LICENSED TRADE URGES CHANGES IN LIQUOR LAW

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27499, 5 November 1954, Page 9

LICENSED TRADE URGES CHANGES IN LIQUOR LAW

The Canterbury Licensed Victuallers’ Association believes it is “high time alterations were made in New Zealand’s antiquated liquor laws to bring the Dominion into line with more enlightened countries overseas.” In a statement issued yesterday, the association’s committee said that on several occasions recently statements had been made in the Christchurch newspapers by opponents of the liquor trade, referring to the result of the poll taken on March 9, 1949, on the question bf 6 p.m. or 10 p.m. closing of hotel bars. In a report to the Christchurch Presbytery, in a statement to the Police Inquiry Commission, and in newspaper advertisements by the New Zealand Alliance, emphasis had been placed on the fact that approximately 75 per cent, of those who voted at the referendum chose 6 p.m. as opposed to 10 p.m. closing, the statement said. “There are two main points which the association feels that the public should know, and which have not been mentioned in the statements referred to,” said the committee. “First, only just over half of those who were entitled to do so voted on that occasion, so that in fact only approximately 39 per cent, of the total eligible population of New Zealand voted in favour of closing at the earlier hour. In this connexion, it is interesting to note the published com-

ment of the Rev. F. A. Hume that ‘much was made of the need for staggered hours, but this was simply the voice of a small but vociferous minority.’ “It seeips to the association that the boot is on the other foot—the 39 per cent, referred to is a definite minority, which for some time has certainly been vociferous. “Second, the referendum gave electors only two choices—6 pjn. or 10 p.m. closing. Thus, if an elector voted for the latter, he was voting for extended hours, as there was no suggestion of the same number of trading hours being spread over a longer period each day, that is, staggered hours. “The association believes the ballot paper did not give electors sufficient choice, and that if a definite proposal had been available for staggered hours to permit hotel bars to open in the evening, it is possible and probable that a different result would have been reached. Another point to be borne in mind is that, on the occasion of this particular referendum, no organised advertising campaign was undertaken by the liquor trade.” * It was common to read in newspaper reports by visitors referring to what were almost invariably called “New Zealand’s antiquated liquor laws” compared with those of other countries, the association said.