Dunne & Lees-Galloway: Further Boot in the Gullet of Rural Hospitality.

Let’s put aside the philosophical argument for a minute and get practical:

Again, Can I still drink handle, & 1/2 bottle wine over hour lunch & be under wowser limit? @IainLG @PeterDunneMP @DavidCunliffeMP
— Mark Hubbard (@MarkHubbard33) October 1, 2013

@IainLG @PeterDunneMP @DavidCunliffeMP Something like 50 rural based hospitality meals around Sth Canty and Marlborough wineries in balance.
— Mark Hubbard (@MarkHubbard33) October 1, 2013

And why am I unsurprised to find Labour have the vote they now need to pass the 40% lower blood alcohol limit for driving because, per network news last night, Peter Dunne, flogging himself in a special interview, of course, says he will be backing it.

Across the last two governments, Peter has done more to destroy my rights and liberty than any minister I can think of. Every day he has gone about his job, he has been only about destroying the fabric of the free, classical liberal Western society.

First he muddied the sacrifice of the ANZACs by presiding over the destruction of the Westminster Principle.

Then he designed legislation that - when passed - MPs understood entailed the torture of animals in laboratory tests so teenagers could get stoned in the weekend on toxic syns; and this when a healthy natural alternative in the form of cannabis was kept criminalised. Cannabis does not have the harmful effects of synthetic substitutes, and has been used by humans for at least 6,000 years with no recorded deaths. You can’t even overdose on it – unlike alcohol.  

Then his single vote ensured a grab-all total surveillance of every New Zealand citizen under the dreadful GCSB Bill.

And now his single vote will likely take even my wine away with lunch. Can someone answer the question in my opening tweet? On TV 1 news last night I’m sure they said the lower limit allows merely three ‘standard’ drinks (thimbles) across three hours for a male. Well that’s me criminalised. Or, rather, we stay at home. Ignoring the meals we have out with friends, just counting Mrs H and I, that’s something like 50 meals in South Canterbury and the Marlborough winery restaurants per annum gone.

The 40% lower limit to 0.05 from 0.08 will deny responsible drinkers such as myself the ability to dine out, while not affecting one jot those already driving above the existing level. It is pointless, but will be perhaps a final nail in the coffin of many in the rural hospitality trade. In the same clip Peter Dunne pontificated his need for the further narrowing of my life, Judith Collins gave the figure of an extra 70,000 honest, responsible Kiwis per annum, between the current limit and Lees-Galloway’s wowser one, who will be criminalised by the state for victimless crimes. To John Key, there better be no free electoral ride in Ohariu-Belmont in 2014.

For the record, given Maryan Street's non-denial twice of my accusation David Cunliffe made her drop her euthanasia bill for fear of scaring the voters, I wonder if he knows how the numbers within the electorates stack up for this nanny-state bill of Lees-Galloway.

Finally, in case you’re wondering: a meal out without a wine is not a meal, it’s a takeaway. Not interested.


Update 1:

I was not aware when I wrote the above that the first time Labour put this legislation on the bar, Peter Dunne and United Future voted against it. So what has changed? Call me cynical, but in the absence of any new science favouring the lower level, then I assume it can only be political expediency. Namely, Peter is thinking of a ministry under a Labour government in 2014?

That or this change of position gets him a TV interview and some time in the lime light for his party.

Either way, horse-trading our lives for power. And more contradictions in the political career of Peter Dunne.