Parliament will debate the opening hours of nightclubs under the Liquor Amendment Bill this Friday that will see nightclubs closing at 1am.
Opposition MPs Faiyaz Koya and Jone Usamate opposed the Bill as Attorney General, Siromi Turaga had brought it under the Parliamentary Standing Order 51, which will be debated without delay this week.
While tabling the Bill, Turaga says the Liquor Act 2006 provides for the regulation of liquor licensing and permitted hours for the sale of liquor and has generally had a direct link to the opening hours of various venues which sell liquor.
He says under the Act special areas have been identified in the areas of Suva and the township of Nadi.
Turaga says there have been numerous reports of brawls, robberies and attacks in the early hours in Suva and Nadi and this has resulted in serious injuries and loss of lives. He says the Bill seeks to amends the Act to remove special zones which provides for the sale of liquor for extended hours in taverns, nightclubs and restaurants in areas in Suva and Nadi.
Turaga says the Bill must be considered urgently to address and assist the social issues arising from the long hours of nightclubs and the subsequent consumption of alcohol.
Opposition MP Jone Usamate says he is flabbergasted that this is being brought under Standing Order 51. He says the members of the government time and time again would continually ask why things are brought through Order 51 and if this is an issue that is so important, why not allow it to be debated in Committees and other means. Opposition MP Faiyaz Koya says in fairness to nightclub owners and tourists who frequent bars and taverns, these special zones were created for a reason. He says he agrees that the government might want to do a consultative exercise with the nightclub owners before they do this. Koya adds there is a considerable amount of revenue that is generated during those hours.
While responding to Koya and Usamate, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance, Professor Biman Prasad says ideally they would like any Bill that is not consequential to go through proper Parliamentary Committees and consultation.
He says Usamate is right as they always argued that non-urgent Bills ought to come through even if it takes one session of Parliament however, on this one, they had extensive consultations.
Professor Prasad says this is not a substantive Bill but he thought it is an urgent Bill and they should go through it.
In his right of reply Turaga says there were wide consultations that were held at the Office of the Attorney General and public consultations were held in Suva, Labasa, Nadi, Lautoka, Beqa, Vanua Levu, Lomaiviti and the Central Division.
Parliament has voted for the Bill to be debated on Friday.
