Editorial

The entertainment scene at Paceville has been out of control for quite some time. One need only visit the place late at night and in the early hours of the morning to witness the crowds of people, often at a very young age, in various stages of inebriation littering the streets with cans, bottles and all sorts of detritus.

In an attempt to rectify the situation, the government, under the instigation of the GRTU and the Malta Tourism Authority, has introduced a new bye-law that bans the carrying of alcohol and its consumption in the streets of Paceville.

As to be expected, its introduction has set off a firestorm of protest. Bottle shop owners who are allowed to sell alcohol till 9 p.m. are accusing the GRTU of having vested interests. Alcohol procured from a bottle shop is obviously much cheaper than buying a drink from a bar or nightclub.

Josef Formosa Gauci, the CEO of the Malta Tourism Authority, strongly disagrees by insisting that in other countries, people do not drink on doorsteps, in the middle of the road and on pavements. He added that should bottle shops want to convert into bars, there is no problem so long as they have the appropriate facilities.

After all, alcohol procured from bottle shops is meant for home use.

Needless to say, many people who advocate an uncontrolled entertainment scenario complain that Malta will not be able to compete with the "wild night life" provided by our competitors in other localities such as Ibiza and elsewhere in the Mediterranean. Is this the sort of entertainment Malta wants to promote? Profit at all costs, even at the expense of corrupting our young people and treating the streets and beaches as an extended litter bin, is unacceptable.

Unfortunately, any law enforcement is greeted with the accusation that Malta is being turned into a police state. If anything, law enforcement in Malta is conspicuous by its absence. Critics are right to complain that various laws already in place are flouted with impunity.

One need only mention the selling of alcohol to underage people, the lack of hygiene in certain night spots, the excessive decibel levels of amplified music and the crass disregard of the smoking ban. Here, the GRTU does not seem to be enthusiastic about law enforcement. The accusation that it is more concerned about lost business to bottle shops cannot therefore be dismissed outright.

Such arguments should not deter the authorities from living up to their responsibilities and curbing uncontrolled and irresponsible behaviour. This law is a step in the right direction.

Paceville is not the only place where matters are out of control. Other localities providing entertainment break the laws, not to mention the outrageous misbehaviour and drunkenness that is characteristic of too many outdoor events at village feasts.

Lax law enforcement in the past should not be used as an excuse to tolerate the status quo. Paceville residents welcome the new law but complain that despite all the hype and the setting up of signposts banning alcohol in the street, nothing much has changed so far. The government has to get its act together and show that it means business by enforcing this new law as well as existing laws without fear or favour.