David Leyonhjelm (NSW, Liberal Democratic Party) Share this | Hansard source

In the previous parliament I chaired the 'nanny state inquiry'. A final report was not produced because of the election, but some excellent interim reports were issued. One of the issues that the committee examined was the Sydney lockout laws.

On 7 July 2012, at around 10 pm, 18-year-old Thomas Kelly was fatally assaulted in a one-punch attack in Kings Cross. In response, the New South Wales government introduced legislative and policy changes affecting the sale and service of alcohol at licensed venues in Kings Cross and other areas of central Sydney. Venues in the Kings Cross precinct were subject to special licence conditions. Every night of the week there was a ban on glasses, glass bottles and glass jugs after midnight. For Friday and Saturday late night trading there was a ban on shots and doubles after midnight; individuals could not buy more than four alcoholic drinks at a time after midnight; and no alcohol could be sold in the hour before closing.

In December 2012, the area affected was expanded to a total of 134 licensed venues. A licence freeze was implemented, preventing the establishment of any new higher risk venues or the expansion of existing venues. One year later, in December 2013, a second tranche of legislation changed licensing conditions for venues in Kings Cross. These included a centralised ID scanning system, which was not rolled out until June 2014, with a requirement for all high-risk venues to operate a linked identification scanner to prevent banned persons from entering licensed premises. It included temporary and long-term banning orders, linked to the ID scanner system, barring individuals from entering venues on the basis of antisocial and violent behaviour, plus a requirement for licensees to record daily alcohol sales and report these quarterly. These particular measures were constructive. They focused on the individuals who caused trouble and did not treat everyone as equally troublesome, but they never had a chance to work.

Less than a month later, on New Year's Eve 2013, before these changes were really in effect, 18-year-old Daniel Christie was killed from a one-punch assault. Even though the punch occurred at around 9 pm, the New South Wales government announced even more restrictions for after midnight. In addition to stricter sentencing, it introduced 1.30 am lockouts and 3 am cessation of alcohol service applying across an expanded entertainment precinct. These provisions came into effect on 24 February 2014. Clubs, hotels, general bars and on-premises licences within the CBD or Kings Cross are not allowed to let people into their venues after 1:30 am. People already in a venue before 1.30 am can stay until the close of business. They are able to leave at any time, but if they leave after 1.30 am they are not able to re-enter during the lockout period or gain entry to any other venue subject to the lockout. These venues are not allowed to sell or supply liquor after 3 am. If it trades after 3 am, the venue can remain open for dining or entertainment but is not allowed to serve liquor. Liquor sales cannot resume until the commencement of the next trading period.

Other measures included a ban on takeaway alcohol sales after 10 pm across New South Wales and a freeze on new liquor licences and approvals across the new Sydney CBD entertainment district. It did not escape anyone's attention that the casino was exempt from the lockout regime.

A review of the lockout laws was commissioned by the New South Wales government, undertaken by former High Court Justice Ian Callinan QC. His report was released two months ago. He recommended reducing the lockout period by half an hour and allowing home delivery of alcohol up to midnight. For those who believe in the individual rather than the collective, and who thought Mr Callinan did as well, the report was a serious disappointment. Easing last drinks restrictions by half an hour will not return Kings Cross to its former glory. Allowing late night entertainment at the Cross without alcohol will not help much either. In fact, inviting international visitors to view our budding artists while choosing between soft drinks will make us a laughing stock. And the hundreds of young people in the hospitality, entertainment and tourism industries who became unemployed will not get their old jobs back.

The ridiculous thing about all this is that the lockout laws would not have prevented the assaults that led to the formulation of the laws in the first place. The assaults occurred relatively early in the evening. In fact, absolutely none of this makes any sense. Why can't Sydneysiders be trusted to stay out past 2 am? Is there something in the water that means Melburnians can stay out late but not Sydney people? Why can Sydneysiders be trusted to visit Melbourne and stay out late but not vice versa? And does all of this have more to do with that madness where governments have come to believe that they must act as our de facto parents? Perhaps this kind of result is to be expected if you allow people who have forgotten the last time they had a good time to set the rules for a party. Prominent amongst such people have been the doctors associations, populated by those who have grown bored of making people feel better and now just want to tell them how to live their lives.

There are the residents associations who are concerned about where things happen. Whether it is smoking, drinking, playing music or anything else they disapprove of, it is definitely not something they want in their neighbourhood. It is known as NIMBY, or Not In My Backyard. But it is also known as Now It's My Backyard, which refers to those who move into an area and start complaining—and there are plenty of those in the Kings Cross area. And, of course, there are the wowsers and moralists who live in constant fear that someone somewhere might be having a good time, including the hypocritical moralists who think it is okay to ban alcohol consumption but are relaxed when it comes to drugs such as ice.

Sydney should be Australia's most vibrant city. It has a glorious history of naughtiness that dates back at least to when the convicts were unloaded onto the shores of Port Jackson in 1788. As Sydney grew, Kings Cross became the place where sailors on shore let off steam. It has provided rites of passage for thousands of Australians and has been the one place in Sydney where bohemians and artists have felt at home. Somehow they have coexisted with us for decades without harming anyone and without needing to be told when to go to bed. There should be a place in Sydney for these people and, as long as they are not harming anyone else, we should leave them alone.

I welcome any moves to relax current restrictions. The reported changes will not revive the nightlife of Sydney, but it should be revived.

I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.