Re: "The Beer Store’s secret sweetheart deal with LCBO revealed" - says The Star
"It’s still pretty obvious that, to paraphrase Yakov Smirnoff, in Soviet Ontario liquor controls you." thought this line was classic!
Canada’s byzantine booze laws generally follow the same rule as gun laws. As the saying goes, gun control isn’t so much about guns as it is about control. It’s an opportunity for others to control you and what you get up to.
Now that Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne is sorta-kinda moving towards lessening the government’s control over alcohol, it’s time we reminded ourselves just how ridiculous Canada’s liquor “control” boards have become.
On Thursday, the Liberals announced the province was liberating beer sales in Ontario. How’d they go about it?
For starters, 450 grocery stores will be able to sell beer, to match the 450 Beer Store locations. Keep in mind the Beer Store is a government-enforced, private-sector monopoly. Not exactly a full-on privatization, but at least it’s moving in the right direction.
But the rest of the changes aren’t exactly free market freedom:
All 24-packs will be subject to a 50 cent tax. Gee, thanks.
They’ll create a beer ombudsman, which would be unnecessary if they just privatized the whole sector.
My favourite is how the government liquor store outfit will be able to do a 10-store pilot project to sell 12-packs. This is laughable. Why only 10 stores? Why just a pilot project? Are they afraid that if every location suddenly, permanently sold 12-packs society would crumble?
This whole announcement was classic government doublespeak. Only in their topsy-turvy world could the government liberate booze by adding a bunch of nitpicky regulations.
It’s still pretty obvious that, to paraphrase Yakov Smirnoff, in Soviet Ontario liquor controls you.
While Wynne and more than a dozen premiers who came before her are guilty of not cleaning up this mess, they didn’t start it. The ultimate fault lies in how Canada’s provinces created their post-prohibition laws.
Politicians finally cottoned on that short-lived prohibition just increased crime. So they loosened the laws. But didn’t entirely liberate them, instead creating “control” boards.
Ranging from Quebec’s SAQ in 1921 to Nova Scotia's liquor board in 1930, the boards should have been a temporary measure to ease us into a free market.
But when it comes to government bureaucracy, there’s nothing more permanent than a pilot project. Almost a century later these bloated nanny state operations are still getting between the consumer and the producer.
Now they’re massive operations that employ sunshine list staff in the head offices and unionized staff at retail locations. Good luck getting rid of these control boards, even though that should be the ultimate goal.
The correct response is to just rip the band-aid off. Get rid of them all. Privatize the whole sector. Alas, it’s clear no politician has the stomach for that.
Instead we’ll just have to cross our fingers and hope we dodge what I call the Paula Abdul rule of government – two steps forward, two steps back.
Wynne’s announcement just barely moves Ontario forward on this front – because at least she’s allowing some sales to the private sector. Let’s be generous and give her three steps forward, two steps back. The next step is to just keep pushing.
In the meantime, can we at least get rid of the dumb laws on the books all across this country? Small victories, please.
That’s what Conservative MP Dan Albas accomplished in 2012 with his private member’s bill tossing out the absurd ban on individuals and small wineries moving wine across provincial borders.
As Albas wrote on his website at the time, the law he was changing “in effect acts as an inter-provincial trade barrier and also deprives wine consumers of the ability to have freedom of choice to sample from the winery of their choosing.”
In Prince Edward Island, their liquor control act is full of absurd nitpicking. It’s against the law for a licensee to “permit any disorderly conduct or the use of vulgar or profane language by any person in his licensed premises.”
So it’s against the law to swear? In a bar? Good luck with that.
They also want all products on offer to play nicely with each other. “Where a licensee displays liquor upon his licensed premises, he shall display all brands and kinds of liquor which he has in stock.”
Huh? Why? Business owners should have the right to display whichever selections they choose.
That’s the headspace Canada’s premiers need to be in when they look at their liquor laws.
Wynne made her announcement standing in front of a backdrop reading “more convenience” – meaning she was making things more convenient for the consumer.
Fine. But it’s not the job of the government to micromanage the consumers’ relationship with an industry, even if their changes do make things more convenient. Their job is just to get the hell out of the way. link is
HERE
.jpg)
