The opposition People’s Party is holding its breath as it awaits Parliament’s verdict on its so-called “progressive liquor bill” on October 2.
Designed to liberalise Thailand’s alcohol market, the bill was a key election pledge touted by the reformist Future Forward Party in 2019. Future Forward's reincarnation, Move Forward Party, won the 2023 general election but was blocked from forming a government, before being dissolved by the Constitutional Court for its push to amend the lese majeste law, which punishes criticism or insult of the royal family with up to 15 years in jail. Future Forward MPs have now reformed as the People’s Party.
Two other liquor bills have also been tabled in Parliament, one drafted by the ruling Pheu Thai Party and the other by its coalition partner, the United Thai Nation Party.
The two bills by government parties are expected to sail through the first reading, while the People’s Party bill faces much bigger hurdles.
Craft beer revolution?
Parliament began considering the three bills, all designed to free up an alcohol market dominated by a handful of giant brewers, last month. Normally in such cases, different draft laws with the same topic are deliberated simultaneously in Parliament. However, a majority of MPs voted to support individual readings for each bill, arguing that the core principle of the People’s Party bill differs from that of the two others.
This move fuelled growing concern that the People’s Party's push to liberalise the liquor market would be shot down in a vote led by government MPs.
“We were hoping that Parliament would consider the three bills together,” said Taopiphop Limjittrakorn of the People’s Party. “But if it decides otherwise, that’s okay. If that’s the case, we will conduct public campaigns on issues they [the opposing MPs] disagree with.”
The main sticking point in the People’s Party bill is that it would grant people the right to brew liquor or beer for their own consumption without permission from authorities.
“They would drink what they make themselves. So, why would they have to seek a permit?” Taopiphop asked.
Before he became a politician, Taopiphop owned a craft beer business. In 2017, he was convicted of breaking the liquor law for operating without a licence and slapped with a suspended jail term and a fine of Bt5,500.
Angered by what he saw as monopolistic rules that perpetuated an oligopoly dominated by a few politically influential corporations, he was determined to change the law.
He joined Future Forward and launched a campaign to free up the market for smaller brewers. He compared his team’s years of hard work to building a ship that has slowly taken shape with growing public support.
“If someone else now takes over the role of captain, that’s fine by me. I just hope our dream for Thailand’s alcoholic beverage market comes true,” he said.
The Pheu Thai Party, which has proposed the rival Community Liquor Bill, denied any suggestion that it had hijacked the work of Taopiphob.
“We are not on his boat. We are on different boats,” Pheu Thai deputy spokesman Chanin Rungtanakiat said recently.
Chanin said Pheu Thai has made clear to Taopiphob from the very beginning that any liquor producer – whether their product is for commercial sale or not – must be certified by authorities.
“The certification is for supervisory purposes,” he said, arguing that removing the brewing permit system would be dangerous, presenting a health risk from homemade hooch.
Last month, 10 people died and 33 fell ill after consuming a homemade brew that contained methanol, which a supplier had reportedly claimed was ethanol.
Taopiphob argues that a tradition of home brewing has existed in Thai communities for decades, and people who brew for their own consumption know not to use potentially harmful ingredients.
“People should have the right to produce their own alcoholic brews,” he insisted.
Current rules
A ministerial amendment to the Excise Act in late 2022 liberalised the country’s alcohol brewing law to enable individuals to produce up to 200 litres of liquor annually with a permit.
While the draft bills proposed by United Thai Nation and Pheu Thai seek further changes to the Excise Act, they would leave the clause on permits required for brewing untouched.
The bills proposed by Pheu Thai and the People’s Party are similar in all other aspects, including a push to remove all restrictions on the production of distilled liquor in communities. Current regulations impose standards for machinery and hygiene in community liquor production.
Both the Pheu Thai and People Party bills also seek to remove ceilings on registered capital and minimum production of brew pubs and breweries, enabling smaller outfits to enter the market.
Oligopoly continues
The “progressive liquor bill” now being pushed by the People’s Party sailed through its first reading in 2022. But just one day before the bill was scheduled for its second and third readings, the Cabinet approved in principle an amendment to lift rules on minimum capital and production for beer producers and machinery for liquor producers. Move Forward called the amendment a deliberate move to derail its draft bill, which duly failed to win parliamentary approval when MPs voted 196 to 194 to shoot it down.
Taopiphob said the Cabinet amendment only paid lip service to liberalising the market because it maintained the restriction on small operators by limiting their staff and the horsepower of brewing machinery.
“It failed to unlock the industry, merely replacing old locks with new ones,” he said.
Thailand’s alcohol beverage market is worth about 400 billion baht a year, around the same size as that of Japan. But while there are more than 20,000 operators in the Japanese market, the Thai market is dominated by just seven giant corporations.
“This oligopoly exists because the law has been exploited as a tool to suppress the growth of the grassroots economy,” Taopiphob said.
Diverting just 10% of the market share to small alcohol producers would redirect up to 40 billion baht to grassroots communities, uplifting some of the country’s poorest areas, he said.
