Editor of the Sowetan, Mr Mpumi Mkhabela
President of the South African Liquor Traders Association, Mr Saint Madlala Mr Leon Slotow
Members of the Public and the esteemed facilitator Ms Tshepiso Makwetla
Let me thank the members of the public for showing up in such high numbers. I am elated to have this discussion on whether the restriction of Sunday liquor trade will have an impact on alcohol abuse and alcohol related problems in our society. I am grateful that Sowetan has created this platform for us to engage the important issue of liquor trade and consumption in South Africa and Gauteng specifically. I think this platform is very important because we, as stakeholders in the liquor industry, have been talking past each other for far too long.
A discussion of this nature between us as government, liquor traders, members of the public and other interested parties, is long overdue. So I am happy that in line with its principles and commitment to foster public debates, Sowetan has dedicated this important space to this issue. I must also thank all of you who have been robustly participating in the public discourse around liquor trade and consumption in Gauteng and South Africa at large. Contrary to popular belief, government actually appreciates the passion and energy that the public has demonstrated in engaging on this issue.
Imagine what such activism would do for this country if it were to be replicated in the spheres of education, health, sports and other sectors of the economy? I, as an ardent believer in the notion that the masses are the makers of history, have been particularly pleased with the vigorous public debate on the issue.
To rephrase Mao Tse Tung’s words on the importance of public debate and discussion: we, as representatives of the people, have the task and obligation to always ensure that we till the soil for public engagement and allow a hundred flowers to blossom and a thousand schools of thought to contend. The vigorous debate on this issue as well as the fierce differences between the different stakeholders on the matter shows that liquor regulation is an extremely turbulent ground to tread.
This is more so given the painful and unfortunate history of liquor regulation in South Africa. The history of liquor trade in this country is one that is closely tied to the history of early industrialisation, urbanisation as well as the struggle against repression and oppression. In the past, liquor traders were often at the coalface of the repressive and racist machinery of the apartheid state. Liquor trade, which developed mainly because of the absence of economic opportunities for black people, in particular black women in urban areas under apartheid, was blamed for all sorts of social ills plaguing the major industrial centres of the country during the late 1930s and the early 1940s.
Of course, the state itself, which was an instrument of white minority rule and oppression, saw no link between these social ills and the systematic oppression and impoverishment it meted out on black people. Liquor regulation under the old white minority regime was designed to stem the flow of black women into cities and towns in this country. This was done through closing down access to beer brewing and sale incomes and therefore curtailing black women’s access to the economic opportunities provided by these activities.
The establishment of municipal beer halls, which yielded massive profits for apartheid municipal authorities, was one of the ways of achieving this aim. In pursuit of this objective, police carried out house raids, destroyed gallons and gallons of liquor stock and often made hundreds of arrests in many cities across South Africa. It is therefore not a coincidence that municipal beer halls became one of the primary targets of popular anger and protest against white minority rule in this country. But as you are aware, every force produces its opposite and liquor traders during this time invented dynamic ways of challenging this repression.
The widespread protests and defiance waged by liquor traders against successive racist regimes is principally the reason why we say that liquor trade as an economic activity is part and parcel of our rich pedigree and heritage as a country. This history means that liquor regulation under our painful past was tied to the apron strings of the apartheid’s state’s driving ideology to control relegate black people to the margins of economic prosperity using regulation, policy, brute force and repression.
This history makes it easy to understand why liquor regulation is such a controversial subject, even in latter-day South Africa. Our proposal (and it remains only a proposal at this stage) to restrict Sunday liquor trade has elicited differing opinions. Serious criticism has also been levelled at us as government. We have been accused of attempting to impose our “religious morality” on everyone. Some suggest that we are turning South Africa into a “nanny state” which “dictates” what citizens should or should not do. Others raise concerns about the economic implications of curbing Sunday liquor trading.
Job losses, the destruction of the tourism industry as well as a squeeze on state revenue are some of the reasons cited against this proposal. While we also share public concerns about the likely economic impact of this proposed regulation, we must at the same time confront the elephant in the room. What is this elephant in the room and what does it look like, you may ask? Well, let me, for a minute or so, imitate Picasso and try and paint the elephant for you. The World Health Organisation identifies alcohol abuse as the underlying cause of disease, premature death, violence against women and children, road fatalities etc. Alcohol abuse has detrimental social and economic consequences.
Research conducted in 2002 found that between one third of arrestees in Cape Town, Durban and Johannesburg charged with family violence reported being under the influence of alcohol at the time of the alleged offense According to Arrive Alive, during 2004, it was estimated that a driver of a vehicle under the influence of alcohol was killed every 25 hours. In 2005 this number changed to a driver killed every 22 hours and in 2006 further reduced to a driver killed every 18 hours.
A UNISA study of six Johannesburg neighbourhoods in 1998 reported that violence in these communities could be attributed to factors including unemployment, poor housing, environmental conditions and excessive alcohol consumption. A Foundation for Alcohol Related Research survey carried out in Soweto revealed that 25 in every 1000 seven-year olds had a severe form of foetal alcohol syndrome According to World Health Organisation estimates, the economic cost of alcohol abuse for South Africa has been estimated at $1.7 billion and 2% of GDP in 2004. So these are the statistics according to various sources.
Statistics are important in helping us to formulate policies and responses to the challenges we face as a society, they do conceal some important realities. Behind these cold facts are parents whose hard labour in raising a child is wasted when a child drops out of university because he lacked the discipline to resist the overflowing wells of alcohol on campus.
Behind the statistics is a woman who today lives with the reality of being HIV positive because she was too intoxicated to insist on a condom. Behind these statistics are women who continuously have to endure physical abuse from partners who become different creatures after consuming alcohol. Behind the statistics are children who cannot concentrate at school because their intoxicated parents were up in arms fighting the whole of the previous night. The truth of the matter is that alcohol abuse has dreadful socio-economic consequences. So what is the solution to this crisis, you may ask. Perhaps you will even accuse us of parading the “Sunday Liquor ban” as a magic wand to resolve all the alcohol related problems we face as a society. This is not the case.
The restriction of Sunday liquor trade is but one of the proposals we have put on the table to curb the abuse of liquor in our society. Sunday was chosen as the most practical day to enforce this proposed regulation as most people do not work on Sundays and there is already a restriction on hours of trade on this day. The suggestion that our proposal has religious and moralistic undertones is grossly unfair and inaccurate. Nowhere in our policies and public pronouncements do we make a connection between liquor regulation and religious preference. To state the obvious, we are a secular state that respects religious freedom.
There are a number of proposals that have been put forward from different quarters of society and different spheres of government. These include: - Alcohol Advertising Regulations - Media Campaigns - Community Based programmes - Education and School-based programmes - Decreasing the economic and physical availability of alcohol - Changing the legal purchasing age - Instituting Restrictive Trading hours and days of sale - Instituting Restrictions in outlet density - Adoption of responsible selling practices - Taxation increases on alcohol
The question we must all ask is who foots the bill for the damage done by excessive alcohol consumption in our society? The answer is quite simple: it is you – members of the public. You foot the bill for the health, educational, security, crime, fatality and many other costs associated with alcohol abuse. This is why we need an integrated approach that cuts across government departments and spheres as well as the public at large. I must reassure you that the Department of Economic Development is still committed to listening to the public about this matter. We have not made a U-turn on our commitment to listen to will of the people.
We are committed to make efforts to change the trajectory of liquor regulation so that it becomes more democratic and people centred. Our aim is to encourage the responsible sale and consumption of liquor while not stifling an industry that puts bread on the tables of many families in this province.
Enquiries:
Phindile Kunene, Media Liaison Officer
Cell: 082 494 2409
Tel: 011 085 2538
E-mail: Phindile.Kunene@gauteng.gov.za
