01.24.12
Changing Liquor Laws Would Be Good Policy and Good Politics
During a recent visit to Austin, TX I had the singular pleasure of seeing a film at an Alamo Drafthouse theatre. Not only could I enjoy seeing The Ides of March in a comfortable setting, but I was able to order a beer and some freshly-baked chocolate chip cookies and have them delivered to my seat during the movie. If you think that sounds great – and it certainly was – your next thought is probably to wonder why you can’t do the same right here at home. It seems like a natural business idea: I’d certainly be willing to invest some of my money in someone who wanted to introduce the concept to British Columbia. The answer, as is so often the case when we ask ourselves why we can’t have awesome things here, is that it’s all the government’s fault.
Now, to be clear, this isn’t really the fault of the current government or Premier Christy Clark, at least not in the sense that they’re the ones who passed the laws in question. In fact, before the election of the first modern BC Liberal Government in 2001 and a subsequent modernization of our Province’s absurdly-antiquated liquor laws it was actually illegal here to walk from one table to another in a restaurant while carrying your own drink – a server would have to come to your table and collect your drinks-in-progress and move them to your destination for you, lest the establishment be fined. However, even after the modernization that took place shortly after the turn of the century (which also allowed a moderate expansion of private alcohol sales), we still have a liquor control regime that is excessive restrictive and which hurts both consumers and businesses.
The latest example of a good business struggling under the dictates of these ancient laws is the Rio Theatre on Broadway. The Rio, an older single-screen theatre that has traditionally shown a mix of first-run movies and older fare applied for a received a liquor license so that it could also function as a venue for live events. However, current laws prevent the theatre from continuing to screen movies, even on a part-time basis, while it also holds a liquor license. This is, in a word, stupid. The Provincial Government has the power to change the law in order to fix this idiocy. It should do exactly that.
This would be good public policy. What is a free enterprise government for if it isn’t going to help clear away useless regulations and laws that stand in the way of consumer choice and the success of business? Can anyone explain what public good is being upheld by laws which restrict people’s ability to purchase and consume alcohol in private venues? This is just some prohibition-era hangover.
While they’re at it, the Premier and the Government ought to look closely at all of our liquor laws.
It’s absurd to me that we, as British Columbians, often end up paying double for alcohol versus what we would pay in, for example, Washington State. There’s no good reason why, for example, a 750ml bottle of Grey Goose vodka in the United States should only be $2 more than a 375ml bottle costs in British Columbia or that a premium Scotch like Johnnie Walker Blue Label should be $289 here and $149 from some sellers in the United States.
Along similar lines, it’s crazy that we retain an antiquated system where most liquor continues to be sold through government-controlled stores, rather than simply allowing us to buy whatever we want from the local grocery store, as is the case in much of the rest of the world.
Some will argue that the Liquor Control Board generates revenue for the government – and that’s certainly true. But it’s also true that BC Liquor Stores are a costly and top-heavy operation, as is the case for pretty much all government-run entities. The government could sell all of its alcohol-related operations and allow the cost of alcohol to consumers to come down while still reaping plenty of money. Why not? That’s how most of the rest of the planet does this stuff.
This is one of those rare occasions when a good policy also makes for good politics. I have long argued that there is a need to communicate to the rising generation the case that can be made for conservative politics. The young, at least this generation, is reflexively ideologically libertarian – hostile to government control, in favor of individual liberty, and skeptical of the claims made by those who claim to represent the interests of the underclass – but votes overwhelmingly for the left as a result of decades of political programming at the hands of the culture and the schools. Too often they have been raised to believe that those of us on the right are otherworldly ogres when, in fact, most of us are just people who believe that we all have a universal human right to make our own choices and use our own resources however we see fit so long as it does not infringe upon the rights of others. Certainly, I will be infringing on no one’s right if I am able to buy a bottle of Whisky at Safeway or if I decide that I would like to enjoy an Old Fashioned while watching Doctor Strangelove on a big screen. This is a teachable moment where we can show people how the right stands for freedom not only in the abstract sense but also in practical ways.
What I would say to the Premier is this: as things stand right now, given the long duration of the present government and the bizarre resurrection of the BC Conservatives it is more likely than not that her government will be defeated at the next election. A safe strategy in these perilous days is likely to lead to nothing any better than a respectable defeat. What is required now is a year of reform – a vivid demonstration that this government still has energy, spirit, and vision. This seems to be as good a place to start as any.
