The government decision to prohibit the advertising and promotion of liquor and tobacco will be welcomed by the majority of the people who accept the established fact that both substances are harmful and addictive. There is no doubt that these measures are not going to stop people from smoking and drinking. But there is every possibility that it would slow the process of growing generations cultivating these harmful habits.

It has been pointed out time and again that government’s liquor and tobacco policy has, to say the least, been ambivalent. On one side, we have long heard lip service being paid to the evils of tobacco and drink. On the other side, there has been almost penal taxation on both cigarettes and arrack with Treasury coffers benefiting hugely from the rake off. There is no escaping the reality that governments have long depended on these taxes for a very substantial slice of their total revenue and, at least in the short term, this will continue to be the case.

Although it can be claimed that the strategy of making both arrack and cigarettes more expensive with monotonous regularity at almost every budget was a price stick to beat down the habit, very few will buy that argument. In truth and in fact, such price increases were intended to boost desperately needed revenues for the state. Both cigarettes and arrack in this country are prohibitively expensive. But even so, a lot of Lankans who cannot afford to drink and smoke continue to indulge. And the State profits from their taxes.

We know on the authority of the Ceylon Tobacco Company, long the monopoly manufacturer of taxed cigarettes in Sri Lanka, that the price stick does serve to beat down sales for some weeks after they are imposed. But thereafter, sales volumes return to what they were. Smokers, apparently, adjust to the higher cost and gaily continue to burn their money and add to the risk of contracting lung cancer later in life. It would no doubt be the same where drinking is concerned.

While alcoholism and drunkenness must be roundly condemned by any right thinking person, drinking in moderation is admittedly not harmful. In fact, medical opinion has been expressed that alcohol can be good for the health in certain circumstances. Many doctors in the west today encourage drinking red wine. At the same time, according to WHO data, most doctors do not smoke. Many of those who did have kicked the habit because they know the dangers better than most.

In Sri Lanka, most of the alcohol related diseases and social problems are due to the wide prevalence of kasippu and other illicit brews. Time was when the preventive arm of the excise department was reasonably effective in stopping "pot arrack’’ as the precursor to today’s kasippu was known, illicit toddy and other hooch. But those days are long gone and the police who are responsible for the preventive functions are not only ineffective but often collude with illicit distillers. Sadly, the shadow of political patronage too has fallen over this whole business. There’s a lot of loot that is shared.

In recent years new problems of smuggled and illegally manufactured cigarettes have cropped up. Although legislation and other governmental action have been promised to curb this menace, nothing realistic has happened up to now. The end result of all this is that the legitimate, tax paying segments of both the liquor and tobacco industries have to pay the price of well intentioned government plans to try and curb the drinking and smoking habits. Meanwhile, the already fat illicit sector continues to get off scott free.

It is essential that the concerned authorities must get their priorities right. While controls on the advertising of alcohol and tobacco should be implemented as quickly as possible in an intelligent, well thought out way, it is necessary to seriously crack down on both illicit liquor and cigarettes. Glib assurances are of absolutely no use. The people must be able to see that there is a committed effort to eliminate these menaces and the progress must be clearly visible. We freely concede that this is easier said than done. But if controls are being imposed on legitimate industries, harsher measures must be used against the illegals.

There must also be some thinking on the pricing policies. By making beer cheaper, the present administration appeared to have tilted towards the argument that soft liquor is better than hard. Having done so and licensed new breweries to increase production that had long fallen short of demand, is a new policy in the making? If so, there must be some logic in the overall strategy. Good intentions alone will not do. The course leading towards the final objective must be both sensible and practical.