other Matters) Amendment Bill becomes law, it could have far-reaching consequences. Public submissions on the bill close on July 23. A product of the ACT-National coalition agreement, the bill commits to amend the Overseas Investment Act 2005 'to limit ministerial decision making to national security concerns and make such decision making more timely'. There are valid concerns that piecemeal reforms to the current act have made it complex and unwieldy. But the new bill is equally convoluted and would significantly reduce effective scrutiny of foreign investments – especially in forestry. A three-step test Step one of a three-step process set out in the bill gives the regulator – the Overseas Investment Office which sits within Land Information NZ – 15 days to decide whether a proposed investment would be a risk to New Zealand's 'national interest'. If they don't perceive a risk, or that initial assessment is not completed in time, the application is automatically approved. Transactions involving fisheries quotas and various land categories, or any other applications the regulator identifies, will require a 'national interest' assessment under stage two. These would be assessed against a 'ministerial letter' that sets out the government's general policy and preferred approach to conducting the assessment, including any conditions on approvals. Other mandatory factors to be considered in the second stage include the act's new 'purpose' to increase economic opportunity through 'timely consent' of less sensitive investments. The new test would allow scrutiny of the character and capability of the investor to be omitted altogether. If the regulator considers the national interest test is not met, or the transaction is 'contrary to the national interest', the minister of finance then makes a decision based on their assessment of those factors. Inadequate regulatory process Seymour has blamed the current screening regime for low volumes of foreign investment. But Treasury's 2024 regulatory impact statement on the proposed changes to international investment screening acknowledges many other factors that influence investor decisions. Moreover, the Treasury statement acknowledges public views that foreign investment rules should 'manage a wide range of risks' and 'that there is inherent non-economic value in retaining domestic ownership of certain assets'. Treasury officials also recognised a range of other public concerns, including profits going offshore, loss of jobs, and foreign control of iconic businesses. The regulatory impact statement did not cover these factors because it was required to consider only the coalition commitment. The Treasury panel reported 'notable limitations' on the bill's quality assurance process. A fuller review was 'infeasible' because it could not be completed in the time required, and would be broader than necessary to meet the coalition commitment to amend the act in the prescribed way. The requirement to implement the bill in this parliamentary term meant the options officials could consider, even within the scope of the coalition agreement, were further limited. Time constraints meant 'users and key stakeholders have not been consulted', according to the Treasury statement. Environmental and other risks would have to be managed through other regulations. There is no reference to te Tiriti o Waitangi or mana whenua engagement. No 'benefit to NZ' test While the bill largely retains a version of the current screening regime for residential and farm land, it removes existing forestry activities from that definition (but not new forestry on non-forest land). It also removes extraction of water for bottling, or other bulk extraction for human consumption, from special vetting. Where sensitive land (such as islands, coastal areas, conservation and wahi tapu land) is not residential or farm land, it would be removed from special screening rules currently applied for land. Repeal of the ' special forestry test ' – which in practice has seen most applications approved, albeit with conditions – means most forestry investments could be fast-tracked. There would no longer be a need to consider investors' track records or apply a 'benefit to New Zealand' test. Regulators may or may not be empowered to impose conditions such as replanting or cleaning up slash. The official documents don't explain the rationale for this. But it looks like a win for Regional Development Minister Shane Jones, and was perhaps the price of NZ First's support. It has potentially serious implications for forestry communities affected by climate-related disasters, however. Further weakening scrutiny and investment conditions risks intensifying the already devastating impacts of international forestry companies. Taxpayers and ratepayers pick up the costs while the companies can minimise their taxes and send profits offshore. Locked in forever? Finally, these changes could be locked in through New Zealand's free trade agreements. Several such agreements say New Zealand's investment regime cannot become more restrictive than the 2005 act and its regulations. A ' ratchet clause ' would lock in any further liberalisation through this bill, from which there is no going back. However, another annex in those free trade agreements could be interpreted as allowing some flexibility to alter the screening rules and criteria in the future. None of the official documents address this crucial question. As an academic expert in this area I am uncertain about the risk. But the lack of clarity underlines the problems exemplified in this bill. It is another example of coalition agreements bypassing democratic scrutiny and informed decision making. More public debate and broad analysis is needed on the bill and its implications.
Scoop
3 days ago
- Scoop
Warning On End Of Auckland's Alcohol Licence Freeze
Auckland's local alcohol policy (LAP) is fast becoming outdated according to one legal expert. The LAP, which outlines the location, amount, and trading hours for alcohol businesses in the region, was implemented last September. Drafted in 2013, it took 10 years to get it approved after it was tied up in legal battles. Dr Grant Hewison, a lawyer who works with Community Against Alcohol Harm (CAAH) in south Auckland, was concerned that parts of the LAP was losing its relevance, today. Presenting to the Safety and Regulatory Committee of the Auckland Council this week, Hewison warned that a raft of new liquor licenses could be on the way. "The temporary freeze in the priority overlay areas will stop next year." Hewison added that assuming there would remain a high bar to new licenses may not be a robust enough position. "My concern is that that may not be sufficient to really address the ongoing proliferation that we're still seeing outside of those priority overlay areas in parts of the region," he said. The LAP came into effect in two stages - the first change was September 16, 2024 which included a two-year freeze on new off-licences in the central city and 23 other suburbs with the highest alcohol-related harm. He urged the committee to consider reviewing the LAP, before the two-year freeze lapsed. "The freeze will end in 2026 so you have a small window of opportunity looking to extend it. "I really encourage you to take some advice from your officers and have a briefing on how this temporary freeze operates, and the consequences of it being lifted." He also urged council to look into protecting neighbourhood centres better, in what he called was a 'technical error' in the LAP. According to the LAP, there was a rebbutable presumption for off-licence outlets in neighbourhood centres. Neighbourhood centres are commercial centres within residential areas. "Unfortunately, the drafting of the neighbourhood centre in the LAP links it to the Unitary Plan, as notified in 2013." He said the LAP only protected neighbourhood centres that existed in 2013 under the Unitary Plan. "Since then, we've had developments of paddocks and fields ... new neighbourhood centres that aren't protected by the LAP." He said the the consequence of that was that the District Licensing Committee recently approved three new liquor outlets in new neighbourhood centres. "I don't think the community and yourselves ever intended that the LAP only protected neighbourhood centres as they were in 2013." He pleaded for council not to wait for six years to review the LAP, but to act sooner. "I think its urgent, and there is provision under section 95 of the Act to make amendments to a LAP to correct what is essentially a minor technical error." Hewison said a lot of work went into the drafting of the LAP, but it was now relatively an older document.
Scoop
3 days ago
- Scoop
ACT Announces Aaron McLeod & Jerry Pickford As ACT Local Candidates For Manawatū
Local Avionics Engineer and Community Volunteer, Aaron McLeod, Selected as ACT Local Candidate for Manawatū District Council ACT Local has selected Aaron McLeod – an avionics engineer and community volunteer – as its candidate for the Feilding Ward of the Manawatū District Council in this year's local election. Aaron, 36, has lived in the Manawatū for over a decade. He began his career as an avionics engineer in the Air Force and now works privately at the Feilding Aerodrome. Married with two young children, Aaron is also president of the Feilding Little Theatre and volunteers his time to help keep it running. 'I'm standing to make sure the Manawatū is a great place to raise kids, live and work. We need infrastructure that supports growth without leaving a debt burden on our children. That means cutting vanity projects, consultant spending, and keeping rates increases to no more than inflation I'll bring practical, communityfocused representation to council.' – Aaron McLeod Local Construction Business Owner, Jerry Pickford, Selected as ACT Local Candidate for Manawatū District Council ACT Local has selected Jerry Pickford – a coowner of a joinery and building company and manager of one of New Zealand's oldest frame and truss plants – as its candidate for the Feilding Ward of the Manawatū District Council in this year's local election. A father of three, and a qualified craftsman joiner, Jeremy leads complex prefabrication projects and works closely with clients and contractors every day. His handson business experience gives him a clear understanding of the challenges local families and businesses face everyday. 'I'm standing for council to bring a backtobasics approach that puts people first. I want to fix what's broken, reduce waste, and make rates fairer. I'll fight for practical investment in local infrastructure and stronger, safer communities – through fresh thinking, real solutions, and the courage to act.'– Jerry Pickford Earlier this year, ACT New Zealand announced it would be standing Common Sense Candidates for local government for the first time — after hearing from New Zealanders across the country who are sick of rising rates, ballooning budgets, and councils that ignore the basics while chasing ideological vanity projects. When you vote ACT Local, you know what you're getting: Fixing the basics Lower Rates Cutting the waste Stopping race-based politics Restoring accountability End the war on cars ACT Local Government spokesperson Cameron Luxton says: ' ACT Local candidates are community-minded Kiwis who've had enough of wasteful councils treating ratepayers like ATMs. It's time to take control on behalf of ratepayers — to restore accountability and deliver real value for money. ACT Local is about getting the basics right: maintaining roads, keeping streets clean, and respecting the people who pay the bills. Our candidates won't divide people by race or get distracted by climate vanity projects. They're here to serve, not lecture." – Cameron Luxton
