Legislative Council Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1) 52 1 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Responsible Alcohol Service RESPONSIBLE ALCOHOL SERVICE The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK Legislative Council RESPONSIBLE ALCOHOL SERVICE The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (14:20): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Consumer Affairs a question about the responsible service of alcohol. Leave granted. The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK Legislative Council The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: The Productivity Commission has recently published a report entitled 'Annual review of regulatory burdens on business: business and consumer services research report.' Under a particular section, it refers to the issue of responsible service of alcohol training and issues to do with the mobility of staff across jurisdictions. The report states: The [AHA]...is concerned with the lack of mutual recognition of responsible service of alcohol (RSA) training across jurisdictions. It is mandatory in all jurisdictions for staff serving liquor to have completed a responsible service of alcohol course prior to being able to serve liquor. Consequently, training has to be replicated for staff working across jurisdictions. This impedes labour mobility and results in additional costs to employers. I note that the submission refers to this being a result of differences in local licensing laws and it states that local knowledge is important. The PC report suggests that mutual recognition is the issue that is being raised by the AHA. My question is: what consideration has the minister given to this particular issue in relation to the latest proposals for amendments to liquor licensing? The Hon. G.E. GAGO Legislative Council Minister for State/Local Government Relations, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Government Enterprises, Minister for the City of Adelaide The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for State/Local Government Relations, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Government Enterprises, Minister for the City of Adelaide) (14:23): I thank the honourable member for her important question. Indeed, we currently have a number of liquor licensing reforms under review, including the review of our code of practice. The consultation for that has been completed and we are now collecting those comments and the government will formulate a response to that soon. However, it is proposed that the new code of practice will revise a number of measures designed to promote and improve compliance with the provisions of the objects of the act. One of those is requiring staff to undertake specified, accredited training which includes the responsible service of alcohol. We know that that training is vital to support compliance requirements. We know that confident and knowledgeable staff are obviously better able to deal with problems that might occur, particularly when an intoxicated person might be creating difficulties in terms of service. It is also important that staff are very clear about their responsibilities, terms of both legislative and regulatory responsibilities. So, this training will help ensure those measures are complied with. Currently, an anomaly has arisen, which I am well aware of, and that is that, although I understand there is a nationally accredited course, nevertheless different jurisdictions have different requirements around what constitutes meeting their requirements for the responsible service of alcohol. Simply the completion of that accredited course is not necessarily the accepted standard across all jurisdictions for meeting the requirements of responsible service training. Some jurisdictions have little add-ons, in that you have to do that bit of training, plus there are additional components, and that makes it extremely difficult for those people who work in the industry. Many of our industries, including our liquor and hospitality industry, operate nationally, or at least in multi-jurisdictions. So, it does make it difficult when individuals have to resit or sit different types of training to meet the responsible service of alcohol requirements in each jurisdiction—and I know this because my husband is one of them; he works across states and has to meet those requirements time and time again. It is an inefficient and ineffective use of people's time. In terms of mutual recognition, we do strive to streamline those processes and reduce red tape and ensure that we meet those standards of compliance to make it easier for people to work across the industry and not be bound by the different jurisdictional requirements. I have had a number of conversations with some of my ministerial colleagues, particularly the Minister for Tourism (Hon. John Rau), who is participating in a ministerial council involving tourism which deals with those issues of workers, particularly in relation to those industries related to tourism, and this is one of them. Their ministerial council is looking at elements around that, so I have asked him to raise this issue in that particular forum to see whether we can establish, if not in that ministerial council itself, at least a task force or a sub-group of that ministerial council that might do some concentrated work on bringing together the different jurisdictions responsible for the requirements around training to see whether we can streamline the process and reach a national position that all states can sign off on. We know that there is an added complication because the elements of this training are not only around the service of alcohol and the requirements around that, and how to manage problem behaviours and confrontation and such like, but it also deals with knowledge around the particular jurisdiction's legislation and regulation, and we know that varies across jurisdictions. We are looking at having perhaps a core training component which deals with certain elements of the curriculum and then perhaps a fact sheet or some sort of add-on which deals with that particular jurisdiction's specific legislation which can be easily dealt with and updated across jurisdictions. It is a difficult issue and, having had a chance to look at in some detail, I can understand why this problem has not been addressed sooner; that is, because of some of the complexities inherent in the system. Nevertheless, I have initiated a process for us to at least have another look at that. It does require the cooperation of all jurisdictions, but we are hopeful that we might be able to deal with this old chestnut.