Three cheers for liquor policy

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: The Oommen Chandy Government can congratulate itself for taking a stand on the State’s maniac boozing fixation. The decision to raise the age bar for buying and selling of liquor to 21 (from the present 18) has garnered a good amount of kudos from youngsters and parents alike. The young Turks, pleasantly toppling our assumptions, generously lauded the policy makers while the voices of dissent  mostly expressed concerns about the practicality of the decision. Nikhil M, a 20-year-old engineering student of College of Engineering, Trivandrum, welcomed the upping of the age limit, saying, “At 21, one is more matured and can take more sound decisions”.Deepthi Pullarkat, who recently finished her BTech, seconded the opinion, since “there were quite a lot of friends who wasted their time, money and energy for getting drunk and they lost out on their academics in the end.” She added that though none of the girls she knew were in the habit of drinking, the boys often told tales of their girlfriends taking to the heady highs. However, brothers Fahad and Faizal Abdullah pointed their fingers at the many loopholes that can hamper the effective implementation of the decision. Fahad, a BTech student of Barton Hill College, thinks that when an 18-year-old is considered old enough to share in the process of forming the government, it ought to be considered that they can get round the technical hurdle if required. “The proposed system of checking the voter ID card before liquor is sold to a young consumer is faulty to begin with. Those who are bent on getting their dose of booze will find their way to hoodwink the law since it cannot be properly monitored this way. It is better to leave it to the discretion of youngsters, they are capable of decision-making at 18.” Faizal, 28, added that in the Gulf, where he has been working for about five years now, a law on similar lines stipulates that men below 21 years cannot enter bars. “Neither is it easy to procure liquor from other sources legally as well. So it is easier to have a screening  at the shops, the licences of which will be revoked, if youngsters below 18 are found to be provided with liquor,” he said. “My opinion is, upping it to even 50 years won’t harm,” was how Dr M Soosai Pakiam, Latin Catholic Archbishop of Thiruvananthapuram, responded to the proposal. “The policy itself is a step forward from the existing one in controlling the consumption of liquor. Of course, there will never be a policy that fully satisfies us. But the question is, how effectively it is enforced,’’ Soosai Pakiam, who heads the Church’s Madya Virudha Samithi, said.Parents of school and college-going youth shared the general opinion that the amendment was in the interest of the State’s adolescents. “The age limit of 21 is not just about sound decisions. It also signifies the age when one has got past the impulsiveness and abrasiveness of adolescence,” said G Nandakumaran Nair, SBI Branch Manager, Sreekariyam. “At 18, it is the time to focus on academics and the career ahead. By the time one is 21, it is likely that one is employed and has one’s own money to spend. Then it could be left to their choice how to indulge their good selves.” Baby P S, public relations officer, Terumo Penpol, whose son is on the threshold of 18, was concerned whether the decision can trigger off a ‘forbidden fruit’ syndrome among the youth. “There is also the danger that if liquor is not available from authorised sources, they might turn to illicit stuff which can be harmful,” she said.While accepting that the proposal has enough loopholes that can help wannabe-tipplers escape the long arms of law, Dr C A Lal, lecturer at Kattakkada Christian College, said that any effort aimed at capping the dizzy heights to which liquor consumption in the State was soaring was laudable. He also pointed out that an 18-year-old will not have attained full development of physique and brain. “At that age, one is still growing up and consumption of liquor can be more damaging than after 21. Why not have a deterrent where you cannot have a fool-proof law?”