Health boards 'wasted' $90,000 trying to stop supermarket changing alcohol shelf angles
Tuesday, 31 July 2018
Public health money wasted on a High Court challenge against a supermarket's shelving arrangement for alcohol should have been spent helping ill patients, critics say.
Fourteen health boards throughout the country collectively paid nearly $90,000 in legal fees to try to stop Dannevirke New World changing the angle of shelves inside its already licensed alcohol area. They lost the case.
MidCentral District Health Board medical officer of health Rob Weir started the process because he was concerned shoppers outside the alcohol area were more exposed to products in the alcohol section after two large shelves were turned on a diagonal angle and two smaller plinths added. The case was important as a test to help define the limits of new alcohol laws, he told Stuff.
But the $90,000 cost of the challenge has only just been revealed after an Official Information Act request.
**READ MORE:
* High Court rules supermarkets can change liquor display layouts
* Visible cartons allowed in Melody's alcohol area
* Attempt to clamp down on alcohol displays and advertising in supermarkets
* Court challenge seeks greater restrictions on supermarket alcohol areas**
It was staggering to see the cost of the case when DHBs claimed to be underfunded and in desperate need of money for life-saving healthcare, New Zealand Alcohol Beverages Council executive director Nick Leggett said.
'It's a waste of public money and energy. You would think officers of health would have better things to do than spend $90,000 pursuing a small business that's legally trading, over the angle of shelves, to the High Court.
'I don't think residents of Invercargill, Dunedin, Nelson, Canterbury should be paying for the High Court to test this.'
It was questionable how useful it would be as a test case, he said.
'These sorts of precedents are academic, but how many hip replacements could that have paid for, or how much retro-fitting of insulation.
'I'd much rather it was put into [alcohol] education campaigns in local districts.'
New World Dannevirke owner-operator Garry Hasler was bemused to hear what the health boards had paid fighting him.
'Wow – did they spend that much? I just think there's better places health dollars could have been spent.'
Defending the issue had costed his business and its parent company Foodstuffs considerable time, stress and money, and he was pleased it was now settled. He is now preparing for the three-yearly renewal of his licence, which he hopes will be straightforward.
Details supplied by MidCentral DHB show the initial hearing of its appeal to the Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority cost $17,924, then the High Court appeal cost $69,552.
MidCentral DHB covered both costs, but public health units representing 13 other health boards reimbursed MidCentral $57,961 of the High Court costs.
The cost had been shared by the other organisations because they 'considered the matters … were of national significance', said MidCentral primary, public and community health operations executive Deborah Davies.
Health boards that contributed funding were Southland, Canterbury, South Canterbury, West Coast, Nelson-Marlborough, Capital and Coast, Hutt Valley, Wairarapa, Hawke's Bay, Tairawhiti, Bay of Plenty, Lakes District and Waikato.
Dr Weir said the appeal had been worthwhile, with the subsequent judgement providing clarification.
'This will provide valuable guidance to DHB public health units as well as to supermarkets and grocery stores throughout the country.'
It was important for health agencies to attempt to limit the adverse impact alcohol has on people's lives and health, he said.