Debate: BAP vs JSRP

This debate was between Bhartiya Awaz Party and Jana Samveda Raksheka Paksha. The topic for the debate was ‘the viability of a hypothetical ban on the consumption and sales of alcohol’. JSRP gave their opening statement in which they spoke about the ‘freedom of the public’ which they firmly believe in and is mentioned in their manifesto. They went on to say that the public can consume what they wish to. They spoke about the fact that the ‘government has no business in business’ and won’t intervene in any sort of business. The Party blatantly stated that it does not make sense to ban the consumption and sale of alcohol.

Whereas, BAP in their opening statement claimed that they do not support the ban on the consumption and sales of alcohol because if they ban it something else would crop up instead of alcohol as an alternative. They further stated that the previous governments put a ban on alcohol which didn't end well and it was not appreciated by citizens. They mentioned that ‘alcohol’ is just a subject under the constitution and every state has different regulations on alcohol. So in the opening statement, it was clear that both parties were not in favor of the ban on the consumption and sales of alcohol.

Moving on to the main arguments of the parties, JSRP gave an observation stating that just before the lockdown was imposed there were long queues of people flooding in front of alcohol stores. They also said that there is a great cultural significance in the context of the consumption of alcohol in India. Furthermore, they claimed that religions like Christianity and Hinduism ‘ promote alcohol’. They stated that if they would stop a regulated market of alcohol then a black market would crop up for sure. They went on to make generic statements like ‘ alcohol should not be given to people who are underage’ which is a known fact of course moreover they repeatedly said that if alcohol is banned something else would come up.

BAP started its main argument by completely disagreeing with the ban on the consumption and sales of alcohol. They supported their argument by saying that they cannot ban it because it plays a huge role in the revenues. They went on to say that alcohol technically does not mean liquor and alcohol is used in make-up products, medicines, and many other products as well so if there is a ban on alcohol how will these products be manufactured? They went on to talk about the coming up of a black market or a hidden trade which was more or less mentioned by the opposition party earlier.

The closing statement started with JSRP stating that both the parties are not in favor of the ban on alcohol. They closed their argument by saying that ‘some people drink it just because it's there’, ‘ it is used as gifts at social events’, and ‘underage drinking should not be allowed’, overall their closing statement was extremely basic. BAP in their closing statement added to the arguments that they had already made in the debate and continued to say that if they put a ban on alcohol then that would essentially stop people from practicing their religion freely and it would bring down the revenues as well.

Both parties agreed on the regulation of the consumption and sale of alcohol, they did not want a ban for the reasons already mentioned. The parties had very general statements to make. When the question was raised regarding the negative effects of alcohol like domestic violence, accidents due to drinking and driving, the fact that teenagers are addicted to alcohol which further affects their mental health and lead to issues like depression and anxiety, and various other things which have a harmful effect on the society, both parties have been adamant that they won't ban alcohol and further claimed that they want to regulate the consumption and sales of alcohol but did not exactly mention how they would do that and failed to mention points that should have been brought to light.