- NEWSDAY.CO.TT - A la Une - Hier 07:02

The long thirst

Our government has announced its intention to bring about the lifting of the legal age for drinking to 21, from 18. Proposed legislation will also increase the age for gambling and consuming marijuana to 25, from 21. The parliamentarians and the public will come down firmly on one side or the other, because it is not a decision that allows for any sitting on the fence, yet it is a very complex matter deserving more than an instinctive or moral response. The first points to consider are the objective for changing the rules and whether it makes sense. The legal age of majority in TT is 18, reduced in 2000 from 21 under an amendment to the relevant act. If we believe that adults are incapable of being right-thinking and exercising judgement, does it make sense to allow them to have the most important right, which is to vote, at the age of 18, when they can determine not only the course of their own futures, but of the rest of the population’s? How about marriage, which implies the begetting of children, with the tremendous responsibility for the rearing of another human being to be a good person and citizen – at which we are already failing? There is no rule against minors having ownership interests in property or disposing of those interests. At 16 consensual sex is admissible, and anyone over 16 can become employed. Add to these the firearms industry recommendation that the age for acquiring a licensed firearm be dropped from 25 to 18, and the intended legislation looks even more strange. If we have all those rights which assume adulthood, duty and accountability, then removing an adult’s right to imbibe alcohol – if that is what the law will seek to do – seems at odds with the natural modus operandi we have created. It begins to look like an attack upon a basic right to choose what to consume, which could well attract resistance and dissent. It is also another example of politicians thinking in silos and not about comprehensive systems that facilitate a smoother working of the economy, trade and the community. [caption id="attachment_1167546" align="alignnone" width="683"] -[/caption] Certainly, alcoholism and drug addiction are plagues on society, families and industries. The cost to the state is enormous, the cost of shattered families and lives is incalculable and society as a whole feels the impact. However, there are economic and social effects of changing the legislation, and these will drive how effective the legislation turns out to be. The negative financial impact of the changes will be great on the food and drink sector, since many young people in the targeted age group consume alcohol as part of their rite of passage, and the size of the market that caters to them must be significant. One might think “bad luck,” but it also means jobs, like CEPEP and URP, which deserve more than kneejerk reactions. In The Long Thirst: Prohibition in America 1920-1933, Tom Coffey does something clever. Instead of arguing the point about the negative effects of banning booze and the booze business, he recalls a series of real characters from that period of US history who clearly demonstrate the corruption and violence that became rife – from the very top to the most base, and including the Mafia – eventually severely distorting US politics, economy and society. Lawmaking is not an easy business. We must sympathise with the government’s desire to reshape the citizenry, and we do know that laws influence culture and provide standards for society. Nobody thinks it is right to kill, steal, dishonour our parents, lie, cheat, etc, which all have their origins in religious law, and our societies have agreed on those rules. The benefits of observing them are clear. Not so, though, if responsible adults are instructed what to consume and are not shown the positive results the legislation might afford, and its limits. Will the police have the right to enter homes where employed adults, maybe even parents, aged 18 and over enjoy a glass of wine at the end of a long day? Justice Ulric Cross used to preach that any law that is not workable is a bad law and should be removed from the statutes. We need to know why we wish to introduce laws that are almost impossible to police and very costly to implement. The evidence of the failure of anti-narcotics legislation and prohibition internationally is indisputable. We run the risk of driving illegal alcohol consumption further underground and developing yet another lucrative and dangerous criminal activity that could eventually inveigle everyone. The industries producing mind-altering commodities have a duty to better educate people on the risks associated with their consumption and be held to account by the state, rather than the state waving a big stick that does unintended damage. The private sector has an important self-interested role to play in this matter.   The post The long thirst appeared first on Trinidad and Tobago Newsday.