DA’S liquor laws defy sense

DEAR SIR — My article on neoprohibitionism published in Business Day (Prohibition and new laws are no substitute for policing, April 5) refers. Below are excerpts from a notice issued since then by the Democratic Alliance (DA) government in the Western Cape.

“In respect of section 60(3) of the Western Cape Liquor Act ... a person who is not licensed or authorised to sell liquor may not at any time have in his or her possession or under his or her control more liquor than the quantity (150l) as prescribed by the minister without the prior written consent of the presiding officer.

“All persons who are not licensed or authorised to sell liquor who have more than 150l of alcohol in his or her possession therefore have to apply for written consent from the presiding officer of the Liquor Licensing Tribunal of the Western Cape Liquor Authority. This includes persons collecting all kinds of liquor to keep in private cellars at home for purposes of personal use....

“All applications must be sub- mitted in writing by means of an affidavit, addressed to the presiding officer, stating the following: full names, identity number and address of the applicant; premises where liquor will be stored; purpose for which liquor will be used; motivation for application;

“Nature, approximate value and quantity of liquor to be stored; copy of ID of applicant; proof of address; plan of the premises where the liquor is to be stored, indicating the address, all rooms with doors, windows and measurements and the use of each room.

“The proposed storage area is to be indicated in colour on the plan. Colour photographs of the premises and storage area; the designated liquor officer at the local police station to indicate on the application whether the designated liquor officer supports the application or not.”

Consider for a moment the implications of this regulation. People about to have a party, or who have a small collection (17 cases) of wine must now draw up plans (showing for example, 10 cases under the stairs, three in the bar, five in the garage) and make sure this information is public property. If the designated liquor officer does not support their application, will they have to break the law and sell the contents of their cellar?

This is not simply bureaucracy gone mad: it is proof that the common sense of those in government diminishes in direct proportion to their period in office.