Why it is wrong to raise the purchase age
August 6th, 2012 at 4:00 pm by David FarrarAn advertisement showing why it would be wrong to raise the purchase age, ny Keep It 18.
The release says:
Keep It 18 has released a video highlighting how ridiculous it will be if MPs vote to increase the purchase age for alcohol from 18 to 20.
The video, at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZ9K1-OY6Zs, shows a 19 year old couple getting married, and then at the reception the happy couple having to drink chocolate milk for the wedding toast.
“It is ridiculous that MPs could vote for a law which says a 19 year old is not mature enough to buy a bottle of wine from a supermarket, yet is old enough to get married” said Sean Topham, Spokesperson for the Keep It 18 campaign. “Our video shows how ludicrous such a situation would be”.
“The proposed increase in the purchase age will actually encourage greater supply of alcohol to those who can’t purchase it for themselves – contradicting one of the primary aims of the bill, which is to reduce supply to minors.”
“It is a myth that youth drinking has increased since the purchase age was lowered to 18. In fact, the prevalence rate of under 18s who drink has dropped 40% in the last five years, according to ALAC’s annual alcohol monitor surveys. The Auckland University’s Adolescent Health Research Group survey of 10,000 secondary school students in 2000 and 2007 also found that the prevalence rate of youth drinkers has dropped significantly since 2000.
“The number of young people caught drink driving has also dramatically dropped, by 50% from 2007 to 2009 and a further 50% in the last year.”
“This shows there is no sound reason to discriminate against 18 and 19 year olds and treat them as minors. We urge MPs to vote for sensible measures to reduce harm caused by alcohol, and to resist the populist temptation to scape-goat 18 and 19 year olds.” concluded Sean Topham.
Also a good read is this op ed in the ODT by ACT on Campus President Hayden Fitzgerald:
Thirty years ago, a four-pack of New Zealand-made beer for $20 would have been unsaleable.
Who would have chosen such poor value over a swap-a-crate of draught beer or a cask of wine?
Today, such boutique offerings are not unusual.
If the products people purchase are any indication of where our drinking culture is headed, the role of alcohol advertising has been misunderstood.
The volume of alcohol sold per capita has actually decreased since the 1989 reforms.
For a start, alcohol advertisers do not necessarily want consumers to drink more alcohol.
What they really want is to increase their own profits.
It is this dynamic which explains why the amount drunk per capita has declined, the amount of advertising has increased, and the sophistication of alcohol offerings has grown during the past 30 years.
Yep.
It is no coincidence drinking culture has become more sophisticated while advertising has been liberalised.
How do you introduce a classier European equivalent to the New Zealand market if you cannot sing its praises to the punters?
What local brewer or vintner will respond by innovating if they are not able to tell consumers what they have done?
Alcohol advertising restrictions will make it that much harder for the boutique start-ups to enter the market.
Those who remain will find the profits are back at the lowest common denominators of price and volume.
A good warning.
Related posts:
- Purchase age not drinking age
- 10 reasons why making it illegal for 18 and 19 year olds to purchase alcohol is the wrong thing to do
- The split purchase age
- Youth and Alcohol
August 6th, 2012 at 4:22 pm
1. How many 18 and 19 year olds get married (or civil unioned) in NZ? A bit of a strawman perhaps?
2. A formal ceremony as shown would normally have parents of the bride and groom. I understand the current legislation allows parents to supply liquor to under-age offspring at a private gathering – why would that not be the case here?
FM
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 4:29 pm
Isn’t the critical debate purchase age not drinking age?
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 4:31 pm
“Thirty years ago, a four-pack of New Zealand-made beer for $20 would have been unsaleable.”
Yeah, because thirty years ago, $20 was quite a bloody bit for 4 beers!
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 4:40 pm
The video, shows a 19 year old couple getting married, and then at the reception the happy couple having to drink chocolate milk for the wedding toast
What a Stupid bloody straw man argument,
The legal purchase age for alcohol used to be 20 in NZ and no one drank chocolate milk at their weddings….
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 5:07 pm
It should be the same as the voting age; if you can vote for a Government then you should be able to buy alcohol! I think both should be 20!
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 5:12 pm
“Yeah, because thirty years ago, $20 was quite a bloody bit for 4 beers!”
When I was at Otago University jugs were $4.80….
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 5:13 pm
My main concern with 18 yr olds buying liquor for off site consumption is that many 18 yr olds are still at school and give easy access, easier than parents or siblings, to many of their under age peers. Yes illegal but very hard to police. 19 for off site and 18 for on site (unless with guardian) seems fine.
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 5:47 pm
Why it’s wrong to redefine marriage……..
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 5:58 pm
When gays are allowed to marry they can drink ginger beer.
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 6:02 pm
What a stupid ad.
As others have stated there is a difference between purchase age and drinking age, so even if the purchse age changed back to 20, the 19 year olds getting married could still toast their marriage.
But here is another point: People can get married at 16 in New Zealand (with parents consent). So even if we accepted the premise of the ad there could be the staus quo with alcohol and have two 17 year olds getting married having to drink chocolate milk at their wedding.
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 6:11 pm
If the European attitude to alcohol is what we’re aiming at, we need to aim higher. NZ’s alcohol per capita consumption (9.62 litres) is behind nearly every European country. Lower than Australia (10.02l), Sweden (10.3l), Finland (12.52l), France (13.66l) or the Czech Republic (16.45 litres of pure alcohol per person per year):
Vote:http://gonzofreakpower.blogspot.co.nz/2012/08/the-49th-paralytics.html
August 6th, 2012 at 6:13 pm
Do you have the figures for chocolate milk?
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 6:33 pm
What nonsense. We don’t have a problem with the purchasing age. We have a problem with people (of any age) thinking it’s ok to get get completely shitfaced
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 6:40 pm
Yeah good job they’re drinking chocolate milk, they don’t need to get pissed to consummate!
Sheesh otherwise if they were 18 and drinking alcohol, the bride would be pissed on alco-pops and insulting the mother in law and the groom would be pissed and trying to get into the pants of the hottest bridesmaid!
Wouldn’t trust teenagers and alcohol, together, a bad combination that’s for sure
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 6:43 pm
Yes Will, but as they saying goes – it’s HOW we are drinking.
Vote:New Zealanders are notorious binge drinkers. So we could have a French person for example having a glass (or two) of wine with their meal every evening drinking more over time than a kiwi going out in the weekend and getting hammered.
August 6th, 2012 at 7:09 pm
Didnt watch the ad, but the opinion piece is very thoughtful. If only our mainstream politicians could raise the level of the debate to critical analysis.
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 7:58 pm
The purchase age wasn’t 20 when I was 18 years old (or even 16) back in the 80s. You just bought a slice of supermarket pizza (they called it a meal) at the pub and as long as you didn’t finish it you were free to drink as much as you liked. I was buying alcohol since I was 16, you just claimed to be 22 and you were never challenged (I was quite tall for a 16 yo). If you were, you just went to the next store and they would sell to you.
Perhaps the stupidest anomaly is that it will be legal for an 18 year old to do all sorts of risky activities like buy cigarettes, work as a prostitute, get a tattoo, but not buy a bottle of beer or wine from an off licence.
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 8:09 pm
It’s not a ‘straw man’ argument.
The argument is that adults who allowed to make the decision to get married, should be able to choose to buy a drink.
It is not literally talking about an actual wedding.
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 8:14 pm
Michael, you left out ‘go to war and die for your country’
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 8:17 pm
I think the ad is great, it shows an extreme application of the rediculous law that is being proposed.
bc – “But here is another point: People can get married at 16 in New Zealand (with parents consent).” – 18 and 19 year olds don’t need parental concent to get married, but they will need parental concent to buy alcohol off-site.
What this ad doesn’t show is the friends of the bride and groom drinking chocolate milk too.
The proposed law is a populist piece of shit law that won’t make one iota of a difference to the problems they’re trying to solve. It will be as useless at stopping the percieved alchol problems as banning smacking was for stopping poor and stupid parents people beating their children.
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 8:20 pm
> I understand the current legislation allows parents to supply liquor to under-age offspring at a private gathering
That may be so, but completely misses the point. It’s incredibly condescending (not to mention embarrassing) for your parents to have to buy you drinks at your own wedding! Leaving aside that the parents of the bride and groom could be dead
But if you’re going to be drinking at your own wedding only if your parents buy you alcohol, why not allow the bride and groom to get the alcohol? I thought those on the Right would be right behind keeping the law as it is.
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 8:23 pm
Clash of cultures here with you Neolibs – social conservative or qualified liberal.
ACT on Campus – I’d pay to see that. Do they have “I love John Banks” t-shirts?
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 8:32 pm
Ill bet they are Greens members. Only someone(s) with the mental ability of a snail would put something together like that. Its so far from the truth.
Vote:If theyre not Greens, then they are climate scientists who have just come from a climate panic meeting……..
August 6th, 2012 at 8:36 pm
Of course it is far from the truth, Barry, because as the law stands, the couple in the video would be allowed to buy alcohol. But if the law changes, they won’t be able to. What part of that can’t you understand?
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 8:51 pm
According to statistics, about 3% of those who marry for the first time are teens.
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 8:57 pm
Trouble is, NZ has created a rod for its own back in liberalising liquor laws to the extent they are today. Its the old story that the more things change, the more things stay the same. Back in the 1970′s I was 15, I had my first drink in a pub which even included a cop in the group. We were typical teenagers back then. It was easy to drink in a pub underage, but much harder to purchase booze from the bottle store (21 was legit age). Nevertheless, we drank until the boose bled from our eyes; homebrewed our own disgusting grog: had weekly vomiting competitions and always elevenis on Sundays. We drove as hard and as fast as we could in our hotted up Anglia’s, Cortinas, Zephyrs etc, pissed as farts. Some of us lossed lives and limbs in road accidents but the majority of us went on to grow up to be responsible and mature adults. But even as an older teenager/young adult and pulling many a dead body from a car wreck during my employment in the emergency services, I still drank like a fish and drove like a bat outta hell. We all did. Until we reached the age of 25 when our brains fully developed and we acted more responsibly. So almost 40 years on nothing has changed apart from the fact that the cars have got faster and respect for fellow citizens and law and order, has diminished. If there is one single thing that would have enormous benefit, it would be to have pubs/nightclubs etc close at 3am (or earlier). Trouble is, the government is now faced with an entire generation of younger voters used to partying until the wee hours, and would not take lightly having this passage of right taken from them
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 9:14 pm
That should have read..’.back in the 1960′s’
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 10:15 pm
Ross69
you dimwit.
The law change is about purchase – its not about drinking.
All the weddings Ive been involved in the couple being united actually dont do the buying – certainly not the undeer 20′s – its their parents who have that priviledge.
As far as I am aware at a function like a wedding ina private location (eg function centre, etc) there are almost no limits on drinking age – its much like being at home. In fact New Zealand has no minimum legal drinking age in the home or when under the control of parents. ITS PURCHASE AGE THAT YOU ARE GETTING ALL MESSED UP OVER.
Those two halfwits in the video can drink quite legally (Im assuming they are in the company of their parents)
Vote:August 6th, 2012 at 11:01 pm
Read the Alcohol Reform Bill again, especially s222 to s229 – anyone who is 20 or over can purchase alcohol and supply it to a person over 18 or over (only a parent or legal guardian can supply alcohol to someone under 18)… so the whole premise is out the window if it is a private function (licensed premises are different).
I do support the age staying 18 though.
Oh, and out of the 20,231 marriages in 2011: 170 had a groom aged under 20 and 531 had a bride aged under 20, according to Stats NZ.
Vote:August 7th, 2012 at 12:45 am
While Will is correct about NZers not drinking as much as Australians, Swedes, Finns, French or Czechs – you’ll hardly ever see Swedes, Finns, French or Czechs out every night pissed off their faces. While the Scandinavians do have a reputation of being fond of the booze a little more when they are offshore, that is a direct result of heavy state intervention with pricing.
Vote:August 7th, 2012 at 7:41 am
I want to know why it’s okay to try and ban 18 and 19 year olds from buying alcohol, but would be an atrocity to ban alcohol from 40-60 year olds.
There’s a lot of problem drinking that goes on at that age. Get too drunk, fall over, and you could break a hip. Your liver and stomach can’t handle it, and you’re more likely to get cirrhosis, pancreatitis, and serious gastrointestinal bleeds. Plenty of people this age are drink-driving – this scumbag doesn’t look 18 to me.
Plus it’s a lot sadder to see a disgusting 50 year old leering and trying to pick up women in a bar.
Vote:August 7th, 2012 at 8:00 am
I couldn’t give a damn if they raised the purchase age up to 21. It may indeed help to instill some of sense of responsibility into the minds of these pimply-faced little bastards. The Ship only lowered it to 18 in the first place out of an act of desperation – a feeble, cynical ploy to court the “yoof” vote prior to the 1999 general election.
Vote:August 7th, 2012 at 8:04 am
So a 50 year old isn’t allowed to chance their arm and get laid?
Vote:August 7th, 2012 at 9:26 am
Who’s stupid enough to get married at 19? That’s the real question….
Vote:August 7th, 2012 at 12:31 pm
Barry
Interesting that you have to resort to abuse…you clearly didn’t bother to read what I wrote, which was that the couple in the video couldn’t purchase alcohol. You didn’t explain why that should be the case. Do you think it’s ok that they can drink but not buy alcohol?
Vote:August 7th, 2012 at 10:31 pm
Hmm, maybe try hooking up Tristan with a 50 y.o. Cougar and perhaps then he might think differently of people older than him?
Vote:August 9th, 2012 at 12:01 am
DPF said:
The volume of alcohol sold per capita has actually decreased since the 1989 reforms.
~~~~~~~~
And reached it’s lowest point around the late 1990′s and has been on an upward curve ever since. The start of the sale of RTDs around that time offset the decreasing demand for beer.
* Note that the Stats NZ changed their methodology during the 1990s so you have to be careful with comparisons (e.g. changed population series, changed method for collection volumes of alcohol production especially wine, changed some of the reporting ranges for spirit based alcohol).
Vote:August 9th, 2012 at 12:05 am
DPF quoted
It is this dynamic which explains why the amount drunk per capita has declined, the amount of advertising has increased, and the sophistication of alcohol offerings has grown during the past 30 years.
~~~~~~~~~~
And the RTD market were making their profits by importing industrial alcohol, flavouring and sugaring it and selling it to the youth market.
Not much sophistication there.
Vote: