Page 990 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 21 March 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
It is important to remind the Assembly why the government reviewed the laws in the first place. It was in response to growing community concerns about the level of alcohol-related violence, crime and antisocial behaviour which was occurring in our city, particularly late at night.
Since the implementation of the new laws, ACT Policing’s statistics show a continuing downward trend in the number of alcohol-related incidents in the territory. ACT Policing attributes this trend to the higher degree of enforcement of the liquor legislation, the establishment of the new ACT Policing alcohol crime targeting team and improved working relationships between ACT Policing, the Office of Regulatory Services and the industry.
The government takes this opportunity to thank all of those who have participated in the consultation processes over the last two years and welcomes the ongoing cooperation that we see between all stakeholders when the planned two-year review of our liquor laws occurs next year.
Turning to the bill itself, the government supports giving the liquor industry at least three months notice of liquor fees. People need time to arrange their business affairs and be able to meet their financial commitments. I know a lot of small to medium sized businesses would have been pleased last year when their fees went down. For those larger, more risky businesses which trade late and have higher incidences of violence, government has maintained the capacity for those with larger liquor licensing fees to pay their fees quarterly.
The Assembly may recall that prior to the notification of the new Liquor Act in September 2010, the annual determination and announcement of liquor fees occurred soon after the May budget each year in the standard fee instrument made for 1 July each year. Licensees then had up to five months notice of their fees, which saw increases in line with annual indexation. Giving the industry adequate notice of fees is a longstanding practice of the government. This practice, however, did change for a brief period because of the introduction of the new liquor reforms and the need to increase liquor fees to fund the new regulatory costs of the ACT Policing alcohol crime targeting team and the additional regulatory services placed with the Office of Regulatory Services.
On top of this, it is important to remind the Assembly that the Assembly itself required the government to undertake a comprehensive review of liquor fees last year, which would not, according to the Assembly’s own time frame, have met the time frame proposed in Mr Rattenbury’s bill. This meant that liquor fees for 2011 and 2012 could not be determined and notified midyear, soon after the May budget. The government required extra time to undertake the fees review and then settle and notify the new fees by November. As I have just pointed out, if this law had applied last year, the government could not have made the new, more appropriate risk-based fees that currently apply.
Mrs Dunne: Well, you pulled your act together.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video