In other countries, patrons don’t complain about midnight closing of nightclubs

Nov 12, 2015 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
As I understand it one of the Government’s main argument for outlawing the opening of night clubs after 2am is that the longer revellers consume alcohol drunkenness increases and the likelihood of accidents on our roads rise. The theory is a logical one, but like the Private Sector Commission points out; there is no scientific findings to support the theory. The Private Sector Commission having remind us of this lack of creditable evidence linking revelry after 2am to a rise in accidents, suggest that bars should be allowed to open until 4am at week- ends. Secondly the PSC argue that closing at 2am will under mind tourism since, I assume, the tourist would want to party until 4am. Finally the PSC says night club owners are losing money because they have to close at 2am. In other words if people are allowed to drink until 4am they will drink more than they would if the time is restricted to 2am. I must point out that the order in which I have laid out the PSC argument has been done randomly and not meant to represent their order of priority.
The absence of scientific evidence to support closing bars at 2am so as to reduce motor accidents occurring during early hours of the morning is not surprising. Guyana is not known for conducting research in such matters, but police record can be helpful. Police records would not be able to tell us what percentage of our annual motor vehicular accidents occur between 12:01 and 6am since most motor vehicle accidents are not reported to the police. Generally motor accidents only attract police attention and action if, per chance, a police witness same or when the accident leads to serious injuries, death or extensive damage to one or more vehicles. So police records can tell us what percentage of the lethal crashes in a given year occurs between 12:01 and 6am and at week-ends. True this would be limited information on the issue but helpful nontheless. But we have figures from the developed world that might indicate what is likely to be the situation in Guyana. In the USA, we are told that in 2010 most road accidents occurred between 3-9pm. However for the same year alcohol was a factor in 71% of lethal crashes and these occurred between 12:01 and 6am (Anish, 2012).
For the Private Sector Commission to be in a moral position to make the argument for opening of bars until 4am they would have to do as they demand of the proponents of the 2am closure. The PSC must produce studies that show that the consumption of alcohol for longer periods at bars do not contribute to an increase in early morning road accidents. In other words, if the absence of scientific evidence nullifies the argument of proponents of a 2am closure then the same absence of scientific evidence must nullify the claims of the proponents of 4am closure. Also how did the PSC come to the decision to propose a 4am closure? What is it about 4am? Why not 3am or 5am? Outside of allowing night spots to make more money what scientific study points to any social good that a 4am closure will give rise to?
The argument that a 2am closure of bars will adversely affect tourism is suspect; again the PSC feels comfortable to offer opinion without scientific support for their claims. I visit Bonaire; an island that regularly attracts more foreign tourists in any given month than Guyana does in any given year. In Bonaire there is a huge benab called Arowak where tourists go in large numbers to party. The Arowak closes at 11pm at week-ends. I have never heard any complaint from the tourists with this closing time. I have heard of no petition to the government by the owners of   the Arowak for an extension of opening hours. In fact the Arowak opens for business at week – ends at about the same time ‘after lunch’ parties use to begin years ago at week-ends in Georgetown. Since down town Georgetown is relatively dead after 4pm at weekends what prevents our  nightclubs from opening for business before dark? As I remember after lunch parties in the 80s (or was it the 70s) use to attract sell- out crowds.
It seems Guyanese businessmen are most comfortable with increasing their wealth without investing in offering their patrons an improved service. In other places proprietors of bars would seek to increase the number of their patrons during the legal hours by adding activities to their product. For example they could advertise and have Charmaine Blackman, Henry Rodney etc, perform at 10pm. Also proprietors could advertise that patrons who are present at 9am will be given a number and that there will be a drawing at 12pm, the patron holding the randomly selected number will win $10000. The night’s experience will be more exciting and much more people will patronize these bars by 10pm making a closing at 2am no problem.  Money will be made not because few people drink for a longer period (unto 4am) but by a larger number of revellers drinking over a shorter period (unto 2am).But not the Guyanese businessman, he wants the government to merely make it possible for people to drink longer. No investment on his part, no thought of making the night’s experience interesting, just have the government change the closing time and let the silly drink themselves into a stupor.
Guyana is a poor country that should be in a hurry to enhance its economic wealth while promoting decent living. I do not see having our young people drinking at bars at 4am in the morning helping in this endeavor. This behavior of our business community does not surprise me, but it certainly disappoints.
Claudius Prince.

---

---