The Ford government has recently announced that the province will move on to liberalize alcohol sales ahead of the previously announced schedule. Specifically, starting September 2024, it will now be possible to pop by the local convenience store or gas station to buy beer, wine, or ready-to-drink beverages. This announcement follows Ford’s election campaign promise to crack down on the alcohol sale monopoly in the province. He says it is time to treat Ontarians “like adults” and bring the long-desired convenience, choice, and lower prices.
The most vocal criticism of this decision, voiced by the media and the opposition leaders, is related to the $225 million that will have to be paid to the Beer Store to break the contract earlier than was previously agreed upon. Another criticism comes from the loss of revenues for the Government of Ontario generated by LCBO, which last year amounted to over 2.5 billion dollars, helping to fund healthcare, schools, and infrastructure. The loss of revenue for the province is real, as Alberta lost much of its revenue when the province entirely ended its alcohol sale monopoly in 1993.
However, a critical consequence of this decision is rarely mentioned. It refers to the very reason LCBO exists in the first place. The objective of this organization was not profit-driven or to offer “better prices to consumers,” seemingly the most important demand of our modern society, but rather, as LCBO officials themselves described, in the “prevalence of good social conditions in the surrounding community and absence of drunkenness and of complaints from neglected dependents.” It was meant to limit alcohol consumption, ensure that underage or intoxicated people don’t access alcohol, and, as a result, reduce violence and health risks.
Alcohol kills over 4,000 people in Ontario, leading to over 22,000 hospitalizations and 194,692 emergency department visits per year. 30% of roadway fatalities are caused by drunk driving in Ontario. According to The Canadian Public Health Association, almost 20% of violent crimes in Canada are associated with alcohol use. LCBO was established to contain these adverse effects; the liberalization of alcohol sales, in turn, will increase alcohol consumption, aggravate alcoholism, burden already struggling public health, and hurt the lower-income population.
Accessibility and consumption.
Dr. Norman Giesbrecht, a scientist emeritus with the Institute for Mental Health Policy Research at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), and Dr. Daniel T. Myran, the Canada Research Chair at the University of Ottawa, recently published their commentary on the proposed legalization of alcohol sales. They demonstrate clearly that the longer hours of operation, geographic proximity, less attention to underage alcohol sales (which will probably result from the wider access to alcohol), and lower prices lead to higher consumption and associated problems, such as deaths, emergency department visits, hospital admissions, interpersonal violence, and chronic disease. This is what happened in Alberta. Between 1985 and 1994, Alberta gradually privatized its alcohol market, increasing the number of stores and hours of operation. It led to substantial increases in the volume of spirits sold and population-level rates of deaths by suicide.
British Columbia had a similar experience. In 2002, the province expanded the number of privately operated stores that could sell alcohol, which immediately affected consumption. More specifically, “every 20% increase in the number of private retail stores per 1000 people was associated with 0.48% and 3.25% relative increases in per-capita alcohol consumption and alcohol-related deaths, respectively.”
The authors also provide an example of the 1978 Quebec wine liberalization, which led to a 10% increase in per-capita wine sales. Even in Ontario, the 2015 expansion of alcohol sales in grocery stores led to a 6% increase in alcohol-related emergency visits, which amounts to an additional 20,000 visits in just two years.
Even on a personal level, I am sure many of us have been in a situation when we needed to get some extra alcohol to get the party going for the night, but because of the walking distance to LCBO or maybe because of its working hours, couldn’t buy more of it. It might feel like a nuisance at the moment, but it is ultimately designed to help us and results in lesser consumption and prevention of potential alcohol-induced problems.
Additionally, as always, the lower-income Ontarians will be more vulnerable to the adverse effects of consumption. Even though lower-income Canadians report less heavy drinking behavior, they are twice as likely to be hospitalized due to alcohol consumption. This is known as the Alcohol Harm Paradox.
Citizens or consumers?
So, instead of talking about people “being adults,” improving the lives of consumers, and the benefits of the free market, we as a society should focus on the actual effects easy access to alcohol will have on our lives and fellow Ontarians. Should we think about these decisions as part of a society, community, or province, or rather as mere consumers?
LCBO has a successful track record in reducing alcohol consumption in our province. Ontario has one of the second-lowest alcohol per capita consumption among provinces and third-lowest in Canada. 7.3 liters per capita. NB – 7.2 liters (has a model similar to Ontario now, with sales in ANBL and licensed grocery stores). Nunavut 4.7 (they have communities that banned alcohol sales altogether). Ontario also has some of the lowest alcohol hospitalizations in Canada. These are concrete numbers and facts. If it is not an achievement and something to celebrate, I don’t know what is. Conservatives should strive to conserve what works and reform what doesn’t, but they should not give in to some abstract ideas of the efficiencies of the free market or, worse yet, populism.
Leave a Reply