issues

   Mathata Titha or Tithata Matha?

 By Dilrukshi Handunnetti 

In the afterglow of crushing the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), an euphoric President Mahinda Rajapakse publicly declared his next war — this time against the stuff that cheers.

Rajapakse did say that bending the elbow too often and at great cost, both to the family kitty and to personal health has become an unbeatable Sri Lankan habit and dedicated himself to the task of rehabilitating this nation in this respect.

Yet the conduct of this particular war does not inspire confidence or appears that easy. Going by the liquor sales and imports that had steadily increased, the government’s policy of Mathata Thitha (an end to alcohol) appears ineffective. It also means, a core aspect of Mahinda Chinthana being observed in the breach and the President’s second war being already a lost one.

Imports increase

As for liquor imports, given Sri Lankans’ penchant for sipping foreign brews, in 2005, liquor imports stood at 1,311,734.000 litres whereas in 2008, it was 1,748,094.000 litres and this fact, notwithstanding the global economic recession, increased local taxes and high cost of living that should have caused this nation not to sip those expensive brews.

Irrespective of the economic conditions that prevailed, in beer imports too there was a marked increased. In 2005, some 581,598.000 litres of beer were imported while in 2008, it was 701,723.000 litres.

Wines imported in 2005 accounted for 987,705.000 litres while in 2008, the imports totaled to 919,470.000 litres, recording a slight decrease. Wine imports have decreased by 6.90% in 2008.

The statistics just go to prove that Sri Lankans, however economically burdened they may be, have demonstrated resoluteness in being able to afford their liquors of all types, irrespective of the place of manufacture.

For all the rhetoric and pledges, when compared with statistics on 2005 liquor imports, the following three years show a steady increase. Foreign liquor imports have increased by 3.13% in 2006, 63.97 in 2007 and 33.26% in 2008. As for beer imports, where the biggest increase has taken place, 2006 showed a dramatic increase in the percentage, 53.12%.  In 2007, it was another 36.79% increase and in 2008, it was 20.65%

As for wine imports, the increase was marginal in 2006, a mere 0.18%. However, in 2007, it was 10.16%.

For all the professed commitment to being rid of alcohol coupled with plans to declare alcohol free zones in keeping with the Jathika Hela Urumaya’s concept of an alcohol free island, the government has continued to raise its revenue through duties levied on foreign liquor imports.

Revenue from liquor

In 2008 alone, the annual duty recovered from foreign spirits was Rs. 383,483,118 while from beer, the state made another Rs. 42,780,461 as duty. The duty levied on foreign wines brought in another Rs. 259,320,718 in to the government’s kitty.

When roughly calculated, the difference between 2005 and 2008 in revenue raised from foreign spirits alone is well over Rs. 100 million whereas from wine imports alone, the increase is over Rs. 50 million.

Let’s then take a look at locally manufactured liquor, a key source of income for a cash strapped economy. The local arrack production in the year 2005 was 38,456,991.59 litres which increased to 44,940,756.96 litres the next year. In 2007, arrack production reached an all time high of 50,087,293.73 litres and in 2008, dropped slightly to 45,910,161.38 litres.

Likewise, there had been a steady increase in beer manufacturing as well. In 2005, 51,548,933.66 litres were locally manufactured followed by 46,824,146.32 litres in 2006. The year next, the manufactured beer was some 49,535,291.17 litres while in 2008, it was 57,456,813.35 litres.

In wine production of course, the manufacturing statistics vary significantly. In 2005, some 6,317.07 litres were manufactured whereas in 2006, it shot up to 10,894.93 litres. The year next, local wine manufacturing rose to 45,172.87 litres and dropped to 8,271.41 litres in 2008.

All of it taken collectively, when compared to the 2005 manufacturing percentage, the overall liquor manufacturing percentage has increased by 16.9% in 2006 which has shot up to 30.2% in 2007 and by 19.4% in 2008.

While statistics do prove that the government’s much publicised Rs. 20 million worth anti alcohol policy has failed to bear fruit in practice, Commissioner General of Excise, D.G.M.V. Hapuarachchi acknowledges with concern that the production, consumption and sale of alcohol products have steadily grown in recent years.

He believes that people should not only be concerned about their family budgets but also about their health, and reminds the general public about the health risks associated with liquor consumption.

Consumers determined

Hapuarachchi does express shock that despite awareness campaigns and policies that do not support intoxication coupled with regular price revisions that should make all types of liquors less affordable, consumers appeared more determined to take the stuff that cheers irrespective of the dent the practice may create in their family kitty.

“It is worrisome that illicit brews like moonshine too has increased in manufacture,” he said explaining that the Excise Department had a special 24 hour operational unit to crack down on illicit brewing facilities.

According to Department statistics, from January to May 2009, the special unit has carried out some 20,473 successful raids. Between Wesak and Poson alone, the two holy months for Buddhists, some 565 detections have been made including a few narcotics incidents. “Moonshine brewing is certainly on the increase,” he notes.

According to Deputy Finance Minister Ranjith Siyambalapitiya, however it is a not a matter of the government simply making money on foreign liquor imports or the locally manufactured brews. “There appears to be an increase, yes. But it is not the government policy. We levy heavy import duty and tax local manufacturers. But there is the tourism and hospitality industries that require liquor to be made available,” he explained.

As for JVP’s Ranaweera Pathirana, a parliamentarian who has consistently raised his voice against the ‘culture of taverns’, the Mathata Thitha policy is a complete failure.

“There is no genuine interest to implement the policy fully. There are taverns in close proximity to schools and places of worship still. Liquor permits are issued incessantly, despite government rhetoric. We all know that many government parliamentarians have sold their liquor permits to make money while some operate their own pubs. The undeniable truth is that there is no commitment,” he insists.

As for the Rs. 20 million Mathata Thitha programme, it is an attractive slogan to be used on election platforms. Or interesting reading for those who still wish to devour the Mahinda Chinthana.