LIQUOR LICENSING (SUPPLY TO MINORS) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 21 February 2013.)

Ms SANDERSON (Adelaide) (10:51): It is with great pleasure that I rise in support of this bill, and I commend the member for Morialta for bringing this important bill to the house. I think it is a very important issue, that is, liquor being supplied to minors by people other than their own parents. I think that most people agree that parenting should be left to the parents and that if parents make a ruling for their family on whether their children are allowed to have alcohol under the age of 18, then that is their prerogative as a family. However, when that alcohol is supplied outside their family in a domestic situation, I think they should also have every right to object to that and have some ability to object to that.

The member for Morialta has done extensive consultation and provided lots of information and notes, not only from people who would be affected but from schools, principals, students, and community leaders who are all very much in support of this bill. There is also lots of new research that has been brought to our attention about the effects of alcohol on developing brains. The younger a person is when they start drinking, the more effect it will have on their brain, so I am definitely in favour of reducing the amount of alcohol that is supplied to minors.

Certainly, in the house that I grew up in there was a zero tolerance. My mother was very strict on zero supply of alcohol, with or without her supervision. I think if anyone else had supplied me with alcohol, not only would I have been in big trouble for agreeing to take it when I knew that I could not but my mother would have certainly wanted some redress against the people who had supplied the alcohol.

In one example that was brought to my office, a parent allowed her 15-year-old son to go to his friend's house for what she thought was just a video and pizza night on a Friday after school, only to find that the children were in a games room separate to the house, where there was a fully stocked fridge. There was no adult supervision and the alcohol had been supplied for these minors without the parents of the minors being aware.

This constituent of mine was then called near midnight to pick up her very drunk and disorderly child, who had been put out onto the street which, as we know, is very dangerous. We have had people hit and killed drink walking; we have lots of advertising campaigns. There was no recourse. Her child could have been killed by a car having been put out on that street, or could have ended up with alcohol poisoning, and under the current law there would be nothing that she could have done about that.

Some of the research the member for Morialta provided states that 62 per cent of children aged 14 to 17 are consuming alcohol at some level. Of that group, 35 per cent obtained it from their parents, so we would assume that it was under strict supervision and in minimal amounts. A small number of these got their alcohol through stealing or purchasing from licensed premises, but the overwhelming majority was supplied alcohol by adults who were not their parents or guardians, and it was in a domestic environment. So, I think this is definitely a big issue and something we need to look at.

There are laws already in place in other states; there is legislation in New South Wales, Tasmania, Queensland and Victoria that prohibits supplying alcohol to minors in a domestic environment except to one's own child or dependant. The Victorian legislation was introduced in November 2011 and polling revealed that 87 per cent of Victorians supported the law and 91 per cent of parents and guardians supported it. Furthermore, the legislation gives the police an extra tool to break up unruly parties involving underage drinking. In Queensland and Tasmania, the legislation allows parents to supply alcohol to their children; in New South Wales and Victoria, they require written consent.

There are different ways of doing this, but I believe, from talking to a lot of young people who are at school and who do go to school parties, there is a lot of pressure placed on them if they are hosting a party that alcohol should be supplied. That is because everyone else has alcohol at their parties and they feel a lot of peer pressure to do what the norm is. My mother, who was more than happy to be disliked—and there were big arguments—did what she believed was the right thing by having a zero alcohol tolerance. Basically, I was not ever allowed to go to any parties just in case there was alcohol present.

The bill would allow parents the strength to resist the peer pressure of their children and their children's friends, forcing them into supplying alcohol for the sake of their child's reputation. They would actually have a legitimate and legal reason to say, 'No, it is against the law for me to supply alcohol to you.' Depending on any changes to that law, or how this bill might go through, it could be that they can have alcohol at that party if written consent has been received by each of the parents of each of the children who intend on drinking at that party.

I think this a very important issue. There are often binge drinking issues in the media; we see young people who, to me, as I get older, definitely look underage—it gets harder and harder to tell—where they are filmed in the gutter in Hindley Street (or wherever they might be). There are very strict regulations on licensed premises in the city and they are doing a terrific job of keeping underage children out and away from alcohol because of the severe fines that are in place. What we can see from the research is that most of the alcohol being provided to underage children is actually in a domestic environment by people other than their own parents without, necessarily, the parents even being aware of that situation, nor have they given consent.

I believe it is a parent's role to raise a child; it is not someone else's parents' role to decide what is right or wrong for your child. This gives parents the power to be able to say, with the backing of the law, 'It is illegal for me to supply alcohol to anyone else's children in any situation.' I commend the member for Morialta, he has my full support with the bill and I hope that we can act in a bipartisan way and put this very important legislation through the house because I do not think there could be any argument that it would be wrong to protect our young and most vulnerable.

Mr PISONI (Unley) (10:59): I too stand to support the bill and I would particularly like to congratulate the member for Morialta for bringing the bill to the parliament. When he first brought the bill out for consultation, I was on the Unley High School governing council. The bill was discussed at a governing council meeting and there was overwhelming support by parents for the bill. Parents were saying that, yes, we want support for the decisions we make with our children. We have made decisions that we do not want our children drinking under the age of 18, and if we do allow them to drink we want it to be in a controlled environment with us and not with strangers or other adults who could ply those children with alcohol and take advantage of them.

There were parents of daughters there, of course, who expressed some concern that, if that did happen, it could very well put their daughters in a vulnerable position, and we all know how difficult it can be to prove a situation like that under the current laws, whereas this makes it very easy for a parent to take action against another adult if they have given alcohol to their under-age child. We are talking about children who could be 12, 13 or 14.

When we went to the induction at Unley High School for our daughter, who is now 19, back in 2006 I think it was, we were warned about that period between high school and primary school being the most dangerous and vulnerable for experimentation by young people. Alcohol was listed as being an area of most concern by those councillors and teachers at Unley High School who were informing parents of the change in their children's development and the change they will be experiencing as they move into high school. This was obviously before the Christmas break from grade 7 into high school.

Parents are saying to me that they want support for their decisions as parents. Another area where this will be particularly valuable for parents would be in the after parties that are formed after the semi-formal that happens in year 11 in most schools, and then the formal which happens in year 12. In both those instances, particularly the semi-formal in year 11, you certainly will not see any children who are old enough to drink, but you will see plenty of alcohol given to children, supplied by adults, in many instances without the knowledge of the parents and certainly without the permission of parents.

Of course the mid-year formal, where only a few of these students may be of drinking age, puts even more pressure on those who are not of drinking age to participate in the drinking at after parties. If you look at some of the venues where these after parties are conducted, there is a large misunderstanding by parents and others of just what are the laws. There was one after party where on Facebook they were advertising a $30 or $40 entry fee, and that included alcohol.

When I raised my concerns with the superintendent at the Sturt police, and asked questions about whether this was in fact in breach of any licensing laws, he said, 'Well, as matter of fact it is: you are charging for entry, which includes alcohol and that requires a temporary liquor licence.' The parents did not have a liquor licence, and were not aware that they needed to have a liquor licence. The police made it very clear that they needed to have that liquor licence in order for that party to continue, and they were horrified as parents that they were breaking the law.

Consequently more parents with a law in place would not want to break the law and they would be able to have that argument back to their teenage children. Those who have teenage children or recently had them will understand how persistent and how knowledgeable they are of the law when it suits their interest. They will be able to tell their children, 'No, you cannot drink at this party, it is illegal for anybody to offer you a drink at this party, so you will not drink at this party and there will not be alcohol at this party, or the party we are having at our house will not have alcohol.' This is simply a mechanism for parents to make their own choices for their own families.

At the moment, that choice is removed by this loophole in legislation that allows some other adult, who may not even have a connection with your children, to make a decision about their drinking, and that is not right. As a parent, that is your sole decision and your parenting right. I urge members on both sides of the house to support this bill and support parents in South Australia.

Mr VENNING (Schubert) (11:05): I rise briefly to speak and support this bill from the member for Morialta. As the member for the Barossa and as a strong supporter of our wine industry, and to a lesser extent our beer industry, I take strong interest in a matter such as this. We all strive for the responsible use and consumption of alcohol. I strongly support this bill and certainly hope it will gain the unanimous support of this house, because I do not believe there should be a single member in this place who would not agree with it.

Teenage or underage drinking is of great concern to us all, especially the binge drinking, the sickness, the risk to health and the inherent bad behaviour that goes with it. It is sickening to see it regularly on our TV. In particular, we have seen vivid vision of what happens in Kings Cross with the drinking, the loutish behaviour, the collapsing in the streets and young people being carted off to hospital in the ambulance comatose. It is a disgusting situation and I think the community in Australia ought to be taking a lot stronger view about it.

I believe this problem starts as a fad amongst young people, or because of peer group activity, as has been said, which often becomes a very addictive habit. As this bill intimates, this activity often starts with underage people being given alcohol in friends' or other people's homes, without their parents being present and without their knowledge or consent. As always, we can draw on our own experiences and, as the house knows, I do enjoy a good red, but I was lucky not to have had any contact with alcohol in my younger years at all.

Members interjecting:

Mr VENNING: Some would say that I am making up for it, and I am, but I must say with the experience and knowledge to know what the responsible activity is. In my younger years, I was lucky enough not to have any alcohol at all. In fact, I was a teetotaller until I was elected to this house in 1990 at age 44, but by now I reckon I have caught up to the average. I fully understand the pleasures and the powers of alcohol but, as an adult with life experience, I know to be very careful.

It horrifies me even to see parents letting their young children have a sip of dad's beer. I understand this bill does not prohibit a parent supplying or giving permission to another parent or adult to allow their children access to alcoholic drinks. I understand that is the case and I am a bit concerned about whether that permission should be given in writing or something like that. Otherwise, the kid is going to say, 'Yes, dad has no worries. He knows I am here. He knows I am going to have a drink.' How does the visiting parent know that, because you do not expect kids to tell the truth, do you, particularly with the peer group pressure that goes with that, and I question that.

We are sick of the horrific activity that has been happening with many young people binge drinking. It is not so much the red wine that they are drinking, it is these powerful mixes that they put together. I saw it myself last Saturday night. I went into a public bar full of young people, and they were not drinking ordinary red wine or beer, they were drinking these high-powered mixer drinks. Why? Quick fix, quick kick. I just shook my head in disbelief because, basically, they are drinking poison. I think it is very powerful alcohol with a very quick result. One was a jager bomb, which I had once and never again. It was a Red Bull and Jägermeister—a very powerful brew. Why young people drink drinks like that—

An honourable member: Or old people.

Mr VENNING: —or old people. You could say I have the constitution to be able to take a bit of that sort of thing. I just think it is crazy that those sorts of drinks are promoted to our young people. I think it is a nonsense. Without putting myself further into this, I congratulate the member for Morialta. I hope that the house will support this because I think it is common sense and should have been done well before now.

Mr GRIFFITHS (Goyder) (11:10): I have to say that I love Thursday mornings. It is wonderful being in this place and listening to the stories from across the chamber, especially when there are good numbers here and there are a few retorts. I might be 51 and rather boring now, but I did have a youth, and there is only one instance in which I cannot remember what occurred.

There are a few times when we have challenges in our life, and I have lived through the teenage years and the challenges that presents. I have lived through having kids and their teenage years and the challenges that presents, and I know it is hard. So, I respect the way the member for Morialta has brought this bill before us because it is from a sense of seriousness and a concern about what occurs.

I have seen a lot of things happen in my life—experienced some, witnessed others, shaken my head in frustration at some and accepted some as being well done and showing a level of maturity. I have also lived with the frustration of seeing people get in trouble because of a lack of willingness to accept responsibility. I have seen some terrible effects of what alcohol actually does, not just to younger people but to those in early adulthood who should have been more sensible about what they did, and the pronounced effects on the rest if their life.

We have to give this some serious consideration. The member for Schubert, in recounting part of his own history, and anybody who stands up to talk about this, has to consider it based upon not only their own experiences but what society is going to need in the future. The member for Unley is actually quite sensible when he talks about issues that have impacted and the decisions that he and his wife have made for their children and the way they have acted that out.

In my life, with my kids, we showed a bit more leniency, but we did so from an informed position and a respect for what they were going to do. My son has a personality that challenges a bit more than my daughter's did, I think it is fair to say. There were some occasions when he came home and I was a bit embarrassed about him, but I knew where he was, I trusted the people he was with and I was prepared to allow him to mature in that way.

But my great concern exists where there are parents who, yes, have faith in their child but, when their child goes into a circumstance they do not know enough about and do not ask enough questions about, and the level of adult supervision that might be there is not as stringent as it should be, some kids get into terrible situations. As much as I do not want a nanny state situation to exist, that is where I think there is a reason for this bill to be proposed and there is a reason for it to be supported.

If I can recount one story, my daughter was a boarder at one of the schools in Adelaide (I shall not mention which school it was), and she was attending a formal. She had consumed some alcohol beforehand, and she had advised her mum and I about what was intended to occur. She went to this function and there was another young lady there who was 'out of it'—that is the way my daughter described it to me.

She chose to actually assist her, which put her at some risk of being identified. She was identified and suffered the penalty of actually being suspended from the school for four days, but I respected the fact that she helped out a young kid at a time when that child did need some assistance and at a time when, if that assistance had not been provided, who knows what could have happened.

There are circumstances we have all to face up to. I always try to tell my kids that there will be ramifications for what they do or say all their life; they have to except responsibility for that. Yes, she took the suspension. Did I like it? No. Did I respect that the school did it? Sort of, but I was prepared to enforce the decision it had made. But I know she has come out of it a stronger person, and I hope that the young lady who was assisted actually learnt from that experience and that she has matured from it, too.

There are a lot of words that will be said. I hope that some level-headed sense is given to the consideration proposed by the member for Morialta, and he has done so with an enormous amount of investigation. It is not just a flippant effort to try to deal with an issue that might have only been brought to him by one person: this has been a consistent issue raised with him. He has done the research. The briefing paper which the member for Morialta supplied to the Liberal Party was very conclusive about what has occurred in other states; consultations that have occurred with schools; and the level of support that existed in a wide cross-section of the community for the change to occur.

I think it should be implemented, because it allows us to put in place some steps so that we can give some assurances to the vast number of parents out there who want to ensure that their child is going to be safe, and that when they put them in the care of others, it is going to be understood what the implications are. It is also going to give them a chance to have a discussion between the generations, which I think is really important. The member for Adelaide talked about a decision that her mother made unilaterally; I respect that that has occurred. I suffered a little from that too. I have hoped that with my own kids I have allowed them to put their case to me, and for the discussion to occur.

I think what the member for Morialta proposes still allows that to occur, and it allows the debate between the parents to occur, in order for everybody to know the implications of what is proposed; what can potentially happen; and what protections are going to be there. But, it will still allow the younger generation to have fun, and that is what it also has to come down to. If you show faith in your child and you put them in a situation where they and others around them can enjoy themselves, they will mature and grow up to be wonderful young adults who will make this state a great state. Well done, member for Morialta.

An honourable member interjecting:

Mr BROCK (Frome) (11:15): I have confessed to a couple of other things, such as speeding fines, so I am going to be very careful today. Firstly, I congratulate the member for Morialta for going forward with this bill and bringing this issue to our attention. As the member for Goyder has just said, he has not just done the research; he has done a lot of research. I congratulate the member for Morialta for bringing up this bill, and the previous bill on the adoption system.

As has been mentioned in this house, we have all done the wrong thing when we were younger. We have all come across a lot of peer pressure, and we have done a lot of things in our youth which may not have been to the benefit of society going forward. The member for Schubert has brought a couple of drinks to my attention that I do not think some of the young people in my area know about, so I really need to warn the member for Schubert to perhaps be a bit careful about what he is saying, and to stay away from those drinks if they affect the member for Schubert so badly.

This bill is a great bill, and I will wholeheartedly support it. I must admit, my own children have gone through that particular period of time, and I now have grandchildren coming up to that age; they are a bit younger at this stage, but they do have a lot of peer pressure out there. When they go to parties, the parents and grandparents need to be very sure that when they go to those locations—I am only picking on parties—that they are going there and they are safe, and that they are not going to consume anything that may be detrimental to their health.

A lot of parents do not mention these things for fear of embarrassment; they know it happens, but they think that if they make it public they are perceived to not be good parents. That is not the case. There are a lot of parents out there and—I think as the member for MacKillop may have mentioned—people go to parties. The parents at these parties are custodians, and if they are going to charge, as the member for MacKillop indicated—

An honourable member: Unley.

Mr BROCK: Member for Unley; I apologise—if they are going to charge for that, then they need to have a liquor licence. People do not realise the consequences and requirements that need to be out there. Peer pressure at schools—I have come across this myself with some friends of mine; their children have gone to parties and have been pressured to have a drink, and things like that, and they really do not want to say no. We have to be very, very careful of what we are doing.

We, as a society, also need to bring to the attention of the public the importance of responsible gambling. The Premier has made it quite clear, in some statements he made recently about the advertising of gambling during sporting events. We also want to be able to cut that out, because that is very attractive and easy to do. To the member for Morialta: I wholeheartedly congratulate you for bringing this to our attention, and I think there should be bipartisan support in this house for a bill of this magnitude. Again, I give you my full support.

Mr PENGILLY (Finniss) (11:19): I seek to make a contribution to this debate. I wish the member for Morialta well with his motion. I—

The Hon. R.B. Such interjecting:

Mr PENGILLY: I will come to that, member for Fisher. I think it is a good idea. The former member for Stuart, the Hon. Graham Gunn, was always reminding us that it is difficult to legislate against stupidity. I think they were wise words, and they often reverberate around the inside of my head when we are thinking about the legislation in this place.

The reality is that, to the best of our ability, we do everything possible, if we are fortunate enough to have children, to educate them from the day they are born until the day we depart, but more specifically, we assist them to get through those formative years from early childhood through to teenage and into adulthood, which in many cases is extremely difficult. I am sure that members in this place who have children have had difficulties at one stage or another with either alcohol, vehicles or whatever.

Let me say that this bill of the member for Morialta's is around the subject of alcohol. Another subject which really concerns me is the issue of drugs, and that is something that is also an appalling thing in our society and is only too plain to see should you venture out and about around the communities. I currently have a major issue with ice down on the south coast, and marijuana has been around forever and a day. My first experience with marijuana—not smoking it, I might add—

Mr Whetstone interjecting:

Mr PENGILLY: No, I've never smoked anything, but my first experience was in 1971 in Wyoming in the United States. I realised how silly you could get on alcohol and how much sillier you could get on marijuana, quite frankly—but that detracts from the subject in the house today.

Members interjecting:

Mr PENGILLY: I beg your pardon? But seriously, the member for Morialta has the very best interests of the youth of today in his heart when he raises this legislation in the house. It is incumbent upon us, as parents, to do all we can to educate our children, but it goes beyond that. The blitz of advertising these days is such that you do not have to drive very far to have alcohol rammed down your throat. This has been around for a long time, because I recall very clearly the fact that, when I came up to boarding school, a bloke called Tim Dean from Kalangadoo in the South-East and I got knocked off for pinching the altar wine in the school chapel. We got in a fair bit of trouble over that when we were about 14, I think.

Kids want to experiment—of course they want to experiment. It is part of growing up to experiment with alcohol, vehicles, unfortunately drugs, sex and everything else that goes with it. That is just part of the process of growing up, and all you can do is try to steer your children through it and hopefully they come out the other end. My view is that the member for Morialta is endeavouring to try to help steer our younger people through a difficult patch in this particular case, and I am hopeful that the government would support this bill of the member for Morialta.

I really cannot see any good reason why they should not support it. We are yet to see as to whether they will come good and offer their support or not. There may well be members on that side that do support it and those in other places have decided that they will not support it. We just have to wait and find out. But, seriously, while you are in this place, if you are in this place for the right reasons, which I feel that most if not all members really are, a sensible and logical step like this should be supported by the entire house and put into place, because only that way can we actually progress.

I heard the member for Schubert earlier, and it is actually a fairly salutary lesson for someone like the member for Schubert, who came in at 44 and had never consumed alcohol because of his upbringing. That is fine; that is no criticism whatsoever. But, these days, as I said, so much is rammed down the throats of our young people, and they cannot get away from it. I know that when I left school when I was 17, we were too young—the drinking age at that time was 21.

We used to have a bloke who we knew in Kingscote when we were kids and he would go and buy us a carton of green death Southwark on a Saturday night and we would sit down at the wharf and get silly on that or go to a dance. They then decided within two months of me turning 21 that they would bring the drinking age down to 20, so that was a bit of a smack, but we actually learnt how to drink. We learnt how to misbehave as well, I might add, and we did some foolish things, but fortunately we got through and we are here today.

I find it rather bizarre, given some of my antics in my earlier years, that I am sitting here pontificating on legislation to do with alcohol now. It is just a fact of life. I commend the member for Morialta for his efforts. I do sincerely hope that the government will support this. I will be very disappointed if they do not and I wait to see the outcome.

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (11:25): I rise to make a brief contribution and wholeheartedly support the member for Morialta's bill because I too, like many in this house, have a young family with children spread out in age. I have an older son who is 23, my youngest daughter is 10 and my middle daughter, just turning 16, is starting to come into the realm of peer group pressure coming into what they call the party scene.

I guess in today's world the young are always looking to be older than what they are; always looking to be part of the scene, if you like, to be invited to parties. Along with the invitation to those parties comes the pressure; the expectation that attending a party is all about having a drink, having a good time and having a dance. That does not apply to all the young ones. It does not apply to all children who are under age.

Sadly, what I am seeing is a growing trend in today's society that there is an expectation that most 15 and 16 year olds do consume alcohol, whether it is attending a party or whether it is attending a formal. One thing I have found particularly with school formals and school socials is that they do bring back memories. My first school social, back in the days at Henley High, had a band that would play and you would always be outside somewhere behind a bush or behind a tree, hiding somewhere—

The Hon. R.B. Such: On your own or with someone?

Mr WHETSTONE: There was some form of expectation that you would be in the bush with a bottle of something to try and put a bit of performance into your night.

The Hon. R.B. Such: Are you sure you were alone, Tim?

Mr Pengilly: Where was Paul Caica?

Mr WHETSTONE: Paul Caica was somewhere in a neighbouring bush. Paul was always one of the great spirits at the school and I must say I do remember Paul fondly because he was a character at the school. In some cases so were some of the other members of this place. There was the expectation that when you went out as a minor (under-age) there was always that reference that when you are going tonight, make sure you have got your bottle of beer or your bottle of wine or your bottle of spirit.

Mr Pengilly interjecting:

Mr WHETSTONE: No, member for Finniss, that never came into the equation. Again, it is about parents being responsible. What their parents are like is what their children are like and, potentially, if you promote drinking to your children, in most cases, it is a reflection. If we see parents being responsible with their children, giving them some form of responsibility, giving them some sort of ownership that they are coming of age, I think it can be responsible.

Whether they are under-age or over-age, it is something that usually happens behind closed doors, but what it leads to along the way really does have an impact on how young under-age children, in most cases, behave. I have gone along to a lot of formals, proms and socials and have had to drag kids away from consuming alcohol because they are performing badly. I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.