alcohol law confusing

Forums › Off topic › alcohol law confusing

richgamer

224 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

Topic # 29479 8-Jan-2009 15:56

have u seen the sale and supply of liquor and liquor enforcement bill that the government is reviewing:

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2008/0254-1/latest/DLM1478528.html

it says parents can supply their kids with alcohol on private property, yet section 164a 'minor may be referred to alcohol early intervention programme instead of paying infringement fee', says a person under 18 who drinks alcohol will be referred to this early intervention programme. Does this only apply for minors drinking alcohol that was supplied to them by someone other than their parents and on public property?

bazzer

3290 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 209

Trusted

Reply # 188240 8-Jan-2009 16:40

Sounds like you answered your own question. What would the infringement be if the minor was supplied by their parent on public property?

Dratsab

3154 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 965

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 188241 8-Jan-2009 16:47

Obviously you're not reading the things you should be - like the Explanatory Note at the beginning of the Bill. Start by reading and understanding this Note, then find the answers to the couple of questions I quickly thought up below.

1. What does the Explanatory Note refer you to? (hint: look at question 2)
2. What do the sections/subsections in the Act(s) referred to via 1. actually say?
3. What constitutes "offences"?
4. Where do they have to occur? (hint: this is key)

By the time you've answered these, you'll be well on your way to having a much better understanding of what is proposed and why it's proposed. Hopefully you'll also be far less confused by then...

If you read the Bill (which is not an "Alcohol Law" - it's a set of proposed amendments to existing statutes) in isolation, as you seem to have done, it will not make sense and appear confusing. You have to read it in conjuction with its relevant references, as well as understand its context - which why there is an Explanatory Note...

When you've finished this little bit of research (over a cold beer perhaps), why don't you re-post here and tell everyone what you've found?

richgamer

224 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

Reply # 188298 8-Jan-2009 22:05

i read what you told me to read, but i still don't have the answer to my question.lol

Dratsab: Obviously you're not reading the things you should be - like the Explanatory Note at the beginning of the Bill.??Start by reading and understanding this Note, then find the answers to?the couple of questions I quickly thought up?below.?

? 1. What does the Explanatory?Note refer you to? (hint:?look at question 2)
? 2. What do the sections/subsections in the Act(s) referred to via 1. actually say?
? 3. What constitutes "offences"?
? 4. Where do they have to occur? (hint: this is key)

By the time you've answered these, you'll be well on your way to having a much better understanding of what is proposed and why it's proposed.? Hopefully you'll also be far less confused by then...

If you read the Bill (which is not an "Alcohol Law" - it's a?set of proposed amendments to existing statutes)?in isolation, as you seem to have done, it will not make sense and appear confusing.? You have to read it in conjuction with its relevant references, as well as understand its context - which why there is an Explanatory Note...

When you've finished this little bit of research (over a cold beer perhaps), why don't you re-post here and tell everyone what you've found?

Dratsab

3154 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 965

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 188314 8-Jan-2009 23:33

No worries :-)

However, it's late, I'm tired and I have a very early start tomorrow so I'm going to be exceptionally brief here - which will probably lead to technical inaccuracies but the gist should be correct...

In a nutshell:
Explanatory Note refers you to:
1. Sale of Liquor Act 1989 (SOLA)
2. Summary Offences Act 1981 (SOA)
3. Land Transport Act 1998 (LTA)

The Sale and Supply of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill 254-1 (2008), Government Bill (hereafter referred to as "the bill") defines the SOLA as the principle Act to be amended. It lists numerous clauses which contain either amendments or insertions to other a Acts as well, but your question mainly covers the proposed insertion of s164A, SOLA.

Section 164A refers back to s162C SOLA and/or s38C SOA. Those sections, in turn, refer to infringement offences. The term "infringement offences" requires a little digging to see what they actually are, but it's not major work.

Skipping to question 4 - infringement offences occur in public places. A private home is not a public place so there is no generally offence when a minor drinks in such a place. Thus there is essentially no change to what we already have.

yet section 164a 'minor may be referred to alcohol early intervention programme instead of paying infringement fee', says a person under 18 who drinks alcohol will be referred to this early intervention programme

No it doesn't. It says a person "may" be referred. Big difference, often misunderstood and misquoted. Clause 43 of the bill refers to the insertion of s164A (into the SOLA) - which, in turn, refers to what you are talking about. As part of the answer to your first sentence/question, you have to follow this clue, which will lead you to see that "infringement offences" occur, as mentioned above, in public places.

However, some public places are exempt if the minor is in the company of their parent or guardian. Some such public places include restaurants. The type of liquor license a restaurant typically holds is called a "supervised" license as it specifically caters for the supervision of minors.

Infringement offences apply to any unsupervised (by a [capable - ie not intoxicated] parent or guardian) minor consuming alcoholic beverages in any public place. So, in short speak, the answer to your last sentence/question is "yes".

Understanding all this can be convoluted and requires some research but if done properly, confusion (and thus misunderstanding) can be avoided.

BTW - I am not a lawyer (or law student) so don't ask me about finer points. All I do is follow the links/referrals and apply my understanding. I'm always more than happy for anyone else to step in and let me know where I've strayed