❓ A parliamentary question regarding the Department of Health's opposition to Sunday trading permits for liquor stores, despite the government's plans to deregulate Sunday trading hours. The Minister defends the department's actions as enforcing the current law.
AnsweredQoN 333Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
LIQUOR STORES - SUNDAY TRADING
Given that the minister responsible for liquor licensing conveniently deferred to the Minister for Health’s department so as not to answer the following question about his portfolio during the Geraldton sitting of state Parliament, I ask - (1) Is the minister aware that the Department of Health is currently before the Supreme Court opposing the Sunday trading approval granted to Subi Cleanskins in Subiaco, a business run by a young couple with a baby who have already spent $40 000 defending this case? (2) Is the minister aware that the Department of Health is also opposing an extended trading permit for Wongan Liquor in Wongan Hills? (3) Will the minister please advise the house on the implications of this action by the Department of Health for the government’s plans to deregulate Sunday trading hours and allow liquor stores in the metropolitan area to trade on Sundays? (4) Why are the minister’s department and the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor moving in different directions on the issue of Sunday trading? (5) Why is the Department of Health wasting scarce resources pursuing this matter in direct opposition to the government’s own policy regarding liquor stores trading on Sundays? Mr J.A. McGINTY
Given that the minister responsible for liquor licensing conveniently deferred to the Minister for Health’s department so as not to answer the following question about his portfolio during the Geraldton sitting of state Parliament, I ask - (1) Is the minister aware that the Department of Health is currently before the Supreme Court opposing the Sunday trading approval granted to Subi Cleanskins in Subiaco, a business run by a young couple with a baby who have already spent $40 000 defending this case? (2) Is the minister aware that the Department of Health is also opposing an extended trading permit for Wongan Liquor in Wongan Hills? (3) Will the minister please advise the house on the implications of this action by the Department of Health for the government’s plans to deregulate Sunday trading hours and allow liquor stores in the metropolitan area to trade on Sundays? (4) Why are the minister’s department and the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor moving in different directions on the issue of Sunday trading? (5) Why is the Department of Health wasting scarce resources pursuing this matter in direct opposition to the government’s own policy regarding liquor stores trading on Sundays? Mr J.A. McGINTY
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
(1) Is the minister aware that the Department of Health is currently before the Supreme Court opposing the Sunday trading approval granted to Subi Cleanskins in Subiaco, a business run by a young couple with a baby who have already spent $40 000 defending this case? (2) Is the minister aware that the Department of Health is also opposing an extended trading permit for Wongan Liquor in Wongan Hills? (3) Will the minister please advise the house on the implications of this action by the Department of Health for the government’s plans to deregulate Sunday trading hours and allow liquor stores in the metropolitan area to trade on Sundays? (4) Why are the minister’s department and the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor moving in different directions on the issue of Sunday trading? (5) Why is the Department of Health wasting scarce resources pursuing this matter in direct opposition to the government’s own policy regarding liquor stores trading on Sundays? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
(2) Is the minister aware that the Department of Health is also opposing an extended trading permit for Wongan Liquor in Wongan Hills? (3) Will the minister please advise the house on the implications of this action by the Department of Health for the government’s plans to deregulate Sunday trading hours and allow liquor stores in the metropolitan area to trade on Sundays? (4) Why are the minister’s department and the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor moving in different directions on the issue of Sunday trading? (5) Why is the Department of Health wasting scarce resources pursuing this matter in direct opposition to the government’s own policy regarding liquor stores trading on Sundays? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
(3) Will the minister please advise the house on the implications of this action by the Department of Health for the government’s plans to deregulate Sunday trading hours and allow liquor stores in the metropolitan area to trade on Sundays? (4) Why are the minister’s department and the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor moving in different directions on the issue of Sunday trading? (5) Why is the Department of Health wasting scarce resources pursuing this matter in direct opposition to the government’s own policy regarding liquor stores trading on Sundays? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
(4) Why are the minister’s department and the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor moving in different directions on the issue of Sunday trading? (5) Why is the Department of Health wasting scarce resources pursuing this matter in direct opposition to the government’s own policy regarding liquor stores trading on Sundays? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
(5) Why is the Department of Health wasting scarce resources pursuing this matter in direct opposition to the government’s own policy regarding liquor stores trading on Sundays? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
(1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
(1) Is the minister aware that the Department of Health is currently before the Supreme Court opposing the Sunday trading approval granted to Subi Cleanskins in Subiaco, a business run by a young couple with a baby who have already spent $40 000 defending this case? (2) Is the minister aware that the Department of Health is also opposing an extended trading permit for Wongan Liquor in Wongan Hills? (3) Will the minister please advise the house on the implications of this action by the Department of Health for the government’s plans to deregulate Sunday trading hours and allow liquor stores in the metropolitan area to trade on Sundays? (4) Why are the minister’s department and the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor moving in different directions on the issue of Sunday trading? (5) Why is the Department of Health wasting scarce resources pursuing this matter in direct opposition to the government’s own policy regarding liquor stores trading on Sundays? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
(2) Is the minister aware that the Department of Health is also opposing an extended trading permit for Wongan Liquor in Wongan Hills? (3) Will the minister please advise the house on the implications of this action by the Department of Health for the government’s plans to deregulate Sunday trading hours and allow liquor stores in the metropolitan area to trade on Sundays? (4) Why are the minister’s department and the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor moving in different directions on the issue of Sunday trading? (5) Why is the Department of Health wasting scarce resources pursuing this matter in direct opposition to the government’s own policy regarding liquor stores trading on Sundays? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
(3) Will the minister please advise the house on the implications of this action by the Department of Health for the government’s plans to deregulate Sunday trading hours and allow liquor stores in the metropolitan area to trade on Sundays? (4) Why are the minister’s department and the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor moving in different directions on the issue of Sunday trading? (5) Why is the Department of Health wasting scarce resources pursuing this matter in direct opposition to the government’s own policy regarding liquor stores trading on Sundays? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
(4) Why are the minister’s department and the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor moving in different directions on the issue of Sunday trading? (5) Why is the Department of Health wasting scarce resources pursuing this matter in direct opposition to the government’s own policy regarding liquor stores trading on Sundays? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
(5) Why is the Department of Health wasting scarce resources pursuing this matter in direct opposition to the government’s own policy regarding liquor stores trading on Sundays? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
(1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
Mr J. McGrath : Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.