A friend of mine was in Vancouver recently, He knows of my penchant for trying different beer and being a gentleman and a scholar (literally) he often tries to bring back new beers for me to try. He also knows of my interest in flying (physically in airplanes as well as metaphysically with enough beer) so when he saw a beer called "Propeller" he thought it was a good fit.

Thing is, Propeller is from Halifax on the east coast of Canada and Vancouver is on the west coast of Canada. Now, Canada is a BIG country. Halifax to Vancouver is around 6,000 KM or about 4,000 miles (for our Metrically Challenged American friends) . I have never been able to get Propeller here in Ontario and we are a hell of a lot closer to Halifax than Vancouver is.

Really starts to show just how screwed up Canada's liquor and inter-provincial trade laws are doesn't it?

The whole mess really started with our own attempt at prohibition. Yeah, we were stupid enough to try it too, we leaned quickly that it wouldn't work, although a bunch of people got really rich really fast, we had Doctors making a fortune selling prescriptions for "Medicinal Alcohol" and boats that could make the round trip from Windsor Ontario to Havana Cuba 3 or 4 times a day.

The whole prohibition thing was Provincial, the Federal Government quickly got out of it for the most part, and although many of our brewers went bust before the whole mess was called off we DID get out of it without as much damage as was done in the U.S.

The damage that was done, however, still exists and is the cause of provincial trade barriers we still have.

In 1928 some provinces still had prohibition while others did not. Since trade between provinces was a Federal matter and not enforceable by the provinces it was perfectly legal for someone in a prohibition province to order and receive alcohol from a province which was not prohibition. Now, no government will tolerate being in a position where they cannot tell citizens what to do and when, and how to do it, so the provinces complained to the federal government which led to a federal law, passed in 1928, which basically states that all liquor (including beer and wine) must be sold to a provincial liquor board and that no shipment to an individual or corporation other than the provincial liquor board was permitted.

This is still the law on the books today. An individual may not carry as much as a bottle of beer between one province and it's neighbour. All the Civil Servants in Ottawa who make frequent "Beer Runs" into Hull Quebec are breaking a Federal law. 'Course, if they happen to be M.P.'s or Senators it doesn't count since they have their own special "exceptions" to the law, wouldn't want to deprive THEM of their special wines and liquors. (They might sober up and realize what a disaster they have created, or worse yet, actually try to DO something).

There are a couple of faint glimmers of hope for Canadian liquor, wine and beer lovers, however. First, the antiquated nature of this law is being recognized more and more. Wine lovers seem to be leading the pack, largely because Canada's wine producing areas are so widely separated and that no 2 wine producing area can ever be an exact duplicate of another. I suspect the wine lovers are also more vocal and that many of them have social, economic and political positions with some degree of power. In short, they tend to get listened to.

Second, the Canadian Association of Liquor Jurisdictions (this is an association of members from all Canada's liquor control boards) have stated that they are willing to look at "Direct to Consumer" shipping between provinces. That is encouraging, if somewhat ironic since this is specifically what the 1928 law was designed to stop.

Finally a Toronto Lawyer named Ian Blue has recently published an article at "The Advocates' Quarterly" legal journal in which he describes his belief that the 1928 law may well be unconstitutional (A PDF copy of the article is available on Mr. Blue's web page). It would require someone with very deep pockets to fight this court challenge since they would almost certainly be up against most if not all of the provincial governments. The defeat of the 1928 law would have enormous ramifications on all provincial liquor control boards. Effectively destroying their monopoly and limiting their ability to be the sole source for liquor within a province. They would become a regulatory and licensing agency rather than a sales agency.

The results of a successful constitutional challenge to this law could be very far reaching. The law itself is specifically and solely about the inter-provincial trade in alcohol but if it were to be struck down it would mean that restaurants in Ontario could import alcohol directly from any other province thus by-passing the liquor control board entirely. It would mean that a small craft brewery in Canada could sell its products over the internet or via mail order, giving them the potential to increase sales volumes at reasonable costs. It would mean that I could finally get beer from anywhere in Canada.

Speculation can be interesting and if I were an MPP I think I would be starting to work toward satisfying those who might be interested in launching a challenge. Specifically the Brewers, Vintners, and Distillers but more importantly the Consumers of Canada. It is a federal law, a successful challenge in any province affects the entire country.

Maybe we can hope to see some kind of rational and modern liquor laws in this country. I, for one, am sick of being treated with suspicion just because I enjoy a good beer with my meals.

Nemsis