Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

The measures that have been gained in the crossbench discussions with the government include $50 million in added spending. That is on top of some half a billion dollars being spent on the problem of alcohol by the government—and by governments generally—over the next four years. It is a further $50 million which will enable a start on substituting for alcohol based sports advertising. It will enable data collection so that we can much better understand and therefore effectively address the problem of alcohol abuse. It will also include the enhanced telephone counselling services with alcohol referrals that have been pursued by the Greens—and Senator Siewert in particular—and community level initiatives designed to tackle binge drinking. These are very considerable efforts which will translate into a reduction in not just binge drinking but alcohol abuse in the community.

But let us not forget—and I think it is a really major breakthrough in the impasse there has been with governments in this country for many decades on even touching the problem of alcohol drinking and abuse—that under this agreement there will be mandatory safe-drinking warnings on the bottles, cans and whatever other containers alcohol comes in and also in alcohol advertising. This is a massive industry with massive advertising clout that has been able to present itself clear and free of any of the encumbrances of the damage done by alcohol abuse. For the first time, the government and the crossbenches have achieved a breakthrough which will put warning signs on all advertising for alcohol in this country as well as on the alcohol containers that people are drinking from. The impact of that is going to be huge.

Let me come back to the government’s other point, which is the fact that the tax itself has reduced binge drinking; it has reduced alcohol abuse. We now have the figures in and they are not coming from the industry. The industry had figures in quite the opposite direction, and I would have expected it from this industry, but we now have the facts, which are that this tax itself has reduced the abuse of alcohol through a reduction in the consumption of alcohol in the country. I notice that Senator Cormann said that, for responsible drinkers, there should be room for growth in the industry of alcohol consumption. I would remind him that all growth is exponential. At the end of the day, you simply cannot keep growing an industry because advertisers are making money out of it without there being added health consequences across the community. For the first time, we are going to have mandatory warnings on all advertising, whether it is on the container or in the magazine that you pick up. The question is whether we are going to have that endorsed by the Senate, have this legislation progress and have, for the first time, warnings on advertising right across Australia and think about the impact that will have on reducing the huge, untoward effects of alcohol consumption. Are we or are we not going to have increased spending on community campaigning and substitution, for the first time ever, through public funding of sporting organisations? Are we or are we not going to have the potential for telephone, internet and other forms of hotline counselling for people who are in trouble and motivated to get out of trouble with alcohol?

I have been in here long enough to know that progress in these areas does take years—sometimes decades. We have seen that with the abuse of tobacco and the abuse of gambling. This package is a major breakthrough in confronting the abuse of alcohol in this country, and we ought to be endorsing it. Our alternative is to say no to it. Sure, we might be able to come back and argue in the budget that the budget should not pass unless we get an end to alcohol advertising. I am totally in agreement with Senator Fielding on this. Why should we have alcohol advertising? If the product is good, let people buy it. We all know that this is a massive profit-making industry which has huge suasion on governments. But today we have here a package that is a very big breakthrough and a big advance. It is not getting us where we want to go, but it is a big step in that direction. We have to decide whether or not we are going to endorse that. The Greens are endorsing it.