Showing posts with label beer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label beer. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 17, 2024

Ontario gov't allows mixed drinks' sale in groceries

The Ontario government is fast-tracking its plan to allow grocery stores to sell premixed alcoholic drinks, after government workers opposed to the plan shut down provincial liquor stores by walking out on strike.  

Ontario further speeds up alcohol expansion amid LCBO strike | Windsor Star | Allison Jones, Canadian Press:

July 16, 2024 - ""Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s government is rushing to get ready-to-drink cocktails on grocery store shelves amid a strike at the province’s main liquor retailer.... Finance Minister Peter Bethlenfalvy announced Monday that grocery stores that are already licensed to sell beer and wine can start ordering the pre-mixed cocktails, as well as large packs of beer, to sell starting on Thursday [July 18] — sooner than the planned Aug. 1 launch.... 

"The sped-up move is part of an already fast-tracked plan to expand alcohol sales in the province. Ford’s previous plan was to get beer, wine and ready-to-drink cocktails in convenience stores and all grocery stores by 2026 [see video], but in May he announced that would instead happen this year.

"Leadership at the Ontario Public Service Employees Union, whose approximately 10,000 workers at the Liquor Control Board of Ontario [LCBO] walked off the job July 5, has said ... the main issue in the labour dispute ... is the expanded sale of ready-to-drink cocktails. Previous rounds of alcohol market expansion in Ontario have kept spirits sales in the hands of the LCBO, and OPSEU worries undoing that will threaten the LCBO and union jobs. Getting ready-to-drink beverages in grocery stores even sooner is an attempt to undercut the LCBO and amounts to interfering in bargaining, said OPSEU president JP Hornick....

"Ford has denied he is trying to dismantle or privatize the LCBO, and government officials have noted that LCBO revenues have increased through previous rounds of alcohol sales expansions. Bethlenfalvy has directed the Crown corporation to showcase and promote Ontario beer, wine, spirits and ciders as part of the expansion, and he has said it will still have an important role as a wholesaler.

"Ford last week firmly ruled out a reversal on the ready-to-drink expansion, saying the ship had sailed 'halfway across Lake Ontario.' The 450 grocery stores across the province that are already licensed to sell beer, wine and ciders can begin placing orders for the coolers and seltzers on Thursday and can sell the beverages as soon as they receive them. 

"They will also be able to sell larger packages of beer, such as cases of 24. An agreement the former Liberal government signed with The Beer Store in 2015 ... [which] gave the company exclusive rights to sell 12- and 24-packs of beer .... had been set to expire at the end of 2025, but Ford’s sped-up plan involves an 'early implementation agreement' with The Beer Store that involves the province paying the company up to $225 million to help it keep stores open and workers employed. The province is also giving brewers a rebate on an LCBO fee that normally brings in $45 million a year, and it is giving retailers a 10-per-cent wholesale discount."

Read more: https://windsorstar.com/news/local-news/ontario-further-speeds-up-alcohol-expansion-amid-lcbo-strike

Premier Ford announces plans to allow beer and wine sales in Ontario convenience stores by 2026 | cpac | December 12, 2023:

Friday, July 21, 2023

Toronto council votes to ban gas lawnmowers, etc.

Toronto Ontario city council voted this week to ban gas-powered lawnmowers, leaf blowers, and week whackers from the city. 

Cheers to beer in parks, but gas weed-whacker ban needs to be cut | Toronto Sun | Brian Lilley:

July 19, 2021 - "City council passed two different motions on Wednesday: One looking to allow an activity that is already happening, the other to ban something the city has no ability to enforce.

"Council gave the go-ahead to allow a pilot project to allow consumption of alcohol in 22 of the city’s roughly 1,500 parks between Aug. 2 and Oct. 9. The motion requires city staff to prepare a report on the pilot project and report back in early 2024. The province gave municipalities the ability to allow alcohol consumption in city parks years ago. Many municipalities did so simply by removing their existing bylaws, but not Toronto....

"My first time in High Park after moving here in my 20s was to watch a play in the park, which I did while drinking a bottle of wine like most of those around me. That was in the 1990s and it’s still happening in parks, at the beach and elsewhere without much in the way of an issue, but we had to debate it still and demand a report.... 


Photo courtesy Wikimedia Commons.

"Moments later, council went from being permissive to restrictive, deciding that even if two-stroke engines powering weed whackers, leaf blowers, lawn mowers and other small engine equipment are legal, they shouldn’t be used in Toronto. The motion called for city staff to 'identify the resources required to develop and implement a ban on two-stroke equipment.'

"The ban would cover city workers using the equipment and residents. For residents struggling to transition, the motion called for staff to look into the ability to set up a lending library for electric versions of lawn equipment that residents could borrow...

"What’s fascinating about this proposed ban is that the city has little ability to enforce such a ban. Buying the equipment would still be legal unless and until the federal government passes legislation to ban it. Even if local stores stopped carrying the equipment, there would be nothing to stop residents from driving outside of city limits to buy their lawnmower or weed whacker or ordering them online.

"It’s certain that some residents would rat out neighbours using gas-powered lawn gear, but what could the city do? The city can’t enforce existing bylaws and has allowed encampments to take over parks across the city, but some councillors want to make stopping you from using a weed whacker a priority."

Read more: https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/toronto-council-says-yes-to-beer-in-parks-no-to-weed-whackers

Sunday, April 16, 2023

This Bud's for Who? What the Bud Light marketing fiasco says about class divisions in America

Mike Mozart, Bud Light Truck at Stew Leonard's, 2014 (detail). CC BY 2.0, Wikimedia Commons.

What the Bud Light Fiasco Reveals about the Ruling Class | Brownstone Institute - Jeffrey A. Tucker:

April 13, 2023 - "How did someone believe that making 'trans woman' Dylan Mulvaney the icon of a Bud Light ad campaign, complete with a beer can with Mulvaney’s image on it, would be good for sales?.... Dylan, who had previously been interviewed on trans issues by President Biden himself, was celebrating '365 Days of Girlhood' with a grotesquely misogynistic caricature that would disgust just about the whole market for this beer. Indeed, this person’s cosplay might as well be designed to discredit the entire political agenda of gender dysphoriacs. 

"Sure enough, because we don’t have mandates on what beers you must buy, sales of the beer plummeted. The parent company Anheuser-Busch’s stock lost $5 billion or 4 percent in value since the ad campaign rollout. Sales have fallen 50-70 percent. Now there is worry within the company of a widening boycott to all their brands. A local Missouri distributor of the product canceled an appearance by Budweiser Clydesdale horses due to public anger....

"The person who made the miscalculation is Alissa Gordon Heinerscheid, Vice President in charge of marketing for Bud Light. She explained that her intention was to make the beer King of ‘Woke’ Beers. She wanted to shift away from the 'out of touch' frat party image to one of 'inclusivity.' By all accounts, she actually believed this. More likely, she was rationalizing actions that would earn her bragging rights within her social circle. 

"Digging through her personal biography, we find all the predictable signs of tremendous detachment from regular life: elite boarding school (Groton, $65K a year), Harvard, Wharton School, coveted internship at General Foods, and straight to top VP at the biggest beverage company in the world. Somehow through all that, nothing entered her brain apart from elite opinion on how the world should work with theories never actually tested by real-world marketing demands....  

"She is a perfect symbol of a problem that afflicts high-end corporate and government culture: a shocking blindness toward the mainstream of American life, including working classes and other people less privileged. They are invisible to this crowd. And her type is pervasive in corporate America with its huge layers of management developed over 20 years of loose credit and push for token representation at the highest levels. 

"We’ve seen this manifest over three years [as] ruling-class types imposed lockdowns, masks, and vaccine mandates on the whole population without regard to the consequences and with full expectation that the food will continue to be delivered to their doorsteps no matter how many days, months, or years they stay at home and stay safe. The working classes, meanwhile, were shoved out in front of the pathogen to make their assigned contribution to herd immunity so that the rich and privileged could preserve their clean state of being, making TikTok videos and issuing edicts from their safe spaces for two or even three years. 

"In the late 19th century, the blindness of class detachment was a problem that so consumed Karl Marx that he became possessed with the desire to overthrow class distinctions between labor and capital.... In every country where his dreams became a reality, however, a protected elite took over and secured themselves from the consequences of their deluded dreams.  The people who in recent decades have drunk so deeply from the well of the Marxian tradition seem to be repeating that experience with complete disinterest in the lower classes, while pushing a deepening chasm that only became worse in the lockdown years in which they have controlled the levers of power. 

"It was startling to watch, and I could hardly believe what was happening. Then one day the incredibly obvious dawned on me. All official opinion in this country and even the whole world – government, media, corporations, technology – emanated from the same upper echelons of the class structure. It was people with elite educations and who had the time to shape public opinion. They are the ones on Twitter, in the newsrooms, fussing with the codes, and enjoying the laptop life of a permanent bureaucrat. 

"Their social circles were the same. They knew no one who cut trees, butchered cows, drove trucks, fixed cars, and met payroll in a small restaurant. The “workers and peasants” are people the elites so otherized that they became nothing more than non-playing characters who make stuff work but are not worthy of their attention or time. 

"The result was a massive transfer of wealth upwards in the social ladder as digital brands, technology, and Peloton thrived, while everyone else faced a barrage of ill health, debt, and inflation. As classes have grown more stratified – and, yes, there is a reason to worry about the gap between the rich and the poor when malleability is restricted – the intellectual producers of policy and opinion have constructed their own bubble to protect themselves from by being soiled by contrary points of view. 

They want the whole world to be their own safe space regardless of the victims. Would lockdowns have happened in any other kind of world? Not likely. And it would not have happened if the overlords did not have the technology to carry on their lives as normal while pretending that no one was really suffering from their scheme. 

"The Bud Light case is especially startling because the advent of commercial society in the high Middle Ages and through the Industrial Revolution was supposed to mitigate against this sort of myopic stratification. And this has always been the most compelling critique of Marx: he was raging against a system that was gradually winnowing away the very demarcations in classes that he decried....  Joseph Schumpeter in 1919 wrote an essay on this topic in his book Imperialism and Social Classes. He highlighted how the commercial ethos dramatically changed the class system. 'The warlord was automatically the leader of his people in virtually every respect,' he wrote. 'The modern industrialist is anything but such a leader'.... 

"But what happens when the corporate elites, working together with government, themselves become the warlords? The foundations of market capitalism begin to erode. The workers become ever more alienated from final consumption of the product they have made possible. 

"It’s been typical of people like me – pro-market libertarians – to ignore the issue of class and its impact on social and political structures. We inherited the view of Frederic Bastiat that the good society is about cooperation between everyone and not class conflict, much less class war. We’ve been suspicious of people who rage against wealth inequality and social stratification. And yet we do not live in such market conditions. The social and economic systems of the West are increasingly bureaucratized, hobbled by credentialism, and regulated, and this has severely impacted class mobility. Indeed, for many of these structures, exclusion of the unwashed is the whole point. 

"And the ruling class themselves have ever more the mindset as described by Thorstein Veblen: only the ignorable do actual work while the truly successful indulge in leisure and conspicuous consumption as much as their means allow. One supposes that this doesn’t hurt anyone…until it does. And this certainly happened in very recent history as the conspicuous consumers harnessed the power of states all over the world to serve their interests exclusively. The result was calamity for rights and liberties won over a thousand years of struggle. 

"The emergent fissures between the classes – and the diffusions of our ruling class into many sectors public and private – suggest an urgency for a new consciousness of the real meaning of the common good, which is inseparable from liberty. The marketing director of Bud Light talked a good line about 'inclusivity' but she plotted to impose everything but that. Her plan was designed for the one percent and to the exclusion of all the people who actually consume the product, to say nothing for the workers who actually make and deliver the product she was charged with promoting.

"That the markets have so brutally punished the brand and company for this profound error points the way to the future. People should have the right to their own choices about the kind of life they want to live and the products and services they want to consume. The dystopia of lockdowns and woke hegemony of public opinion – complete with censorship – have become the policy to overturn if the workers are ever to throw off the chains that bind them. The boycotts of Bud Light are but a beginning."

Read more: https://brownstone.org/articles/what-bud-light-fiasco-reveals-about-ruling-class/

Wednesday, January 18, 2023

Health Canada report calls for zero alcohol consumption

A Health Canada-funded report recommends zero alcohol consumption, and calls for mandatory warning labels on all alcoholic beverages as a first step to that goal.

What's behind Canada's drastic new alcohol guidance | BBC News - Holly Honderich:

Warning labels on liquor bottles in Yukon, Canada, 2020. Canadian Centre for Substance Abuse / CBC.

January 17, 2023 - "In Canada, it should be Dry January all year round, according to new national recommendations that say zero alcohol is the only risk-free approach. If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance.

"The advice is a steep drop from the previous recommendation, published in 2011. Those guidelines allowed a maximum of 10 drinks a week for women and 15 drinks for men.

"The new report, funded by Health Canada, also suggested mandatory warning labels for all alcoholic beverages....

"The nearly 90-page report, from the Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction (CCSA), details a variety of health risks associated with what was previously considered low alcohol consumption. According to the CCSA, any more than two standard drinks - each the equivalent of a 12-ounce (341ml; 0.6 pints) serving of 5% alcohol beer or a five-ounce (142ml; 0.26 pints) glass of 12% alcohol wine - brings an increase in negative outcomes, including breast and colon cancer. 

"It may be a rude awakening for the roughly 80% of Canadian adults who drink. Canadian experts say the drastic change in guidance - from nearly two drinks per day to two per week - is the result of better research over time....

"The new recommendations put the country out of step with several other Western nations. Australia's national guidance, published in 2020, recommends a maximum of 10 standard drinks a week. France suggests the same. The US recommends no more than two drinks a day for men and one for women, while the UK suggests no more than 14 "units" of alcohol - around six glasses of wine, or pints of beer - per week. But Canada is not a total outlier. As of 2015, the Netherlands' health council recommended that people abstained from alcohol altogether, or drink no more than one standard drink each day.

"It's still an open question whether Canadians - who love their beer almost as much as they love hockey - will be convinced to drink less because of this guidance. According to the Global Drug Survey, in drinking frequency, Canada does not rank in the top 10 countries globally, falling below the global average. But on the measure of 'feeling drunk', Canada jumped to the sixth spot, just behind the US and the UK....

"CCSA scientists and other experts say that mandatory labelling of all alcoholic beverages with health warnings, now common practice for cigarettes, is a necessary first step.... Still, mandating nationwide labelling would require sign-off from Health Canada. In a statement to the BBC, the agency thanked the CCSA for its work, saying alcohol use presents 'serious and complex public health and safety issues'. But it would not comment on adding health warnings to Canadians' drinks."

Read more: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64311705

Friday, June 28, 2019

Alberta shows benefits of privatizing alcohol sales

Don’t believe what Ontario’s Beer Store is saying about liquor sales in Alberta | National Post - Ivonne Martinez:

June 20, 2019 - "In the province of Ontario, the airwaves are filled with debate and contradicting information about beer sales. Albertans could not be more united on beer sales: For over 25 years, Albertans have understood that liquor sales can be competitive, convenient, profitable and accessible without compromising safety. That’s why the Alberta system has a 90-per-cent public satisfaction rating.

"But Ontario unions and The Beer Store continue to misinform the public in an effort to protect their existing monopoly.... The Beer Store is currently running an ad campaign that ... perpetuates myths about the harm of privatization and blatantly distorts the truth about the Alberta liquor system ... to justify the monopolistic protection that persists in Ontario....

"The facts however tell a different story. Alberta has over 1,500 independently owned liquor stores ... that offer the largest selection of liquor products in Canada. Alberta liquor retailing accomplishes this by providing Albertans with convenience, competitive prices and the highest of social responsibility. Like Ontario, the Alberta provincial government regulates liquor sales, and liquor stores must ID anyone that looks to be under 25 years....

"And what about The Beer Store’s claim that a 24 pack of Coors Light is more expensive in Alberta than in Ontario? The Beer Store is owned by Labatts and Molson (National Brewers).... Molson itself ... set a higher price for its beer in Alberta....

"Other facts that are left out include the 12,000 direct jobs created by liquor retail in Alberta, contributing $866 million annually to provincial revenue and creating a $3-billion industry.

"Alberta has a fully open free market that doesn’t block products from other provinces or countries. As a matter of fact, Alberta has individual liquor stores that have more beer selection on the shelves than the entire province of Ontario....

"Ontario doesn’t have to look far for a successful liquor model. All Alberta liquor stores are standalone retailers, whether independent, chains or grocers. This allows our liquor stores to simply focus on making the best experience for consumers while keeping minors from accessing alcohol. Albertans can get wine, beer and spirits at one store. One stop to access the best selection of products from across the province, country and the world. One stop."

Ivonne Martinez is the President of the Alberta Liquor Store Association

Read more: https://nationalpost.com/opinion/dont-believe-what-ontarios-beer-store-is-saying-about-liquor-sales-in-alberta
'via Blog this'

Friday, April 20, 2018

Provincial trade barriers OK'd by Canada's Supreme Court

Supreme Court upholds law prohibiting Canadians, wherever they live, from buying beer wherever they want | The Star - Tonda MacCharles:

April 19, 2018 - ""Gerard Comeau wasn’t the only one shaking his head when the Supreme Court of Canada ruled Thursday there is no 'constitutional guarantee of free trade' within Canada.

"'Money’s more important than liberties, I guess,' said the 64-year-old retired linesman.... Comeau’s bid to strike down the [New Brunswick] Liquor Control Act’s limits on cross-border beer shopping failed, but he became the champion of free-traders across Canada.

"Now some of his supporters hope all the attention his case, and the social media campaign dubbed #freethebeer, brought to the issue will galvanize provincial and federal leaders to drop barriers they say add $50 billion to $130 billion in extra costs to goods and services that cross provincial borders....

"The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the 1867 constitution did not impose 'an absolute free trade regime within Canada' ... [and] any decision to knock down interprovincial trade barriers would be a political one.... It cited the 'need to maintain balance' ... as long as the law’s primary purpose is not aimed at blocking trade across provincial borders.

"Any other interpretation, warned the court, could lead to a whole slew of laws being invalidated: environmental or public health regulations, agricultural controls on the production and distribution of eggs, dairy or poultry, for example, and 'innumerable' other exercises of provincial jurisdiction."

"Lawyer Howard Anglin, of the Canadian Constitutional Foundation, which intervened at the high court in support of Comeau’s arguments, ... believes the ruling actually provides an opportunity for a federal government or federal party leader to push to lower trade barriers, using the federal power to regulate trade and commerce....

"Freer trade between provinces could be a windfall for the provinces, said Anglin, who pointed to a senate committee report that accepted findings by Trevor Tombe and Lukas Albrecht. They say interprovincial barriers cost each Canadian household about $7,500 a year."

Read more: https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2018/04/19/supreme-court-upholds-laws-limiting-amount-of-alcohol-moved-across-provincial-borders.html
'via Blog this'

Monday, June 12, 2017

Indiana Libertarians hold drink-in against beer law

Hoosier hoist a cold one for liberty | News | tribstar.com - Scott L. Miley, Terre Haute Tribune Star:

"John Boroughs drank a Budweiser tall boy to toast what he believes is his right to buy a cold beer on Sunday. He was joined by about 60 others in a standing-room-only crowd inside ... a Ricker’s convenience store in Columbus.....

"His beer came from a cooler inside the store where employees check IDs and serve from a refrigerated shelf behind the counter. He sat in one of 28 seats at the store which had been refitted to obtain a restaurant license.

"Like-minded Libertarians from Jackson and Bartholomew counties participated in a Drink In for Liberty in support of reforming Indiana’s alcohol laws.

"Jay and Nancy Ricker, co-founders of the Anderson-based chain, were on hand. 'We’re the only state in the nation that has a warm beer and cold beer law. I don’t think people understand how unique, in a bad way, Indiana is in that respect,' Nancy Ricker said....

"Although Steven Buffington doesn’t drink alcohol, he was at Ricker’s as vice chair of the Jackson County Libertarian party. 'It’s all about principle for me. We should be able buy where we want to, when we want to, how we want to. If the state is going to try to push markets on us and force to buy from specific places, I don’t think that’s reasonable or fair,' Buffington said....

"'What I don’t like is the government making decisions on who can sell things,' said customer Brent Land. 'The only reasons for not allowing other high-volume retailers to sell it cold is the package liquor lobby ... When the government supports that, is the government trying to prop up a dying business model?'...

"About 71 percent of Hoosiers favor allowing all state-licensed retailers the right to sell cold beer, according to a survey released last week by the Indiana Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association which supports Ricker’s efforts.

"The survey of 600 registered voters also showed that 65 percent supported Sunday carryout sales and that 64 percent favored a repeal of the restriction on liquor.

"However, 67 percent opposed allowing minors into liquor stores and 59 percent opposed restricting the sale of spirits to only liquor stores."

Read more: http://www.tribstar.com/news/hoosier-hoist-a-cold-one-for-liberty/article_042b0335-bd21-5e48-bceb-a46ad1fff6ff.html
'via Blog this'

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

NB enforces beer monopoly despite court ruling

Why New Brunswick is vowing to keep busting anyone importing beer, even after judge said it’s legal | Financial Post - John Williamson:

May 16, 2016 - "Heads the province wins, tails you lose. This appears to be the response of the Gallant government to the recent court decision declaring unconstitutional New Brunswick’s longstanding restrictions on bringing alcohol for personal consumption into the province. The government has until the end of the month to appeal Provincial Court Judge Ronald LeBlanc’s ruling that the law violates the Constitution’s free-trade provisions by blocking the flow of goods within Canada. But already New Brunswick’s Public Prosecutions Office is — despite the court ruling — threatening legal action against residents that enter New Brunswick with more alcohol than is permitted by the provincial government’s liquor regulations.

"New Brunswick resident Gérard Comeau was charged by the RCMP in 2012 and fined $295 for illegally bringing in 14 cases of beer and three bottles of liquor from a Quebec border town into his home province. Under the New Brunswick Liquor Control Act, it is a crime to purchase more than one bottle of liquor or wine or the equivalent of 12 pints of beer from retailers outside of the province. Consumers are instead forced to purchase spirits from the New Brunswick Liquor Corp., a government-owned monopoly that charges double the price for beer as Quebec. "

"According to Luc Labonté, director of the province’s Public Prosecutions Services, the law restricting liquor imports remains in effect because 'in theory' the court ruling applies only to the person who brought the case — Mr. Comeau.... The Supreme Court of Canada has stated only superior courts — not provincial courts — can invalidate a law. Consequently, Judge LeBlanc’s decision is not a binding legal precedent....

"Judge LeBlanc’s ruling, however, makes any conviction under New Brunswick’s law unlikely. After the Comeau decision, anyone charged with the offence of importing alcohol will plead 'not guilty,' knowing his or her trial will rely on the newly established precedent.

"The Canadian Constitution Foundation supported Mr. Comeau in the beer case. The group’s executive director Marni Soupcoff explained, 'It’s true that "in theory’ the law remains on the books, but it would be ridiculous for New Brunswick prosecutors to go to court to enforce it now that one of their own judges has plainly assessed it as unconstitutional.' Ms. Soupcoff believes charging other New Brunswick cross-border beer consumers would be a waste of time and money.

'But costly enforcement that wastes time and money could be exactly what the province intends....
The punishment for New Brunswick consumers wouldn’t be the conviction, but the lengthy and costly court process itself.... Most people will, quite sensibly, keep suffering overpriced alcohol in New Brunswick rather than risk having to fight for their rights."

Read more: http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/why-new-brunswick-is-vowing-to-keep-busting-anyone-importing-beer-even-after-judge-said-its-legal
'via Blog this'

Friday, July 24, 2015

NB retiree sues for right to buy Quebec beer

Retiree at heart of cross-border booze-run case getting funding help - Colin Perkel, Canadian Press:

July 23, 2015 - "A man whose drive from New Brunswick to Quebec to buy cheaper beer ended in arrest said Thursday he's looking forward to airing his constitutional challenge in court next month as a defence crowdfunding campaign gets underway.

"In an interview from Tracadie, N.B., Gerard Comeau said he just wants to know whether he has the right to buy his beer in Quebec....

"As part of a sting operation, RCMP arrested Comeau, now 62, in October 2012 when he returned with 12 cases of beer and three bottles of liquor which he bought legally in Pointe-a-la-Croix, Que., just across the river from Campbellton. Police seized the booze and charged him with illegally importing alcohol into his home province.

"Cross-border alcohol shopping is a regular thing in the area and the retired power lineman had been making the run two or three times a year into Quebec to score beer — which costs about half the New Brunswick price — and lottery tickets.

"However, provincial law in New Brunswick — related to federal anti-smuggling efforts implemented at the height of Prohibition — forbids importing more than one bottle of wine or 12 pints of beer — about 19 regular bottles — from any other province. The restrictions, stiffer than importing alcohol from the U.S., carry a $292.50 fine for violators.

"Comeau's case has drawn support from the Canadian Constitution Foundation, which this week launched a crowdfunding drive in an effort to raise $20,000 for a fight that seems destined to be decided by the Supreme Court of Canada.

"A lot of people don't even know that provision is in the law," Karen Selick, the foundation's litigation director, said from Ottawa.... Section 121 of the Constitution is supposed to allow for the free flow of goods across provincial borders but, Selick said, a Supreme Court decision dating to 1921 that narrowly interpreted the section is at the heart of the dispute.

"'We think that case was wrongly decided and that enough time has gone by that the Supreme Court should look at it again,' Selick said.

"The foundation, a registered charity that bills itself as an independent, non-partisan organization that aims to defend Canadian constitutional freedoms, said the trade barriers benefit government monopoly sales agencies while constraining private business and citizens."

Read more: http://www.thespec.com/news-story/5749137-retiree-at-heart-of-cross-border-booze-run-case-getting-funding-help/
'via Blog this'
Crowdfunding site: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/free-beer#/story

Tuesday, December 16, 2014

Class action suit against Ontario beer monopolies

LCBO and Beer Store 'sweetheart deal' lawsuit calls for $1.4 billion in damages - Market Business News- Joseph Nordqvist:

December 14, 2014 - "A secret deal signed in 2000 between the LCBO and the Beer Store, limiting competition between Ontario’s provincial and private alcohol monopolies, has resulted in a class-action lawsuit.

"The retail outlets have been alleged of being part of a 'conspiracy to fix, raise, maintain or stabilize prices of beer in Ontario' and 'participated in illegal and secretive discussions and made agreements relating to prices and distribution areas of beer in Ontario.'

"The class-action lawsuit calls for $1.4 billion in damages. It has not yet been proven in court and the lawsuits need to be given the green light by a judge before proceeding as actions.

"The claim also demands $5-million in 'punitive and exemplary damages.'

"London, Ontario based Siskinds LLP filed the court documents on behalf of David Hughes and a company that operates a restaurant called The Poacher.

"Earlier this week the Toronto Star reported on a secret ‘sweetheart deal’ made between the LCBO and the Beer Store in June 2000.... As a result of the deal Ontarians can, for the most part, only buy larger cases of beer at the Beer Store. Prices of beer at the Beer Store are set by the three Belgian, Japanese, and American brewing companies that own the corporation. Labatt Brewing Company (AB InBev) has a 49% stake, Molson Coors Brewing Company owns 49%, while Sleeman Breweries (Sapporo) has a 2% stake.

"The Canadian restaurant industry group, Restaurants Canada, demanded that the Ontario government cancel this 'sweetheart deal'. It said that it has asked for an investigation to be carried out by the federal Competition Bureau.... According to Restaurants Canada, the deal limits competition and increases the cost of beer in bars and restaurants."

Read more: http://marketbusinessnews.com/lcbo-beer-store-sweetheart-deal-lawsuit-calls-1-4-billion/40861
'via Blog this'