Article on liquor monopolies in The Gazette

YARRA VALLEY, Australia - "How can you live in a country where the government tells you what you can drink?"

That comment was made by a number of Australian winemakers who while being anxious to export to Canada are critical of the role played by the various provincial liquor control boards. "It's a monopoly and they protect their monopoly status," said one producer who has dealt with most of provincial boards and is amazed at how consumers tolerate such a system.

Liquor control boards are hard to swallow for wine producers

Amen.

What is the history behind this state of affairs having developed in Canada? Contagion from US prohibition or specifically Canadian problems?

I am particularly interested because of the increasing demonisation of alcohol in Europe, even in a country like France which expelled its Puritans towards the end of the 17th century. The latest vexation is a proposed law to forbid the distribution of free drinks, even at events like trade tastings.

I spent a couple of weeks in BC and AB on a trip to the Canadian Rockies in September and was aghast at the prices I saw on familiar labels. It's amazing Canadians drink wine at all!

I spent a couple of weeks in BC and AB on a trip to the Canadian Rockies in September and was aghast at the prices I saw on familiar labels. It's amazing Canadians drink wine at all!

I'd say the famed "Peace, order and good government" have a lot to do with that!!

I'm not a big fan of the monopoly system in most provinces in our country, but Ozzies talking about how they hate the government to decide what wines you can drink is a little hypocritical. Have you seen the range and prices for 'foreign' wines available in Australia? Through some incredible taxes (even compared to BC!), it's pretty hard for Ozzies to drink anything else than Oz (and NZ) wines. Sounds like government control to me!

But back to Canada, I've met many winemakers around the world who only shake their heads when asked about what it's like to deal with the monopolies here in Camada. For many worthwhile producers, especially smaller operations, it's just not worth the major hassles. We lose out big time as a result of the arcane rules and regulations created by the monopoly systems. And we still can't ship wine across provincial lines!

I've met many winemakers around the world who only shake their heads when asked about what it's like to deal with the monopolies here in Camada. For many worthwhile producers, especially smaller operations, it's just not worth the major hassles. We lose out big time as a result of the arcane rules and regulations created by the monopoly systems. And we still can't ship wine across provincial lines!

You know, John, it gives us something to think about for sure. I don't think that governments have any - and I mean any - ideological bones to pick over beverage alcohol ... All the talk about social responsibility (an LCBO buzzword) is window dressing, and it sounds like good public relations. But really, it's all about keeping the cash cow alive ... Really, if the government had any stake in encouraging healthy drinking, it would try to address those aspects of the culture that encourage binge drinking and other unhealthy behaviours.

I don't often complain about the LCBO or Vintages (its "fine wine" division) - mainly because I can usually find enough interesting wines to keep me satisfied. And those that I can't find I usually make myself (e.g. dry Concord, etc.) However, I do think that in a democracy, we should have fewer inter-jurisdictional trade barriers, not more!! This is to say that if I want to order a case of Quebec-grown and -made Frontenac online, or a few bottles of Nova Scotian New York Muscat, I should be able to go online, fill out an e-form, pay whatever provincial taxes might be applicable, and have the wine sent to me. It seems like such a civilized way to do things - but there are wholly cynical, entrenched interests that want to see such reasonableness disallowed.

And don't let them tell you that it's for the good of our children - hogwash. They know this, but it's just too good a racket to give up.

There's talk that because of the current economic issues, the provinces and federal government are going to try to deal with cutting the provincial barriers to trade in Canada. Gordon Campbell in BC seems to be the leader on this issue. It is pretty silly to have internal barriers to trade, especially in tough economic times, when global trade is decreasing. But I wonder if wine will be included even if - it's a big if - such an opening up of trade barriers occurs? The cynic in me says it will not be, due to the power of parochial thinking.

So, John S, do we ship the Donnhoff to you as olive oil!!!!?

What is the history behind this state of affairs having developed in Canada? Contagion from US prohibition or specifically Canadian problems?

I am particularly interested because of the increasing demonisation of alcohol in Europe, even in a country like France which expelled its Puritans towards the end of the 17th century. The latest vexation is a proposed law to forbid the distribution of free drinks, even at events like trade tastings.

Yes, I think it relates all the way back to prohibition, which was largely (but not completely) a result of the US prohibition laws. Quebec has always had more liberal alcohol policies, as befits their continental ties, but the rest of Canada has followed the American concern over alcohol. Plus, in Canada, government regulation of various social goods is often seen as the best approach (e.g., health care, tertiary education) as opposed to the states, where individualism and the free market is said to be the best approach. I think that's the main difference. And once governments figured out the use of so-called 'sin' taxes on alcohol and tobacco could generate considerable revenue, the die was cast!

So, John S, do we ship the Donnhoff to you as olive oil!!!!?

I've heard of such nefarious goings-on, but never from personal experience, of course! Actually, I really have never used that particular approach - there's enough wines for me to get broke on from here, and from my travels...

Plus, in Canada, government regulation of various social goods is often seen as the best approach (e.g., health care, tertiary education) as opposed to the states, where individualism and the free market is said to be the best approach. I think that's the main difference.

It's worth pointing out that it's dangerous to generalize about the US as practices vary widely between the states. Here in Washington (state), for example, wine is left to the free market (although distribution is regulated) and wine appears in state liquor stores, private wine and liquor stores and grocery stores. Hard liquor, on the other hand, is solely in the hands of the government and appears only in the state-owned stores. In other states (California would be a good example), just about anybody can sell anything. On the other end of the spectrum, in yet other states, *all* alcoholic beverages are sold by the government. The interesting thing is that liquor prices are virtually the same in WA as they are in CA - even a bit lower in WA - even though liquor sales are monopolized by the government in WA and not in CA. So the evidence is that government monopolies can but don't necessarily result in higher prices. It all depends on taxes and, in Canada's case, tariffs.