Depending on who you ask, the proposed changes to the law dictating the sale of alcohol either seriously dilute the case for licensing trusts – or lend weight to it
The first stage of proposed amendments to the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 would remove the ability to appeal local alcohol policies (currently costing ratepayers millions), as well as giving community opponents more power to have a say over licence applications and removing the “unnecessary formality” of licensing hearings.
Effectively the reform, spearheaded by Justice Minister Kiri Allan, will look at handing more power to the community to decide where and how alcohol sales will take place.
West Auckland Licensing Trusts Action Group spokesperson Nick Smale said the proposed changes to the act weakened a key argument of West Auckland’s trusts – known collectively as 'The Trusts' – around the proliferation of bottle shops that would occur if the trusts weren’t in place.
“It dilutes an argument for the monopoly for sure.”
While some might see the proposed act as further proof of the redundancy of licensing trusts in this day and age, The Trusts see it as validating.
The Trusts chief executive Allan Pollard said he watched Kiritapu Allan announce the change on Sunday and thought, “Talk about back to the future”.
Back to the future
The Portage Licensing Trust and Waitākere Licensing Trust were created as community-owned liquor near-monopolies in the early 1970s aimed at controlling/limiting the sale of alcohol in the area.
They are set up to reinvest surplus profits into West Auckland. There are two other monopoly licensing trusts still in existence in New Zealand, the Mataura Licensing Trust, which covers Mataura and Gore in the South Island and the Invercargill Licensing Trust.
Pollard said the appetite for the community to control supply of alcohol into communities was coming full circle, “It's almost like the community knows it gave up lots of control, and they're essentially seeking more control.”
“I believe the licensing trust is a really good community ownership model, I would urge the Government to actually look at the licensing trust model before making any decisions to move forward on alcohol control.”
He said the more say you give to communities, through voting for board members of licensing trusts which in turn own the off and on licensed premises, the more control you give the people.
Funnily enough, the action group wrote a letter to the justice minister in June on her appointment to the role seeking a review of the existence of monopoly trusts as part of the review of the Supply and Sale of Alcohol Act.
Local elections
During last month’s local elections two representatives from the action group, which describes the monopoly as “stink”, were elected on to each of The Trusts.
Smale said the representatives would “push the trusts to do better” around providing more choices for consumers as well as trying to convince other board members competition would be a good thing.
Pollard acknowledged the new bigger presence of anti-monopoly members on the board and said the trust was working on a five-year strategy that would see better hospitality outcomes for West Auckland as well as better choice of liquor retailers, but ultimately believed staying as a trust was the best move for the region.
Last October the action group managed to get more than 38,000 signatures on a petition to force a vote on whether the monopolies should be allowed to continue. Following verification it fell short of the 16,910 signatures needed to constitute a vote.
It said not enough signatures could be matched with the electoral roll and amongst the ones that did match there were too many duplicates.
Trusts' performance
Smale said the group had been focused on its election campaign but that it was “probably time” to revisit the possibility of another petition and assess its options with four members on the trust boards.
He believes getting rid of the monopoly wouldn’t destroy The Trusts, but turn them into community trusts that could repurpose their assets elsewhere.
At the time of the petition last year he said The Trusts’ return over the past decade worked out to around 1 percent of the community assets they hold.
In accounts for the 12 months to March 31, 2022, The Trusts had total assets of $173.11 million and gave grants and sponsorships to the community of $1.89m, a return of 1.1 percent.
The Trusts’ total property portfolio, valued at $120.81m (including plant and equipment) in its accounts, are held at their historical purchase cost (less depreciation and impairment), meaning the true market value of its properties, by far the largest component of assets, is likely much higher.
