Arrack Ban: What Really did the State Government Achieve?
By Melka Miyar, Daijiworld.com, Mangalore (NR)
- What's the big deal about the much-flaunted, 'daring' step of the government?
Mangalore, Jul 5: Yes, arrack has been banned in the state. Though one cannot really imagine any rosy picture painted about the state after this ban, the state government may proclaim and publicize that it has achieved a great deal by banning arrack. But the fact remains that the state government has succeeded in shifting the tipplers from arrack shops to wine shops.
Now we find that a majority of the arrack consumers have turned to wine shops. The state government too knows this fact very well. Hence, it has set the target bar high for the excise department, to increase its revenue by 200% through wine shops.
Interestingly, Indian Made Liquor (IML) which is sold in the wine shops statewide can bring in higher income than arrack to the state exchequer. In this connection, while speaking to daijiworld, deputy superintendant of excise G Pinto informed that the revenue earned by the government by selling a litre of arrack is only Rs 2, while money minted by wine shops is Rs. 40 per litre of IML, a whopping two hundred per cent rise !
This clearly indicates that ultimately a small rise in the sale of IML can benefit the government in particular, to a large extent. And the wine shop-owners in general too. Hence clearly the income being generated thus has shifted from the arrack shops to wine shops. No doubt, the 'calculative' state government has banned sale of arrack after calculating all these gains.
According to Noor Mohammad Hussain, deputy commissioner of excise, the government is not allowing anyone to open new wine shops in the state. But the reality is that the department is putting all its efforts to double the income through the existing wine shops. In fact for that purpose the state government has even doubled the licence fees for wine shops.
Statistics indicate that earlier the excise department’s revenue earnings was Rs 7.67 crore through sale of arrack every month in Dakshina Kannada district. On the other hand, the revenue earned every month from wine shops was Rs 9.79 crore. If the new target is achieved by the excise department, there will be an additional income for the state. Even if it achieves 175%, it can easily offset the loss incurred on account of arrack ban.
Now this is indeed food for thought as to what financial loss government is incurring on account of ban on sale of arrack. The second question to ponder on is, is there really a genuine interest on the part of the state government to prevent drunkards from consuming alcohol?
On the ground level the reality is that the production of illicit liquor has been increasing day by day in the state. Over the past 4 days, a total of 7 incidents of sale of illicit liquor has been tracked by the DK by the police and the excise department. It seems to be the biggest headache for the excise department in the coming days.
The irony is that drinking arrack will cause serious health problems for the drinkers, as illicit liquor is dangerous to life. There are several cases of death reported in the state owing to consumption of toxic illicit liquor. Hence, educating the drunkards to stay away from this dangerous liquor is the need of an hour, informed Noor Mohammad Hussain.
No doubt women’s empowerment groups have a major role to play in banning the sale of arrack. These groups face an uphill task as they have struggled a lot against arrack sale, all over the state. Now the responsibility lies with the women’s self-help groups to ensure that the drunkards do not get drawn towards illicit liquor. The excise department cannot watch everything fully, hence the role of women empowerment groups is prominent, says Hussain.
But the task is not an easy one. As one cannot prevent a drunkard who will as an alternative for arrack shop, go in search of a wine shop. Even cheap liquors are easily available today in wine shops. A packet of 100 ML arrack used to cost Rs 13. But the cheapest liquor which contains 180 ML can now be availed of at Rs 28 which is not really a major difference.
Informed sources say that the liquor sold in the wine shops is an alcohol stronger than arrack, thereby giving more kick than arrack. So from this point of view what is the big loss an alcohol consumer incurs? So neither is the government losing anything and nor are the arrack-consumers gaining anything on account of the ban on arrack sale.
So ultimately the moot point is what did the government achieve from this ban?
Melka Miyar - Archives