Free beer for all

Written By: - Date published: 10:46 am, August 12th, 2015 - 191 comments
Categories: john key, national, Politics, same old national, the praiseworthy and the pitiful, you couldn't make this shit up - Tags:

keydrinking

As part of the right’s never ending pursuit of confusion and diversion we have a proposal surface recently to address what they obviously think is the country’s most pressing problem.  Not falling income from Dairy exports, not child poverty or increasing unemployment, not the failure to address increasing greenhouse gas emissions, but the ability to drink in any bar at any time when the All Blacks are playing during the Rugby World Cup..

From Stuff:

Pubs look set to stay open in the early hours of the Rugby World Cup after the Prime Minister confirmed the Government would pick up a bill that flopped in Parliament.

ACT leader David Seymour tabled a bill on Tuesday that sought to allow pubs to open outside of legal trading hours to show matches being played in the United Kingdom.

But the Green Party objected with co-leader James Shaw accusing Seymour of trying to boost his profile.

Now John Key has come to the party and said he has spoken with Justice Minister Amy Adams who was drafting a bill.

The Government only needs 61 votes to get it over the line, and with everyone but the Greens supporting the idea it’s a sure bet.

The issue has allowed the Government to engage in a bit of Green bashing.

Seymour branded the Greens “party poopers” after they objected to his bill and accused them of being “spiteful” and “opposed to fun”.

Key wasn’t surprised they objected and described it as “par for the course”.

The Greens were “always opposed to anything that’s sort of vaguely good fun,” he said.

The Green objection is more nuanced than the way it has been presented.  From Morning Report:

The Green Party says it blocked the attempt to introduce the proposed legislation because it was too broad and had the potential to cause real harm to communities.

Green MP Kevin Hague said it would have given a blanket exemption for all licensed premises to serve alcohol at a time of day that was deemed inappropriate when they applied for their original licence.

We have licensing laws for very good reasons.  The unfettered access to alcohol any time of the day or night can result in social problems.  And what may be acceptable in Downtown Auckland may be totally unacceptable in the suburbs.  This is why we have licensing laws and licensing authorities that make those case by case decisions.

In the absence of any evidence of need the Government wants to suspend the work of Parliament to pass a law to allow more drinking.  And in the process it has engaged in a bit of Green bashing.

Are we in that bad a state that the most important issue we are facing is being able to facilitate the further drinking of beer during a rugby game?

191 comments on “Free beer for all ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. travellerev 1
    12 August 2015 at 10:51 am

    Noo, you’re kidding? Beer and games. The fallback tactic of rulers and their banksters since time immemorial only!

  2. Gosman 2
    12 August 2015 at 10:51 am

    The Greens had the opportunity to support this bill through the first reading and then request changes that they thought should be made. Instead they nixed it completely. Of course they are going to be attacked for this. The Labour party wasn’t so silly. Why do you think that was?

    • mickysavage 2.1
      12 August 2015 at 10:58 am

      Why waste time on it.

      • dukeofurl 2.1.1
        12 August 2015 at 11:22 am

        Exactly.
        People I know who are big All Black supporters are happy to wake up in the morning to the result. Like last weekend.

        Somwhere the big issue about alcohol and sports seems to have been trampled by the beer barons, as usual.

        Interesting that the kickoff is 16:00 UK time. Why is it the sports TV deals here make sure night matches for all blacks are locked in.

        • Gosman 2.1.1.1
          12 August 2015 at 11:46 am

          So we should base decisions like this on the opinions of the people you personally know should we?

          Why do you think the UK Parliament passed a similar bill in relation to the Football World cup in Brazil last year?

          • dukeofurl 2.1.1.1.1
            12 August 2015 at 11:51 am

            Not everyone is inconvenienced by the late finishes !

            But are you saying there is a huge need to drink in bars from 4am to 6am?

            I bet where I live there wont any open even with a law change. Sports TV is available in peoples homes you know.

            • Anno1701 2.1.1.1.1.1
              12 August 2015 at 12:33 pm

              a lot of bars will realize once wages/electric etc are calculated , opening at that time of the day will be a net loss

              i mean how much booze are you really going to sell at that time of the day on a weekday (anywhere but k road that is )

          • te reo putake 2.1.1.1.2
            12 August 2015 at 12:11 pm

            The UK situation wasn’t similar, Gossie. It just extended bar opening hours out to 1am. So close to the opening hours we’re already used to having here. And it was only for the England matches. Once they were eliminated, normal hours resumed.

            • Gosman 2.1.1.1.2.1
              12 August 2015 at 12:22 pm

              My understanding was this only involved All Black matches.

              • te reo putake …
                12 August 2015 at 12:53 pm

                No. The bill allowed opening for all matches. However, I gather National are going to propose that it only apply to AB games and other games in the knockout stages. So still far wider than in the UK.

                Just as an aside, I once wrote a paper at uni looking at the correlation between sport, alcohol and violence. No surprises that world cups are no fun for the family. Increased domestic violence, A&E use and arrests follow sport related drinking pretty closely. I mainly looked at football in the UK and South America and the last RWC here.

                • Gosman …
                  12 August 2015 at 12:59 pm

                  I would be interested in the raw data you used for your paper as there is an urban myth called the Super bowl effect which highlights how increased domestic violence around sporting matches is not as pronounced as people make out.

                  • te reo putake …
                    12 August 2015 at 1:18 pm

                    You are correct about the Superbowl violence affect. The rise in violence on Superbowl day is similar to the rise in drink related violence on any other big American holiday. I believe Xmas and Thansgiving, which are multi day holidays, are actually worse for violence.

                    However, two points. One, any rise is bad news. Secondly, the Superbowl is played on a Sunday arvo, with work beckoning the next day, so those two factors have a mitigating affect. We are talking here about drinking through the early hours of the morning. Potentially, that could mean drinking all night as usual, then staying up to watch a game at, say, 2 am, followed by the AB’s at 4am, or similar. That is, an all nighter.

                    Btw, my research was primarily on World Cups (rugby and football) and while most of the articles I referenced came via the uni library and online university resources, I think you’ll be able to google RWC Auckland + violence and get some hits (so to speak!).

              • Tracey …
                12 August 2015 at 4:05 pm

                your understanding is wrong. If your understanding were right it would be about our “national game” blah blah but it is the Hotel Association lobbying to make more money for its members and pretending it is doing it for the people… their man was very tricky when asked, who approached who… he to seymour or the other way round… Seemed a straight forward enough question, unless you dont want to tell the truth.

            • dukeofurl 2.1.1.1.2.2
              12 August 2015 at 12:39 pm

              a trademark half truth from Gossipman

          • Macro 2.1.1.1.3
            12 August 2015 at 2:04 pm

            FFS Gosman if a bar really really want to stay open for these events the law already allows them to apply for an extension to their liquor license! This is just a sick attempt by your sick lot to gain some brownie points.

        • Phil 2.1.1.2
          12 August 2015 at 11:48 am

          People I know who are big All Black supporters are happy to wake up in the morning to the result.

          Then, almost by definition, they’re not “big All Black supporters” at all.
          😛

          • tc 2.1.1.2.1
            12 August 2015 at 11:54 am

            Or they understand team sports and remember 91 when we took too many of the 87 team who were past their best….Dan and Ritchie come to mind.

      • Gosman 2.1.2
        12 August 2015 at 11:43 am

        Just because you don’t think something is important doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be looked at. The role of Parliament is to discuss all sorts of matters many of which most people find of little importance but others do think deserve attention.

        • dukeofurl 2.1.2.1
          12 August 2015 at 12:44 pm

          The government paid it little attention. Seymour is not exactly the Mad Butcher in his diehard sports following.

        • Tracey 2.1.2.2
          12 August 2015 at 4:07 pm

          Seems very last minute. The fixtures have been out for months…

    • Blue Horseshoe 2.2
      12 August 2015 at 11:02 am

      Attack attack

      Gossip, tell us all again about counter party risk

      Do you believe The Greens effectively assessed counter party risk before they made the decision to go against the booze barons

      • Gosman 2.2.1
        12 August 2015 at 11:48 am

        No. I think this is a knee jerk reaction from The Greens who haven’t really thought of the long term consequences of being seen as the party that makes it difficult for people to enjoy watching the Rugby Union world cup in the way they want to. In short it is bad politics for them and is why Labour did not object to the bill.

        • miravox 2.2.1.1
          12 August 2015 at 8:03 pm

          Quick question: Are the games being played live on free to air tv?

          • mickysavage 2.2.1.1.1
            12 August 2015 at 8:08 pm

            Is that so important? Surely it is more critical for good old boys to get boozed at 7 in the morning than ordinary Kiwis to see the game …

            Labour and the Greens should promote a bill requiring all networks to show the games free of charge.

            • miravox 2.2.1.1.1.1
              12 August 2015 at 8:14 pm

              You forgot the /sarc in your first sentence micky 😉

              “Labour and the Greens should promote a bill requiring all networks to show the games free of charge.”

              Exactly what I was thinking. Then have a huge bbq breakfast to publicise the bill and that other countries will be getting their games live free-to-air.

              • whateva next? …
                12 August 2015 at 8:30 pm

                sounds much healthier and a far bigger return than some people drunk by 9.00 a.m

    • BM 2.3
      12 August 2015 at 11:04 am

      Yep, the greens really are the weak link of the left.

      Does explain why Little is more NZ First focused, he just can’t rely on the greens to not fuck it up.

      • dukeofurl 2.3.1
        12 August 2015 at 11:24 am

        A month of boozing will help the country how ?

        Oh yeah the Mps are there just to represent the liquor interests.

        • BM 2.3.1.1
          12 August 2015 at 11:30 am

          Seriously?

          • dukeofurl 2.3.1.1.1
            12 August 2015 at 11:46 am

            You are caught out in your silly games- focusing on what doesnt matter.

            If David Seymour was really being ‘liberterian’, his bill would abolish all licensing hour restrictions completely, and for any occasion.

            I though uneven playing fields were to be removed forthwith, but it seems keeping nanny state is fine except for RWC.

            • Anno1701 2.3.1.1.1.1
              12 August 2015 at 11:51 am

              a real libertarian would do away with the age restrictions as well

            • Gosman 2.3.1.1.1.2
              12 August 2015 at 12:20 pm

              Neither David Seymour or the Act Party are pure libertarian. They have never claimed to be.

              • dukeofurl …
                12 August 2015 at 12:48 pm

                Really ?

                You must try to keep up

                “If you look at our key principles on our website, the first line reads: A free society: free trade, free speech, and personal and religious freedom.”

                and lets dont forget-“Restrict local government to its core functions”

                Yep , a limited libertarian agenda all right, must have been written by Stephen Joyce.

                • Gosman …
                  12 August 2015 at 12:54 pm

                  I stated ‘pure libertarian’. It certainly has libertarian sympathies and supporters however it is a much broader party than that.

                  • dukeofurl …
                    12 August 2015 at 1:32 pm

                    You mean a sort of ‘sectional interests libertarian’.

                    Interesting about your statement that Seymour has never said he is a libertarian- as usual you are wrong, but there’s a twist.

                    “I should point out I contacted David, whose shorter response is that while HE is a libertarian, his job is to serve the voters who elected him, who are not.”

                    A weasel then ! That sound of a head imploding is Jamie Whyte

                    http://pc.blogspot.co.nz/2015/02/seymour-libertarian-but-not-as-we-know.html

                • Tracey …
                  12 August 2015 at 4:10 pm

                  He means a pure libertarian, that mythical person who can say everything is fucked and should be done the libertarian way cos that will solve all ills… and cos it’s mythical and doesn’t exists in any form it can’t be wrong.

                  • sirpat …
                    12 August 2015 at 4:45 pm

                    quit it you two……..I just laughed coffee out me nose and all over me desk………….hilarious!!!

        • Jones 2.3.1.2
          12 August 2015 at 1:27 pm

          “A month of boozing will help the country how?”

          All those alcohol sales will be good for NZ’s GDP… and, oh yeah, booze company profits. What more do we need to know?

          • Macro 2.3.1.2.1
            12 August 2015 at 2:07 pm

            And don’t forget the increased hospital admissions! They add up on GDP too you know – yep so all good!

        • aidan 2.3.1.3
          12 August 2015 at 6:15 pm

          yeah. remember how we (as a country) tried to review laws around liquor? and then the mp’s were lobbied heavily by the industry? and then the proposals were gutted? remember?

      • DoublePlusGood 2.3.2
        12 August 2015 at 11:35 am

        Except that the greens are right that this is a massive waste of parliament’s time, and poorly conceived legislation. Criticism here should be being directed to everyone *but* the Greens.

        • Gosman 2.3.2.1
          12 August 2015 at 12:24 pm

          If that was the criteria for rejecting it why did they support the proposed bill by the NZ First MP recently that was also both those things?

          • dukeofurl 2.3.2.1.1
            12 August 2015 at 12:51 pm

            Ever heard of fast track legislation, that is what Seymour was trying on.

            • Gosman 2.3.2.1.1.1
              12 August 2015 at 3:44 pm

              Correction. That is what David Seymour has ACHIEVED!

              • McFlock …
                12 August 2015 at 4:27 pm

                Wow.
                He’s managed to do something that was already available with special licenses. Only now there’s absolutely no local oversight.

                Fucking earth shattering.

                • Gosman …
                  12 August 2015 at 4:35 pm

                  If it is unnecessary why didn’t both Labour and The Greens oppose it then?

                  • McFlock …
                    12 August 2015 at 5:03 pm

                    The Greens probably opposed it because they support local rights and minimisation of alcohol harm.

                    Labour probably didn’t think it was that big a deal and it was obvious that fuckwits like you would portray any votes against rimmer as being anti-fun rather than supporting community wishes.

                    The majority of voters of Epsom are obviously raging alcoholics, but then we already knew that by looking at their election record.

                    • Tracey …
                      12 August 2015 at 5:20 pm

                      they wanted those who have breached prior licences excluded, they wanted only AB games, not all 48. They wanted NO licences to those premises that children have to walk past on the way to school after a game… you know, crazy shit like that

                    • McFlock …
                      12 August 2015 at 5:51 pm

                      big government gone mad.

                      Mind you, down in Dunedin one of the things that really made the licensing folk pull finger about the student pubs was an annual event that involved students preloading and queueing outside a pub at noon, or even early. Basically 3AM behaviour in broad daylight, including puking and urinating on the state highway, lots of petty damage to vehicles and buildings around the area, etc.

                      It really showed the general public just how “responsible” some bar managers actually are, and the penalty of their negligence.

              • Tracey …
                12 August 2015 at 4:27 pm

                Yes, he will be long remembered for his contribution to NZ society. All hail David Seymour, of the plagerised Jerusalem speech.

      • Tracey 2.3.3
        12 August 2015 at 4:08 pm

        Yeah imagine having principles and sticking to them, rather than leaping on each populist bandwagon that rumbles by…

        • Gosman 2.3.3.1
          12 August 2015 at 4:24 pm

          Seems like The Greens failed that test as well.

          • Tracey 2.3.3.1.1
            12 August 2015 at 4:25 pm

            with everyone else… you know the bill today is different from the one yesterday?

            The Greens ought to have asked for the games to be free to air? That would have been savvier.

      • aidan 2.3.4
        12 August 2015 at 6:09 pm

        not. they just try to be responsible about the way laws are drafted and it happens to suit the right to paint them as party poopers, helped along by a compliant msm of course. and dicks like you and gos

  3. Atiawa 3
    12 August 2015 at 11:29 am

    Key’s comments are about appealing to his National party support base. They will love him for his understanding and good bastard one of us attitude.
    I was going to say that he’s a “slick” operator, but the correct term is “shrewd”.
    He plays the game like no other has.

    • Autonomouse. 3.1
      12 August 2015 at 12:46 pm

      Kinda shows the shift in thinking from the political left as the “national party support base” you refer to in this context would include a considerable number of working class kiwis that were once considered the Labour Party Support Base. It appears that Labour have evolved to a higher level of consciousness & damn the consequences of isolation.

      • Atiawa 3.1.1
        12 August 2015 at 3:19 pm

        Well in all likelihood their mums, dads and grandparents probably were.
        Good point though.

  4. Stuart Munro 4
    12 August 2015 at 11:30 am

    The conflation of drinking with sport is not a particularly healthy trope – though personally I don’t support the idea of licensing hours anyway.

    It’s a PR bill and the Greens were right to nix it. Labour should too – a process already exists for event based licence extensions – that process could be simplified perhaps. But treat both ACT and Key with the contempt they deserve. Utter and unremitting.

    Let’s talk about the TPP eh.

    • gsays 4.1
      12 August 2015 at 3:34 pm

      hi stuart,
      “Let’s talk about the TPP eh.”
      no, no, the flag the flag.
      here are MY opinions on the flag.

      bill hicks talks of “the gulf war distraction”, it took our minds off domestic issues.

      • Stuart Munro 4.1.1
        12 August 2015 at 4:43 pm

        So long as we flag the TPPA away.

        And if not, I want a list of everyone that okayed it. We may be needing another prison. If the public are feeling uncommonly charitable to traitors.

        • sirpat 4.1.1.1
          12 August 2015 at 4:48 pm

          why do we need another prision?…….a few stakes……..some blindfolds……no hang on….no blindfolds we want them to see it coming and…….a box of bullets……cheap as chips!!

          • Jones 4.1.1.1.1
            12 August 2015 at 5:42 pm

            Guillotine are far more cost effective. If you want them to see it coming then they can lie with their heads facing up!

          • Stuart Munro 4.1.1.1.2
            12 August 2015 at 8:47 pm

            In the Spanish Civil War bullets were short – they ran them over with trucks.

            We might get somewhere staking them out in shallow water and feeding them to the paua – and I think Gerry would be a natural for the transformation the protagonist underwent in Tusk – though perhaps a sea elephant would be more appropriate in his case. Collins should probably meet her end in a swamp kauri hot tub full of sour milk…

            We should run a competition for the forty most creative endings 😀

            • sirpat 4.1.1.1.2.1
              13 August 2015 at 1:16 pm

              tied to a chair with headphones on and treated to a never ending dialogue from sean plunkett?

  5. Mike the Savage One 5
    12 August 2015 at 11:30 am

    Yep, I just commented re that on Open Mike, and how people’s attention is being diverted away from actually much more important matters and issues the country faces.
    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-12082015/#comment-1057970

    Has anybody heard Paul Henry talk about the dairy price collapse driving one major industry into the ground? Has anybody heard any talk back hosts talk about the economy, about unemployment to increase, about housing affordability in Auckland being in permanent crisis now?

    They are almost all at it, the ones like Sean Plunket on Radio Live(ing Dead), like Paul Henry, like the ones on ZB and even in print media, oh, this is IMPORTANT.

    People need to be able to drink beer during the rugby world cup screenings at pubs and clubs next year, and they must discuss the new flag designs right now, nothing else matters (apart of not forgetting to spend money and consume products).

    Our glorious, eternal leader, “Kim John Key”, is in firm control, with his loyal party underlings, and mercenary ministers, and they have also in Auckland various players involved, in pressing Auckland Council into the corner, by bullying them, using developer lobbyists and others, to bring in changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan, that will mean, NO housing mix rules, and the ONLY minimum dwelling size criteria is to build units or apartments only at least 30 sqm in size, with only 2 cubic metres for storage if they have no garage.

    We need chemically induced joy, oh joy, we need beer during games, or the sky will collapse over us, the end is nigh, and the Greens are “spoilers”, so this is what comes next, a bill by government, to ensure plenty of beer can be poured in early hours when games will be shown.

    Good grief, and most keep wandering around sleep walking into the looming disaster, as tenants in their own land, mere servants, “Mexicans with cell phones”, for casual, underpaid jobs, and little else.

    • Tracey 5.1
      12 August 2015 at 4:14 pm

      Beats the focus being on the bank economist saying we are in BIG trouble in NZ economically…

      ” But the current rate of growth is unsustainable, a panel of some of New Zealand’s top economists told a briefing in Auckland today.

      And they said many New Zealanders are not aware how much our economy is relying on one-off boosts like the Christchurch rebuild, or how quickly it could slow down when they come to an end.

      Westpac chief economist Dominick Stephens said New Zealand’s recent growth had been fuelled by the Canterbury earthquake rebuild, low interest rates and a surge in net migration, which hit a 10-year high in the year to June.

      ”When the Canterbury rebuild ends people will be quite surprised by the size of the downturn,” he said. ” aug 24 2014

      Today

      :The “ferocious” and unexpected slump in global dairy prices, a levelling off in the Canterbury quake rebuild and falling confidence means the economy is cooling down fast.

      Westpac Bank economists say they now expect GDP growth to drop from 3.3 per cent to below 2 per cent a year ” in short order”.

      Unemployment would rise to 6.5 per cent, wage rises would be low and the housing market would slow, Westpac said in its latest Economic Overview report.”
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/71019239/nz-economy-coming-off-the-boil-amid-ferocious-dairy-price-dive-westpac

      now, drinking during All Black games…

  6. Sabine 6
    12 August 2015 at 11:33 am

    Beer and Rugby. Dear Leader pulls ponytails and fondles hair while NZ burns.

    Surely 24 hour licences will cause no problem, we all know that the only evil drug in this country is weed. Gotta keep that one illegal to fill the prisons.

    • tc 6.1
      12 August 2015 at 11:59 am

      Whilst Alcohol and Tobacco skate away not paying their share of the damage they cause which I’m sure Todd Barclay and Carrick Graham would disagree with me on.

  7. Olwyn 7
    12 August 2015 at 11:50 am

    You could see this one coming to the point where it looks planned: Get little Davie to suggest a bill that is too broad for at least one of the left wing parties to accept. Let it hang overnight. Come morning, fun Uncle John saves the day. The party’s back on! Hurrah! Lashings of beer! Hurrah!

  8. Autonomouse. 8
    12 August 2015 at 11:53 am

    We dont have Sky at home, but for the recent All Blacks vs Samoa game which was played around midday NZ time, I started work early so I could have an extended lunch and meet my wife a two young kids (aged 4 & 5) in town to watch the game. The four of us went to a bar with a group of like minded friends, we shared some pizzas, the kids amongst us had a couple of glasses of watered down orange juice (mine have never tasted fizzy, nor full strength juice), the wife had a lemon lime & bitters and I had a cool refreshing pint of cider, and we all enjoyed the game.

    There were no drunkards to be seen, no untoward behaviour, no spilling out into the streets thereafter to wreck havoc upon an unsuspecting mid afternoon populous, nope, it was just a diverse group of individuals coming together for a common love of the game, most of whom were partaking in a few raspberry & cokes as they had to head back to work at the final whistle.

    Come the Rugby World Cup, I’m looking forward to heading into town at 7:30am with my kids (assuming it’s not a school day), having a hearty pub breakfast and enjoying the games in the company of my family, friends, and fellow rugby supporters before heading off to work for the day.

    I doubt very much that there will be many individuals setting their alarms for 5am so that they can preload on Woodstock Bourbon & Cola’s for a few hours before heading into town (as is the issue faced by the hospitality trade in the evenings), nor will the revelers from the night prior be sitting around on park benches waiting for four hours for the bars to reopen.

    This piece of legislation has been proposed to bring large proportion of the population with a common interest together, and crate a sense of unity and passion amongst supporters as we battle it out to retain the Webb Ellis Trophy.

    • mickysavage 8.1
      12 August 2015 at 11:57 am

      But who is to say this will not be happening anyway? And do we have to facilitate the drinking of even more beer at 7:30 am?

      • Autonomouse. 8.1.1
        12 August 2015 at 12:09 pm

        It’s not about the beer, I cant really think of any entity other than bars that has the existing infrastructure and would be better suited for public broadcast of this significant event? The DCC were quite proactive in broadcasting the Super Rugby Final within a family friendly environment within the town hall, which would be nice to repeat, though there would be a very vocal few that would strongly object to burdening the rate payers with the demands of Rugby supporters.

        • dukeofurl 8.1.1.1
          12 August 2015 at 2:45 pm

          Ever heard of non licensed cafes/coffee shops ?

          They are normally operated by early starters so will be happy to open doors an hour or so early for those wanting a coffee/breakfast. No special license required.

          • Autonomouse. 8.1.1.1.1
            12 August 2015 at 3:17 pm

            Yes indeed, I know and frequent plenty. Cant say I can name a single one that boasts a big screen TV, let alone one with a public broadcast license for SkyTV. Can you?

        • Tracey 8.1.1.2
          12 August 2015 at 4:30 pm

          If it’s not about drinking, then why didnt Seymour’s Bill seek dispensation for cafes which instal screens and sky to be able to open earlier for the post 3pm games?

      • Autonomouse. 8.1.2
        12 August 2015 at 12:16 pm

        Oh, and re your query as to who’s to say it wont happen anyway ….. given the high costs of applying for individual special licenses on each and every occasion (as it the case now) combined with what will ultimately be very nominal takings over the bar, I would suggest that there would be apprehension from publicans given a return on their investment (cost of special license) would be far from guaranteed.

        • dukeofurl 8.1.2.1
          12 August 2015 at 2:46 pm

          Around $200 for up to 12 events. Not a high cost

          • Autonomouse. 8.1.2.1.1
            12 August 2015 at 3:27 pm

            It may vary from region to region, but in my neck of the woods I’m pretty sure that it’s upwards of $1,000 for each event, and under current legislation, each game would be considered an individual event.

            Let’s look at the issue for a change instead of just shooting it down because of the messenger. Why should our national game only be enjoyed by those that can afford Sky TV, why shouldn’t those on lesser incomes be able to watch and enjoy the tournament as well?

            • dukeofurl 8.1.2.1.1.1
              12 August 2015 at 3:53 pm

              NO it isnt, the costs are set by the government. $1000 is for over 400 customers and 12 events. Bars will be at the level of 100 customers and $200 for 12 events.

              • Autonomouse. …
                12 August 2015 at 4:23 pm

                From the justice website “Territorial authorities can set their own fees framework for special licences through a bylaw”

                • Tracey …
                  12 August 2015 at 4:29 pm

                  and what are they? Cos they must have the by-law by now cos this is not a new thing? You said $1000, can you post proof of the assertion? You must have got that from somewhere?

            • Tracey 8.1.2.1.1.2
              12 August 2015 at 4:22 pm

              They should but that would hurt Sky’s profit and Seymour and Key won’t do that, and why should they when they can help boost bar owners takings AND Sky’s viewership all at once.

              Did anyone ask Seymour why his bill wasn’t to make the games Free to Air?

            • Gangnam Style 8.1.2.1.1.3
              12 August 2015 at 5:14 pm

              “Why should our national game only be enjoyed by those that can afford Sky TV, why shouldn’t those on lesser incomes be able to watch and enjoy the tournament as well?” Oh bollocks to that, unless you saying its a free for all & bars will be happy to let a bunch of non drinkers/non spenders watch rugby on their big tvs. Kinda defeats the purpose doesn’t it?

        • Tracey 8.1.2.2
          12 August 2015 at 4:21 pm

          yes, apprehension, that is why their lobby group is pushing so hard for this. Most can’t see a profit, not at all..

          Left it til the last minute too…

      • Gosman 8.1.3
        12 August 2015 at 12:33 pm

        You haven’t addressed the issue why Labour did not oppose this and indeed why Andrew Little came out in favour of it. If this is as cut and dried as you make out why is Labour seemingly at odds with your opinion?

        • Tricledrown 8.1.3.1
          12 August 2015 at 12:47 pm

          Goosestepper small beer.
          From small minded.
          PM to busy sidestepping sheepgate.
          Beer story good distraction propaganda zombies fall into line like shheep. Beer Mad boozeman.

          • Autonomouse. 8.1.3.1.1
            12 August 2015 at 12:57 pm

            Good distraction indeed, John K probably owes the Greens a couple o beers (maybe early morning ones at that) for making an issue out of this as it could have just sailed through without so much as a peep and we’d all still be fixating on “sheepgate” instead (yeah/nah).

            • Macro 8.1.3.1.1.1
              12 August 2015 at 2:13 pm

              Your need to watch a game of rugby could have been easily met without this open slather bill – the sports bar of your choice could have and would have simply applied for an extension of its license for that particular game.

              • Autonomouse. …
                12 August 2015 at 3:13 pm

                You are strong on your opinions, but to me they do not seem relevant to real world situations and are lacking a bit of an understanding of commerce relative to the industry in question, so FYI ….. under current legislation a special license is required for each and every time a bar wishes to trade outside their regular hours. The cost of each individual application is upwards of $1,000.

                It would not be economically viable in many instances for a licensed premises to fork out $1k as they’re not going to be able to recoup the outlay, so it is naive to assume that they “simply” apply for an extension of license.

                This isn’t about encouraging drunkenness and gross profiteering by bar owners, it’s about facilitating support for the Rugby World Cup (with a snap election to be called the day after Richie lifts the trophy!!!)

                • freedom …
                  12 August 2015 at 3:35 pm

                  “The cost of each individual application is upwards of $1,000.”

                  Ever considered getting factual information from the relevant authority or even reading the other posts before making such wildly innacurate statements?
                  http://thestandard.org.nz/free-beer-for-all/#comment-1058082

                  http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/licencesregulations/alcohol/sellandsupplyalcohol/Documents/2015rugbyworldcupspecialadvice.pdf

                  • Autonomouse. …
                    12 August 2015 at 4:34 pm

                    From the Justice website “Territorial authorities can set their own fees framework for special licences through a bylaw”. Pot, meet kettle.

                    Interesting to see Auckland’s restrictions, given what’s required in order to be considered a “special event” and the fact applicants need to “pick your dates/events well because we are opposed to
                    applications for events for every match” then it appears those North of the Bombays require a temp change in legislation more than most. All we wanna do is watch a game of rugby!

                    • freedom …
                      12 August 2015 at 4:56 pm

                      Where did I suggest territorial authorities did not have the ability to set their own fees?

                      The question is whether there exists any special licence fees “upwards of $1000” for “each and every time a bar wishes to trade outside their regular hours.” Remembering this discussion is specific to RWC 2015 events. Is there any proof to accompany your claim?

                • Tracey …
                  12 August 2015 at 4:23 pm

                  “You are strong on your opinions, but to me they do not seem relevant to real world situations and are lacking a bit of an understanding of commerce relative to the industry in question, so FYI ….. under current legislation a special license is required for each and every time a bar wishes to trade outside their regular hours. The cost of each individual application is upwards of $1,000. ”

                  please post your proof for this figure. Thanks

      • Tracey 8.1.4
        12 August 2015 at 4:19 pm

        Could get around it by just making the games free to air… then people can stock up, invite over friends and voila… but this is about profits… for sky and bars…

        and it smells of planning… why leave it so late, it’s not like the schedules weren’t announced months ago. Bars don’t want to pay council and licence fees when they can get it for free… Why was Robertson so evasive when asked if he approached Seymour or the other way round…

        it’s not about the people, people. That’s just the smokescreen.

        sheepgate anyone?

        • Autonomouse. 8.1.4.1
          12 August 2015 at 4:40 pm

          Agreed, here’s the real issue, it should be free to air. The last world cup was broadcast on multiple free to air channels, why is no one pushing that angle, or would doing so raise the ire of non rugby viewing tax payers …………

          • Tracey 8.1.4.1.1
            13 August 2015 at 7:51 am

            How are you ging finding proof for your assertion that the licences will cost $1000?

            Any idea why all these pubs have waited over 2 years to apply for the licences? Seems odd to leave it til just a month out. Seems Mr Robertson is playing everyone. Again.

            David Seymour is a puppet

      • sirpat 8.1.5
        12 August 2015 at 4:53 pm

        because it helps the rockstar economy…..more beer equals more deliveries equals more truck driver and barperson hours equals more taxes paid and how many beers do you want with your flag sir?

    • Anno1701 8.2
      12 August 2015 at 2:16 pm

      “and crate a sense of unity and passion ‘

      heh crate…

      Freudian slip ?

  9. appleboy 9
    12 August 2015 at 11:55 am

    What do you expect from a PM who would shag a small warthog if he thought it was A a photo op and B what everyone else wanted to see.

  10. shorts 10
    12 August 2015 at 12:15 pm

    This govt bought in the legislation that created the conditions they now want to reverse for a series of games

    Licensed Premises can apply for special licenses if they want to remain open – there is no need for parliament to decree they can do so – leave it to local councils and communities to decide what is in the best interests of their community

    This is popularise politics of the worst order… and another attack on local communities/councils to boot

  11. McFlock 11
    12 August 2015 at 12:19 pm

    So, basically, if a licensed premises has a TV on in the corner, they can stay open all night regardless of their license?

    Sounds legit /sarc

  12. Tiger Mountain 12
    12 August 2015 at 12:26 pm

    jeez that PM can move quick on important issues, clink!!…urrrpp!! glug glug…urrrpp!!
    ShonKey, fighting, for your right, to paarrrrty!!

    the “rubber worl cub” is being held in another country this time right?
    and don’t most rugby fans have home grog ups these days?

  13. Steve Reeves 13
    12 August 2015 at 12:36 pm

    Yes, so the headline NZH and so SHOULD be running with is: John Key in beer-for-All-Blacks U-turn!!!”

  14. Kevin 14
    12 August 2015 at 12:46 pm

    I think there will be a lot of wives, girlfriends, cats and dogs silently cheering-on the Greens on this one.

  15. infused 15
    12 August 2015 at 1:01 pm

    This thread sums you lot up perfectly.

  16. Charles 16
    12 August 2015 at 1:08 pm

    “…anything that’s sort of vaguely good fun…”

    Even John Key is having a hard time convincing himself that what will happen isn’t going to happen.

  17. Puckish Rogue 17
    12 August 2015 at 1:08 pm

    Oh noes the PM has announced something that a lot of voters are going to agree with and even Mr Andrew Little agrees with it yet apparantly its all a big smoke job from the PM to divert away from other issues

    Seriously? It was the Greens that made this an issue, it was the Greens that gave John Key the opportunity to dump on them

    The Greens seriously misjudged this

    • You_Fool 17.1
      12 August 2015 at 1:17 pm

      It’s called being principled, you should look it up and maybe show the definition to Key as well so he knows about it as well…

      • Puckish Rogue 17.1.1
        12 August 2015 at 1:27 pm

        Whats so principled about it

        • mac1 17.1.1.1
          12 August 2015 at 1:33 pm

          What are principles, PR?

          Rogue – definition of rogue by The Free Dictionary
          http://www.thefreedictionary.com/rogue‎
          An unprincipled, deceitful, and unreliable person; a scoundrel or rascal.

        • Macro 17.1.1.2
          12 August 2015 at 2:20 pm

          Obviously you have no understanding of what a principle is either – but we already knew that.

          • Puckish Rogue 17.1.1.2.1
            12 August 2015 at 2:26 pm

            I’m curious about whats so principled about the Greens stand and since no ones ackshully answering it means no one on here can answer it either

            • Macro 17.1.1.2.1.1
              12 August 2015 at 2:31 pm

              Bullshit – its just that you – by your own words, and as pointed out by mac1 above, your own ‘name’ confirms it – have no idea of what a principle is – so trying to explain it to you would be a complete and utter waste of time – now fuck off and annoy someplace else!

              • Puckish Rogue …
                12 August 2015 at 2:45 pm

                Ok so assuming you’re not a rule or pattern that specifies how a certain input sequence (often a sequence of characters) should be mapped to a replacement output sequence (also often a sequence of characters) according to a defined procedure its fair to say for me its just a pen name however you’re missing the Puckish part (if you want to be pedantic) which means mischievous or impish

            • Anno1701 17.1.1.2.1.2
              12 August 2015 at 2:34 pm

              principled—- Standing behind their beliefs/ideas IN-SPITE of them not being particularly popular (in this instance anyway)

              but I think you already knew that !

              • Puckish Rogue …
                12 August 2015 at 2:47 pm

                At least you acknowledge its not going to be popular, in fact its quite impressive just how many people are going to be unimpressed with the Greens 🙂

                • Anno1701 …
                  12 August 2015 at 3:06 pm

                  I dont really give a hoot about rugby myself so wont be affected either way

                  I dont think many places will actually be open IMO , I worked in the licensed trade myself for years in the UK & Europe , If i asked staff to come to work @ 4am when they had only finished @ 1pm the same morning they would have just laughed at me

                  • Puckish Rogue …
                    12 August 2015 at 3:28 pm

                    Makes it even more pointless of the Greens to be banging on about it then

                    • Anno1701 …
                      12 August 2015 at 4:52 pm

                      the whole thing is pointless as we already have licensing laws that allow late opening (upon application and payment of a fee)

                      so what has the law achieved anyway

                      a massive exercise in futility really

                      mind you it gave us something to argue about for a few hours , much better than doing my job 🙂

                    • Tracey …
                      12 August 2015 at 5:24 pm

                      I guess the Greens should have MADE the press print their and report their whole stance including that this was National’s Act, that they are the ones who put it in place knowing about the world cup, making them prime dickheads and hyporcites… but the press chose not to share that with you PR, so you look a bit stupid now with some of what you are laying on the Greens… and it’s National who are happy for you to look like some dupe who swallows 15 sec soundbites as fact.

              • Gosman …
                12 August 2015 at 3:30 pm

                How come they voted for it second time around then? Were their principles only good for one day?

                • dukeofurl …
                  12 August 2015 at 3:48 pm

                  Stopping it being passed under urgency without any chance of amendments is a fairly good principle- not that Seymour has any, as he says his principles dont suit being a poodle for National.

                • You_Fool …
                  12 August 2015 at 3:52 pm

                  As pointed out it wasn’t a popular stance, so maybe they thought it was not worth the effort to explain why this was not worth opposing (which is that it is a waste of time, pubs can already get permission to sell at this time anyway, and it was too general) or maybe the 2nd time round it has actually been tweaked to be workable? I understand that National were going to make it for AB + knock-out games only, not all and sundry?

                  In any case I am not sure why this change was needed, I mean it is possible to get an exception and be able to sell beer at these times, and pubs do it for Football games, which cannot be as popular as rugby games in this country? So surely it will still be profitable to get an exception and show AB games? So why the need? Or is this a piece of populist feel good crap that also helps to line the pockets of the few, whilst also ensuring that the many are also screwed over (i it is as general as I am lead to believe) ?

                  • Puckish Rogue …
                    12 August 2015 at 4:00 pm

                    Could you imagine hundreds if not thousands or applications all going round about the same time for example it took me 4 weeks to get final permission from the Selwyn District council to build my house and its in a sub division so its not like it needed a lot of work done to approve it so I could easily see a whole lot of bars missing out because the applications were signed off on time

                    • Tracey …
                      12 August 2015 at 5:07 pm

                      Can you imagine a pub in rugby loving kiwiland NOT knowing there was a rugby world cup in 2015 , and not knowing when the fixture schedule came out and applying in plenty of time?

                      Venues and schedule announced 2 May 2013

                • Tracey …
                  13 August 2015 at 7:48 am

                  Because the second time they voted for it to go to a Select Committee where changes can be proposed and debated. yesterday they voted it down from becoming law instantly as drafted. You aren’t really this dense are you Gosman?

                  The difference is big.

            • Tracey 17.1.1.2.1.3
              12 August 2015 at 4:38 pm

              do you know why it had to be rushed? Cos I have known the All Black’s schedule for months,. So why wasn’t this introduced months ago? Cos Bruce Robertson hadn’t had a willie wonker whisper in Seymour’s ear…. until now…

              And if this is about the people, and not the drinking WHY didn’t Seymour ask for Free to Air coverage?

        • Skinny 17.1.1.3
          12 August 2015 at 4:24 pm

          Wasting private members bill time in support of the alcohol industry and lets not forget the gaming industry too. Bet Skycity will be rubbing their greedy hands together. Does National’s open all hours law allow for gaming hours to be increased too?

          • Gosman 17.1.1.3.1
            12 August 2015 at 4:30 pm

            And yet both The Greens and Labour are in favour of some relaxation for the RUWC for some reason. Go figure huh 😉

            • Tracey 17.1.1.3.1.1
              12 August 2015 at 4:39 pm

              Hague said he was against some of the changes, were any of them addressed in the changes introduced between yesterday’s version and todays? Cos the bill has changed. I ask cos you seem to have a great handle on what was in yesterday and today’s Bill.

              • Gosman …
                13 August 2015 at 5:18 am

                There were no changes between the bill that got accepted and the o email rejected by The Greens.

                • Tracey …
                  13 August 2015 at 7:46 am

                  it took you some time though Gosman cos you werent really following the minutiae of the thing, just jumping in to appalud Seymour’s Clayton’s success.

          • James Last 17.1.1.3.2
            13 August 2015 at 2:27 pm

            If you had even half a brain you’d know that all New Zealand casinos – like casinos the world over – are allowed to be open 24 hours a day, seven days a week. So no, it won’t make any difference to sky city or Christchurch Casino or Dunedin Casino one way or the other.

      • Melb 17.1.2
        12 August 2015 at 9:55 pm

        Greens are so principled that they are backing the bill today.

        • Tracey 17.1.2.1
          13 August 2015 at 7:47 am

          They are backing the Bill going to Seelct Committee today. Yesterday they opposed it becoming law immediately, as drafted. It’s actually a bigger difference than you seem able to understand.

          • Melb 17.1.2.1.1
            13 August 2015 at 9:33 am

            Sorry, you are wholly wrong. It still would have originally gone to select committee. Seymour wasn’t trying to get it passed under urgency, he was only trying to table it in Parliament. Standing orders are that a tabled bill only needs one MP objecting to be rejected (the Greens).

            Yesterday the exact same bill was submitted, to go through the exact same process. No objection from those principled Greens.

            A separate vote (not tabling the bill) as to whether Parliament goes into urgency would have needed to be taken to pass this bill in one go. It’s actually a bigger difference than you seem able to understand.

    • whateva next? 17.2
      12 August 2015 at 8:54 pm

      no such thing as bad publicity

  18. Keith 18
    12 August 2015 at 1:34 pm

    Distraction, oh my god, yes, patronising the alcohol industry donors, definitely.

    But the Green’s needn’t worry. My experience of dealing with the rugby supporting public is they are as docile as any good doing character out of an Enid Blighton book. Lashings of ginger ale and all that. They probably even have little dogs called “Timmy”! Mostly white, very conservative and all about fair play and a jolly good time even if there’s a cheeky bit of “biff” or bit of “claret” spilt. They are by their very DNA eminently dull, like the game, a real blast from the greyness of past New Zealand.

    Extending pub hours during the RWC carries all the risk of doing the same in a Chess tournament so no harm will be done although this is hardly the reason Nationals pseudo MP for Epsom is championing this cause.

  19. reason 19
    12 August 2015 at 1:46 pm

    National are the most pro-drug government you could ever find …….. as long as the drug is Alcohol.

    When the rugby world cup was held in NZ they loosened the booze selling laws as their great economic plan was to sell lots of piss to poms ……….

    At the moment New Zealand subsidies the Alcohol drug industry by paying for and cleaning up the mess that this ‘aggressnagenic’ drug causes ( increases in consumption lead directly to increases in violence ).

    The Alcohol drug industry is protected and promoted by the Nats and side effects include building new prisons at great cost.

    The ‘steinlager all blacks’ sound like a pack of piss pimps to me.

    Drugs should be kept out of sport.

  20. Scottie 20
    12 August 2015 at 2:28 pm

    Do you guys ever relax and stop political point scoring? Kiwis love rugby and they love to support the All Blacks. And guess what they like a beer with their mates when they watch rugby. It’s about time all the bars a restaurants were open all night when the All Blacks are playing at the World Cup. I salute the passion we see displayed at the Football World Cup when fans party and celebrate all night in countries like Italy and Spain. I’ll be having a beer with some mates and watching every World Cup game and I hope to find the town buzzing.

    • dukeofurl 20.1
      12 August 2015 at 2:40 pm

      This govt bought in the legislation that created the conditions they now want to reverse for a series of games.
      They can apply for license which costs about $200 for 12 events

      • Puckish Rogue 20.1.1
        12 August 2015 at 2:50 pm

        Thats a good compromise, open for AB games, quarters, semis and final and apply for licences for the rest

        Simple as

        • You_Fool 20.1.1.1
          12 August 2015 at 3:57 pm

          Or keep it the same and pubs who want to can pay the $200 – call it a RWC tax if you will, and we don’t have to waste parliament’s time dealing with this…

          Or you know we can waste their time and our tax money… hey wait, I thought you guys were against wastage of tax payers money?

          • Puckish Rogue 20.1.1.1.1
            12 August 2015 at 4:13 pm

            I’m also against unneccasary taxes

            • Tracey 20.1.1.1.1.1
              12 August 2015 at 5:05 pm

              yet you voted for the govt that brought this legislation in which Seymour wants to change and with which Key agrees (Key who was in the government that made the changes) , but the greens are the idiots?

    • Tracey 20.2
      12 August 2015 at 4:40 pm

      Couldnt they just make it free to air and allow “kiwis” to drink at home and invite friends over and make brunch? You know if it is about the people.

  21. tangled_up 21
    12 August 2015 at 2:48 pm

    Not a good start from Shaw. I mean there’s really nothing to gain from doing this. It makes them look petty and the Govt. reasonable in contrast.

    • dukeofurl 22.1
      12 August 2015 at 3:46 pm

      OH dear Gossipman, you havent been checking your emails.

      Thats what normally happens, all the greens did was prevent its being passed under urgency.
      Now it gets proper consideration- not that I would waste 5 min on it,- but thats the rules.

      • Puckish Rogue 22.1.1
        12 August 2015 at 3:54 pm

        Its not what happens thats important its what the voting public believes thats important

      • Gosman 22.1.2
        12 August 2015 at 3:55 pm

        Lol! Nice spin there. Except David Seymour wouldn’t be able to decide if this goes under urgency or not and the new bill will still likely have to be fast tracked.

        • Tracey 22.1.2.1
          12 August 2015 at 4:54 pm

          12 August 2015

          Greens welcome more responsible RWC booze bill

          The Government’s decision to accept the Green Party’s request to bring a responsible Bill to Parliament to allow more bars to open during the Rugby World Cup games, is being welcomed by the Greens

          The Green Party yesterday denied leave for an Act Party Bill that would have allowed every licenced premises in New Zealand to stay open in the morning, during many of the 48 rugby world cup games, regardless of where that pub was, or what previous licensing restrictions it had been subject to.

          “We wrote to the National Party yesterday asking it to bring a more responsible Government Bill to the house, stating that we are happy to work with all political parties on a more measured Bill that let us all watch the rugby with our friends, but wasn’t so irresponsibly broad,” Green Party Health spokesperson Kevin Hague said.

          “David Seymour’s Bill would have meant any bar, even ones that had repeatedly been in trouble with the police, to sell booze till 8 or 9am for every one of the 48 World Cup games, regardless of police or community concerns. If we hadn’t denied leave that Bill would be the one before Parliament now.

          “This morning the Government has said it is working on a more considered Bill. I love rugby, and I love having a beer while I watch rugby with my friends so I’m as keen as anyone to see responsible bars allowed to open to screen the important World Cup matches, but the law needs to be workable.

          “Our letter to National stated our preference for any new Bill be one that:

          – Applies only to All Blacks games
          – Restricts the geographic areas that bars can open (i.e. limits on residential areas and bars that are in proximity to schools)
          – Restricts application to bars that have good records i.e. bars that are or have recently been in breach of liquor licencing rules should not be included

          “The Government is much better placed than a sole Act MP to use Government legal and policy advisors to draft a more well-constructed Bill and then use the normal Parliamentary process to bring it to the House. We are open to supporting a Government measure that addresses our concerns,” Mr Hague said

          http://www.scoop.co.nz

          • Gosman 22.1.2.1.1
            12 August 2015 at 4:58 pm

            Except it was David Seymours bill that was accepted not the Government’s.

            • Tracey 22.1.2.1.1.1
              12 August 2015 at 5:02 pm

              with the Govt’s changes to be taken on at select committee…

              “Mr Seymour said only broadcasting All Black matches was “deeply unfair” and he wanted it to apply to all 48 games.

              But he was willing to consider other Green proposals including restrictions on bars which have previously breached their liquor licences.

              After the Act bill was shot down by the Greens yesterday, the Government began drafting its own bill.

              That work would now be scrapped, and the Government planned to propose changes at the committee stage.

              National wants the law change to apply only to All Black games and knockout matches – a total of 12 matches.”

              so NOT the 48 Seymour wanted but closer to the 6 (assuming AB’s make final) that Greens wanted.

              • Gosman …
                12 August 2015 at 5:22 pm

                No matter how you spin it Tracey this is still David Seymour’s bill NOT The Government’s. I do admire your attempts to down play his success though. It shows that you are likely peeved that he managed to show up The Greens AND get the bill accepted.

                • Tracey …
                  12 August 2015 at 5:28 pm

                  No, you are playing up his actions as success at the expense of the Greens which is nOT an accurate representation. YOU started by trumpetting his “win”

                  “Pretty impressive win for David Seymour it seems”

                  yet…

                  He failed to get it passed last night
                  He has not yet got what he proposed

                  So he has “won” nothing more than a Bill going to Select Committee. he sought it for all 48 games and sought its passage yesterday. He failed.

                  Unless he was deliberately grandstanding and wasting time yesterday and never really wanted his full Bill or urgently? You are the one spinning Gosman, and yet again you pretend you are responding to my claim, yet I am responding to your bizarre assertion of Seymour winning

                • McFlock …
                  12 August 2015 at 5:37 pm

                  Wow, I looked out the window and people are in the streets celebrating this “success”.

                  This is sure to take rimmer’s party above 1%!

                • You_Fool …
                  12 August 2015 at 9:56 pm

                  I think you will find that the only reason that the Greens didn’t vote it down again is because they have assurances/promises by the government to change it in ways that The Greens are happy with, or is the Greens and National working together now a bad thing that should never happen?

                  • UniBoy_YoungVoter …
                    14 August 2015 at 12:23 pm

                    It’s early days, I think its really hard to say “It should have never happened”, this is probably the early stages of the Green Party working with the National Party and/or its coalition. People especially the media in the future may speculate the Green Party to join the National Party coalition (2017 elections, one can guess?). Is it because of this? Is it because of what Green Party’s James Shaw is bringing to the Green Party.

                    Interesting how James Shaw delivered accusations of ACT Party’s David Seymour of writing the bill as a PR stunt and profile boosting. One would question what message are they sending to the National Party? Are they undermining the ACT Party?

                    This is also an opportunity for the Green Party to take some spotlight and dance on the receiving of the spotlight.

    • Tracey 22.2
      12 August 2015 at 4:42 pm

      Didn’t Bruce want it passed yesterday?

  23. whateva next? 23
    12 August 2015 at 5:57 pm

    Where we would we be without alcohol and something to win? whether it’s a government election, security council seat, boat race, rugby/cricket world cup, The Bachelor, Masterchef or whose design for the flag?
    without alcohol all this “winning” seems so vacuous and empty somehow

  24. Realblue 24
    12 August 2015 at 6:48 pm

    As opposed to losing? You’ve been voting left too long. Winning is actually quite a lot of fun.

    • mac1 24.1
      12 August 2015 at 7:37 pm

      If you’ve been around politics for six decades, Realblue, you wouldn’t have said that. I’ve now voted in sixteen elections, and known that feeling of ‘fun’ for six of them. I expect that by the time I’ve voted in 20 elections it’ll be like the Ashes cricket series which are all square after a hundred plus years.

      By the way, winning elections is about more than fun. For some it means a rewarding job, education, a fair deal, a good and purposeful life, decency, justice.

      When those things happen, we all win.

    • whateva next? 24.2
      12 August 2015 at 7:42 pm

      it’s definitely not the only thing in life though Realblue, and gets boring when you realise that

  25. RedBaronCV 25
    12 August 2015 at 8:10 pm

    Where’s the taxpayer union – how dare parliament waste our valuable tax dollars passing an idiot law when there already is a way of applying to have your bar open all hours if you think it will pay.

    Don’t know that the hospo workers are so keen on the staying up all night stuff – they should go for double time.

  26. Brian Smith 26
    14 August 2015 at 7:34 am

    “always opposed to anything that’s sort of vaguely good fun,” – Key says when the economy is imploding around him. Key opposes the legalisation of marijuana, banned party pills, but encourages drinking because it’s ‘good fun’ and he clearly likes it ( photo ops, alcohol lobbyist mates). Populist propaganda to divert attention away from the sinking ship. Key would like to have a Rugby World Cup every year.

  27. UniBoy_YoungVoter 27
    14 August 2015 at 3:55 pm

    Answering the blog, no we are not in a bad state YET. Acting upon the issue now, may prevent this on becoming the MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE, rather than wait for the problem to escalate in the near future. I think it is smart that the Green Party is willing to negotiate with the Rugby World Cup Bill, rather than completely dismissing it. This does make me question the stance, the Green Party are trying to communicate, with James Shaw saying one thing and Kevin Hague is saying another thing.

    Is there tension within the Green Party caucus?
    Is the Green Party leadership unsettled?
    It will be interesting to see what media take away from this, they might even ask the same questions as I did. Will there be a lot of attack on James Shaw from the media?

    If the Green Party were to take it seriously (instead of a PR stint), it will be a good opportunity to set their agenda, advocate for their values, their public’s values and hopefully for them bolster their traditional 10% – 12% election result.

    James Shaw needs to be careful as a leader and not escalate issues which may paint him a negative face, a little bit too early.