Is Labour really saying what counts is the strength of the alcohol a 9 year old drinks?

January 10th, 2014 at 7:00 am by David Farrar

have said:

“There is something very wrong about any adult thinking that it’s fun, entertaining or appropriate to get a child drunk. This attitude is a wake-up call about the culture of drinking and youth drinking, that is going unchallenged right across New Zealand,” said Sue Moroney.

“The Labour Party challenges this damaging culture – we must change attitudes and support families to do their best for our next generation.

“It will also be a test of the Government’s law change of December 2013 which made an offence of supplying to a minor, without parental consent.

It never used to be an offence to supply minors with alcohol, only to sell it to them. The law changes should mean a very easy prosecution if the suppliers can be identified.

“Labour supported the Government’s alcohol law reforms, but criticised them for not going far enough.

“Amongst the amendments proposed by Labour was the outright banning of RTDs such as the one supplied to the Hamilton boy. Unfortunately, it was voted down by the Government, as were Labour’s other amendments to improve the law.

Is Labour really saying or implying that the problem is that the nine year old was drinking 7% RTDs instead of 5% RTDs? I mean, seriously? Isn’t that somewhat desperate. The nine year old shouldn’t be drinking any alcohol full stop.

Or are Labour saying that a 40 year old builder in West Auckland should be banned from drinking a 7% RTD because someone illegally supplied one to a nine year old? On that basis all alcohol in NZ would be banned.

“The Government failed to implement all of the recommendations of the Law Commission on alcohol law reform which Labour said were needed to challenge the damaging drinking culture in New Zealand.

Actually the proposal to restrict RTDs to 5% was not recommended by the Law Commission. One reason the Law Commission cited was substitution, and indeed the likely impact would be those who like 7% RTDs would then swap to self mixing their own drinks which tends to involve a strength of 13% to 20%.

“I am mindful that Fairfield is a community that wants more for its young people. While young people are still on holiday, parents must be vigilant. Greater access to youth programmes will go a long way to getting kids off the streets and finding productive ways to utilise their holiday time,” said Nanaia Mahuta.

So the problem was not enough local youth programmes. yeah, right.

Tags: ,

31 Responses to “Is Labour really saying what counts is the strength of the alcohol a 9 year old drinks?”

  1. Keeping Stock (10,339 comments) says:

    It’s a pretty pathetic attempt by Labour to blame the Government for what happened in Fairfield. If that’s the best that Labour can do, the party is in even worse shape than first thought.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Archer (208 comments) says:

    Disgusting behaviour by Labour to try and make political gain out of the unfortunate circumstances of a 9 year old child. Obviously laws were broken for this situation to occur, but the correct outcome is not to make more laws but for the person(s) responsible for breaking the ones we already have to be prosecuted.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Alan (1,087 comments) says:

    Slow news day on Kiwiblog eh?

    Never mind I’m sure there’ll be 400 replies in GD about David Bain soon enough…

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Manolo (13,767 comments) says:

    For the socialists it is always the duty of the state, but never the responsibility of the bludgers, the criminals, the stupid or the reckless offenders.

    Nanny state to the umpteen degree.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. burt (8,269 comments) says:

    Labour do take being the ‘opposition’ very seriously.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. duggledog (1,556 comments) says:

    Nanaia Mahuta was interviewed on Maori TV yesterday about this. It was in Maori, of course, but was subtitled. She pointed out that Fairfield, whilst being a great community, had some families that needed help. Which was just really inspiring. The segment ended on the voice over stating that Ms Mahuta has plans to help combat the problems in communities like this which she is still working on.

    As for Moroney, being a Labour MP she will just try and devise new and exciting ways to get her filthy hands into my pocketses in order to ‘close the gaps’. I can’t bear the woman. Hamilton used to be a great, middle class, safe city. It still is in some areas but Fairfield, 5X Roads and Hillcrest have turned to utter shit.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Ross Miller (1,704 comments) says:

    Who or what is Nanaia Mahuta?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Michael (909 comments) says:

    I’m not sure how you can pass laws preventing this when there are people out there who think giving primary school aged children alcohol is okay. Even if it is their birthday.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. flipper (4,060 comments) says:

    duggledog (886 comments) says:

    January 10th, 2014 at 7:53 am

    Nanaia Mahuta was interviewed on Maori TV
    ****

    Did not see that version, but did see the TVNZ.
    Whatever she said is irrelevant.
    What is important is that it shows that she does have a mumbling mouth that is sort of connected to a brain, of sorts.
    I say that because it is only the SECOND time I have ever seen her “speak”.
    Mahuta is a classic example of why we do not need 90% of the list MPs, and why only three Maori seat MPs should be in the Parliament.
    The rest, including Moroney, are trash.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. tvb (4,421 comments) says:

    RTDs are specifically designed to get young people into drinking so that alcohol is like a soft drink. I think they should be banned or they could be attacked by banning RTD drinks with more than a minimal amount of sweetener in them.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Keeping Stock (10,339 comments) says:

    burt said

    Labour do take being the ‘opposition’ very seriously.

    They do indeed burt. In fact they are so good at it, they should consider taking on the mantle of opposition on a permanent basis :D

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. alloytoo (542 comments) says:

    @tvb

    I think we should refrain from banning things willy-nilly and rather encourage self control and responsibility.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. burt (8,269 comments) says:

    tvb

    Right… So before RTD’s people never mixed spirits with sugary soft drinks …. No… Never happened… Yes ban the packaging because a cheap bottle of vodka and a big bottle of coke is so different to a 24 pack of RTD’s …

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Ed Snack (1,872 comments) says:

    tvb is correct in the way that RTDs are made to be easy to drink, but one can easily achieve exactly the same mix by purchasing a small bottle of spirits plus a bottle of mixer. Not as convenient but that’s certainly what we used to do, so would the solution then be to ban soft drinks as mixers ? Good luck with that.

    Also, young children used to be fed alcohol all the time, as gripe water for example. That was apparently up to 15% alcohol, and kept the little buggers quiet for ages.

    Drinking at this young age of 8-9 is also not new, it used to crop up every so often over the years. RTDs make it a bit easier to do so, but the % alcohol content is almost irrelevant once it is over about 2%. The sad part is that kid is on track to be come an “addict” to multiple substances from a young age, and will never have a normal sort of life but one based on substance abuse, crime, and welfare. Probably a combination of his culture, home circumstances (which are related also), with some admixture of genes. And the availability of alcohol is only part of it, there is reference to dope as well, and although not something I claim extensive knowledge of I believe that the use of marijuana by adolescents and younger is considered potentially damaging to brain development.

    What’s the likelihood that in a few years we see this child before the courts accused of some horrendous crime; and part of the defense is that he is not responsible because of arrested development/brain damage ?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. calendar girl (1,232 comments) says:

    Banning RTDs (or any similar kind of banning) may be well-intentioned, tvb, but it doesn’t work. Imagine banning manufactured cigarettes, for example, and expecting people not to use roll-your-own tobacco. As for the state regulating the amount of foodstuffs in thousands of drinks and foodstuffs …..

    A simple way to replicate the convenience of “banned” RTDs would be for liquor retailers to make available a handy pack of a dozen empty bottles with a 1-litre bottle of bourbon, vodka or rum.

    The present media and political interest in the kid’s RTD incident is not about an evil product itself, any more than a shooting murder is the fault of the relevant bullet. It’s about a scumbag adult supplying booze to an inadequately-supervised kid. That’s already illegal.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Keeping Stock (10,339 comments) says:

    @ burt – part of my initiation into drinking in the early 1970’s was the dreaded Screwdriver; a combination of cheap vodka and orange cordial. It was foul, but it was cheap. RTD’s are hardly a new phenomenon.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. burt (8,269 comments) says:

    Keeping Stock

    And back then if you didn’t like the screwdriver you could get ‘gimlet’ which was vodka and lime cordial. As you say – nothing new in the product, just the packaging in small cans rather than a 750ml bottle.

    Also back in the day we didn’t really have skate parks but that didn’t stop us hanging out in parks drinking screwdriver/gimlet or sniffing lighter fluid or smoking a few tinies ….

    The big difference – nobody had a video camera back then.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Longknives (4,744 comments) says:

    One 9 year old kid stumbles round on You Tube pretending to be drunk and clearly playing it up for the camera and the Left go beserk- Let me get this straight? the solution is three part?

    1- We must raise taxes (Us ‘rich pricks’ can never pay enough)
    2- Alcohol must be banned or priced out of the market (according to the always balanced Doug Sellman)
    3- That poor mother’s DPB payments must be raised significantly (She clearly isn’t coping..)

    For fuck’s sake- What a storm in a Labour/Greens/Mana teacup..

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Longknives (4,744 comments) says:

    The great irony being that if the little feral had been stoned the silence from the Left would have been deafening..

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    A Westie builder drinking RTD’s?

    C’mon, only if the builder’s been through a sex change.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Left Right and Centre (2,979 comments) says:

    It’s a pity there’s no way to legislate that ‘serious’ political parties not be 100% proof dumbarse PC-dripping dipshits. 70% maximum cut-off.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Zapper (1,021 comments) says:

    Pretty standard turn of events really.

    Something negative happens.
    There are proper avenues to deal/punish with the people to blame.
    Labour makes the statement that blames the Government, containing either factual errors or outright lies.
    The polls remain bad for Labour.
    Repeat.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Weihana (4,537 comments) says:

    Longknives (3,668 comments) says:
    January 10th, 2014 at 9:30 am

    The great irony being that if the little feral had been stoned the silence from the Left would have been deafening..

    But would you have been? Or would you have said something along the lines of “and these lefty drongos want to legalize this stuff”.

    Seems to me both the right and left are guilty of the same fear mongering. Personal responsibility suits when it suits and doesn’t when it doesn’t.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. burt (8,269 comments) says:

    Perhaps we could take the same approach to this that is taken with banning drugs. Ban the posting of video clips showing intoxicated people then when nobody has seen a video of intoxicated kids for a while claim that it’s because kids are no longer getting intoxicated.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Whale Oil has surfaced to spout on this topic:

    http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2014/01/farrar-spruiking-rtd-manufacturers/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. SPC (5,619 comments) says:

    No DPF it is not easy to prosecute the suppliers in this case – the law applies to those over 18 doing so, not those under 18 supplying a 9 year old.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. SPC (5,619 comments) says:

    Why do we have after school programmes? Why do we have holiday programmes?

    Are they as irrelevant to the issue of child safety/supervised activity as you suggest?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Left Right and Centre (2,979 comments) says:

    Hey – I’ve got a drinking game – take a sip from your RTD can every time some clown from Labour comes up with a social policy idea that is loopy, ineffectual, impractical, illogical, will change nothing, be a complete waste of time-money-effort. And erodes their support more and more until it’s just them and their diehard blinkered cheerleaders in the polls….

    You’ll be plastered quicker than the 60 minute makeover house.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. RRM (9,919 comments) says:

    My little toddler wants to eat whatever we’re eating, and that extends to drinks too.

    I’d been getting a bit over him demanding a share of every drink that’s ever in my hand, so one evening when I was sipping a whiskey, I had a brainwave: I’ll give him a tiny taste of this, and he’ll never ask for what I’m drinking for at least the next ten years!

    So I dipped the tip of my pinkie finger just ever so slightly onto the surface of the whiskey, just enough to coat the tip of my finger in a thin film.

    Tapped that finger on the tip of his tongue… the little bugger’s face lit up and he wanted more! :mad:

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. DJP6-25 (1,387 comments) says:

    RRM 4.27 pm. Dad tried that with beer when I was four, and I’ve hated the stuff ever since. One sip was enough.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. seabreezeent (31 comments) says:

    Whale Oil is right, I take my hat off to him in this case, at least he is not driven by self interest and has the balls to tell it how it is re RTD’s.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote