For a small-scale winemaker such as Kubek, increasing that market could make a huge difference. His operation has seven full-time employees and a couple of part-timers in the peak season. He produces about 2,500 cases of wine a year, giving him an annual revenue of about $500,000.
“For us, a big day would be $3,000 a day,” he said. “If someone buys three cases of wine, there’s 1,000 bucks.”
Opening up direct-to-consumer markets in six provinces, he estimates, could result in at least a 50 per cent increase in revenue — the difference between $500,000 and $750,000 a year.
The battle to open up the interprovincial liquor markets is long-running.
In 2012, a Gerard Comeau, a New Brunswick retiree who liked to pop over to Quebec to buy cheaper beer, was stopped and fined $292 for returning home with more than the province’s allowed 12 pints of beer — about 18 cans.
Comeau fought the charges, and what became known as the “free-the-beer” case went all the way to the Supreme Court.
In 2018, after a five-year legal battle, the country’s highest court ruled that provinces did have the right to limit the amount of alcohol that could be carried or shipped across their borders.
In June 2019, the federal government removed all federal restrictions on the interprovincial shipping of liquor. Provinces, however, are still entitled to govern the supply of liquor within their borders. The manner in which most provinces have chosen to do so has effectively resulted in barriers to shipping alcohol direct-to-consumer in most provinces.
Currently there are four provinces — Nova Scotia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and B.C. — that will allow their residents to receive alcohol shipped direct-to-consumer from other provinces. So, if you’re in Winnipeg, you can order wine from the Niagara region and have it sent direct to you.
But that trade is not reciprocal. An alcohol producer in Manitoba cannot send their products direct to consumers in Ontario. In Ontario, as an example, there is no limit to the amount of alcohol that a person can bring in from another province — as long as it’s for personal consumption. But an Ontario resident cannot have out-of-province alcohol shipped from a producer to them direct.
Albas says that’s the fault of what he calls the “liquor monopolies.” He names the LCBO in Ontario and SAQ in Quebec specifically, but other provinces have similar government-run entities.
His bill takes a unique approach to the perceived problem — one that Sylvain Charlebois calls “a stroke of genius.”
Charlebois, a professor in the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University in Halifax, sees both the timing and the target of Albas’s bill are inspired.
It would allow Canada Post to offer direct-to-consumer sales and delivery of out-of-province beverage alcohol.
Albas’s bill aims to change the behaviour of Canada Post. That, Charlebois says, makes the free trade of alcohol in the country a federal issue.
“He’s actually tackling a Crown corporation,” said Charlebois. “He’s trying to make the government accountable to Canadians, trying to get Parliament to fix this problem by using one of its Crowns.”
Also, said Charlebois, the tabling of the bill — in the midst of a COVID-19 pandemic — is timely, in that the use of e-commerce and the home delivery of items is far more prevalent.
“People are buying way more online, and supply chains are much more open and democratic now.
“If you’re a brewery, and you’re at the mercy of the LCBO, or SAQ or NSLC, all of a sudden, you have a marketplace that is attainable, that is reachable. You can reach out to consumers much more easily than just 10 months ago.”
If the bill were to pass, Canada Post would be able to transport alcohol anywhere in the country. If a brewer in Winnipeg wanted to send beer to a consumer in Toronto — which they could not do now — Canada Post would be able to make that delivery.
If the bill passed, provinces would have six months to opt out — to keep their borders closed to outside alcohol. But, according to Albas’s bill, doing so would mean that province’s alcohol producers would not be able to ship their products outside the province either. The premiers of those provinces would be forced to explain to the public that they were opting out and explain to their alcohol producers that they would no longer be able to ship their products to consumers outside the province.
“It’s the 21st century; everyone else is using home delivery and Canada Post is a safe and trusted carrier,” Albas said.
Charlebois says Albas’s bill will face stiff resistance. He recognizes that an Opposition member’s private member’s bill would not survive a rumoured spring election, and says provinces such as Ontario and Quebec would also be vehemently opposed.
“These corporations do generate a lot of revenues for the government and they don’t want to compromise that or risk anything at this point without knowing how revenues could be affected if borders open up,” he said.
According to Statistics Canada, in 2018-19, net income and other government revenue derived from the control and sale of alcoholic beverages amounted to $12.4 billion across the country.
An LCBO spokesperson referred questions to Ontario’s Ministry of Finance.
“Ontario is committed to enhancing the interprovincial trade of beverage alcohol in a way that works for consumers and businesses and is consistent and fair to Ontario producers and retailers,” said Finance spokesperson Scott Blodgett.
“In June 2019, the federal government removed restrictions on the interprovincial shipping of liquor but did not remove the province’s authority to regulate alcohol, possession and sale within its boundaries. Ontario is aware of the Private Member’s Bill and is following its progress.”
