A new Bill has been introduced this week in the Parliament, proposing to ban public consumption and retail sale of alcohol across Singapore from 10.30pm-7am.
One would think that Singaporeans turn into these uncontrollable alcoholics every night, running down the streets behaving like wild monkeys and acting as public nuisances to everyone in sight.
While excessive drinking is a vice, the implications and consequences of such a ban are way too disproportionate to the actual situation. If an island-wide ban is considered an appropriate solution to address noise pollution and mild public nuisance arising from drinking, then we are subconsciously granting the Parliament a dangerously high degree of control over our private lives, all in the name of public's interest.
It is not a particularly relevant ban for people who do not drink or have a habit of drinking, but the fact that you'd have to apply for a PERMIT to drink at barbecue pits and void decks is simply an inhibition of an individual's liberty that is uncalled for. If executed strictly, it restricts peoples' freedom to choose and forces us to behave in a certain way, which can lead to serious consequences.
In view of the 25% increase in tax on alcohol, is this really necessary?
I do agree that implementing such a ban is way too rigid and restrictive. A fairly huge part of nightlife in Singapore is contributed by the consumption of alcohol in popular tourist spots like Clarke Quay after 10.30pm, and nightlife is an important factor in the tourism industry in Singapore. Such a ban will only adversely affect this sector in Singapore, not to mention infringe the rights of people to drink in public. Singapore is a fairly small state that is relatively easier to keep intoxicated behaviour in check as compared to other countries. A more reasonable ban would perhaps limit drinking from unearthly hours like 1am onwards. 10.30pm is way too early. Most kids might not even have gone to bed yet.