The Dunedin City Council’s staff-only social club has hit back at an objection to its liquor licence, labelling the concerns as “entirely without merit”.
Representatives of the Dunedin City Council Social Club were questioned by the council’s own district licensing committee on Thursday after an application to renew its liquor licence was opposed.
The sole objection came from public objector Scott Stucki, who has previously been linked to Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) Ōtepoti, over concerns about the operation of the club’s licence and the regulatory oversight of it.
Social club chairwoman Louise Berry told the committee the club was a long-established workplace organisation, tracing back to before 1960.
It was entirely self-funded through membership contributions and received no financial support from the council.
Mr Stucki had presented the committee with “inaccurate and misleading” data, and his analysis was based on assumptions about the purchase price of goods and profit margins, Ms Berry said.
Asserting the club supplied a significant quantity of free alcohol to its members was “baseless and irrational”.
“These allegations are entirely without merit and should be dismissed accordingly.”
Mr Stucki said his financial analysis of the club’s accounts used “only estimates” of gross margin percentages, and he had been very open to the actual accounts and costs being clarified.
He was “tremendously concerned” after obtaining documentation he claimed showed neither police nor Te Whatu Ora Health New Zealand had been visiting the venue for a period, outside of renewal processes.
“I would hate to posit the idea that we are so short of resources for alcohol regulation and compliance that any one of the agencies couldn’t attend this … [licensed premises] at least once in the term of their current licence.”
He also believed there was an appearance of bias, which was something the committee needed to consider.
“It seems very insular, it seems very self-contained.
“If the only check and balance we have in here is that other members of the DCC, other licensing inspectors who are also employees of the DCC, will occasionally pop in, there is a question of optics here.”
Chief licensing inspector Tanya Morrison said she was not aware of a need to monitor the club, which was not to say they could not monitor it.
No incidents of concern had come to their attention that warranted any further action.
Monitoring was generally based on risk, and could mean multiple things.
“As a staff member of Dunedin City Council, I can attest to monitoring this club in some way, shape or form by simply being exposed to some of the promotional materials I see around the building.”
Neither herself nor fellow inspector Alison Blair had ever been members of the social club, Ms Morrison said.
“So whether there’s an actual or perceived conflict there, I’ll leave that for the committee to decide.
“We’re acutely aware of our responsibilities to act independently, and we do so.”
Medical officer of health delegate Aaron Whipp said the risk rating of the premises was assessed as “very low”.
Since the pandemic, premises deemed low risk were only inquired about on paper.
The committee reserved its decision.