HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2015-11-17 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Liquor Licensing (Entertainment on Licensed Premises) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 15 October 2015.)

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (17:29): I rise on behalf of Liberal members to support the second reading of the Liquor Licensing (Entertainment on Licensed Premises) Amendment Bill. Section 105(1) of the Liquor Licensing Act requires a licensee to apply to the licensing authority for consent to provide entertainment on the licensed premises or any area adjacent to the licensed premises.

A number of groups, including the Music Industry Council and others, have argued that this provision is onerous and is the biggest barrier to the live music sector in South Australia. They argue that this restriction does not exist in any other state and does not apply to other forms of entertainment, such as recorded music.

The government's stated aim of this bill is to cut red tape and make it easier for licensed premises to host live music. It seeks to amend the act so that venues no longer have to apply for a separate licence to have live music between 11am and midnight. For example, restaurants could have a guitarist playing in the background without having to seek the consent of the licensing authority.

Venues that want to have live music after midnight will still be required to make an application. Licensees will also be required to obtain the consent of the licensing authority if the entertainment is prescribed entertainment as defined in the bill. The government's argument is that this bill strikes an appropriate balance between reducing red tape and maintaining regulation of entertainment during the hours that noise from licensed premises is most likely to impact upon residents.

The bill obviously has the support of the Music Industry Council. It has also been supported by the Australian Hotels Association, which has made a number of public statements highlighting that, in its view, hotels are the lifeblood of the live music industry in South Australia. The clubs association has recently contacted our office and indicated that it too supports the bill.

Liberal members in the Assembly and the Legislative Council support the broad policy goal of encouraging live music in South Australia in clubs and hotels in particular. It has been interesting to note the various contributions of members in the House of Assembly. I am sure the Hon. Mr Gazzola and the Hon. Ms Franks will speak during the second reading debate of this bill.

As an observer over a number of years, it has been interesting to see the trend in debate in terms of live music. I acknowledge the work of my former ministerial colleague Di Laidlaw almost 20 years ago now, I think. Her contribution to live music development has been acknowledged by members in this chamber previously—for example, taking on board John Schumann's advice.

I remember during those particular years discussions with people like Pete Steedman and others who were at the forefront of trying to promote live music, not only through entertainment venues but in particular through music in schools. As a former shadow minister for education and minister for education, I saw a number of programs promoted during that particular period, some of which continued and some of which died off in the last 20 years or so.

I think generally the community is more accepting of live music through our hotels. It has been interesting to note the changing nature of live music in some of our venues and the very interesting coming together of the provision of live music and pop-up food vans. For example, at the Wheatsheaf Hotel only last week, there was a wonderful wafting smell of hot chips through the open live music area. It made for a compelling evening; it was very difficult to resist the hot chips as well as drinking and enjoying the live music at that particular venue.

We are seeing through that combination, as the Hon. Mr Gazzola and the Hon. Ms Franks have mentioned in previous contributions, an increasing variety of live music and entertainment options. As I said, with maybe slightly greater numbers at some of these venues, now there are people seeing the opportunity that it might justify having a pop-up food van outside, whereas perhaps in the past, live music in some venues might have only been attracting the nearest family and friends of the particular performers in the live music venue at the time.

There was one issue that was raised in our party room debate by one of my country colleagues or colleagues who represent a regional area. I did look to see whether it was raised in the House of Assembly debate—it may well have been—but I know that I raised it at some stage because I had a letter from the Deputy Premier responding to the question, so it might have been raised in the debate as well as separately. It is an issue in relation to a definition of 'licensed premises' as it might impact on some country communities. I want to place on the record the response I got from the minister, who says:

I write in response to your inquiry in relation to the application of the Liquor Licensing Bill upon areas adjacent to licensed premises. The bill amends section 105 of the defined licensed premises as for purposes of this section a reference to licensed premises will be taken to include a reference to any area adjacent to the licensed premises that is under the control of a licensee for the licensed premises.

The question that was being raised by this member representing a regional area was that beer gardens and open areas that are adjacent to the four walls of a licensed premises, on his thinking, would be included and therefore the removal of restrictions in terms of entertainment would not just be within the four walls of the licensed premises: it would be in an open beer garden area. Clearly, issues in terms of management of noise are significantly different if you are an open area for neighbouring residents, maybe a few hundred metres down the street, as opposed to being within the four walls of a hotel.

This member was raising the question: it is fine to reduce the red tape within the premises because you can manage the noise within the premises, but if you are in an open beer garden outside, how are you going to manage those issues? This was the question that was put to the minister, and this is his reply:

I note that section 105 of the Act in its current form also deals with areas adjacent to licensed premises. Under the bill, a licensee may use any part of the licensed premise, which includes any area adjacent to the licensed premises that is under the control of the licensee for the licensed premise for the purpose of providing entertainment between the hours of 11am and midnight without the consent of the licensing authority.

The use of adjacent areas to the licensed premises for the purpose of providing entertainment would also depend on any approvals or conditions under the Development Act 1993 and whether it is regarded as a change in the use of land. Any change in the use of land would require approval under that Act.

It is also important to note that the process under section 106 of the Liquor Licensing Act 1997 relating to noise complaints will remain unchanged under this bill. Section 106 allows for a complaint to be made to the Liquor and Gambling Commissioner regarding noise from licensed premises.

The letter was signed by John Rau, Deputy Premier, and it is dated 23 September 2015. I put that on the public record. At this stage, we are not seeking to amend the bill, but we are putting on the record the concern that a member representing a regional area has raised. I think that it is a valid point of concern. I think that the import of the Premier's response is that, if there is a noisy entertainment option in an open beer area which impacts on residents in a country community, there can be complaints under the existing provisions lodged with the Liquor and Gambling Commissioner.

I guess that this is an area that, sensibly, we just monitor and if ultimately there proves to be a problem, the issue can be raised in the parliament with the government in terms of how those particular issues might be monitored. I certainly acknowledge, on behalf of my country colleague—and I guess the same issues could be raised in some metropolitan venues as well—that managing potential noise issues within the four walls of a hotel or club, for example, are clearly easier than if you are in an open beer garden area outside.

As I said, we are not seeking to amend the bill or defeat any provision of the bill at the moment, but we put on the record the issue that has been raised and the Premier's response to it. It is an issue that clearly in our view should be monitored over the coming period and, if it is a problem, then we can look at potential solutions. With that, on behalf of Liberal members, we indicate our support for the bill and our wish that it might further encourage the development of the live music industry in South Australia.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (17:40): I rise on behalf of the Greens to support the Liquor Licensing (Entertainment on Licensed Premises) Amendment Bill 2015 put forward by the government, some three years after I put forward a similar bill to remove the entertainment consents from liquor licensing—what I call 'the culture cops' from policing whether or not one can have a beer while watching jazz or perhaps not grunge or to come in and say to the Dublin Hotel, 'I'm sorry, you are only licensed to play folk music,' and in fact take them to court because they had a DJ on one day.

That sort of overly restrictive, bureaucratic policing of culture in this state in our licensed venues is why we have this legislation here before us, but also why we should have passed it three years' ago when I first brought a private member's bill to this place. The government bill is restricted to fewer hours than the Greens bill would have been, and that is certainly something that I support. I am happy to see the government take the lead on this and ensure that it is properly implemented.

Section 106 will remain and noise will of course not be affected in terms of this particular bill. This bill will simply deal with liquor licensing enforcement, enforcing genres of entertainment—types of entertainment—not the nuisance of an entertainment. Nuisance will continue to be addressed by the provisions that will remain in the act in terms of noise and other amenity provisions and protections for residents and neighbours of licensed premises.

It is a very welcome debate that I hope will be a short one today. Certainly it has been a long-fought campaign, not just of the Greens, but of people from the Music Industry Council most recently, but of course MusicSA, the Musician's Union, the Australian Hotels Association, and Save Live Australian Music (SLAM) have all been active players in this, and so many, many more.

One I want to pay particular tribute to is Ianto Ware, who would be known to those who do care about a vibrant Adelaide, and also the Live Music Office and John Wardle of that office. Those two men in particular actually sat down in a small Sydney bar and drafted the original bill with me some three and a bit years ago, and I am sure that they will welcome this day as well. It will be the day that we see the end of the Belgian Beer Café on Ebenezer Place only being able to have the string instrumentation of harps or perhaps a didgeridoo.

I'm not sure why Higher Ground was only approved to have the music of Andean, Ancient Greek, Christian country, Indian/Asian, Latin freestyle, Gregorian chant, mediaeval, opera, polka, blue grass (and that is two words for blue grass, Hansard; it is very important and we will get to it in a minute) genres which of course must be particularly troubling, as Walter Marsh of Rip it Up wrote, for banjo players who adhere to the conventionally single word spelling of bluegrass music.

I am sure the Seven Stars Hotel will be happy to be allowed to have five people on their stage or even six rather than the currently prescribed four. I am also sure that those venues which are prohibited from currently playing grunge will breathe a sigh of relief when they are not sure whether or not the band that they have booked for their Friday night performance has traversed from rock into grunge and perhaps back again.

Liquor licensing should never have been involved in policing culture. It is a waste of public resources, it is a waste of time, and it loses the point of liquor licensing, which is to ensure the safe and responsible provision of alcohol in publicly licensed venues. I look forward to this being just one of many steps to support the live music industry. It is big business across the globe and it can be big business for South Australia.

We have many fine live acts. We have people who step onto the local stages and then go on to become world leaders: Sia Furler, I Killed the Prom Queen, and so many more. Everyone, of course, will point to Cold Chisel, who indeed got their start in Adelaide pubs. Let's get more live music in those Adelaide pubs and see more Cold Chisels in the future. With those words, I commend the bill.

The Hon. J.M. GAZZOLA (17:45): I rise to support the bill. I admit that it has been a long time coming so I will not delay the second reading for too long. I wish to acknowledge the support and contributions made by parliamentary colleagues in this and the other place, but there are many who have played an important role in getting the bill to this stage.

Firstly, I would like to acknowledge Dini Soulio, the Commissioner for Consumer Affairs, Liquor and Gambling, and his staff; Ian Horne and Wendy Bevan from the Hotels Association—and we all know that the predominant users and supporters of live music are the hotels in South Australia; the Music Industry Council; Becc Bates and Karen Marsh from the Music Development Office; the Hon. Tammy Franks and the Hon. Kelly Vincent for their perseverance and support and, indeed, you could add patience; the Premier and the Deputy Premier, especially Kim Eldridge from the Deputy Premier's office and the Minister for the Arts, for their leadership; and finally, as the Hon. Ms Franks said, Mr John Wardle, Policy Director for the Live Music Office, who also happens to be a fine guitarist. Hopefully, once local government gets on board, we will see the hospitality and entertainment industry grow, generating jobs and further economic activity for the state.

The Hon. J.A. DARLEY (17:46): I would just like to indicate for the record that I will be supporting the bill.

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Employment, Higher Education and Skills, Minister for Science and Information Economy, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Business Services and Consumers) (17:46): I believe all second reading contributions have occurred and I thank all honourable members who have made a contribution and all who have indicated support for this bill, which fundamentally looks at cutting red tape, reducing costs to business as well as obviously encouraging the live music industry to thrive.

We believe that the bill does strike a balance between reducing red tape but still maintaining adequate regulation in the entertainment sector. With those few words, I look forward to the matter being dealt with expeditiously through the committee stage.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

Bill taken through committee without amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Employment, Higher Education and Skills, Minister for Science and Information Economy, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Business Services and Consumers) (17:48): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT