New Zoning/Early Closure Thread

[..]

OK here is the latest that I know:

 

As of yesterday, I had lunch with two bar owners in Thonglor district. They have not heard a word officially about what to do. Same for a couple of owners on Soi Cowboy last night.

 

Now we know from the reports in The Nation that things are going to be status quo (hate to say "I told you so", but I did ). Lunching with a Wash. Sq. bar owner, the Soi 22 bar-owner's political rep and an Army 3 star, amongst others today, I got further scoop. The owner's rep went to a Cabinet meeting and was told that this order to revert to the "grandfather clause theory" came from "higher authority than Khun Purachai." The General said that he understood that this was to be a temporary thing and that further orders will be issued in 10 days to three weeks. But he was also smiling when he said this, so maybe the thing will die (my suspicion all along). However, still no word from the MiB as to what *they* are going to do!

 

Also, word on the street from usually reliable sources is that The Cave on Soi 33 was being made example of and will never reopen (no word on other branches). Also rumour has it that the owner is still a guest of the MiB and will be for some time. For what was unclear...

 

So, there is the latest, totally unofficial, slightly better than rumour-mongering, scoop!

 

Cheers,

SD

[Guest]

Thanks Tiger.

 

It's always good to have someone who has their ears and other parts of their anatomy close to the action. ::

[Guest]

There is an excellent editorial in today's Bangkok Post, which emphasizes a point which I have always thought was not emphasized enough - the new rules will essentially put the "trendy yuppie-style pubs, first-class hotels and cocktail lounges where couples, families and tourists looking for respectable places" go out of businesses while protecting what most would consider the 'sleazy' places.

 

I always thought this was the point to emphasize. Getting sympathy for NEP will always be a losing battle. The best quote, which should be repeated over and over again because it puts the proponents of this new rule on the defensive, is as follows: "If this goes ahead it could give the impression that the sex tourist or home-grown philanderer is being catered to at the expense of the regular tourist, family and couple-oriented places."

 

Maybe a letter to the New York Times (with a copy of the Bangkok Post editorial) following the New York Times recent article? The proponents of these new zoning regulations want the regulations to be seen as curbs against vice, but if they are protrayed as measures that protect sleaze at the expense of respectable places in the local and international press, it will really put them on the back foot.

 

The editorial in full:

 

'Cinderella' law turns the clock back

 

Thailand has always been famous for its fun-filled nightlife but that could be about to change once early closing and restrictive zoning laws begin to bite. While different categories of entertainment places within the Patpong, Ratchadipisek and Royal City Avenue (RCA) zones will be allowed to stay open for a reasonable length of time, those with the misfortune to fall outside these special areas will have their operating hours shortened to the point where they will be unable to survive.

 

Worst-hit, apparently, will be the trendy yuppie-style pubs, first-class hotels and cocktail lounges where couples, families and tourists looking for respectable places can go. These places can be found on Soi Thonglor and in other areas of Sukhumvit which are outside the zones. They most certainly cannot be found among the sleazy bars and glitzy massage parlours within the three zones. If this goes ahead it could give the impression that the sex tourist or home-grown philanderer is being catered to at the expense of the regular tourist, family and couple-oriented places.

 

Of course, not all couples will be looking for a place to enjoy themselves after midnight except, possibly, on special occasions and weekends, but those that do often mean the difference between financial success and going bankrupt.

 

Only the bars in the designated entertainment venues will have long enough opening times to survive. In other words, only bars in Patpong, Ratchadipisek and RCA will benefit from zoning _ bars that cater to sex tourists and underage teenagers prone to drug abuse. The fact that RCA is in the extended-hour zone at all makes a mockery of the whole exercise as it is a well-known hotbed of underage drinking, drugs and fighting _ precisely the evils the government says it is trying to wipe out and wants to use a 10pm curfew to do so. The question then arises as to why they are given an additional two hours' drinking time at the expense of responsible adults who frequent establishments outside this area.

 

If a side-effect of government policy is to put all the nice couple, tourist, shift-worker and family-oriented pubs, cafes, cocktail lounges and bars out of business by slashing their hours of operation because they don't happen to be located in the zones, then it is fair to ask what it plans to do about all the thousands of unemployed that will result. This is important because these controls will be imposed nationwide and of the many who will lose their jobs, few will be likely to want to return to work on rice farms or endure the low-paid drudgery of factory life. Something very scary could happen to the street and petty crime statistics unless this is properly thought out.

 

For now Bangkok will have only three zones (or actually only two, as RCA and Rachadapisek will soon just flow into each other). Does this mean all partygoers from Thon Buri, Bang Na, Rama III and other areas will converge on Patpong or Rachada after March 1? If so, the traffic police are going to have a nightmare and the crowds won't have room to move.

 

At present, the ''rules'' are so obscure and seemingly illogical that only certain officials have the ability to interpret them on a case by case basis. True, Bangkok should have had zoning 50 years ago just as it should have had a mass transit system 30 years ago. It had to catch up one day but, in doing so, it must take into account the reality of the situation as it exists now. No one wants to live next to a noisy disco and zoning makes sense, but it is traditional business practice to allow those places outside the zones an extended grace period to relocate or change their business first.

 

And what about other types of zoning? One family built their dream house on Bangkok's outskirts only to have a smelly fertiliser factory set itself up next door to them. Now, that's where zoning is really needed.

[BlazingStarz]

Thai Government Decides on Delay and Partial Reprieve Regarding Operating Hours for Various Entertainment Venues

 

BANGKOK: According to a story on the front page of The Nation newspaper Saturday, February 28, 2004, the Thai Cabinet put into at least temporary abeyance plans to impose strict new regulations controlling the times various types of entertainment venues can be open.

 

Both that report and street intelligence indicate the move came at the behest of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

 

At this point, about the only thing that remains reasonably certain is that the date a venue's license was issued will be the major determinant. Those venues granted licenses prior to the enactment of the Entertainment Act on January 13, 2004 will continue to operate under existing laws and regulations, whereas those licenses on or after that date will be subject to the new regulations when -- and if -- they actually are brought into effect.

 

While the news report says plans are to enforce a new set of regulations at some point, it is unclear when that might be. Many people are speculating that one strong possibility is that the government will let the issue sit quietly for some time and then either modify or eliminate the plan.

 

Resistance has been vocal, vociferous, and increasingly organized, according to street intelligence.

 

Interest in this debate remains extreme among all parties concerned, regardless of their individual views.

 

As of 3:30 P.M. Saturday, The Nation had not yet updated its online edition at http://nationmultimedia.com to reflect the addition of the story to the dead-tree version's front page early Saturday morning.

 

--BangkokAtoZ.com 2004-02-28

http://www.bangkokatoz.com/News_Alert_28FEB2004.htm

[..]

LOL, Mekhong Kurt (Bangkok A-to-Z webmaster) was working faster than usual today. He was at our little luncheon today as well, as you can tell from his report. Oh and it's there in The Nation online now:

 

+++++++++++

 

Time called on early bar closing

 

Published on Feb 28, 2004

 

Leave the bar at midnight? Just wait and see.

 

The government's plan to impose midnight-closing on nightspots outside designated zones from Monday might be postponed or even aborted because of a new draft regulation that maintains the current closing time.

 

The Interior Ministry yesterday sent the draft ministerial regulation for Cabinet review, possibly next week, said Vichien Chavalit, chief of the Department of Provincial Administration's Investigative and Legal Affairs Bureau.

 

The draft, which was written under a Cabinet resolution on February 10, sticks to the present closing time stipulated in the latest version of the Entertainment Act, which came into effect on January 13, Vichien said.

 

This requires that all entertainment venues licensed before January 13 close at 1am, nightclubs and bars must close at 2am, and lounges, tea houses and massage parlours at midnight.

 

He said that only entertainment venues licensed after January 13 and outside the designated zones would be subject to the midnight-closing time.

 

There are only three designated entertainment zones in Bangkok - Patpong, New Petchburi, and Ratchadaphisek.

 

Vichien denied that the draft was a policy reversal for the Ministry. It had pushed for early closing of nightspots as part of its social-order campaign, but the move has come under intense criticism from the night-entertainment industry and disgruntled club-goers.

 

The guideline for keeping the status quo on closing times came from Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

 

"The draft follows the Prime Minister's views," Vichien said.

 

Thaksin said on his weekly radio address on Valentine's Day that the midnight-closing time would not be imposed on businesses that were open before the new rule took effect.

 

The recent changes in opening hours and zoning policies has left the night-entertainment industry in limbo, with business owners unsure what the new rules would be and what effect they would have.

 

When contacted by The Nation, several high-ranking metropolitan police officers and owners of major entertainment venues yesterday declined to comment on the issue, saying that they needed to see the final decision from the Cabinet first.

 

A source in the Metropolitan Police Bureau said that the police would make sure that nightlife businesses strictly comply with the closing time stipulated in the new ministerial regulation.

 

Phermsak Lilakul

THE NATION

 

++++++++++++

 

Cheers,

SD

[Flashermac]

Generals and bar owners have lunch together??? Hmmm.

[Shit-Spattered Dog]

Curiously, polite and orderly Singapore is moving in the opposite

direction. Last summer, the police announced that bars would be

allowed to open around the clock and that patrons could dance on

tabletops.

 

Um, perhaps a nanaplaza.com branch office possibility?

 

Shit.

[robaus]

As I've said in several previous posts, the only way to end sex tourism here is to make it too expensive by raising the standard of living. Thailand needs a government that really loves Thais. End political and police corruption, make secondary education free and compulsory, provide decent well paid jobs, introduce and enforce minimum wage labour laws and proper workplace conditions, provide a healthcare system, and old aged and single parent benefits.

 

Let sex tourism end by natural attrition when people like me are priced out of teh market. Their present intiatives will simply create a black market, increase corruption and crime. TIT

 

I don't care if Singapore is open 25 hours per day, I wouldn't dream of going there for sex. I used to go there from Australia on shopping trips 3 times a year, but now I can't fucking afford. Pun intended.

[lotus]

I hesitate to reply, since this is totally off-topic; the so-called "social order" initiative is nothing at all to do with sex-tourism. But a post like this cannot go unchallenged...

Single-parent benefits!! Are you serious?

Even if all the benefits you propose were made available (which of course is impossible) it would make no difference to the sex-tourism levels.

It exists simply because it is tolerated. Girls work in the bars because they want to not because they have to. It's a relatively easy job with high reward, even if you doubled normal wages it would still be higher.

have you ever wondered why neighbouring countries such as Malaysia don't have sex tourism despite having similar social conditions?

[Old Hippie]

Lotus,

 

I'll add that even some women with decent paying jobs as well as many girls with high paying sponsors still work, they just want the extra money. I know many girls with sponsors (who think the girl is not working) who receive 20,000+ a month and still work. Likewise, I knew many girls in Uni here who danced in upscale "gentlemen's clubs" for the fast money, despite the fact that their parents were supporting them...all in the mind set, as long as there is relatively big money to be made, sex will be available.