Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

Unlike the opposition, the government takes the problem of the binge drinking epidemic among young Australians very seriously. The budget measure for excise on ready-to-drinks, or RTDs, will assist us in tackling this very problem. The evidence is crystal clear that excise is an effective measure in reducing alcohol consumption. International experience backs this up. The revenue raised through this measure will also assist in funding new prevention activities, which we really need if we are serious about getting long-term health outcomes.

The opposition are all at sea on this issue. Firstly, they supported it. On the day we announced this measure, the Leader of the Opposition said:

The proposed increase in the excise on alcopops is something that will be supported by us ...

Now, just days later, they have reversed their position and are threatening to block this measure. The opposition simply do not understand this issue. There is no need for a Senate inquiry and the government does not support the motion.

When you go back and examine the matters raised by Senator Colbeck from the opposition, he talked about being surprised. In the COAG communique of March 2008, COAG agreed on the importance of tackling alcohol misuse and binge drinking among young people. COAG agreed to ask the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy to report to COAG in December 2008 on options to reduce binge drinking, including in relation to closing hours, responsible service of alcohol, reckless secondary supply and the alcohol content in ready-to-drink beverages. It was clearly on the record back in March. What we then did as a government was to announce a national binge drinking strategy and increase the excise on RTDs. On 10 March the Prime Minister announced a national strategy worth $53 million to address the binge drinking epidemic among young Australians—something the opposition have failed to see or hear or understand. But for their benefit I am happy to say it again. The national strategy will begin with three new practical measures to help reduce alcohol misuse and binge drinking among young Australians: $14.4 million to invest in community level initiatives to confront the culture of binge drinking, particularly amongst sporting organisations; $19.1 million to intervene earlier and assist young people and ensure that they assume personal responsibility for their binge drinking; and $20 million to fund advertising that confronts young people with the costs and consequences of binge drinking. So two matters: COAG provided the communique in March 2008 and on 14 March the federal government responded to that and announced a $53 million package. We take the matter very seriously. Within that there are three measures to address it.

In addition, the statistics show that between 2000 and 2004 the percentage of female drinkers aged 15 to 17 reporting that they had consumed RTDs at their last drinking occasion had increased from 14 per cent to 62 per cent. They are the figures that demonstrate that there is a serious problem in this area. The opposition fail to see that there is a problem in this area and fail to want to address it. That is the position the opposition are adopting here. The government has taken a deliberate course to address it. The opposition are all at sea in respect of this.

In respect of the broader matter, it is really a cynical position that the opposition have now taken on this. They were against scrutiny in the last parliament. They are now trying to hang their hat on any peg they can find and now argue whatever suits, completely ignoring the position they took prior to this. When you examine the position, it is clear that this reverses the previous government’s decision in 2000 to tax these drinks like full-strength beers rather than full-strength spirits and therefore the opposition now are saying, ‘Well, it may not be what we want.’ It is crystal clear that the opposition should not only support this measure but also facilitate its passage.

I will not take up a long time in this debate. We do have other bills that we need to go on with. In terms of the opposition indicating that they think the Australian government has sprung surprises, this is a surprise motion by Senator Colbeck. He has not provided earlier advice that this was a matter he was going to bring on today. If he does wish to refer matters to Senate committees, I would encourage him to use the usual processes in this place. Take it to the relevant committee, have the matter dealt with there and then have it debated in the usual process rather than using your numbers in this place to effect an outcome. You are not following the procedures that are adopted in this place. You are using your numbers to crunch through an issue without the proper processes of the Senate being dealt with. That is a minor issue. I raise it just in case Senator Colbeck does not understand that there is a process and procedure in this place for references.

Question put:

That the motion (Senator Colbeck’s) be agreed to.