SSDP Members respond to ‘Police take aim at 'high-octane' supermarket booze’ 
published in the Otago Daily Times, Thursday 6th of July 2023
https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/low-cost-means-higher-risk-officer

We share the Police’s concern for the harm caused by high-strength alcohol being sold or discounted to a price that is both unsafe and irresponsible. But since filing or initial objection SSDP’s members have done significant work. We’ve come to understand that the ecosystem of alcohol access, particularly off-license alcohol consumption, is completely unbalanced.

SSDP’s members believe that the cheap alcohol that streams out of off-licenses is the fundamental cause of the hugely damaging level of alcohol-related harm, including a horrific amount of sexual violence, experienced by students and young people in Dunedin. From our own experience we know that the harm continues, resulting in the immediate and desperate need for action. This is why we have objected to Countdown’s license being renewed without harm-minimisation conditions being imposed, and why we will continue to object to off-license renewals on the same basis.

The last time Dunedin had the opportunity to significantly address alcohol-related harm in our city was with our community created Local Alcohol Policy (LAP), which in September 2016 Countdown among other large corporates appealed and gutted, with a hollow shell of the Community’s efforts being approved on the 25th of October 2018.

On the 6 October 2019 – just short of a year later, Sophia Crestani tragically died at a North Dunedin Flat party, which was fuelled by off-license alcohol had become out of control.

In 2016, Dave Cull, Dunedin’s Mayor at the time criticised the opposition to the LAP, saying Countdown, among the parties to the appeal were "putting their profit ahead of the wellbeing of the community. These are large corporates saying, ‘we don’t really care what the community thinks, or the harm being done to it.’

For the District Licensing Committee hearings today and tomorrow, Countdown has once again come flying down to Dunedin with its Russell McVeagh lawyers, to claim that there is no evidence that harm is being caused by the excessive or inappropriate consumption of alcohol sold by Countdown in Dunedin, and to downplay and diminish the reality of alcohol-related harm experienced by both students and the wider community in Dunedin.

SSDP sees history repeating itself, but alcohol-harm in Dunedin has intensified to the point where even students are beginning to acknowledge that it is unacceptable. Our objection is based on the recent 2021 position of the Court of Appeal, supported by the Supreme Court in 2023, that in areas where alcohol-related harm is common, that it is justified for additional conditions directed at the minimisation of alcohol-related harm to be opposed on an alcohol-license. Given the intensely damaging alcohol-related harm experienced by students and young people in Dunedin, we believe that our District Licensing Committee can has no reason not to decisively act to address alcohol-related harm.

Countdown must prove they meet a higher standard of suitability.

SSDP holds that the reality of the alcohol-related harm experienced by students and young people in Dunedin is undeniable. This is rightly identified in section 1.3 of the Dunedin Local Alcohol Policy which states that Dunedin’s youth/student population is ‘particularly vulnerable to hazardous drinking and alcohol-related harm.’

Recent case law holds that in the case of the grant or renewal of a license where there is a vulnerable location or community, an applicant is required to meet a higher standard of suitability. This involves demonstrating an understanding of the local vulnerabilities and engaging with the community on how to address these vulnerabilities.

We believe that Countdown has failed to do this appropriately. As we stated in the first point of our objection letter, essentially all the information provided by the applicant in the renewal application is generic (except for the premise floorplan, and a fire evacuation letter), with little or no information that gives detail or consideration to the specific location and sensitivities of the area that it’s license operates – even though in their own words they aim “to be an industry leader in the responsible service of alcohol”.

This is in contrast with some local Licensees, who our members have recently engaged with. These local Licensees are not only passionate about their businesses but have willingly accepted conditions on their license aimed at the minimisation of alcohol-related harm. They live in Dunedin, and so they understand the reality of the harm that occurs here. The level of responsibility and understanding of alcohol abuse in Dunedin these Licensees have displayed has really impressed us.

Given what we’ve witnessed of Countdown’s actions and in the objection process so far, including how superficial their approach to responsibility has been, our members believe that we need to be having serious conversations as to whether Countdown is truly a suitable applicant to be selling alcohol in Dunedin.

Lack of opposition by Medical Officer of Health and Licensing Inspector is a failure to minimise alcohol-related harm.

The Otago Daily Times has noted that neither the Medical Officer of Health nor Licensing Inspector opposed the application. This is not an uncommon occurrence in Dunedin.

In the face of alcohol-related harm experienced by students and young people in Dunedin, our members are tired and frustrated that these two reporting agencies are essentially missing in action, and that their lack of opposition is often seized upon as evidence by applicants such as Countdown whose actions directly contribute to the alcohol-related harm that occurs in Dunedin.

Regarding our opposition to Countdown, we emailed all three reporting agencies requesting a meeting to discuss our objection. Meetings between objectors and the reporting agencies do happen in other parts of New Zealand. However, our request was denied. We have noticed multiple references to communications between the agencies Countdown within the hearing reports, and our members feel that as objectors we have been pushed to the side. Both the Medical Officer of Health and the Licensing Inspector responded to our request to meet with nearly identical wording – and both suggested contacting Countdown ‘to discuss any matters that you have raised in your opposition.' We found this suggestion extremely concerning, given the power imbalance between parties, and Countdown’s reputation for using harsh cross-examination tactics on objectors to their alcohol licenses. We think that the Agencies should be open to developing effective working relationships with us (and other objectors).

We note that the Alcohol Inspector’s position on high alcohol low-cost single sales is very different to the one taken at the hearing for Pak’n Save South Dunedin on the 12th of May. This is likely due to Countdown taking several single sales over 5% ABV off the shelves at its Dunedin Central store, despite keeping them on the shelves at all other Countdown stores in Dunedin. Without a condition, Countdown could simply place these back on the shelves.

Our members, in looking back at reports for other Licensing Hearings noticed that the Inspector has supported the police’s stance only on single sales ‘in fairness to all off-license premises.’ We interpret this as considering commercial interests of other off-license businesses, and both the legislation and case law are clear that the purpose of the Act isn’t about commercial interests, it’s about the minimisation of alcohol-related harm. We believe the Dunedin City Council’s Licensing Inspector needs to address this immediately and focus on what is fair to the people of Dunedin who experience the alcohol-related harm that occurs in our city.

Regarding the Mr Whipp, the delegated Medical Officer of Health (under section 151 of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act): since 2021 we can only identify two circumstances where Mr Whipp has objected to the grant or renewal of an alcohol license. This contrasts with the previous delegated Officer of Health, who from DCC records either objected or provided considered comment on every matter before a District Licensing Committee Hearing.

For SSDP’s objection to the University of Otago’s license, Mr Whipp did not attend or send one of his colleagues, leaving Te Whatu Ora without representation at the hearing. The Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act allows the Medical Officer of Health to delegate functions to someone suitably qualified or trained to exercise or perform them. In reviewing Mr Whipp’s education and experience, we are uncertain that he has the relevant Public Health qualifications required for facilitating harm minimization in this space. Although, it seems he has extensive experience working within the hospitality industry. We do not understand how this is acceptable given the amount of alcohol-related harm experienced by our Dunedin community.

Our members believe that immediate and decisive action needs to be taken to ensure both agencies are meeting their responsibilities under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol act to minimise alcohol-related harm ‘to the smallest amount, extent or degree.’ Critically, we feel as though the regulation of alcohol in Dunedin is currently without an effective Medical Officer of Health.

© Scoop Media