tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8266377399164867212024-03-18T20:19:35.097-07:00VanEast Beer BlogRamblings, rantings, ideas and opinions, from a man who has many, about the politics of craft beer and the craft beer industryPaddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.comBlogger124125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-64182869552061212992015-12-03T13:18:00.001-08:002015-12-03T13:19:27.101-08:00An Insider's View of the CAMRA South Fraser Situation<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>I have to let everyone know I am currently involved with the Campaign for Real Ale of BC as president of the Powell River Branch which also gives me a seat on the CAMRA BC Executive. Since 2011 I have held a seat on the CAMRA BC Executive representing either CAMRA Vancouver or Powell River which has given me a bird's eye view of what has occurred with the CAMRA South Fraser branch. The views put forward here are mine, and not sanctioned by CAMRA BC in any way, but things from my insider's perspective.</i></blockquote>
Before I get started here on the subject of the temporary, and I stress temporary, suspension of operations of the South Fraser branch of CAMRA BC, I want to just put it out there that we need to remember that this is just about craft beer.<br />
<br />
So take a deep breath, relax and let us put things into perspective here.<br />
<br />
This is not about finding a cure for cancer, fighting ISIS or about eliminating world hunger nor has anyone been put out on the street or lost their ability to feed themselves or their family.<br />
<br />
No one from the CAMRA BC side of things has made disrespectful personal comments about those involved in CAMRA South Fraser nor made claims of intentional wrong doing.<br />
<br />
Much has actually been done to insulate and protect those involved with the SF executive and that is probably the main reason the issues have not been common knowledge.<br />
<br />
No one has been "thrown under the bus," to quote one of the tweets I saw out there related to this situation. People need to take responsibility for their actions or lack of actions in relation to their current situation, including myself and the rest of the BC executive.<br />
<br />
From my perspective, the SF executive did not do a lot to help
themselves. According to CAMRA BC president, Ari Dressler, they did not respond to multiple requests, "to provide budgets, minutes, financials and membership information". They also did not help themselves by not representing themselves at the last BC
Executive meeting after they had been put on notice from the BC
president and the subject of CAMRA South Fraser had been put on the agenda.<br />
<br />
Maybe
there are valid and compelling reasons why these requests were not
fulfilled and representation was not present at the last meeting, but I
have not heard the reasons why. <br />
<br />
And, on the flip side, if the BC executive acted differently and took more control early on in the branch's existence, the branch may have traveled down a different path and grown into a fully functioning and healthy branch of CAMRA BC.<br />
<br />
On November 23rd, Dressler, announced, "that the CAMRA BC Executive has taken the difficult decision to suspend
the South Fraser Branch of CAMRA BC until a vote can be held at our AGM (you can read the entire announcement <a href="http://camrabc.ca/" target="_blank">here</a>).<br />
<br />
As a member of the BC Executive for the past five years, and having been there since Day One of the South Fraser branch, I can tell you this decision came after quite some debate, a debate that goes back over two years and three BC executives.<br />
<br />
The decision was a difficult one but the difficult decision had to be made.<br />
<br />
I know, in some circles, emotions are running high and people are going on the offensive to protect themselves or their friends. I get that and I get that everyone is entitled to their opinion and have the right to voice them, as long as those opinions are not attacking individuals or offensive.<br />
<br />
I will put it out there that many of the negative comments on social media and complaints via e-mail are based on partial information, partial truths and a few bizarre and borderline delusional interpretations on what has occurred since 2013.<br />
<br />
Quite simply, since inception, the South Fraser's branch executive
teams, and there have been more than one executive team involved, have put CAMRA BC in
a position of being in violation of the Society Act of BC which jeopardizes the entire society's reputation and existence.<br />
<br />
The CAMRA South Fraser branch executive has also, on an almost-continuous basis since inception, been in contravention of CAMRA operating procedures and policies, CAMRA BC
by-laws and have not responded, whether intentionally or not, to numerous directives and requests from the CAMRA BC Executive to comply.<br />
<br />
This branch has been a disaster on the executive level since the early days when the original executive disintegrated, with the majority quitting due to internal conflict, within the first two months of existence.The executives who have been dealing with SF since the first AGM were dealt a difficult hand as the branch's foundations were already unsteady, but from what I have seen, there has been little done to repair even the most basic issues, such as organizing a functioning bank account and keeping a current and accurate membership list.<br />
<br />
This is not to say that those who have been involved with the CAMRA SF executive are not good people, lovers of what CAMRA is about and dedicated supporters of the craft beer revolution.<br />
<br />
I really do really do believe that most, if not all, are good people. <br />
<br />
This is not to say that these same people are banned from holding CAMRA executive positions again at either the branch or the provincial level.<br />
<br />
If they are members in good standing, they have the right to run in yearly elections.<br />
<br />
That is not what is at play here and no one has made those accusations.<br />
<br />
What is clear is that many involved in steering the SF executive were not able, for various reasons, to fulfill the difficult and complex duties, obligations and responsibilities of running a branch of CAMRA BC, despite guidance, advice, support, direction, directives and eventually official warnings.<br />
<br />
Running a CAMRA branch is not an easy task.<br />
<br />
I have both run the largest branch in the society and started a branch from scratch in a city where 99% of the people thought CAMRA had something to do with photography.<br />
<br />
It is not all about organizing fun beer events, sending out a few tweets and Facebook posts.<br />
<br />
It is a lot about dealing with people, being responsible and accountable. It is about being organized, keeping necessary records and managing finances while operating within the structural framework of the Society Act and CAMRA BC by-laws, policies and procedures.<br />
<br />
It is about dealing with people and coping with, on some level, an-almost constant state of conflict while members are calling your integrity, intelligence and motivations into question.<br />
<br />
And it is about putting in hours and hours of volunteer time.<br />
<br />
Much blame has been heaped on the CAMRA BC executive for not providing support and guidance to the new SF branch.<br />
<br />
I can tell you that I started the Powell River branch just weeks prior to the SF branch being approved and we received great support. We are now well over 100 members and growing quickly. South Okanagan is not even a year old and they are solid as granite, and if you speak to their executive, they will tell you they have received all the support they have needed to launch their branch, which is an active branch and one that represents itself well in the CAMRA BC executive.<br />
<br />
So I do not think the problems lie completely with CAMRA BC as some have put forth.<br />
<br />
This suspension, or probably a better term, hiatus, had to happen. It was done for the protection of the
South Fraser members, and the protection of the society as a whole.<br />
<br />
SF members should be concerned that their branch has never, and I stress, NEVER, had a functioning bank account.<br />
<br />
Not quite true as apparently right now they do have a bank account but have no access to it and have seemed incapable of finding a solution.<br />
<br />
The SF members should be concerned that their executive have not payed CAMRA BC its portion of membership dues - $5 from every individual and joint membership goes to CAMRA BC in order to allow it to operate and look after the administrative side of things.<br />
<br />
The SF members should be concerned, especially as we are coming up to AGM season, that despite repeated requests for it, no comprehensive membership list has been provided to CAMRA BC.<br />
<br />
These are just a few of the most worrisome things, but the list of issues is long and goes back to the branch's roots.<br />
<br />
Having said that, the current executive have done some great things building CAMRA's profile in the region but as I said, events and tweets are not the whole of what a branch is supposed to be doing. I am not sure if they have grown the membership beyond what was inherited from Vancouver when the SF branch was formed because there is no current membership list to refer to.<br />
<br />
<br />
This is not a CAMRA Vancouver power grab as suggested by some on social media and beyond.<br />
<br />
CAMRA Vancouver has been quite vocal in that they have no interest in absorbing the branch. They are doing so short term to give SF members a place to go. CAMRA Vancouver president, David Perry, actually excused himself from most discussions about CAMRA SF and abstained from any votes related to SF to ensure there was not appearance of conflict as he knew these unfounded rumours were out there.<br />
<br />
This is a claim made by a few, that Vancouver wants to take over SF, goes back the the first executive of SF and some interpersonal conflicts. It has always been false and makes no sense as it was the Vancouver branch who most helped get the branch up and running and lent support. <br />
<br />
To help highlight how this train of thought is false, there have been on-going CAMRA BC discussions over the past year or two about how to create smaller branches to better serve the members which flies in the exact opposite direction of the claim that Vancouver is power hungry and wants to absorb SF.<br />
<br />
I, for one, would love to see a CAMRA East Van, CAMRA N Van, CAMRA Downtown, CAMRA Richmond, CAMRA Surrey, etc.<br />
<br />
I am even in the process of trying to divide up CAMRA Powell River by creating a committee on the Lower Sunshine Coast to mentor them so that eventually they can have their own branch to better serve our members who live in that region.<br />
<br />
Having smaller branches is a much better way to be inclusive and better serve the membership of certain areas.<br />
<br />
The CAMRA BC plan is now, and
always has been, to get the SF branch's affairs in order and have them
grow to become a productive and active member of the society, upholding
the values and supporting the mandate of the CAMRA BC.<br />
<br />
What CAMRA BC is
attempting to do is organize an extraordinary general meeting, or AGM, for SF
members to discuss all the issues and to put everything on the table for SF members so that a
plan for the future can be put into place to ensure success.<br />
<br />
At this point a meeting cannot be organized as the SF executive
have not supplied a membership. At this point CAMRA BC has no idea who is a CAMRA BC member in good standing of the SF branch.<br />
<br />
CAMRA BC is a consumer advocacy group, run by volunteers who love craft
beer, and lately it has been more about the consumers consuming than the advocacy, but that is a different blog post for a different
time. What many do not understand that the branches actually have no legal standing on their own, other than having permission to operate under the CAMRA BC umbrella. There is only one society registered with the province, that being CAMRA BC. They hold all the insurances that protect the branches when they hold events, they are the executive who must report and file with the province each year.<br />
<br />
They are the executive that is ultimately responsible for what goes on. But CAMRA BC has historically not micro-managed branches and have allowed local executives to do as they see fit as long as they are in compliance with the by-laws and Society Act.<br />
<br />
Having rogue branches operating out there under the CAMRA BC umbrella puts the autonomy of all branches in jeopardy.<br />
<br />
Could things have been done differently?<br />
<br />
Of course.<br />
<br />
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Everyone out there has an opinion on how this could have been handled differently. CAMRA BC has learned much from this and safeguards are now in place, as to how new branches are approved, founded and built, that are a direct result of the initial and almost instantaneous problems identified with the SF branch's founding and structure. The South Okanagan branch is a prime example of this new process, a process that is constantly being tweaked, looked at and refined.<br />
<br />
Should the general membership been more informed earlier?<br />
<br />
Possibly yes, but again, how do you address a membership when you have no list of members to address? As well, CAMRA BC was trying to work to protect the feelings and reputations of some. <br />
<br />
This is another lesson learned.<br />
<br />
As a group, lets look at moving forward and fixing this instead of entertaining delusional beliefs, propagating untruths and pointing fingers. All parties want to see a healthy and functioning branch of CAMRA operating south of the Fraser. In fact, there is probably room for two or three branches in the area.<br />
<br />
If you are an active member of SF, why not reach out to the executive who was elected in 2015 and push them to provide a membership list and financial reports so we can move forward and hold a meeting. Better yet, why not help get those things organized?<br />
<br />
I, for one, want this meeting to take place sooner than later and I hope to be in attendance to be accountable for my role in what has transpired and to ensure the members get answers to their queries. The answers I give may not be the answers they want to hear, but I will be truthful and forthright. My opinion is that this branch should have been shut down weeks after inception when multiple and serious issues were identified. I pushed for that at the time, but others wanted to give things a chance to work out.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, they have not worked themselves out and here we are.<br />
<br />
I do not expect some to like this post, agree with it and that may include some within the BC executive but I felt that these things needed to be said. I have nothing against those who have been involved in trying to launch this branch and in fact do not know any of them personally other than from the odd meeting or event. I want what is best for CAMRA BC and the members who support what CAMRA is all about.<br />
<br />
And, most of all, remember, it is only beer. Lets have some fun and fight the good fight of advocating on behalf of the craft beer drinkers of BC. We do not need to fight each other as there is enough conflict in the world already.<br />
<br />Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-25820615954831655692015-11-30T19:23:00.003-08:002015-11-30T19:23:52.464-08:00The Mad Scientist & the $1000 Bottle of Beer "It is the most interesting beer in the province right now."<br />
<br />
A
bold statement from any brewer plying their trade in a province with
close to 100 craft breweries, but when it comes from someone as
creative, innovative, and yes, as eccentric as <a href="http://www.stormbrewing.org/" target="_blank">Storm Brewing's</a> James
Walton, my curiosity is instantly piqued.<br />
<br />
Whether Glacial Mammoth Extinction is BC's most interesting beer will cause debate among beer craft beer lovers, but what is not up for debate is that the $1000 price tag for a one-litre bottle makes Glacial Mammoth Extinction BC's most expensive beer! My research shows it is not only the most expensive beer on the BC market now, but that it is the most expensive beer ever sold in Canada.<br />
<br />
<br />
Have I piqued your interest yet?<br />
<br />
This
beer is about more than what is inside the bottle, although the beer
stands out as one of the most unique beers Walton has ever released from
Storm Brewing, and that is saying something, but the hefty price tag has more to do with the packaging than it does the beer inside.<br />
<br />
And that is no disrespect meant to the beer which is special.<br />
<br />
In fact, Walton was so pleased with how the Glacial Mammoth Extinction turned
out that he decided to give this beer special treatment, commissioning two East Vancouver artists to create unique works of art to package a limited release of 10, one-litre bottles from the 400 litres produced.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgd8r4RnW6XC3CuXZPEge8mOv9oZ7Phb_5OcdKAvurZQoxSB6yhyphenhyphen7QRIlIYdDqXzGH6_sOsZ5SDn6sGR5_SkZ3u1tteFY_DwrVu1mnx01viL1NKjp7pjNlkY3ugWbYa6prL_E0-HLqiBkE/s1600/James+Mammoth.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgd8r4RnW6XC3CuXZPEge8mOv9oZ7Phb_5OcdKAvurZQoxSB6yhyphenhyphen7QRIlIYdDqXzGH6_sOsZ5SDn6sGR5_SkZ3u1tteFY_DwrVu1mnx01viL1NKjp7pjNlkY3ugWbYa6prL_E0-HLqiBkE/s320/James+Mammoth.JPG" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The Mad Scientist himself & a $1000 bottle of beer</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The beer comes packaged in hand-blown glass bottles created by <a href="http://www.terminalcityglass.com/" target="_blank">Terminal City Glass Co-Op's Brad Turner</a>. These bottles are works of art in their own right but when you consider each bottle is adorned with a one-of-a-kind pendant, made by artist Richard Marcus, from 35,000-year-old mammoth ivory, you begin to understand why these bottles are Canada's most expensive beers.<br />
<br />
"(It's) the only beer I have ever thought worthy of being
treated that extravagantly," stated Walton when queried as to why he was moved to package his beer in such a unique and expensive manner.<br />
<br />
Which brings us to the beer itself.<br />
<br />
Walton,
Storm's iconic owner-brewer, has earned the nickname of The Mad
Scientist in BC craft beer circles and is well known for thinking
outside of the box when it comes to brewing beer. From brewing and aging
Belgian-style lambics close to 20 years ago, before anyone in BC but the ultimate beer geeks knew what a lambic was, to his current trend of
creating weekly weird, wacky and delicious "Brainstorm" kegs
for growler fills at the brewery, Walton has not let the restrictions of
established beer styles or current brewing trends limit his
imagination.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrIPiRh5HfuZ1G8U1e3POW4fe8nl_acgn6jrQ6xz5bUJ3c0h2gJrsudLRd7OBovwxaVw_copJueu-uvUEv6hqj-l13o0WaD5YsO4_aKm2Xm-tHjfrpLIK1ByH42utjdptN-hxnYW40jPc/s1600/Mammoth+Tusk+Pendant.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrIPiRh5HfuZ1G8U1e3POW4fe8nl_acgn6jrQ6xz5bUJ3c0h2gJrsudLRd7OBovwxaVw_copJueu-uvUEv6hqj-l13o0WaD5YsO4_aKm2Xm-tHjfrpLIK1ByH42utjdptN-hxnYW40jPc/s200/Mammoth+Tusk+Pendant.JPG" width="150" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Art meets craft beer</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The Glacial Mammoth Extinction is a prime example of how far Walton is prepared to push the limits.<br />
<br />
Walton took his <span style="font-family: inherit;">formidable <a href="http://www.stormbrewing.org/#!thebeers/csgz" target="_blank">Imperial Flanders Red Sour Ale</a>, which is an 11% (a Storm 11%) sour bomb</span> meant for those most adventurous craft beer drinkers, and froze it, in two stages over a month, to -30 Celsius. The high-octane, boozy liquid which remained was then placed into French oak barrels and aged for two years. What has come out of this intense and complicated process is a 25% ABV (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) nectar that tastes more like fortified wine or Port than beer.<br />
<br />
In keeping with my philosophy of not rating beers, I will only say that I liked it when I recently had a wee nip at Storm.<br />
<br />
Actually, I liked it a lot and yes, I would not hesitate to order and drink it again.<br />
<br />
For those who tasted this beer last year, when Walton released a keg as a sneak preview of what was coming, the extra year in the oak barrels has treated this beer well, mellowing it out and allowing the more subtle flavours to come to the fore. It is highly drinkable even at 25%.<br />
<br />
That is as close to a review as you will get from me.<br />
<br />
The official description I received from Storm Brewing states that the Glacial Mammoth Extinction is, "a sweet, rich, viscous 100% malt beverage that
resembles Port more than beer".<br />
<br />
Glacial Mammoth Extinction tasting notes (from Storm): <br />
<ul>
<li>
Colour </li>
<ul>
<li>dark brown </li>
</ul>
<li>
Nose </li>
<ul>
<li>raisins</li>
<li> prunes</li>
<li> black cherries,</li>
<li>Sherry notes </li>
</ul>
<ul>
</ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>
Taste</li>
<ul>
<li> initial sweetness</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>
tang of acidity on the front</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>umami </li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>
prunes</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>
muscat grape</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>
soy sauce</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>
tannins from the base beer as well as tannins from in the barrel
combine together to balance the sweetness</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>
Mouthfeel</li>
<ul>
<li> thick with nice legs from the alcohol</li>
</ul>
</ul>
For the majority who cannot afford $1000, Glacial Mammoth Extinction will be available for growler fills at Storm Dec 5th at a
still-pricey-but-far-more-reasonable price of $40 for 0.5 litre or $80
for a litre.<br />
<br />
Walton told me the Glacial Mammoth Extinction is "bullet proof" and "likely infinitely stable" in regards to cellaring, stating that the beer may go flat in the flip-top bottles but that it will not go off so if you can afford it, it might be worth the risk to put some of this away to see if and how it ages. <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-21120119380302339392015-06-19T08:58:00.000-07:002015-06-19T09:10:38.587-07:00Recent Craft Beer Price Hikes Nothing More Than BC Liberal Asshattery<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>"Let's put things in perspective: every month, some prices go up and some
prices go down -- just as any other retail cost of good -- but we're
talking about cents here."</i> - Suzanne Anton as quote by Bill Tieleman in <a href="http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/06/09/BC-Craft-Beer-Hikes/" target="_blank">The Tyee</a> June 9, 2015 concerning BC beer prices.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>The Reality Since April 1, 2015:</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li><i>55 beer products deceased in price;</i></li>
<li><i>19 beer products showed no change in price;</i></li>
<li><i>94 beer products increased by less than 1%;</i></li>
<li><i>219 beer products increased between 1% and 5%;</i></li>
<li><i>123 beer products increased between 5.01% and 10%; and,</i></li>
<li><i>74 beer products increased by more than 10%. ****</i></li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
</blockquote>
I know just a short month ago I stated I was packing it in as a blogger, but this latest BC Liberal move, which saw them randomly hike the prices of beers, mostly craft beers, without telling the breweries ahead of time or giving them a cut of the increase, has me foaming at the mouth and I feel compelled to vent here before I explode.<br />
<br />
Damn you BC Liberals and your BC liquor policy reforms. <br />
<br />
This latest price hike on June 2nd was a blatant kick in the crotch to BC craft beer consumers who have been the driving force behind the growth of the flourishing BC craft beer industry.<br />
<br />
What an asshat move!<br />
<br />
As a side note, I am submitting to the Urban Slang Dictionary the following : <br />
Asshat- (noun), definition, "BC Liberal politician". <br />
Asshattery - (verb), definition, "actions taken by BC Liberal Party related to BC liquor reforms"). <br />
<br />
Okay, back on track now with my rant...<br />
Approximately 40 new breweries have opened in BC the past few years and many more are in the planning stages. Yes, BC breweries are producing world-class brews, but without consumers to purchase them these beers would most likely never be brewed commercially. As well, businesses and jobs associated directly and indirectly with the craft beer industry would not be supported or created, and local economies not spurred on in communities across the province.<br />
<br />
I can just imagine the conversation in the BC Liberal Caucus meeting.<br />
<br />
Question: "We need to increase government revenues folks, where can we screw the general public next?"<br />
Response: "Well this craft beer seems to be selling well and has increased sales by about 40% over the past few years, why don't we just raise prices there? We don't need to tell anyone. Breweries are too busy making beer and consumers are too apathetic to do anything about it, not to mention, they are beer drinkers. We can just keep the difference. No one will notice..."<br />
<br />
I wish the BC Liberals would at least buy me dinner and give me a little kiss before bending me over the table and, well, you know where I am going with that one. I'm going to let you fill in the blanks and keep this PG rated.<br />
<br />
This price hike could finally be the move that kills the goose laying the golden eggs.<br />
<br />
We already pay outrageous prices for craft beer in BC and this is not because of the craft breweries who produce it. There is a tipping point for prices where
consumers get turned off (and pissed off) with the cost of the goods
in question and begin to think long and hard about making
purchases and look for other options. <br />
<br />
In communities like mine, Powell River, craft beer is just becoming accepted in the mainstream thanks to our local brewery, Townsite, who have blazed the trail. There are many beer drinkers here just discovering craft beer and who are converting over from the mainstream lager swill that was the only choice in town for decades.<br />
<br />
Restaurants, pubs and private liquor stores are just starting to support the industry and offer craft beer products regularly. Many businesses were previously hesitant to sell craft beer due to the fact that it was a new in this market and, more often than not, more expensive than the national brand lagers. Pricing is far more important in communities where jobs, especially higher paying jobs, are hard to come by.<br />
<br />
Higher-priced products, due to the harsh reality of economics and family budgets, are a hard sell when there are cheaper, although inferior, options . Pricing craft beer beyond those consumer thresholds could stall out this industry in markets outside the major urban areas and tourist resorts.<br />
<br />
This scenario is playing itself out in many communities around BC. Not every market is like Vancouver and the Lower Mainland where the consumers are used to paying ridiculously high prices. This move to increase prices yet again, just for the sake of increasing government revenue, will slow down sales in these smaller markets and could possibly confine the craft beer revolution's spread across the province.<br />
<br />
Most of the smaller breweries operate with a slim profit margin and are trying to find the balance between making a reasonable profit and not alienating consumers due to price. Our liquor prices are artificially high in BC, boosted by our government who rake in hundreds of millions of dollars a year on booze. We are paying high prices because the government controls the final prices of booze in this province, not the manufacturers.<br />
<br />
A prime example was just prior to the April 1st change over to the government's new alcohol pricing system. The Liquor Distribution Branch (LDB) contacted craft breweries (and I am sure all booze manufacturers in the province) and gave them a chance to adjust their wholesale prices; the price manufacturers set to sell their products to the LDB. The catch was that the government was not telling the breweries how much the government was going to mark up these prices, so the breweries had no idea what the final price on their products would be on the shelves.<br />
<br />
The brewery folks in BC literally had to guess as to how much consumers would be paying for their beer and were hoping they guessed right on their wholesale pricing. Setting the price too high (underestimating the mark-up) meant potentially alienating customers because of price increases and setting the price too low meant a decrease in revenue for the brewery for no reason whatsover.<br />
<br />
But at least both the industry and consumers were aware that prices were about to shift April 1st and were, although in most cases unhappy, prepared. <br />
<br />
The June 2nd, prices went up again for some craft beers without warning or consulting the craft beer breweries or explanation to consumers that this was government driven and not a decision from the breweries themselves. I know of one brewery partner who found out about the price hike when they saw the increased price of their products on the BC Liquor Store shelves!<br />
<br />
And not a penny of the latest increase is going to the breweries. <br />
<br />
Suzanne Anton and her crew in charge of all things boozy in BC keep up the mantra, of "don't worry, some prices will go up by a little, some will go down. This is the reality of the consumer market. It is only a few cents here and there..."<br />
<br />
Yes Minister Anton, let's put things in perspective. <br />
<br />
The reality is that since April 1st (stats from <a href="http://camravancouver.ca/2015/06/15/advocacy-update-2015-liquor-reform/" target="_blank">CAMRA Vancouver update</a>):<br />
<ul>
<li>10% of Beer products have dropped in price.</li>
<li>3% of Beer products have shown no change</li>
<li>87% of Beer products have increased in price</li>
</ul>
<br />
If you look at which products have been increased, the majority are craft beer products made here in BC. How the Hell is that a sign that the government is supporting the BC craft beer industry and small businesses, under which category most craft beer breweries fall under?<br />
<br />
These price hikes are stacked on top of the price hikes many BC communities endured last year when the BC Liberals reintroduced "happy hour" which they paired up with new minimum drink price scheme (click<a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2014/06/open-letter-to-suzanne-anton-john-yap.html" target="_blank"> here</a> to read) which impacted those going out to a licensed establishment for a drink.<br />
<br />
Now we are getting nailed on our take home purchases. <br />
<br />
I am sick and tired of the cynical and entitled nature of this government. Their liquor policy reform consultations were supposed to be held to help find out the wants and needs of British Columbians and alochol industry stakeholders. I am quite certain not one craft beer consumer put forward they wanted multiple price increases applied to their favourite beers. I am also certain not one craft brewery representative put forward the desire to have craft beer prices go up while brewery profit margins stayed the same or decreased slightly.<br />
<br />
Wake up consumers. Start writing letters, e-mails to those in charge. Start letting your local MLA, no matter what party they are from, know this is unacceptable. If not, we are going to continue to see the BC Liberals choke off the industry until it stalls out due to decreased sales secondary to ever-increasing prices.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">(****statistics from the Campaign for Real Ale of BC - Vancouver Branch)</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-21408931761455468942015-04-23T09:23:00.000-07:002015-04-23T09:23:00.532-07:00It's a WrapFour and a half years ago I decided to combine two of my great loves, writing and craft beer, and the VanEast Beer Blog was born. When I started, I had no real idea what I wanted to focus on, but my interest in politics and my connections in the craft beer industry soon sent The VEBB down the political road and I was lucky to be writing during some very interesting and tumultuous times in the evolution of both the BC craft beer industry and BC liquor policies.<br />
<br />
Many times it was my friends in the craft beer industry who fed me inside information about issues and problems. They came to me because they could not, or would not speak out because of a very real fear of reprisal from the BC liquor bureaucrats and they knew I would speak out loudly knowing I was out of reach. To all of you, and you know who you are, thanks for feeding me such great leads and tips that allowed me to make a few politicians, liquor inspectors or LCLB-LDB brass squirm for a few moments when their complete and total lack of common sense was exposed.<br />
<br />
This blog has never been wildly popular but judging from the comments and e-mails I did receive, I found a dedicated following among many of the politicians and bureaucrats involved in forming, implementing and policing BC liquor policy and craft beer industry shakers and movers.<br />
<br />
And probably more surprising to me, the mainstream media began to monitor what I was writing and on several occasions took a post I had written and ran with it, sometimes, much to my amusement, blatantly lifting words from this space and placing them in a more highly visible place in their television or print reports.<br />
<br />
Not all have agreed with what I have written, but that is the nature of writing about contentious subjects, especially when personal opinions are put forth. I tried my best to use my journalism background to investigate what I was writing about but I could never resist including some sort of Paddyrant and those who know me know that I can be fairly straightforward and blunt when the mood strikes me.<br />
<br />
I am proud of what this blog has accomplished in regards to highlighting the good, the bad and the ugly of the BC craft beer and liquor industries and the policies that govern them. I am pleased I have been able to help out a few friends when they needed a little help from someone outside the reach of the politicians and bureaucrats.<br />
<br />
And I take a certain satisfaction, as I mentioned above, that I have been a major pain in the ass for a few of those who contribute to the asshattery that takes place related to BC liquor policies and the enforcement of same.<br />
<br />
But as you have probably guessed, the time has come to shut this space down, well, at least as far as new content goes. My growing family responsibilities, work responsibilities and time spent having fun growing Powell River's Campaign for Real Ale of BC branch takes up more than enough time to make it very difficult for me to spend the time and resources to keep the VanEast Beer Blog going. It may not seem like writing a few words now and then would be time consuming, but trust me, it took a lot of time and effort to produce most blog posts I posted.<br />
<br />
Not that it matters. There are many out there writing about beer. And let's face it, this was always just about craft beer and my love for it and to tell you the truth, I'd much rather be enjoying a craft beer on my deck while chatting to friends than writing about it.<br />
<br />
I will still be around, still involved in advocating and supporting BC-brewed craft beer. I am still involved with the Campaign for Real Ale of BC, at least through 2015 and will still be found sipping a Fat Tug or two craft beer spots around the province.<br />
<br />
So thanks to all who have supported this blog, whether you were a fan of what I said or read it in order to get pissed off and voice extreme dislike for me as a blogger and in some instance, as a person. I think the comments highlighting how misinformed and stupid I was brought as much joy and motivation to me as those who voiced positive support.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-82632555471172837322014-09-29T04:57:00.001-07:002014-09-29T04:57:17.220-07:00End Moratorium on LRS Licenses to Stop Exodus From Rural Areas - Quick, Easy FixI don't know why it took so long for people to figure out the negative impact the elimination of the "no more than five kilometre" rule for the buying and relocating of private liquor store (LRS) licenses would have on rural areas in BC.<br />
<br />
In Friday's Vancouver Sun, an article appeared with the headline <a href="http://www.vancouversun.com/touch/news/metro/Liquor+licences+being+sold+anticipation+rules/10236505/story.html?rel=831135" target="_blank">"Liquor licenses being sold in anticipation of new rules"</a> which has caused a bit of a stir in some rural communities and among those who are interested in the BC retail alcohol industry.<br />
<br />
This is not really breaking news as this situation has been bubbling and boiling for months now, even before the change to the BC liquor laws concerning relocating LRS licenses was announced last March by Liquor Control and Licensing Branch (LCLB) General Manager, Douglas Scott.<br />
<br />
The old policy (which is still in place until some time next year) states that a LRS license can be sold and relocated, but that the new location can be no more than five kilometres from the old location. This ensured rural areas would not be abandoned and that there would not be an over-concentration of LRS locations in urban areas. The new policy, which is set to come into effect sometime in 2015, states that LRS licenses can be purchased then moved anywhere in BC, as long as they are not moved to within one kilometre of an existing LRS, government liquor store (GLS) or rural agency store (RAS).<br />
<br />
My immediate thought at that time of the announcement was that LRS owners in smaller, rural areas, where commercial property is much cheaper than in urban areas, must be ecstatic as the value of their businesses just skyrocketed. In fact, before the announcement was made, I know there were big city types sniffing around in my town of Powell River, attempting to buy existing LRS locations and I do not think they were planning on leaving the big city for the fresh air and ocean views of the Sunshine Coast.<br />
<br />
Obviously they were in the know and had been tipped off that this change was coming and they were trying to get in before the LRS prices trended upwards in the hinterlands of BC.<br />
<br />
I remember sitting in my local, The Red Lion Pub, one of the LRS locations mentioned in the Sun article, discussing this fact with friends over a beer just after I had heard the planned law changes. It was as plain as day to me that sharp business folks were going to shop about in cheaper rural areas to buy LRS licenses and then move them out of their communities to more lucrative urban markets. The big city purchasers of these licenses do not care that the locals in the small communities are getting screwed and will be highly inconvenienced by the moving of their local LRS.<br />
<br />
It was also obvious to me that smart LRS owners were going to increase the price of their businesses, if they were looking at selling, or be tempted to sell as their business was suddenly much more valuable and desirable on the market. LRS licenses are already a much-coveted commodity due to the moratorium on granting new licenses in BC and with the new policy, a LRS in Smalltown, BC was closer in value to those in say Vancouver, due to the fact that there were far less restrictions on relocating them.<br />
<br />
This inflated value of all LRS locations and the and exodus of same from rural communities can all be blamed on moratorium on granting new retail liquor licenses. I see the solution to this problem as being quite simple - if a LRS license is sold and relocated more than a kilometre away, allow for another LRS license to be approved for the location where the license was moved from to replace that service for local consumers. The policy could stipulate that the new license could not be tied to anyone who had a financial stake in the license which had been sold and relocated to stop people from just opening up LRS locations and flipping them to those who want to relocate that license. The government could even put a stipulation that the new LRS license could not be relocated for five years...Hell, make it 10 years!<br />
<br />
The Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM) should have been yelling loudly at the government during their recently held convention but they were too distracted by the more pressing issues of saving rural, coastal communities by trying to right the BC Ferries shipwreck.<br />
<br />
I think that allowing LRS licenses to be relocated anywhere in BC is not a bad decision, provided the government allow for the replacement of that service in the community the LRS is moved from.<br />
<br />
As I have said in the past, BC liquor policy needs to make sense for all of British Columbians, not just those who live in urban areas.<br />
<br />
Small BC communities are already struggling to attract and hang on to viable businesses and this stupid, short-sighted change to liquor policies is going to do just the opposite by encouraging small town business owners to flog their LRS's at falsely-inflated prices, to those who have no plan to keep that business in an area where it is much needed. Once again it is the consumers who are getting shafted by the BC Liberal liquor law reforms - specifically the consumers in rural areas. Like with the increase in the minimum drink price, which has impacted many rural areas negatively by driving the price of beer up, those who are drafting the new policies did not look at the impact this would have on British Columbian alcohol consumers outside urban areas.<br />
<br />
Or if they did, the Liberals simply did not care that rural consumers, who already have limited choices, would be further limited and their communities without a successful business which provided much-needed employment and services.<br />
<br />
I cannot blame those who own LRS locations in small towns or those who wish to buy these licenses and move them. They are business people trying to maximize their assets. They are doing nothing shady or illegal. They are doing what is allowed under the law.<br />
<br />
Those owners in small communities will have to deal with the fallout of selling what potentially could be the only LRS license in the area which would leave their neighbours and those they bump into on a daily basis without an outlet to buy booze outside of the local BC Liquor Store's restricted hours or the limited selection at the local rural liquor store (RAS) if there is one. But some cold stares and snide comments will be a little easier to take for these business folks due to the fact they probably were paid far more than they ever imagined they would get for their business.<br />
<br />
Lift the moratorium and this all goes away. Those wishing to sell can still make a pretty penny for their businesses to be bought and relocated but at least there would be a mechanism in place for consumers in small towns to be somewhat protected.<br />
<br />Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-84913582487754789452014-08-04T20:23:00.001-07:002014-08-04T20:24:00.441-07:00Federal Government Want to Make Sure a Pint is a Pint - Maximum Fines of Up to $50,000 for Repeat Short-Pour Offenders Now Federal Law.<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>"</i></span></span><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.1200008392334px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>You're entitled to get what you pay for</i></span></span><i style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.119998931884766px;">" - </span></i><i style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.119998931884766px;">Industry Canada</span></i></blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgabH9Y94P0-RKqoahtAzFAwlkoFDJaU_cCydoy0pvMSCdeYJeI7zkMS75eGYOYJsec8lxQI94HFuNxpzVdo4wM5serCQdq-0lg8a52T4sCsxEexKTyhDOE7K2o4097_RC_fszFxlggOf4/s1600/Bt-vaMkIEAAXfb-.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgabH9Y94P0-RKqoahtAzFAwlkoFDJaU_cCydoy0pvMSCdeYJeI7zkMS75eGYOYJsec8lxQI94HFuNxpzVdo4wM5serCQdq-0lg8a52T4sCsxEexKTyhDOE7K2o4097_RC_fszFxlggOf4/s1600/Bt-vaMkIEAAXfb-.jpg" height="218" width="320" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"><br /></span></span></span>
The Campaign for Real Ale of BC's (CAMRA BC) <a href="http://camravancouver.ca/advocacy/fuss/" target="_blank">Fess Up to Serving Sizes</a> (#FUSS) Campaign received some unexpected help August 1st when the Canadian Federal Government launched their <a href="http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/080.nsf/eng/home" target="_blank">"Fairness at the Pumps" Campaign.</a><br />
<br />
Fairness at the Pumps states, "(e)<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">ffective August 1, 2014, the law states that businesses who short sell consumers, on purpose or through carelessness, can face penalties or court-imposed fines of up to $50,000." </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The information on Industry Canada's website, which clearly includes</span></span><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"> draft beer servings in the campaign,</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"> encourages consumers to file a complaint if they suspect they are "not getting what they paid for" and provides instructions as to what information is required to help Measurement Canada investigate and a </span><a href="http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/icgc.nsf/eng/h_07026.html#from=Weights&situation=measuring" style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;" target="_blank">link</a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"> to file the complaint electronically, by telephone or by snail mail. They are even using</span><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"> the </span>hashtag<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"> #</span>getwhatyoupayfor<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"> in tweets, something I would recommend consumers do so Industry Canada can track interest regarding this new law.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuTHLPzTz4zJuQYWykw5jAvLem7xo1H2TD6Wxj1P92Nr74vp7_nzZ9OGfDYtXVQCcsJRwW72OTEbZL4mYzYsDG7tfAzup_iDfGQ0qNb9NMBXka0FJp4B9SDeB-L1QqhdFLaUPWHJ_f1YY/s1600/measurement-canada-1024x367.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuTHLPzTz4zJuQYWykw5jAvLem7xo1H2TD6Wxj1P92Nr74vp7_nzZ9OGfDYtXVQCcsJRwW72OTEbZL4mYzYsDG7tfAzup_iDfGQ0qNb9NMBXka0FJp4B9SDeB-L1QqhdFLaUPWHJ_f1YY/s1600/measurement-canada-1024x367.jpg" height="227" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">instruction on how to file an official complaint if you suspect you have been short-poured<br />
<br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.119998931884766px;">It also appears that CAMRA BC's #FUSS Campaign is finally being acknowledged by the BC Liberal Government who included the following in their <a href="http://www.newsroom.gov.bc.ca/2014/07/updated-prices-better-align-with-consumers-expectations.html" target="_blank">last liquor policy update </a>concerning lowering the minimum drink price for serving sizes of over 50 ounces for draft beer and cider:</span></span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">"Pubs and restaurants serve draught beer and cider in a variety of sizes - generally, 9 oz., 16 oz. or 20 oz. glasses, or by the pitcher (approximately 60 oz.). If unsure, British Columbians are encouraged to ask establishments what their serving sizes are, so they can be sure of the per-ounce price they are paying and be better aware of the amount of alcohol they are consuming.</span></span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<ul style="background-color: white; list-style: outside url(http://www.newsroom.gov.bc.ca/styles/images/arrow.gramif); margin-left: 0px; padding-left: 20px;">
<li style="line-height: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 5px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">As part of the terms of their licence, B.C.’s licensed establishments must have a drink list available to consumers that outlines their serving sizes.</span></li>
</ul>
<ul style="background-color: white; list-style: outside url(http://www.newsroom.gov.bc.ca/styles/images/arrow.gramif); margin-left: 0px; padding-left: 20px;">
<li style="line-height: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 5px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">If consumers have concerns about the accuracy of serving sizes offered at an establishment in B.C., they can contact Industry Canada: <a href="http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/icgc.nsf/eng/home">http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/icgc.nsf/eng/home</a>"</span></li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
Until this announcement t<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.119998931884766px;">he BC Liberals have brushed off CAMRA BC's complaints that many pubs and restaurants do not declare their serving sizes and if they do list them, they do so inaccurately. Although they do not state they are going to enforce the law and put the ball clearly in the court of the consumer to follow up, the Liberals have at least acknowledged </span></span><span style="line-height: 21.119998931884766px;">publicly</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"> to consumers this serving size list requirement exists and also have acknowledged that not knowing how much alcohol you are consuming can impact consumers in a negative way, something CAMRA BC has been pointing out to the LCLB & the Liberals for years.</span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;">Now it appears that Industry Canada is ready to go to bat for draft beer consumers in our country but here in BC the only fly in the ointment is that if the LCLB does not enforce strictly the need for posted serving sizes, and a licensee has no listed serving size, then consumers cannot complain they are being short-poured as they will not know what a full-pour measure is. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;">For the Measurement Canada to able to investigate a serving size issue, they need to know what that serving size is supposed to be. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;">Conveniently, the Liberals left out the information that <b>if a licensee cannot produce a serving size-price list for their alcoholic beverages, you can make a formal complaint to the LCLB at lclb.lclb@gov.bc.ca or by calling </b></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #111111; line-height: 18px;"><b><span style="font-family: inherit;">1-866 209-2111</span></b></span><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"> and they are compelled to send a liquor inspector to investigate and enforce the law.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;">Both levels of government have put the burden of responsibility onto consumers who they are advising to file complaints if draft beer servings are short-pour or misrepresented. If you really want to make sure a pint is a pint and stop this practice of misrepresenting serving sizes and short pouring by some licensees, you need to take action and file an official complaint. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.119998931884766px;">Both the Canadian Government and BC Provincial Government have opened the door, acknowledged there is an issue and given consumers the information they need to kick in that door for good, but it is up to consumers to ensure they get what they pay for.</span><br />
<br />
If you are short-poured or an establishment does not have a serving size list when you ask for one, try to resolve the issue by talking to the management of the establishment in a polite manner. If you still cannot resolve the issue to your satisfaction, put the government bureaucrats to work and file a complaint.<br />
<br />
It be fantastic to be able to say you live in a province where a pint is a pint!Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-47821873381537277282014-07-25T13:34:00.001-07:002014-07-25T13:34:54.613-07:00Close But No Cigar - Draft Beer Pitchers Minimum Price Lowered But Status Quo for Everything ElseThey were so close to doing the right thing but in the end the BC Liberals did little too correct their epic failure regarding new drink price minimums in BC.<br />
<br />
In what can only be described as a knee-jerk reaction to negative feedback received concerning the controversial liquor <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2014/06/43-price-hike-does-not-sound-like-happy.html" target="_blank">drink price minimums</a> announced June 20th, the BC Liberals <a href="http://www.newsroom.gov.bc.ca/2014/07/updated-prices-better-align-with-consumers-expectations.html" target="_blank">send out a notice</a> today that they were , "(c)<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">reating a new category for draught beer and cider servings 50 oz. and over - with a minimum price of $0.20 per oz," to "</span></span><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">better meet the expectations of British Columbians". </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Today's announcement stated that draught beer servings over 50 oz (1420ml), otherwise known as pitchers, will have a minimum drink price set at $0.20 per ounce/28ml but all other draught beer serving sizes will remain at new minimum of $0.25 per oz/28ml which is by far the highest in Canada.</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">For the record, even the new pitcher category, at $0.20 per oz/28ml is still the highest beer minimum in Canada. </span></span><br />
<span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglxFZDfZY4ZYcxWfR1Yik_XZhUnULR2KXPSFNyx1G2CV3uf-yGhw1-EO9qgtdukBsnypBmT-pwfCClDVow4jphS5T7rbFcrpjRBS7-AHUiFgy8oOnZd3cCHOVOLJvwDMTo4PhKAogxcrI/s1600/14728878115_866e44b9e9_n.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglxFZDfZY4ZYcxWfR1Yik_XZhUnULR2KXPSFNyx1G2CV3uf-yGhw1-EO9qgtdukBsnypBmT-pwfCClDVow4jphS5T7rbFcrpjRBS7-AHUiFgy8oOnZd3cCHOVOLJvwDMTo4PhKAogxcrI/s1600/14728878115_866e44b9e9_n.jpg" /></a></span></div>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">Parliamentary</span><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"> Secretary for Liquor Policy Reform, John Yap, was quoted in the announcement as saying, </span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">"</span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">The B.C. Liquor Policy Review has been centred on listening to the views of British Columbians and industry stakeholders, and best aligning any changes we make with their views. Upon reviewing B.C.’s minimum prices, we realized they </span></span><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">weren't</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"> on par with consumers’ expectations and we took action to find a fair compromise that still upholds B.C.’s high standards for health and safety.”</span></span></span></blockquote>
I am curious how he came to the conclusion that encouraging consumers to buy the biggest serving size possible "<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">upholds B.C.’s high standards for health and safety"?</span><br />
<br />
Imagine this conversation:<br />
<br />
Friend 1: "I see that a pitcher is cheaper by the ounce than a 16-oz sleeve! I was just going to have one sleeve but why don't we order the pitcher so we can take advantage of this great deal?"<br />
<br />
Friend 2: "Yeah, I was just going to have one as well, but to Hell with it, lets get the pitcher. One or two extra beers never caused anyone any harm...by the way, are you driving home?"<br />
<br />
As craft beer drinkers, this change will impact us in a very limited way. Very few craft-beer-friendly places serve pitchers as most craft beers are stronger in alcohol so licensees do not feel it is appropriate to offer the bigger serving sizes. In fact, fewer and fewer licensees are even offering pitchers any more as, more often than not, draught beer serving sizes are being reduced to the ever-shrinking "sleeve" glass.<br />
<br />
This change will give some slight relief to those who enjoy the mainstream lagers that have dominated the Canadian market for decades but, as mentioned, they will still be paying far more for their happy hour pitchers than in other provinces in Canada.<br />
<br />
This is a bizarre move by Justice Minister-Attorney General, Suzanne Anton and Yap and I really wonder if they do think they are "listening" to British Columbians and that this change will placate the masses who are seriously pissed off about the June 20th minimum drink price-happy hour announcement. Don't get me wrong, today's announcement is a baby step in the right direction, but at the end of the day, I would have to say that the BC Liberals and those dealing with the liquor policy reforms have shit the bed once again.<br />
<br />
They cannot really believe we are that stupid to believe this small, token change fixes the EPIC FAIL that is our new minimum drink price standards.<br />
<br />
I will be writing more on this subject over the weekend but just wanted to get a quick post out there to let everyone know what was going on.Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-72114098217991353682014-07-17T10:24:00.001-07:002014-07-17T10:25:21.755-07:00Stateside Craft Does the Right Thing by Their CustomersAt least one Commercial Drive beer joint recently caught short-pouring customers have made a considerable effort to "serve it right" to give their customers what they are paying for and as a result have received #FUSS Approved status from the Vancouver branch of the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA) of BC.<br />
<br />
Stateside Craft, located at 1st Avenue and Commercial Drive, have changed their glassware to a larger size in order to ensure they can fully deliver on their promised serving size of draft beer after it was posted on social media a few weeks ago that they were serving 12-oz pours when they were claiming serving sizes of 14 ounces.<br />
<br />
Stateside had been advertising 14 ounces, but in fact, their glasses filled to the brim were capable of holding that volume so with head, as is essential with a good pour, and a little space to make sure the beer did not spill over when transported to the table, the pour came in at 12 ounces. This practice of advertising the glass capacity and not the actual volume of beer poured is a widespread practice in BC that actually puts licensees at odds with the law according to <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2014/07/consumers-rejoice-as-getting-good-head.html" target="_blank">Measurement Canada</a>.<br />
<br />
I know 2 ounces does not sound like much, but for a 14-oz beer that is $7, which is not uncommon in craft beer places in Vancouver, being 2 oz short is the equivalent of short-pouring by $1 before tax and tip. Add that up over a year and see how much money for nothing you may be forking out at places skimming off the top of their beer servings.<br />
<br />
Almost immediately after the short-pour video hit social media, Stateside representatives stated they would right the wrong and it appears they have followed through.<br />
<br />
CAMRA Vancouver president, Adam Chatburn, who was on the original measuring adventure, went back to Stateside July 15th and found that the glassware had indeed changed. The measure posted also had changed from 14 oz to <span style="font-family: inherit;">400,000,000,000 picolitres, a cheeky but valid use of the metric system that is legal and works out to 400 ml or about 14 oz. Chatburn measured his beer and found the serving to be, "spot on." (<a href="http://camravancouver.ca/2014/07/16/fuss-update-stateside-craft-change-glassware/" target="_blank">see post here</a>) He also found, that except for the cider, which is a very high quality and high priced item, the beer prices had not changed. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimeQkVqfr1Kga6gNcrFgvnpX8YCaA_cbEEX5C3lO8-Io-tQLA73GgKL9ZXGLQmtoRTqcOomVrXWnwZ_KO_0M_5fAncp8yFjrVCSMip-hmc97WldLv9eWm28mjAnxhGeC6ihVJZQ2os13w/s1600/stateside-nailed-it-1024x535.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimeQkVqfr1Kga6gNcrFgvnpX8YCaA_cbEEX5C3lO8-Io-tQLA73GgKL9ZXGLQmtoRTqcOomVrXWnwZ_KO_0M_5fAncp8yFjrVCSMip-hmc97WldLv9eWm28mjAnxhGeC6ihVJZQ2os13w/s1600/stateside-nailed-it-1024x535.jpg" height="208" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Stateside have turned a negative into a positive by doing the right thing<br />and fixing serving size-pour issues. Lets hope they get consumer support<br />& other craft beer places follow suit</i></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
"It just shows that establishments that are committed to the craft beer
community are prepared to do the right thing and give consumers the beer they
promised," stated a very pleased Chatburn who posted <a href="http://camravancouver.ca/2014/07/16/fuss-update-stateside-craft-change-glassware/" target="_blank">here</a> to give Stateside praise.<span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">"</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; line-height: 18px;">Congratulations to</span><a href="https://www.facebook.com/statesidecraft?fref=ts" style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; line-height: 18px; text-decoration: none;"> </a><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stateside Craft</span><a href="https://www.facebook.com/statesidecraft?fref=ts" style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; line-height: 18px; text-decoration: none;"> </a><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 18px;">and thanks for stepping up and doing the right thing for consumers, it’s businesses like this who are leading the way serving craft beer. </span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 18px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 18px;">Chatburn hopes this change to honest and accurate pours will garner consumer support and states in his post, </span></span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white;"><i><b><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 18px;">"if </span></span><span style="line-height: 18px;">you've</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 18px;"> not been there (Stateside) yet I can give them the #FUSS seal of approval so you know that when you put your money down you’ll get every last picolitre of beer (or amazing cider) you paid for."</span></span></b></i></span></blockquote>
<br />
Stateside Craft was one of several Commercial Drive establishments found to be serving less beer than their serving sizes indicated when Chatburn and a friend headed out armed with a calibrated cup, high definition camera, their smart phones, a thirst for beer and a healthy curiosity on July 5th. The pair posted their findings, including videos <a href="http://camravancouver.ca/2014/07/06/fuss-comes-back-with-a-vengeance/" target="_blank">(click here & go to bottom of page)</a>, immediately on social media which <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2014/07/shit-storm-in-beer-glass.html" target="_blank">caused a bit of a stir</a> in the Vancouver craft beer community. Out of all the tests posted that day from five different establishments, only one pour hit the mark, that being <a href="http://tangentcafe.ca/" target="_blank">Tangent C</a><a href="http://tangentcafe.ca/" target="_blank">afe</a>'s 12-oz pour. The rest fell short of the promised volume including a "pint" at Vera's Burger Shack which measured only 16 ounces.<br />
<br />
In Canada, if a pint is advertised, it must be 20 imperial ounces if ounces are used to indicate volume and that does not include head.<br />
<br />
As a consumer, I know I will support the Hell out of Stateside for making this move, as long as they continue to offer up accurate serving sizes & pours and hope other craft beer consumers do as well. I also hope other licensees in the craft community take note of what Stateside have done and get on board with CAMRA BC's #FUSS Campaign and give their customers what they are paying for.<br />
<br />
Chatburn is continuing to hit Vancouver area establishments who serve draft beer and carry out is "research". This move is apart of the <a href="http://camravancouver.ca/advocacy/fuss/" target="_blank">CAMRA BC Fess Up to Serving Sizes</a> (#FUSS) a consumer advocacy campaign aimed at getting licensees to post their draft beer serving sizes and then deliver the posted volume of beer. The #FUSS Campaign was mounted to try to combat the widespread practice of misrepresenting serving sizes and short pouring here in BC. The Campaign for Real Ale of BC are an independent, consumer advocacy group, with approximately 1,500 paid members, championing the rights of BC's craft beer consumers.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-84725128461305340162014-07-15T11:44:00.001-07:002014-07-15T12:02:00.131-07:00Justice Minister Brushes Off Beer Consumer's Complaints About Being Cheated<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXb84uLmdYkSrAHw8TIz8akGGQx2-oBazkTmEmLAVVpMRiGEriuLugOwyBBBt-X_0uGT9rg2sYabePuUZ-J7LhVa6drih8yXAz7cLzu_UCRTuxzvCJln7mXlbEKmbqI4zunVIlZfbam5Y/s1600/FUSS-Logo.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXb84uLmdYkSrAHw8TIz8akGGQx2-oBazkTmEmLAVVpMRiGEriuLugOwyBBBt-X_0uGT9rg2sYabePuUZ-J7LhVa6drih8yXAz7cLzu_UCRTuxzvCJln7mXlbEKmbqI4zunVIlZfbam5Y/s1600/FUSS-Logo.png" height="150" width="200" /></a>British Columbia's Attorney General and Justice Minister, Suzanne Anton, recently told craft beer consumer<br />
advocates, the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA) of BC, that consumers are on their own, as far as she is concerned, if they feel they are being cheated or mislead about the serving size of their draft beer.<br />
<br />
In a response to a letter sent by CAMRA BC to Anton (read <a href="http://www.camrapowellriver.ca/fess%2520up%2520documents2.html">here</a>), imploring her to endorse CAMRA BC's <a href="http://camravancouver.ca/advocacy/fuss/">Fess Up to Serving Sizes (FUSS) Campaign</a> and to consider making a few more much-needed changes to the Liquor Control & Licensing Branch (LCLB) policies to help protect consumers and promote public health and safety, Anton wrote, via e-mail,<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><i>"If a customer is not pleased with the service in an establishment, they have the choice of raising the issue with the licensee or taking their business to other bars or restaurants"</i></b></blockquote>
As a BC consumer, it does not make me feel very confident when the province's Justice Minister appears to be condoning or ignoring business practices that see <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2014/07/shit-storm-in-beer-glass.html" target="_blank">consumers being defrauded and purposely mislead and misinformed about what they are purchasing</a>.<br />
<br />
In their letter, CAMRA BC also suggested having a policy requiring certified marked glassware, with "fill to here" (plimsol) lines indicating the volume, and having the alcohol content of beer (ABV) added to the legally-required serving size list. CAMRA BC believes that by making these two changes to BC liquor policy, along with the enforcement of the serving size list requirement, consumers and servers will better know exactly how much alcohol is being served and consumed which will help them better monitor over-serving and over-consumption, important in BC with the popularity of higher alcohol craft beers, strict <a href="http://www.servingitright.com/" target="_blank">Serving it Right</a> rules for alcohol and tough drinking and driving laws.<br />
<br />
Anton's response, which you can read in full <a href="http://www.camrapowellriver.ca/letter%20from%20minister.html">here,</a> was, at best, a brush off and seems to indicate that the Justice Minister and/or her staff:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>did not read the letter</li>
<li>read the letter and did not understand what CAMRA BC was getting at </li>
<li>read the letter and simply did not care that BC draft beer drinkers are being lied to, short-poured and defrauded when it comes to draft beer serving sizes in this province.</li>
<li>have no real interest in truly striking a balance between consumer wants/needs and public health and safety</li>
</ul>
Even though the focus of the letter was on getting enforcement concerning serving-size-price lists, Anton did nothing more than point out what CAMRA BC already knew, that this legal requirement for a list exists, and stated, "b<span style="background-color: white;">eyond that, government's focus </span><span style="background-color: white;">is not on the array of serving sizes found within the province."</span><br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<span style="background-color: white;"></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"></span>
<span style="background-color: white;">It seems to me that the Justice Minister is saying, "yes, we have that law, but no, we are not going to enforce it. We trust you, licensees of BC." </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;">To borrow an analogy from CAMRA Vancouver president, Adam Chatburn, isn't that like posting a speed limit then nailing a sign below the posted speed saying, "but don't worry, we aren't enforcing this. We trust you to comply with the speed limit"? </span><br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj11HkftfwcUwONbs6K9hNyVpGqWBWNnKdFaY7ty_gmXYb-6ORbUO612QVNc1bb1tvZdBbsX2M3c9VHIICX07CNQN6bVmf3C1H7ErkCaqsousfKXumTbsJpBeQ2-6fH73wsVhW9Gl2rKto/s1600/Weizenbier.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj11HkftfwcUwONbs6K9hNyVpGqWBWNnKdFaY7ty_gmXYb-6ORbUO612QVNc1bb1tvZdBbsX2M3c9VHIICX07CNQN6bVmf3C1H7ErkCaqsousfKXumTbsJpBeQ2-6fH73wsVhW9Gl2rKto/s1600/Weizenbier.jpg" height="320" width="160" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Justice Minister Anton says<br />
no to gov't required plimsol<br />
lines for draft beer glasses</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;">In addition, Anton advised CAMRA BC the BC Liberals would not consider requiring the use of certified, marked glassware, stating, </span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><i>"Government's resources and focus lay heavily on public safety issues, such as
over-crowding, minors accessing alcohol, public disturbance,
illegal activities, and so forth. It would be a burden for provincial
liquor inspectors and police to measure glassware in addition to their
other duties."</i></b></blockquote>
Would liquor inspectors and police not have more time on their hands to deal with public safety issues, like such as over-crowding, minors accessing alcohol, public disturbance, etc, because they would <b>NOT</b> be burdened with measuring volumes in glassware because those that certified the glassware and placed the plimsol (fill-to-here) lines had already done that!<br />
<br />
With the minimum price of a glass of beer tied directly to volume, $0.25/oz or 28ml due to new BC minimum drink price legislation, would the government not have a vested interest in knowing if licensees are reporting proper serving sizes so that the government gets an accurate amount of alcohol tax?<br />
<br />
I don't understand a government that passes a policy tying drink prices to volumes served when they have no interest in the volume of serving sizes in the first place.<br />
<br />
I know many licensees who think marked glassware is a great idea and the perfect way to level the playing field between unscrupulous licensees and those who want to serve it right and be honest.<br />
<br />
Although there is a cost attached to replacing glassware, if brought into effect over a period of time so glasses could be replaced through normal wear & tear & attrition, the cost would be less burdensome to licensees. And although there is a shortage of suppliers at the moment providing glassware with plimsol lines, I am sure some clever business person would quickly fill the void if they new that using such glasses was going to be a legal requirement for all licensed establishments.<br />
<br />
For those not familiar with CAMRA BC's FUSS Campaign, the consumer advocates have been pushing the LCLB, which Anton is currently responsible for, to enforce their policy that all liquor licensees, in the Justice Minister's own words, "must have a list available showing drinks, drink sizes and prices," in order to give consumers the information necessary to make informed decisions and to help eliminate the misrepresentation of draft beer serving sizes.<br />
<br />
The campaign was started in 2011 by the CAMRA BC Vancouver branch who were being inundated with complaints from consumers (some members, some not) that there was wide-spread misrepresentation of draft beer serving sizes - being told they were ordering a certain volume of beer and being served much less - and that the serving size list requirement was basically being ignored so consumers had no idea what volume of beer they were ordering before it actually arrived at the table.<br />
<br />
The government talks about striking a balance between consumers needs and public health and safety yet they continue to ignore and brush aside complaints about dubious practices by some licensees which impact public health and safety negatively and violate consumers' rights. This call to enforce the existing law and make these changes would benefit everyone...except the dishonest licensees whose practices are now forcing industry-wide fraud as everyone must complete in the marketplace and being honest puts a licensee at risk of looking bad and losing customers.<br />
<br />
BC beer consumers should be outraged that the BC Liberal Government, via their Justice Minister-Attorney, are completely ignoring this issue. Not all consumers care, but there are a great many who do. Not all licensees are unscrupulous, but those who aren't are feeling pressure to use questionable methods of making their draft beer pricing more attractive to consumers.<br />
<br />
For the life of me, I do not understand why the LCLB and the Provincial Government do not take this problem seriously.<br />
<br />
Maybe if if 1/2-litre carafes of wine started arriving with 350ml in them or 1.5 oz servings of scotch were arriving in one-ounce measures we might see some action...Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-88297835517706278352014-07-09T09:44:00.003-07:002014-07-09T10:00:12.323-07:00Consumers Rejoice as Getting Good Head in Your Local Pub Should Be Free of Charge!! <div class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Every craft beer lover worth their weight in hops knows the head on a beer is an important part of the experience and a must for any good draft craft pour.</span></div>
<div class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">And even though the more discerning consumers demand their beer arrive with that essential froth and foam on top of the beer, many of them probably do not know that they do not have to pay for the privilege of having well-poured beer.</span></div>
<div class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">That's right - by law, the head/foam/froth, whatever you want to call it, that is on top of the liquid inside your beer glass is not considered part of the serving size volume you are paying for despite what many licensees, and consumers for that matter, tell you.</span></div>
<div class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/mc-mc.nsf/eng/home" target="_blank">Measurement Canada</a> is a government agency who, in their own words,</span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<br />
<blockquote style="background-color: white; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-top: 10px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">"is responsible for ensuring the integrity and accuracy of measurement in the Canadian marketplace. We:</span><br />
<ul style="background-color: white; margin: 5px 5px 10px 40px; padding: 0px;">
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;">develop and administer the laws and requirements governing measurement,</span></li>
</ul>
<ul style="background-color: white; margin: 5px 5px 10px 40px; padding: 0px;">
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;">evaluate, approve and certify measuring devices, and</span></li>
</ul>
<ul style="background-color: white; margin: 5px 5px 10px 40px; padding: 0px;">
<li><span style="font-family: inherit;">investigate complaints of suspected inaccurate measurement"</span></li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">I wrote Measurement Canada after the <a href="http://camravancouver.ca/2014/07/06/fuss-comes-back-with-a-vengeance/" target="_blank">weekend hubbub</a> (click the link to get CAMRA Vancouver president Adam Chatburn's version of events), what I have dubbed the <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2014/07/shit-storm-in-beer-glass.html" target="_blank">shit storm in a beer glass</a>, and asked specifically if the head of a beer was considered by law to be apart of the volume of the serving size.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The response from Measurement Canada was very clear; the
foam at the top is not included<span style="color: #1f497d;">.</span></span><br />
<span style="color: #1f497d; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">I had also written them about clarification on serving sizes, acceptable margins for error and what to do if you had a complaint.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Here is their response:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">"Vendors
are required by the <i>Weights and Measures Act</i> to deliver, within the
applicable limits of error, the quantity of product they are claiming to sell.
This includes individual servings of beer sold in restaurants, pubs, bars, etc.<br />
<br />In
Canada, a pint contains 20 ounces (568ml); therefore, a vendor selling a pint of
beer must deliver 20 fluid ounces of beer. The limit of error for 20 fluid
ounces is 0.5 fluid ounces. So, if a vendor is claiming to sell a pint of beer,
then 20 fluid ounces of beer should be delivered to the customer with a minimum
of 19.5 fluid ounces of beer in the glass.<br /><br />When
a vendor is not advertising a pint and is claiming a lesser amount, e.g. 14
fluid ounces then 14 fluid ounces is the
quantity that must be delivered."</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">That limit of error, if my math is right, is 2.5% of the serving size volume. Again, not much room for misinterpretation, especially when combined with the "no foam" response. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">I only found out about Measurement Canada recently when a consumer - an admitted non-CAMRA member and one who tends towards non-craft beers but who has been following #FUSS closely - contacted me regarding a complaint about the Terminal Pub in New Westminster where he was convinced the pint advertised on the menu was actually being served in a 16-oz sleeve. He asked me where he could complain and I directed him towards the LCLB and his MLA, who he contacted. Both his MLA and the LCLB directed him to Measurement Canada who took his complaint, investigated and got back to him with the news that the Terminal was switching to the proper glassware to provide a pint as they were advertising.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I haven't heard back yet if the change has happened, but the point of the matter is, Measurement Canada received to complaint and acted.</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">To further clarify things, according to the Weights and Measures Act, both </span>millilitres<span style="font-family: inherit;"> and ounces as long as those ounces are Canadian units which are based on the Imperial System, not the US measurements for ounces. </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">So no, licensees cannot advertise a "pint" and serve you 16oz stating "that is an American pint". A pint in Canada is 568ml or 20 </span>Canadian<span style="font-family: inherit;"> ounces end of story.</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">So there you have it folks - seems pretty clear-cut as far as the law goes. </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">Now take that info and do what ever you want to do with it. Licensees do have the choice to ignore the above posted information from Measurement Canada and/or ignore the legal provincial requirement to have a serving-size-price list but if they do, they do run the risk of being complained about and/or exposed by consumers feeling they are not getting all that they paid for. I know this information will not be popular with a lot of licensees but they have had a good run, the field has been tilted in their favour for a long time and there should be no more excuses about "industry standards" or misunderstandings about what is considered a serving size and what needs to be delivered, "</span>within the applicable limits of error"<span style="background-color: white;"> to the consumer. </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Consumers can also choose to ignore short pours if they are comfortable with paying for beer that is not in their glass. Up to them. No skin off my nose. It is their choice to do what they want with their money.</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">But those who do care do seem to be within their legal right to politely bring up the issue to the licensee or their representative and if a reasonable solution is not agreed upon, take that complaint to the next level which is Measurement Canada for short pours and the LCLB for no serving size list. </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">For those consumers who do choose to stand up for their consumer rights, see the info about where to lodge your complaints below.</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">For Measurement Canada they wrote me, </span>If
you believe you received an inaccurate measurement, you can find information on
how to <a href="http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/mc-mc.nsf/eng/h_lm00007.html">file
a complaint</a> with Measurement Canada on our website. In
this case, the section “Other” applies. Alternatively, you can call Measurement
Canada’s Western Region Office at 1-855-666-3834 or email <a href="mailto:Peter.Wakeland@ic.gc.ca">Peter.Wakeland@ic.gc.ca</a>.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">For the LCLB for complaints about no serving size list click the link <a href="http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/lclb/branch/contact.htm" target="_blank">here</a>.</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #1f497d; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-33291314376168731122014-07-07T06:29:00.002-07:002014-07-07T12:26:59.423-07:00Shit Storm in a Beer GlassThis past weekend there was a shit storm that hit the Vancouver craft beer community.<br />
<br />
Draft beer consumers, fed up with their belief that they are systematically being mislead about serving sizes, collided with liquor licensees who pour, in a way they feel is acceptable, the craft beers we so love. This collision had social media buzzing as folks weighed in on the differences of opinion which I will get into below.<br />
<br />
I learned something during the course of the discussion that, naively, I had never thought of before; consumers and licensees define draft beer serving sizes differently.<br />
<br />
Somewhere along the way it has become somewhat of an industry standard in Vancouver for licensees to use the size of a serving vessel as the serving size they post on serving size/price lists and/or convey verbally to consumers while many, if not most, consumers consider that actual amount of beer that arrives in the glass to be the serving size.<br />
<br />
And this fundamental difference of opinion is causing some great unrest in some quarters of the tight-knit Vancouver craft beer community.<br />
<br />
What is the difference you ask?<br />
<br />
Well, consider if a bar uses 14-oz sleeves for their draft beer and post 14-oz as their serving size.<br />
<br />
That glass would have to be filled to the brim, without any head, to achieve the advertised volume and would be so full it would be impossible for a server to carry without spilling all over the place.<br />
<br />
No craft beer lover wants their beer served without the appropriate amount of head and no craft beer lover wants to see their favourite brew end up on a serving tray or the floor. And no craft beer licensee wants the spillage that accompanies filling a glass to the brim.<br />
<br />
Realistically, that 14-oz sleeve, if poured properly, will arrive with about 12 oz of beer in it. In this example, approximately one/seventh, or a little over 14%, of the advertised serving is not being delivered to the customer, which for a $7 sleeve works out to $1, before tax, being paid by the consumer for nothing more than foam and air.<br />
<br />
If you take into consideration the 15% alcohol tax and a modest 15% tip you are looking at $1.30 vanishing into thin air for each beer you order using the above example.<br />
<br />
Measurement Canada, who police this type of thing, told me in an e-mail a few weeks ago,<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>"<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 15px;">Vendors are required by the</span><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 15px;"> </span><i style="background-color: white; font-size: 15px;">Weights and Measures Act</i><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 15px;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 15px;">to deliver, within the applicable limits of error, the quantity of product they are claiming to sell. </span></span></b><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 15px;"><b>This includes individual servings of beer sold in restaurants, pubs, bars, etc."</b> </span></span></blockquote>
<b><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 15px;">T</span></span>he "applicable limits of error" mentioned in the e-mail is 2.5%</b>. That is only 0.5 oz of error allowed for a pint and 0.35 of an ounce for a 14 oz pour. <br />
<br />
It seems consumers legally, if they care about such things (and not all do), do have a legitimate beef.<br />
<br />
In contrast, licensees, especially in Vancouver, are feeling pressure to do all they can to compete and attract customers in a highly competitive market.<br />
<br />
I have been told by more than a few licensees that because using the glass size has become the "industry standard" in Vancouver for serving sizes, they are feeling compelled to advertise the glass capacity as the serving size is, even if they know that full measure is not arriving at the customer's table. They are feeling forced, they tell me, to make the decision to serve the way they are in order to compete with the next bar next door who is doing so. Being ethical and saying you serve 12 oz in a 14-oz glass for the same price as the bar next door who say they serve 14 oz in a 14-oz glass means the possibility of lost customers.<br />
<br />
I don't think for the majority of licensees are dishonest and maliciously set out to cheat their customers - they are just doing what everyone else is doing in the Vancouver marketplace. I know some bar and restaurant owners very well; some are my dear friends, welcome in my home any time, honest and well-meaning and I support the Hell out of them and their businesses any time I can.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, the widespread practice, that has been adopted by even the most honest of folks out there, is illegal. It is not acceptable that consumers should be expected to donate money, from 15-20% at times, for goods they do not receive, to businesses so those businesses can compete in an industry that has little margin for error.<br />
<br />
And it sucks that we have such a screwed up "industry standard" that forces honest, good-intentioned licensees to have to make this kind of ethical decision just to feel they can compete in the marketplace with unscrupulous types who operate with impunity due to government disinterest and consumer apathy. <br />
<br />
Last Saturday a few craft beer consumers, including CAMRA Vancouver president, Adam Chatburn, who does care about getting what he pays for, headed out to a few of Commercial Drive restaurants and bars, armed with a calibrated glass and their cell phones, and proceeded to find out the posted or verbally conveyed serving size for beers, ordered those beers, measured the volume of beer they received, videoed the results and tweeted these videos and the numbers. <br />
<br />
They found that most establishments- <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgjUqWbPrVI" target="_blank">only Tangent Cafe was commended for their perfect 12-oz pour</a> - served glasses of beer that fell short, well outside the legal margin for error, compared to the serving sizes promised. In one establishment they found a 20% difference between volume promised and volume delivered when the pint they ordered came in a sleeve.<br />
<br />
The posting of these results initiated the above mentioned shit storm.<br />
<br />
Some applauded, others booed. Some heaped praise on those posting, others called them down and got personal. I am not here to talk about the process, the reactions, the exact results or whether what these consumers did was right or wrong. You can go <a href="http://camravancouver.ca/2014/07/06/fuss-comes-back-with-a-vengeance/">here to read CAMRA Vancouver President, Adam Chatburn's explanation</a> of what went down, why they did it and what they found out from his perspective.<br />
<br />
This whole thing has come to a head because of CAMRA BC's Fess Up to Serving Sizes Campaign (FUSS) which is nothing more than trying to get licensed establishments to accurately provide their draft beer serving sizes then deliver on that promise as required by both federal and provincial law.<br />
<br />
That is what FUSS is - nothing more, nothing less.<br />
<br />
I know because FUSS was an idea I came up with a little over 2.5 years ago.<br />
<br />
I didn't just pull FUSS out of my ass; I came up with the idea when I was in the president of CAMRA Vancouver after receiving a bazillion complaints from members and non-members alike who believed they were getting much smaller measures in their glasses than they were being promised when they ordered. I thought it would be great for Vancouver craft beer consumers to get CAMRA friendly bars and restaurants to provide a list of their draft beer servings sizes, as required by law, and then lead the charge by producing said measures in hopes that craft beer consumers would be satisfied and these establishments would see increased business due to their transparency regarding what they were serving.<br />
<br />
Easy, right? A win-win situation.<br />
<br />
Well, not so much as this has turned into a mess with legal and consumer expectations conflicting with the need for licensees to compete in a very cut-throat and often dishonest market. There was, in fact, considerable push back from some on the industry side of the craft beer community, although I will say, most of the feedback was positive and in support of the campaign.<br />
<br />
So how do we clean up this mess?<br />
<br />
The best way would be for all bars to have marked glassware - glasses with plimsol (fill-to-here) lines so that both those serving and those being served could see that the promised volume was in the glass. CAMRA BC proposed this to John Yap during the liquor policy review and suggested it be phased in over two years so glassware could be replaced slowly when needed via attrition. BC used to have these types of glasses - I can remember them in my early days of going to the pub - but they have long since disappeared.<br />
<br />
The government are not interested in legislating the requirement for marked glassware and I have been told by licensees that there is a problem with finding marked glassware and that these glasses are expensive.<br />
<br />
The simple solution, which isn't perfect, but which could work, is for licensees to buy glassware that is larger than their planned serving size - i.e., a 16-oz sleeve for a 14-oz serving - leaving room for foam and eliminating the need to fill the glass to the brim.<br />
<br />
It would mean eye-balling the amount going into the glass but it shouldn't take long for the bartenders of the city to figure out where on the glass they have to be to hit the mark.<br />
<br />
Bars and restaurants who did this could then be uber-supported by CAMRA BC, CAMRA Vancouver, who could run campaigns lauding these places for their transparency and ethical choice to serve it right and be 100% honest about what they are serving. CAMRA could also continue to push the provincial government and Measurement Canada to nail places that do not comply with the law. The craft beer consumers and us who write about such things could support these places by tweeting, posting, writing and talking about them and more importantly, frequenting them over those establishments who choose the status quo.<br />
<br />
I have heard that one of the bars called out on Saturday has, as a result of the incident, decided to go this route and order 16-oz glassware to properly fit the 14-oz pours they advertise. Good for them. I hope they follow through, I hope they get the recognition they deserve for turning a negative into a positive and I hope consumers and CAMRA BC support the Hell out of them to both reward them and encourage others to follow suit. I know when I find out they have followed through I will be giving them my support.<br />
<br />
Something has to give as this issue is not going to go away and CAMRA BC and CAMRA Vancouver are not going to go away. It is a mess, caused by consumers not standing up for their rights for decades and government not giving shit, and it needs to be fixed.<br />
<br />
Let's work together as a craft beer community, consumers and businesses together, to find a workable solution instead of pointing fingers at each other. It really sucks that friends are finding themselves on the opposite side of the fence on this issue when all can be on the side of fixing the problem.<br />
<br />
I know some of you out there are going to bash me for this post...give er. This is how I see it and I think it is important. I don't like being expected to accept a situation that is fundamentally wrong and I won't.<br />
<br />
If you don't care about this, good for you. Carry on paying for foam and air. But remember, that payment for nothing could be going towards your next, already-expensive sleeve.<br />
<br />
This, at its core, it what CAMRA BC is all about. CAMRA BC is a consumer advocacy group, not a beer club or a kiss-industry's-ass club.<br />
<br />
If you are a member and feel FUSS is misguided and wrong, get involved, get elected and change the course of your society.Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-33342326624248735032014-07-01T12:05:00.001-07:002014-07-01T17:23:55.942-07:00BC Now Ranked 9th Highest for Domestic Beer Prices in the World! (if we were a country)Recently BC introduced new minimum beer prices that force licensees to sell beer for on-site (in bar or <br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyr4pu4otHycZH4JW2VXQyujReFaGDTaeNRKJlyv1bXVMY2WUezL8Md_fgdzbq_eU_CClS6nG8Qn6SF363payzin2WbxPUAfAeyySQ1Hb6cRQjyRRTuHiJZ1W4eB94h-XLwn43JsZDL8w/s1600/price-of-beer-infographic.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyr4pu4otHycZH4JW2VXQyujReFaGDTaeNRKJlyv1bXVMY2WUezL8Md_fgdzbq_eU_CClS6nG8Qn6SF363payzin2WbxPUAfAeyySQ1Hb6cRQjyRRTuHiJZ1W4eB94h-XLwn43JsZDL8w/s1600/price-of-beer-infographic.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://comparisons.financesonline.com/beer-prices-around-the-world-compared/" target="_blank">see larger image here</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
restaurant) consumption for $0.25 per 28 ml (one ounce) which are the highest beer prices in Canada.<br />
<br />
And if that was not bad enough news for BC beer consumers, according to the website <a href="http://numbeo.com/">numbeo.com</a>, we are now also the <a href="http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/prices_by_country.jsp?displayCurrency=CAD&itemId=15" target="_blank">ranked 9th highest IN THE WORLD for domestic beer prices</a>!!<br />
<br />
Using a 500 ml (18 oz pour) as the gage, BC, at $4.50, finds only Iran ($8.32), United Arab Emirates ($6.47), Papua New Guinea ($6.45), Singapore ($4.99), Australia ($4.85), Norway, $4.82, Afghanistan ($4.62) and Qatar ($4.56) with higher priced domestic beer.<br />
<br />
According to this website, it is cheaper to get a beer in countries known for their liberal attitudes like Kuwait, Libya and Iraq.<br />
<br />
Just for the record, the website ranks Canada at 20th, with an 18 oz pour averaging $2.86 well below BC's newly set minimum.<br />
<br />
I am not sure how reliable these statistics are, as they are compiled by input from users of the website around the world. But since health care advocates are freely using vaguely referenced studies, unsupported statistics and statistics taken out of context, I am going to put these numbers out there for all to ponder and have a little fun with them.<br />
<br />
The website where I found these stats, via a post on <a href="http://comparisons.financesonline.com/beer-prices-around-the-world-compared/">financesonline.com</a> and an post by <a href="http://financesonline.com/author/david/" target="_blank">David Adeleman</a>, states, "<span style="font-family: inherit;">Numbeo is the world’s largest database of user contributed data about cities and countries worldwide. Numbeo provides current and timely information on world living conditions including cost of living, housing indicators, health care, traffic, crime and pollution. Numbeo uses the wisdom of the crowd to obtain the most reliable information possible."</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
If these stats are remotely accurate, it does not paint a pretty picture for BC beer consumers. <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2014/06/a-call-to-action-please-take-minute-to.html" target="_blank">It is yet another reason we need to voice our opinions</a> loud and clear to Premier Christy Clark, Justice Minister Suzanne Anton, et al.Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-85636670328596780382014-06-29T13:24:00.000-07:002014-06-29T13:44:33.670-07:00A Call to Action - Please Take A Minute to Make a DifferenceAs you all know I am thoroughly disgusted by the ill-though-through policy that has introduced a new <br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3-sd0nhyLWftdfLUi6E_Ach2gsJeWLPD-QWitBw7CYwVtQImVAtzG6IMKYYMzeehN89ZYkdrEzH1oQrcVmEnt6liYGvEbq3xAYjsPzGOhBLDAvWwa4S5NthQmjoAvoQeOFVMENHz9Cik/s1600/Unhappy+hour.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3-sd0nhyLWftdfLUi6E_Ach2gsJeWLPD-QWitBw7CYwVtQImVAtzG6IMKYYMzeehN89ZYkdrEzH1oQrcVmEnt6liYGvEbq3xAYjsPzGOhBLDAvWwa4S5NthQmjoAvoQeOFVMENHz9Cik/s1600/Unhappy+hour.jpg" height="300" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">kind of sums it all up doesn't it? photo by dennis the foodie</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
minimum drink price here in BC, giving us the highest drink price minimum in the country.<br />
<br />
From the thousands of hits on my posts related to this and the overwhelming negative reaction to this policy I have received in the form of emails, tweets, comments & Facebook comments, I think it is time to act and let those who brought in this policy, and those who can advocate on behalf of alcohol consumers in BC, know we want this changed.<br />
<br />
You may think, "why bother", but I can tell you from past experience, this works. When a politician gets 50-100 e-mails related to a certain issue, they take notice. When they get hundreds, especially of the negative variety, they get nervous and tend towards action. If they get thousands, well, they simply cannot ignore them.<br />
<br />
If we act, maybe the Liberals will find a way to save face and fix this bad policy.<br />
<br />
One thing is certain; if we do not act, nothing will happen. Please bcc me so I can keep track of the numbers of e-mails sent. <br />
<br />
The e-mail does not need to be long. Short, sweet, polite and to-the-point. If you have specific examples as to how this new minimum drink policy is negatively impacting you - i.e., prices at your local have gone up, or the discount provided at your local being minimal because the drink price minimum is only slightly lower than the regular price - use them. I would recommend just sending one email and addressing it to all you want to send it to. I have provided email addresses below for you to cut and paste and a link so you can find your local MLA's contact info.<br />
<br />
I would also suggest you "like" the <a href="https://www.facebook.com/FixBCHappyHour?fref=ts" target="_blank">Fix BC Happy Hour Facebook page</a> as I am sure the politicians are keeping tabs on it and seeing the numbers rise substantially will make them nervous as well. Yes, I know Bill Tieleman has ties to the NDP and was one of their strategists, but this isn't about political parties, it is about getting bad policy fixed so it works for all of BC, not just those who want to see increases to alcohol prices in BC.<br />
<br />
This policy just makes no sense. Previous to this new legislation, there were literally hundreds of daily drink specials - specials that had to be maintained for the entire time a licensee was open that day - that were lower than the current drink price minimums and there seemed to be no issues or need to fix things due to widespread drunkenness, abuse and over-serving.<br />
<br />
Now, to protect ourselves from ourselves, they have introduced temporary specials, happy hours, at higher prices to what end as the pricing during the daily specials were not causing undue problems. As well, in other provinces with substantially lower minimum drink prices, there are no glaring issues or problems that I have seen. The last time I was in Montreal, Toronto, Calgary or Halifax, I did not see drunken mayhem in the streets, yet our government, who were sold a bill of goods by "industry & health advocates", saw the need to set our minimum much higher to prevent problems that quite frankly do not exist in other jurisdictions.<br />
<br />
Please write. Encourage your friends and family of drinking age to write. Remember to state in your e-mail you are a registered voter as losing votes is one of the few things that gets a politicians attention 100% of the time.<br />
<br />
Here are some relevant e-mail addresses:<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 20px;">Christy Clark - <a href="mailto:premier@gov.bc.ca">premier@gov.bc.ca</a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 20px;">Suzanne Anton (Justice Minister) - <a href="mailto:JAG.Minister@gov.bc.ca">JAG.Minister@gov.bc.ca</a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 20px;">Douglas Scott (GM of Liquor Control & Licensing) - <a href="mailto:douglas.s.scott@gov.bc.ca">douglas.s.scott@gov.bc.ca</a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 20px;">John Yap - <a href="mailto:John.Yap.MLA@leg.bc.ca">John.Yap.MLA@leg.bc.ca</a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 20px;">Shane Simpson (NDP critic liquor portfolio) - <a href="mailto:Shane.Simpson.MLA@leg.bc.ca">Shane.Simpson.MLA@leg.bc.ca</a></span><br />
VanEast Beer Blog - <a href="mailto:vaneastbeerblog@gmail.com">vaneastbeerblog@gmail.com</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.leg.bc.ca/mla/3-1-7.htm" target="_blank">List for MLA contact info</a>Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-3829700327961777072014-06-27T13:13:00.000-07:002014-06-27T13:13:22.748-07:00More Price Increases to Come for BC Craft Beer Drinkers? Many in BC find themselves paying more for their beer this week than they did last week due to the BC Liberal Party's announcement of new minimum drink prices, which are now the highest in the country, but this may not be the last beer drinkers see for price hikes.<br />
<br />
I have heard, though the grapevine, that the government is still planning on tying beer prices to alcohol content (ABV), in the name of public health and safety, because apparently us alcohol consumers just can't stop ourselves from over-consuming and we are all incapable of self-regulating.<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 22.399999618530273px;">Recommendation #18, in </span></span><span style="line-height: 22.399999618530273px;">Parliamentary</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 22.399999618530273px;"> Secretary John Yap's </span></span><a href="http://www2.gov.bc.ca/local/haveyoursay/Docs/liquor_policy_review_report.pdf" style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 22.399999618530273px;" target="_blank">BC Liquor Policy Review Final Report</a><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 22.399999618530273px;">, submitted to Justice Minister and Attorney General, Suzanne Anton, states:</span></span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; line-height: 22.399999618530273px;">
<i><span style="font-family: inherit;">"LDB should consider tying minimum prices to the amount of alcohol (e.g., a beer with seven per cent alcohol would have a higher minimum price than a beer with four per cent alcohol)" </span></i></blockquote>
When<a href="http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/lclb/docs-forms/policy-directive-2014-07.pdf" target="_blank"> the new minimum price structure</a> was announced last week, I thought maybe the Liberals were backing away from this recommendation, as I had heard from some reliable sources that Christy Clark and her crew were afraid of the public backlash related to increased liquor pricing, but that is obviously not true as the new minimum is taking its toll in those less affluent areas outside the Lower Mainland.<br />
<br />
But if the info I received the other day is true, then those who enjoy some of the stronger beers out there on the market, which are usually craft beers, may be digging even deeper into their pockets to purchase those beers and not just in pubs and restaurants. If this recommendation is converted into policy, it will impact all beer, whether bought to be consumed in a licensed establishment or packaged product purchased to be consumed elsewhere,<br />
<br />
It means growlers, which have escaped the new minimum drink price, will be impacted and depending on the policy and what it dictates some growler fills will increase.<br />
<br />
Keep in mind this is 3rd-hand information and I have not had confirmed by the LCLB or LDB so this may not in fact be true. But if the government keeps caving to health advocates and anti-alcohol lobby groups, who are using scare tactics and meaningless statistics to try to get what they want, which is higher priced booze which is harder to access, I think this change to increase the price of stronger beers will become a reality.<br />
<br />
No one knows exactly what is going to happen and when but after last Friday's happy-hour-minimum-price fiasco, I am very afraid of what what may coming down the pipe. The Liberals seem to like to pull these announcements out of a hat and the policies do not seem to be very well thought through in some cases, read booze in supermarkets.<br />
<br />
CAMRA Vancouver has posted about beer-ABV issue and let their stance be known, which has shifted significantly sine the drink minimum announcement. Read what they have to say <a href="http://camravancouver.ca/2014/06/26/lots-of-support-for-camras-unhappyhour-stance/" target="_blank">here</a>.<br />
<br />
I would recommend consumers get ahead of this. At the bottom of the CAMRA Vancouver post is all the contact information for government and the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch. If you want to let the Liberals know how pissed off you are with how they rolled out happy hour - and be clear that I am not against happy hour but with the minimum drink prices that were imposed - and want to head off any further price increases by letting them know enough is enough by e-mailing, tweeting.<br />
<br />
If the beer consumers of BC do stand up and shout loudly, maybe we can make a difference.<br />
<br />
One thing is clear, if we do not, we have no chance...Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-1226423783132853882014-06-26T15:43:00.001-07:002014-06-26T15:43:42.463-07:00Will The BC Libs Risk Tax Revenue or Make a FUSS About Serving Sizes?As most of you reading this will know, last week the BC Liberals announced policy changes that would allow BC licensees to have "happy hours" but the trade off was that there were new minimum drink prices put in place, the highest in Canada by the way, that would see the price of a drink increase for many BC alcohol consumers at their local water hole.<br />
<br />
I will not go into how disgusted I am with this move that sees many paying 30% or more for a pint of beer in their local, but you can read my original post <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2014/06/43-price-hike-does-not-sound-like-happy.html" target="_blank">here</a> and my open letter to Justice Minister & Attorney General, Suzanne Anton and her parliamentary secretary, John Yap, <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2014/06/open-letter-to-suzanne-anton-john-yap.html" target="_blank">here</a>.<br />
<br />
I will tell you that Anton's assumption that there may be the "occasional case" where a licensee has to raise the price of there drinks is dead wrong, even in grossly, overpriced Vancouver. I recently found a website that lists all drink specials in Vancouver and, for example, on a Monday there were 261 specials listed and out of those, I stopped counting at 20 those who would be in violation of the new policy.<br />
<br />
What I am wondering at this point is if Anton & Co decide to stick with this ill-thought-out and misguided policy, where the minimum drink price is directly tied to the volume of the drink, is Anton going to press the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch (LCLB) to pay attention to serving sizes and enforce the LCLB policy that all licensees must provide a drink price and serving size list for all alcoholic beverages served in the establishment or is she just going to trust that these licensees, many of whom have been misleading consumers for years, are going to suddenly become honest about how much they are serving?<br />
<br />
If she leaves the licensees to regulate themselves, she is leaving the fox in the hen house. Many licensees will manipulate the situation to suit themselves, claiming smaller serving sizes so they can have lower drink specials to draw people in and so as not to alienate their regular customers by raising the price of their pint by 30%. This obviously benefits the consumer but means government will miss out on alcohol tax revenue and I have never seen a government that does not take an interest in maximizing their tax revenue from consumers.<br />
<br />
On the flip side of things, some will be claiming larger serving sizes than they are actually providing, as is the widespread practice now, so they can continue to gouge the consumer during their happy hours and now they can blame it on the government's new drink minimum.<br />
<br />
The Campaign for Real Ale of BC (CAMRA BC), with their <a href="http://camravancouver.ca/advocacy/fuss/" target="_blank">Fess Up to Serving Sizes (FUSS) Campaign</a>, has been pushing for years to have the LCLB enforce this serving size list policy, and ensure the serving size volumes that are listed are accurate, but the LCLB and the BC Liberals have repeatedly said they don't care about serving sizes and that licensees can self-regulate in regards to complying with the serving size list requirement.<br />
<br />
In fact, in a recent response to a letter by CAMRA BC suggesting that the serving size list policy be enforced and the government consider legislating that certified, marked glassware (indicating volume of the glass) be required, like in Britain and many European nations, our Justice Minister wrote:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>"For public safety reasons a licensee's terms and conditions guide states the
maximum serving sizes that an individual or group of people may order at any
one time. In addition, the licensee must have a list available showing drinks, drink sizes and
prices. </i> <i>Beyond that, government's focus is not on the array of serving sizes
found within the province</i>.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Government's resources and focus lay heavily on public safety issues, such as
over-crowding, minors accessing alcohol, public disturbance,
illegal activities, and so forth. It would be a burden for provincial
liquor inspectors and police to measure glassware in addition to their
other duties. If a customer is not pleased with the service in
an establishment, they have the choice of raising the issue with the
licensee or taking their business to other bars or restaurants."</i></blockquote>
So if the government is not going to concern themselves with the size of drink an establishment serves, other than making sure they do not offer more than the legislated, maximum drink size, how are they going to enforce this new minimum and insure they are getting their fair share via alcohol tax?<br />
<br />
Or more to the point, what the Hell is the point of the new policy if they have no way, or no desire to enforce it due to limited resources and limited desire?<br />
<br />
I can imagine this conversation happening all over BC:<br />
<br />
Liquor Inspector: "That looks like a pint glass and you are selling it for $4. You need to charge $5!"<br />
Licensee: "Why you are mistaking, kind liquor inspector. That glass only holds 16 oz therefore the minimum I can charge is $4."<br />
Liquor Inspector: "OK, I trust you completely. Thank you for clearing that up. Carry on"<br />
<br />
Now that government revenue can potentially be compromised, maybe, just maybe, the LCLB liquor inspectors will be directed to take a little more interest in just exactly how much beer is in your glass and the practice of misrepresenting serving sizes will be eliminated.<br />
<br />
Time will tell, and who knows what the government is thinking. By the looks of this, they really were misinformed and badly advised as to how this new policy would impact consumers and obviously, they did not think things through.<br />
<br />
Also, as an aside, by advising customers that if they don't like getting defrauded and ripped off they should raise the issue with the licensee and/or take their business elsewhere and not bother the Justice Minister's office, is BC's top cop, the person charged with overseeing justice and law enforcement in this province, not condoning dodgy business practices and fraud?<br />
<br />
It certainly seems she is not interested in making sure British Columbians get what they paid for but I could be mistaken as to what the Justice Minister condones and what she does not. I can only go by the e-mail I received.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-35919270455943622512014-06-22T20:15:00.002-07:002014-06-24T12:24:56.189-07:00Open Letter to Suzanne Anton & John Yap - Why Is My Happy Hour Beer This Week More Expensive Than My Regularly Priced Beer Last Week?Dear Ms Anton and Mr Yap<br />
<br />
I feel compelled to write you both about the recent announcement regarding the change in BC liquor policy that sets a new minimum drink price for alcohol in BC.<br />
<br />
I will warn you that I am more than a little unhappy with this move as it means higher beer prices for myself and many other BC beer consumers. I find the change misguided and out of step with what BC beer consumers really want which is get a pint of beer at a fair price. I also feel the move is a knee-jerk reaction to pressure imposed on the government by special interest groups and a move that was not thought through as to how it will impact all of BC, not just the Lower Mainland and South Vancouver Island.<br />
<br />
In short, the change is a step backwards in regards to "modernizing" BC liquor policy. By setting the new minimum price for beer at $0.25 per ounce for beer, BC is now has, as far as my research goes, the highest drink price minimum of all the provinces.<br />
<br />
By setting these new price minimums, many British Columbians are going to see the price of their pint of beer increase from those in rural and remote areas to some in grossly, over-priced Vancouver. And I am talking about craft beer which is usually higher priced than the national, mainstream lager prices. Those who chose to consume these traditionally cheaper lagers are going to be hit even harder than craft beer drinkers.<br />
<br />
Ms Anton, you were quoted as saying, "<span style="background-color: #f1f1f1; line-height: 16px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">T</span></span><span style="background-color: #f1f1f1; line-height: 16px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">here may be the occasional case where consumers see a drink price go up. However, overall, we don’t expect consumers will see much of a difference in terms of drink prices. If anything, they will notice new happy hour drink specials offered by licensees, which weren’t allowed under the previous rules."</span></span><br />
<br />
In the community I live in, Powell River, prices have no relation to those you find in the bigger urban areas and I can tell you that by setting the price of a pint of beer at $5, many in my town are going to see the price of their beers rise by over 30%! This is in an area where good paying jobs are not easy to find and where many have a tight entertainment budget. I have traveled around BC enough to know this is going to be true in many other communities. My local, neighourhood pub previously sold a pint of craft beer at $4.50 with the tax included. I now will have to pay $5.75 with tax. And as I mentioned, those drinking the cheaper lagers will see an even bigger hit to their wallet. So great, my local pub can have a happy hour now where they are able to offer beers substantially more expensive this week than they were regularly before the policy change last week.<br />
<br />
Your new happy hour minimum is going to create the need for many licensees, not just "the occasional case", like my local, to raise their regular prices and some to raise their existing daily special prices to comply with the law. I believe that you both have either misunderstood, or just ignored, the real wants and needs of the consumers of BC and instead have chosen to listen to special interest groups who have a specific agenda and who have been giving you "expert" advice aimed at getting what they want.<br />
<br />
And they have gotten what they want, which is higher alcohol prices for many in BC.<br />
<br />
Ms Anton, you were again quoted on the <a href="http://www.newsroom.gov.bc.ca/2014/06/happy-hours-and-minimum-pricing-take-effect-in-bc.html" target="_blank">BC Newsroom</a> web page as saying, "(I)<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">mplementing minimum drink prices is an important part of our commitment to protect health and safety, as we move forward on modernizing B.C.’s liquor laws. In setting the minimum price, it was important to us that we listened to both industry and health advocates. We have done that and I believe establishing a $3 per drink minimum achieves a good balance for them, and for British Columbians.”</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I do thank you for taking it upon yourself to look after my health and safety, but I, like many reasonable and rational adults in BC, who enjoy an alcoholic beverage responsibly, quite frankly do not require your supervision or imposed limits to protect myself from myself.</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
You already have laws in place to control and punish those who over-serve, serve intoxicated patrons and who do not comply to the Serving it Right Program, so why not focus on the offenders and not punish the rest who serve and consume alcohol responsibly. These laws, which are already quite restrictive and, if followed by the letter of the law, make it damn near impossible to get more than a drink or two in any licensed establishment especially in a short period of time like a happy hour.<br />
<br />
I am thankful that common sense prevails over the letter of the law in most establishments.<br />
<br />
Minimum pricing will take care of itself as licensees need to turn a buck on their sales. Yes, some establishments and consumers would take advantage and over-serve and over-consume if you truly offered the option of reasonably-priced drinks during happy hours, but is that not what you liquor inspectors are for?<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I am afraid that you may have been hoodwinked by some of the health care and industry advocates you had advising you and your team during this review who were, for their own reasons, pushing for higher alcohol prices. </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">And I am perplexed why you did not have any consumer advocates advising you as to what the average British Columbian alcohol consumer wanted in regards to minimum prices and happy hours.</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">In regards to these advocates you were listening to, I will use the example Dr Lawrence Loh, Medical </span></span><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">Adviser</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"> for Fraser Health and one of the health care advocates who has pushed the public </span></span><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">safety</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"> and health </span></span><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">perspective to your government regarding liquor policy changes</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"> and whom I had the chance to discuss liquor issues with on CBC Radio's "Early Edition" program.</span></span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"> </span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">I do not want to pick on the doctor, as I am certain he does put a priority in the public health and welfare, but from my conversation with him</span></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"> it was </span></span><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">clear</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"> to me he really did not have a solid argument for increasing prices and decreasing accessibility in regards to alcohol in BC as he contradicted himself, over-simplified complex issues and made alarmist statements. </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">If he is an example of those you listened to, then it worries me to no end that the government is not getting a clear, accurate and full picture from these advocates. </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">The good doctor was confronted with the fact that in other </span></span><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">jurisdictions with</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"> more liberal liquor laws, such as Quebec, some US states and Europe, there do not seem to be any more alcohol-related problems than we have here where we have stricter laws, he stated we have to use </span></span><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">caution</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"> when comparing BC to other </span></span><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">jurisdictions</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"> due to the fact that those other </span></span><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">jurisdictions</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"> may have different views towards alcohol and different "drinking cultures". </span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">Dr Loh, not two minutes later, was referring to unidentified studies, with vague references to statistics and "a large body of evidence", from "other jurisdictions", like Australia and the US, that proved decreased pricing. associated with happy hours and increased access to alcohol lead to all kinds of social evils and societal problems.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">I was confused, as did the health care expert advocate seem to be.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">Which is it? Can we look to other jurisdictions to support </span></span><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">arguments</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"> and to help predict what may happen here, or not? </span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">I am more than a little concerned that someone who contradicts themselves so blatantly is one of the folks you have been listening to in forming policy that impacts all of BC.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">Dr Loh also stated that alcohol was "responsible" for a variety of societal and health problems including "mental health issues". </span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">Now as a Registered Psychiatric Nurse, who has worked in some of BC's most acute psychiatric units, I can tell you that this is a gross over-simplification, inaccurate and simply untrue statement in the majority of cases. Alcoholism is a very complicated disease and often there are social, cultural, economic factors at play as well as mental health factors in some cases. </span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">Yes, some with mental health issues do have alcohol issues but many do not. In fact, many </span></span><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">suffering</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"> from mental health related problems I have worked with do not drink alcohol at all. And many with alcohol issues have no mental health issues whatsoever.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 21.599998474121094px;">To say one is responsible for the other is naive or manipulative, depending on the intent. I am not sure where the doctor was coming from with that statement but as a Medical Health Officer, speaking to the public, he should know better than to make an alarmist statement like that.</span></span></span><br />
<br />
Again, I am concerned if you are receiving advise and pressure from groups making public statements like this.<br />
<br />
I have also seen statistics in the media from addictions experts and health care officials stating that approximately 37% of all people who present at hospital emergency rooms in BC have consumed alcohol with in 12 hours of arriving at hospital.<br />
<br />
It is a powerful statistic if you do not apply any sort of critical thinking. Anyone who has taken even a rudimentary statistics course, or who has any common sense, can tell you it is a misleading and empty statistic unless more information is given about the type of study done, where, when and the methodology. It is also important to have the statistics put into context and have a complete picture. It is alarmist and again an attempt at manipulating the public when presented in the way it has been presented.<br />
<br />
How many of those who had the drink within 12 hours arrived at hospital for something related to alcohol or as a result of intoxication or intoxicated behaviour?<br />
<br />
We don't know because that vital information is not supplied.<br />
<br />
How many had a cup of coffee within 12 hours? I am sure more than 37%, so does this mean coffee consumption is directly linked to ER visits? Ridiculous, isn't it? So is the unsupported statement related to alcohol.<br />
<br />
And how many people in BC have a drink and do not present at an emergency room within 12 hours? I would be willing to bet in the range of 99% and if so, does that not indicate that drinking alcohol keeps you away from the ER?<br />
<br />
Again ridiculous, but using the logic of the 37% statistic, it makes sense.<br />
<br />
Oh statistics, they are so slippery and misleading when not all the information about the study and results are supplied.<br />
<br />
And where did you get this new minimum price per ounce. It is much higher than say Quebec, Ontario and Alberta where I believe it is set around $0.16 per ounce, putting the minimum pint price at $3.20 pre-tax. Is there some empirically based evidence that these jurisdictions have significantly more alcohol-related woes therefore we need to set our minimum drink price higher?<br />
<br />
Oh yeah, I forgot, I am not supposed to compare BC to other jurisdictions, as per the medical experts, or am I? I am confused.<br />
<br />
As well, you have to look at the motivation for the "industry advocates" wanting these changes. Of course they want a high minimum drink prices if there is happy hour as it means more guaranteed money in their pockets from customers. It also cuts out the chance of the bigger, greedier chains and and corporations in the urban areas from having the annoyance of some smaller, independent businesses offering up great specials and under cutting them to try to stay afloat and lure business to their establishments.<br />
<br />
Do you think ABLE cares about my local pub, or the hundreds of other small-town watering holes? Do you really think the BC Restaurant and Foodservices Association care what happens in small-town, rural BC? Do you think they really represent those establishments that cater to the less affluent and less fortunate who want to get out once in a while for a beer to socialize?<br />
<br />
If they did, they would have shouted very loudly about the fact that this move may in fact decrease business in some cases.<br />
<br />
I hope you get a flood of letters like this from consumers complaining that they are now paying substantially more for their beer. And I hope you listen because you clearly are out of touch with the whole of BC in regards to this issue. BC liquor policy needs to make sense for all of BC. This policy negatively targets the less affluent and those licensed establishment who serve them, those who do not live in more expensive urban settings and businesses who do serve alcohol responsibly and by the letter of the law but do so at a price that is reasonable and attract patrons to their establishment.<br />
<br />
Now, I am going to head down to my local for a pint to unwind and I will be having to take a $10 bill with me instead of $5 bill to pay for that beer. Thanks a lot for that. I am sure any others who may be there will be thanking you as well for the 30% increase to the cost of their pint.<br />
<br />
Sincerely<br />
Paddy Treavor<br />
Unsatisfied British ColumbianPaddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-42127171405222858762014-06-21T11:07:00.000-07:002014-06-21T11:07:33.931-07:0043% Price Hike Does Not Sound Like Happy Hour to Me<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0bvNnJgpF_PPeGNEugFCskAqB1oLAdww8HxbRQVlB8Lk3UyOOMW28RAGmiEDlLshdhdydbzYntkm15moYmzhDr9uN2ARvmSiOh771dQfVxk0IYI5W7QQo-vHyiVEeopdFqrsuAvHFfRs/s1600/happyhr.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0bvNnJgpF_PPeGNEugFCskAqB1oLAdww8HxbRQVlB8Lk3UyOOMW28RAGmiEDlLshdhdydbzYntkm15moYmzhDr9uN2ARvmSiOh771dQfVxk0IYI5W7QQo-vHyiVEeopdFqrsuAvHFfRs/s1600/happyhr.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a>Friday afternoon the Liberals announced that BC alcohol licensees, as of the time of the announcement (read policy directive <a href="http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/lclb/docs-forms/policy-directive-2014-07.pdf" target="_blank">here</a>), are now free to have temporary drink specials, otherwise known as happy hour.<br />
<br />
But before you run down to your local pub looking for a 2-for-1 special, know that with the new minimum <br />
drink pricing of $0.25 per 28 ml (one ounce) that was tied to the happy hour announcement, many beer drinkers in BC will see the regular price of their pint increase significantly, especially in more rural areas of BC.<br />
<br />
At $0.25 an ounce, a pint works out to $5 before tax. My local in Powell River, for example, charged, before yesterday, $4.50 a pint (yes a real pint), tax included, for craft beer on a regular basis. Now that price will have to increase to hit the new minimum standard.<br />
<br />
I will now pay more for my pint at the minimum "happy hour minimum" price threshold, before tax, than I was on a regular basis, with tax included, in my local and many other establishments in my town.<br />
<br />
Happy Hour my ass.<br />
<br />
This situation is not atypical to my local as economies outside the Lower Mainland are completely unrelated to Vancouver and big city prices due to variety of reasons, like the lack of high paying jobs or the necessity to rely on seasonal work to make ends meet. This new minimum pricing did not take that into consideration, or the BC Liberals and their crew of civil servants and bureaucrats who wrote the policy just did not care that this price hike may mean less business for small town pubs and those establishments that cater to the less affluent here in BC and less opportunity for those with low income to get outside of the four walls of their homes to socialize over a beer at their local.<br />
<br />
And in areas like the outrageously priced Vancouver, where a pint often can run $10 after tax and tip, those places with great daily specials, like Martini's on Broadway for instance where a pint is, excuse me, was $3.50 on Wednesdays, because the new minimum drink pricing they will have to increase their "special" prices.<br />
<br />
Using Martini's as an example, the price hike will be 43%! <br />
<br />
It is obvious that Justice Minister/Attorney General, Suzanne Anton, her Parliamentary Secretary, John Yap and those they charged with shaping the new BC liquor policy "modernization" caved to the pressure from special interest groups.<br />
<br />
Certain hospitality industry associations have been pushing against happy hours from the start as increased competition from lower booze prices during happy hours means less dollars in the pockets of their members. Big chains do not want to have to compete with smaller, independent establishments which are more likely to lower their prices for happy hours in order to lure customers through their doors.<br />
<br />
And I warned you all in the past to be wary of the fact that government were listening closely to health officials about minimum pricing for booze in BC.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
Health authorities and their advocates have been pushing for higher booze prices and less access to alcohol from the start of this process using statistics from vague, unnamed studies and scare tactics to push their agenda forward. When I had the opportunity to <a href="http://www.camrapowellriver.ca/news.html" target="_blank">discuss this issue on radio on CBC</a> (scroll down to Oct 31st) head-to-head with Fraser Health Medical Officer, Dr Lawrence Loh, he ran out a stat that 37% of people who present at BC emergency departments have had a drink of alcohol within 12 hours arriving.<br />
<br />
Sounds like a very ominous and telling stat.<br />
<br />
My response - what percentage of people in BC who consume a drink of alcohol do not present at an emergency department within 12 hours? That is a stat I would like to see! I guarantee you it is the 99% or above range.<br />
<br />
The good doctor had no response to that. Stats can be twisted and manipulated any which way in most cases, depending on how you pose the question.<br />
<br />
Dr Loh, in response to me stating that alcohol in grocery stores work in many other jurisdictions, stated we have to be wary of using other jurisdictions and studies based in those jurisdictions to predict what will happen in BC because we may have different attitudes and a different culture in BC related to alcohol.<br />
<br />
Actually, a great point, but then, to bolster his argument 5 minutes later, he started spouting off stats from studies done in other jurisdictions that supported his point of view, contradicting his warning not to look to other places where booze is viewed in a different light than conservative BC.<br />
<br />
This happy hour-minimum pricing policy is an epic fail for consumers in many areas of BC. As with the issue of alcohol in grocery stores, John Yap and those involved in the process from the government side, have completely misunderstood or completely ignored the real wants and needs of the alcohol consumers in this province. I am not sure if they are believe their own bullshit that they are listening to consumers and giving consumers what they want because clearly, they are not.<br />
<br />
The government has quietly backed away from their promise to tie beer prices to alcohol content and instead have just nailed everyone. At the end of the day, the BC Liberals are not modernizing anything. They are making changes that look great but really have no effect in reducing the Nanny State that exists in BC related alcohol policy.<br />
<br />
Now, if you don't mind, I am going to head down to my local and celebrate the return of happy hour in BC by paying $1.50 or so more for my pint than I did on Thursday.<br />
<br />
Thank you John Yap, Suzanne Anton and all of those involved in this asshattery called the return of happy hour to BC.Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-48534667285900940742014-04-23T12:05:00.001-07:002014-04-26T10:33:09.949-07:00The Beer Consumers On-going Acceptance of Being Robbed - Ignorance Is Not Bliss!!For reasons I will never understand, for years draught beer consumers in BC have blatantly been ripped off<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjF6O4_KoF0lmjg-tfvCCAD7Q9uYcMGzNK3T6K4ZIzOxenTz6V754yWm2_NMDpY9uUpLorKJ2k__hbb5LnuXLV5waqAAPGKEhlCpKDoC0L43PRI6BskBWg7eQLUMe44x8Auk0ly2_J4cc8/s1600/FUSS-Logo.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjF6O4_KoF0lmjg-tfvCCAD7Q9uYcMGzNK3T6K4ZIzOxenTz6V754yWm2_NMDpY9uUpLorKJ2k__hbb5LnuXLV5waqAAPGKEhlCpKDoC0L43PRI6BskBWg7eQLUMe44x8Auk0ly2_J4cc8/s1600/FUSS-Logo.png" /></a></div>
and consumers have accepted this practice without much complaint.<br />
<br />
The majority of time we are confronted with the decision of whether or not to order a draught beer, we are being forced to so with out being given the basic information to make an informed decision.<br />
<br />
How much beer is being offered per serving? What is the strength of the beer? How do I know I am getting what I ordered as far as a serving size?<br />
<br />
These are all basic pieces of information we, as consumers, should be supplied before we even order the beer and take our first sip.<br />
<br />
Yes, I am on about the serving size issue that exists in this province, the same one that has existed for decades. Check out this <a href="http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=ifIdVpG6JtcC&dat=19580129&printsec=frontpage&hl=en" target="_blank">Vancouver Sun newspaper article from January 29, 1958</a> (3rd page over under headline "Beer Glass Plimsol Line Is Half Inch From Top") where the then president of the BC Restaurant Association, J.J. Custock, pointed out draught beer consumers were, in many cases, "being robbed".<br />
<br />
Custock's advice at the time, if consumers were not getting their full measure of beer in their glass they should "get up and walk out" of the establishment. Although this is good advice, I propose consumers take things further and begin to stand up for their rights.<br />
<br />
Due to the fact that the government and the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch (LCLB) will not step in the enforce their own rules and protect consumers' rights and because we, the draught beer consumers of BC, are such a passive and willing-to-be-screwed-over bunch, it has become the norm for licensees leave their patrons in the dark in regards to how much beer they are serving. And even when serving sizes are established, they are often misrepresented, whether intentionally or not, leaving the consumer with less than they think they have in their glass.<br />
<br />
Last week the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA) of BC relaunched their <a href="http://camravancouver.ca/advocacy/fuss/" target="_blank">Fess up to Serving Sizes (FUSS) Campaign</a>, sending off a <a href="http://www.camrapowellriver.ca/fess%2520up%2520documents2.html" target="_blank">letter</a> to various politicians & <a href="http://www.camrapowellriver.ca/fess%20up%20documents.html" target="_blank">a press release</a> to various media outlets in BC advocating for the protection of basic consumers' rights and the enhancement of public safety.<br />
<br />
CAMRA BC has beefed up and expanded their campaign - originally FUSS pushed to have the LCLB enforce their legal requirement for licensees to either post, or keep handy, a serving size/price list for all alcoholic beverages they serve, which must be produced upon request by a consumer - by adding that the alcohol content of beer (ABV) should be included on the serving size list and that draught beer glassware should have a "fill-to-here" line, known as a plimsol line, so the consumer knows they are getting the pour they ordered.<br />
<br />
By enacting legislation requiring a serving size-ABV list for all draught beer and marked glassware, consumers will be able to make informed decisions about what they are ordering so they can determine:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>if they are getting value for their money</li>
<li>just how much alcohol they are consuming</li>
<li>whether they should be driving their vehicles or <a href="http://www.servingitright.com/alcohol_effects_appendix.html" target="_blank">not based on exactly how much alcohol they have consumed</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.camh.ca/en/hospital/health_information/a_z_mental_health_and_addiction_information/alcohol/Pages/low_risk_drinking_guidelines.aspx" target="_blank">if they are over consuming according to Canada's Low Risk Alcohol Drinking Guidelines</a></li>
<li>whether they are getting what they paid for</li>
</ul>
Servers and licensees will also be more informed as to just exactly how much alcohol they are serving their customers and better be able to judge whether they are over-serving or not. With the new liquor policies about to be enacted, more legal responsibility will be placed on the licensees and servers, making them possibly financially liable if someone leaves their establishment after having a drink and gets into trouble due. BC is looking to enact a "last drink" style of legislation that puts the onus of responsibility on the establishment that serves a consumer their last drink, which means licensees will have to be more vigilant as to whether a consumer has been drinking prior to arriving at their establishment. This makes it even more important, as a licensee or server, to monitor just how much alcohol they are serving.<br />
<br />
I don't know how many times I have spoken to bartenders and servers who have absolutely no clue as to the size of glass they are serving or the strength of the beer! It makes quite a difference to a person's blood alcohol level if they are consuming 16oz of 7% beer over 12oz of 5% beer!!<br />
<br />
It also impacts the wallet significantly being offered a 20oz pour (pint) and being served a 16oz sleeve. When the bill comes and states you owe $10, try paying $7.50 and see how far you get!!<br />
<br />
This campaign was originally launched in 2011, when I was president of CAMRA Vancouver, and <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2012/06/camra-vancouver-making-fuss-in.html" target="_blank">FUSS worked its way all the way to the BC Legislature</a>, but Rich Coleman, then overseeing the province's alcohol portfolio, did not care that consumers were being ripped off. Coleman basically stated that the LCLB gets very few complaints from the public about this issue and when they do, they investigate, but otherwise it was up to the licensees to police themselves.<br />
<br />
I had several e-mail communications with then LCLB General Manager, Karen Ayers and she brushed the issue off as unimportant, even though she stated preventing over-serving was a LCLB priority, which, if CAMRA's ideas were implemented, would be far less likely as both consumers and servers would know exactly how much alcohol was being served. Ayers did state that she would "remind" licensees and liquor inspectors of their obligations via the LCLB's newsletter, but I never did see any evidence that she did so and when I talked to a liquor inspector, one known for being an unreasonable hard-ass who looks for any excuse to hassle licensees, he denied ever having any direction to enforce this policy.<br />
<br />
Coleman and Ayers have moved on and others are now holding the reigns of power related to overseeing and enforcing alcohol policy in BC on so hopefully they will see the importance and practicality of these suggested changes.<br />
<br />
I took a lot of abuse from a small segment of licensees when FUSS was first launched in Vancouver and I know they will again complain CAMRA is misguided, but to be perfectly blunt, I really don't give a shit. This is about consumers' rights, not licensees' rights. The playing field has been slanted in the direction of licenses for longer than I can remember and unscrupulous and/or uncaring licensees have been taking advantage. I can hear licensees stating this will cost them money, but no, it will not as producing a printed list or having a chalkboard list costs next to nothing and glassware could be phased in over a two-year period, with current glasses being replaced with plimsol-lined glasses as the establishment replaced glassware, which happens constantly due to breakage, wear and tear, theft, etc. As well, branded glassware should not be impacted and you only have to look to Europe to see that plimsol lines have been ingenuously inserted into brand logos or placed elsewhere on fancy beer glasses without impacting the branding.<br />
<br />
In other parts of the world I have visited, not being given the information about how much beer you are ordering, how strong that beer is and then not being given the measure you were told you would receive, would cause great unrest among consumers. Here, we accept this practice while grumbling into our sleeve glass of undetermined size about being short-poured and ripped off.<br />
<br />
Complaints about serving sizes and getting short-poured is still the Number One complaint I receive from consumers but if consumers really want to evoke change, they have to force the issue and take Coleman's statement, that the LCLB will investigate if they get complaints, to heart. The LCLB are obligated to investigate. Instead of complaining to the person next to you at the bar, or passivity accepting "getting robbed", take 30 seconds to send an email to the LCLB & Justice Minister (see addresses below), naming the establishment, time, date and issue.<br />
<br />
Remember, this is not about pushing for the return of the pint! FUSS is about getting licensees to inform consumers exactly what they are offering and then delivering on that promise.<br />
<br />
If this issue is important to you, take matters into your own hands and defend your consumer rights. The LCLB will not act in regards to this matter until directed to by the government and the government will not direct them to act until consumers become a pain in the ass for the politicians.<br />
<br />
It is up to us to force this change. What do you have to lose...other than the continued practice of being ripped off? <br />
<br />
E-mail complaints to:<br />
Douglas Scott - General Manager of the Liquor Control & Licensing Branch<br />
<a href="mailto:douglas.s.scott@gov.bc.ca">douglas.s.scott@gov.bc.ca</a><br />
Suzanne Anton - Justice Minister & Attorney General<br />
<a href="mailto:JAG.Minister@gov.bc.ca">JAG.Minister@gov.bc.ca</a><br />
<br />
Use social media<br />
<br />
<div style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 1.25em; padding: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Take a photo (or video) of your less-than-a-20oz-pint next to the sign that says “pint” and email or tweet it to @VanEastbeerblog, @CAMRABC @CAMRA_YVR along with the hashtags #FUSS and #servingitwrong and CAMRA & VanEast Beer Blog will help spread the word.</span></div>
Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-57165531778157930562014-02-28T11:03:00.004-08:002014-02-28T11:03:47.989-08:00Changing the Culture of Fear & Paranoia: The Recommendation That Could Change How Liquor Policy is EnforcedFor as long as I can remember there has been a dark cloud of paranoia that has hung over many BC liquor manufacturers & licensees who fear that their livelihoods, namely their liquor-related businesses and the licenses associated with them, are in jeopardy if they question provincial liquor policy and the decisions made the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch (LCLB), the Liquor Distribution Branch (LDB) and their employees.<br />
<br />
But all this may be about to change as a result of one of the 73 recommendations made by John Yap in his <a href="http://www2.gov.bc.ca/local/haveyoursay/Docs/liquor_policy_review_report.pdf" target="_blank">BC Liquor Policy Review Final Report</a>. In his report, Yap is recommending the BC Liberals allow for,<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>"applicants and licensees seeking a review of LCLB decisions should have access to a new and separate decision-making body outside the licensing branch. The Ministry of Justice should review current processes and determine how best to provide independent decision-making for those seeking appeal."</i></blockquote>
This recommendation, which is getting no press coverage or water cooler time, is the recommendation that could drag our liquor policies, and how they are implemented and enforced, into the 21st Century. This could also be the recommendation that allows liquor related business owners do what they want to do, namely run their businesses without undue interference and inconsistent application of BC liquor policy from alcohol related government agencies.<br />
<br />
By creating an affordable, independent system for licensees and liquor licensee applicants to appeal LCLB & LDB rulings, inspectors & upper echelon bureaucrats will be held accountable for their decisions which may cause some of the less scrupulous and less knowledgeable types to think twice before acting. Those seemingly arbitrary and illogical rulings and decisions we all hear about will now be examined by someone who, in theory, will have a completely objective viewpoint. Licensees will no longer have to fear retribution as much as they will have an avenue for lodging complaints when they feel they have been done wrong.<br />
<br />
It may also provide some consistency to how the policies and laws are applied and create case examples of rulings that could work similar to case law in the courts, setting precedents that can be used in the future when similar situations arise and there is conflict between licensees and the powers that be enforcing and implementing liquor policies.<br />
<br />
By having rulings for specific issues on the record the ability to interpret and manipulate policies could be eliminated or at least decreased. And if a particular inspector or bureaucrat keeps having their actions and decisions hauled into and overturned by this appeal process, maybe, just maybe, problems will identified and actions taken to correct the problems like supplying proper support and education to those who are abusing their power or making questionable rulings. And if the problems continue to persist, maybe, just maybe, those not doing their job in an ethical and equitable manner, will be disciplined and possibly removed from those positions of power.<br />
<br />
I know when I met with Yap, as a part of the CAMRA BC presentation during the review, he was very interested in the idea of an independent appeal process and he did acknowledge that he had heard from several sources that many licensees fear speaking out even when they believe they are 100% in the right. We had quite a long discussion about this and I got the distinct impression that Yap wanted to ensure that there were checks and balances in place in regards to enforcement of liquor policies. He also mentioned he would like to see liquor inspectors get more education about the policies they are enforcing and the mandate they are carrying out.<br />
<br />
I get a regular flow of emails and telephone calls from liquor license holders and people trying to obtain liquor licenses, who ask me to look into questionable and at times seemingly arbitrary decisions made by our province's liquor bureaucrats and their minions, but almost all end their requests with the following stipulation, "Please don't use my name or anything I have told you because I don't want any trouble (from the LCLB or LBD)."<br />
<br />
At the moment, licensees know they have little-to-no recourse if they find themselves on the wrong side of their local liquor inspectors or the bureaucrats who work in the LCLB & LDB head offices as currently there is no appeal process built into the system. Once a decision has been made and/or a penalty imposed, that is it, end of story, no matter how nonsensical or unjust. Licensees often feel helpless in this very unbalanced system and those enforcing and implementing policy know it. <br />
<br />
Currently, front line LCLB liquor inspectors, if they are so inclined, have been free to make rulings as they see fit, interpreting the often poorly and vaguely worded policies and laws to their advantage, making rulings and decisions that cost licensees crippling amounts of money, with little fear of being held accountable and at times with little working knowledge of the policies and laws they are enforcing. I am not saying all liquor inspectors are like this, but it seems like licensees from all corners of the province have had negative experiences.<br />
<br />
Those higher up the bureaucratic food chain are free to direct these liquor inspectors as they see fit. In the cases of those in positions of power, they, in certain instances, have the ability to write liquor policy on the fly, basically unchecked as the politicians who are supposed to be responsible have little-to-no interest or knowledge of what is going on and only pay attention when the shit hits the fan. Politicians rely heavily on the advice of the top bureaucrats and the top bureaucrats have a vested interest in making things as easy on themselves as they can, pushing their own private agendas knowing they have little chance of having to answer for their decisions unless something goes wrong and the media get onto a story that reflects negatively on the government's policies.<br />
<br />
Laws are often enforced arbitrarily and inconsistently. Both the LCLB & LDB hide behind the often outdated and nonsensical liquor policies when it suits them to enforce them and ignore those same policies and laws when doing so suits their needs. <br />
<br />
I know some of you out there think I am just being dramatic and trying to cause trouble here but trust me, I have sat down with liquor inspectors who have no idea what they are talking about, who make bizarre decisions based on their interpretation of the liquor policies or have an unwillingness to try to address problems without being unnecessarily heavy-handed. I have also seen cases where the LCLB & LDB have seemed to rule or act for no other reason than to put people who complain or question policy in their place. If you want some specific examples check out <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2012/02/thank-you-karen-ayers-lclb.html" target="_blank">here</a>, <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2011/10/us-breweries-almost-banned-from-gcbf.html" target="_blank">here</a>, <a href="http://prpeak.com/articles/2013/12/03/news/doc529e84df2b1b2068125480.txt" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2013/10/storm-of-bureaucratic-red-tape.html" target="_blank">here</a>.<br />
<br />
Having said that, I know that there are many who work in the alcohol bureaucrat arms of government who are very honest, helpful and try to do what they can to be fair and equitable to licensees and liquor-related businesses but they are overshadowed by those others I have been talking about.<br />
<br />
I hope the government looks hard at creating a system or appeal that will help create a far and equitable process for everyone involved in the BC liquor industry. Liquor inspectors, the LCLB & those who issue liquor licenses and enforce the laws have a job to do, which is enforce liquor policy, but this enforcement needs to be consistent, predictable and both those abusing the policies and breaking the law and those enforcing the policies and laws need to be held equally accountable.Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-6192627312025266212014-02-27T22:49:00.000-08:002014-02-27T22:50:36.012-08:00Help Feed Vancouver's Hungry by Drinking Craft Beer<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEha-ppqE_Jmcb6t-MF4RQwujHcSrR90VLavMFRuDZH5nTPIFuXEfoXZjSOBxE2mx47eqPF6g_rA8z7XOIZljboNjJ0iDeSWaEXxsfpQRI_1SVNm2wQeTcGGqxgDD2RYE28LcW3ZXACxWao/s1600/esbfest.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; display: inline !important; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEha-ppqE_Jmcb6t-MF4RQwujHcSrR90VLavMFRuDZH5nTPIFuXEfoXZjSOBxE2mx47eqPF6g_rA8z7XOIZljboNjJ0iDeSWaEXxsfpQRI_1SVNm2wQeTcGGqxgDD2RYE28LcW3ZXACxWao/s1600/esbfest.png" height="400" width="308" /></a>If you are looking for a reason to justify a mid-week craft beer session, look no further than Liberty Wine Merchant's 2nd Annual East Side Beer Fest to be held Wednesday, March 5th at the WISE Hall, located at the corner of Victoria Drive and Adanac Street.<br />
<br />
The event, organized by Liberty's Commercial Drive location, is donating all proceeds from the event to the Greater Vancouver Food Bank and is asking all who attend to also bring a non-perishable food item to the event which will also be passed on to the food bank.<br />
<br />
Last year's inaugural event was a sell out which helped Liberty donate <span style="background-color: white;">$4,287 to the Food Bank</span><span style="background-color: white;"> along with the food items donated at the door by thirsty craft beer lovers. This year's event has a great line up of breweries and beer importing agents lined up (see list below).</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 17.940000534057617px;">"For the 2nd Annual we have decided to go with a mix of new vendors and old, half from B.C. and half agents importing world class beers," stated Liberty Commercial store manager William Ford. "Some notable new additions are recent start-ups Four Winds and Bomber Brewing and new agents UnTapped, Modern Malt and new-to-us Bravo."</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 17.940000534057617px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 17.940000534057617px;">As an added bonus, Liberty have confirmed that their own nano-distillery, The Liberty Distillery, will be pouring samples of their vodka and white whiskey.</span></span><br />
<br />
Food will also be available from various Commercial Drive businesses to help soak up all the great craft beers and artisan spirits on offer. Don't wait until the last minute as last year's event had no tickets available at the door due to being sold out ahead of time.<br />
<br />
The event runs from 7-9 PM with tickets running $24.99 each or 4 for $80. For more information on the event and where to get tickets check out Liberty's event page <a href="http://libertywinemerchants.com/pages/wine-tasting-events.php" target="_blank">here</a>.<br />
<br />
List of confirmed breweries and agents<br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Breweries: Driftwood, </span><span style="background-color: white;">Central City, </span><span style="background-color: white;">Phillips, </span><span style="background-color: white;">Howe Sound, </span><span style="background-color: white;">Parallel 49, </span><span style="background-color: white;">Four Winds, </span><span style="background-color: white;">Mill St., </span><span style="background-color: white;">Bomber</span><br />
<br style="background-color: white;" />
<span style="background-color: white;">Agents: </span><span style="background-color: white;">McClelland Premium Imports (Erdinger, Delirium, Rodenbach), </span><span style="background-color: white;">Bravo (ie. Saison Dupont, Gulden Draak, Caracole),</span><span style="background-color: white;"> TruCraft (ie. Lagunitas, Super Bock, Brooklyn, Hopworks), </span><span style="background-color: white;">Untapped (ie. Trou du Diable, Dieu du Ciel, Rev. Nat's),</span><span style="background-color: white;"> Modern Malt (ie. Occidental, Base Camp, No-Li), </span><span style="background-color: white;">The Liberty Distillery (Vodka & White Whiskey), </span><span style="background-color: white;">Peacock & Martin (ie. Westmalle, Tempelier, Fraoch)</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-64440379753790686002014-02-09T18:08:00.002-08:002014-02-09T18:08:38.394-08:00The Beer is out of the Garden Part II: Recommendation Misses for the BC Craft Beer IndustryRecently, citizens of BC were privileged to see the great reveal in regards to what direction the province is considering alcohol-wise as the Liberals released the <i><a href="http://www2.gov.bc.ca/local/haveyoursay/Docs/liquor_policy_review_report.pdf" target="_blank">BC Liquor Policy Review Final Report </a> </i>outlining all 73 of John Yap's recommendations for modernizing BC liquor laws and policies.<br />
<br />
While many of the recommendations look promising in regards to hauling our liquor policies into the 21st Century, it is important to remember that at this point they are nothing more than recommendations and the real test as to how modernizing these policy changes will be comes when the actual policies are drawn up and implemented by the bureaucrats working on behalf of our elected officials.<br />
<br />
And have no illusions, it is not the politicians who are drafting these policies, as few of them have any idea what the issues really are and most depend heavily on the advice and direction given by their top dogs at the LDB and LCLB who the politicos trust. It is also the bureaucrats and their staff that implement, regulate and enforce the policies so without them on board, it is possible little could change.<br />
<br />
Yap is probably the most learned politician in BC regarding to issues related to our current liquor laws and policies, after sitting down with the 66 stakeholder groups for their direct input and feedback, and the countless social media and on-line submissions from citizens of our province. Hell, why the BC Liberals do not give him the alcohol portfolio at this point is beyond me.<br />
<br />
There is a chance that many policy changes will be very positive for our exploding craft beer industry (<a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2014/02/the-beer-is-out-of-garden-yaps-report.html" target="_blank">read here</a>) but there are a few recommendations hidden away in the 59-page report that could have a negative impact and a few misses, recommendations that were not made, that, by their absence, failed to hit the mark in supporting BC craft beer.<br />
<br />
The first one to come to mind is going to be very unpopular with both manufacturing and consumer sides of the craft beer community. Recommendation #18, in Yap's report, states:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>"LDB should consider tying minimum prices to the amount of alcohol (e.g., a beer with seven per cent alcohol would have a higher minimum price than a beer with four per cent alcohol)" </i></blockquote>
This is not surprising for many reasons and you can bet that the various health authorities, addictions-based stakeholders, all of whom are looking solely from the public safety and health perspective, and the big, national breweries, who churn out endless volumes of 5% swill, pushed Yap & Co. hard on this one.<br />
<br />
The negative impacts are obvious I would think. Whether breweries are taxed at a higher rate for higher alcohol beers, or the minimum price is just increased once the beer is in the hands of the LDB, consumers will be paying more for these beers which could see a decrease in sales. It may also limit beers what brewers will be allowed to brew as brewery managers/owners may shy away from the higher alcohol beers if price increases start impacting sales numbers and the brewery's' bottom lines.<br />
<br />
But let's be honest, the alcohol content listed on labels are, at times, closer to suggestions than actual fact as it is so this may have little impact. The enforcement of verifying the actual strength for all beers for every batch being sold is next to impossible and the LDB will have to depend on the good will of the breweries to tell them the truth.<br />
<br />
One positive from this for fans of less boozy brews is that breweries might start looking at making more session beers than the high octane craft brews we see dominating the market at times. <br />
<br />
I have always felt that the breweries were living on borrowed time, with the "mark-up" or tax being the same on beers up to 11.99%. I was just waiting for the government to realize that they could make a tax grab from breweries under the guise of promoting public health and safety. That time may have come and considering all the potential great changes for breweries and consumers, this may not be too hard to swallow, again depending on the actual breakdown and policy.<br />
<br />
Another recommendation I believe many breweries will find annoying, especially those who have splashed out lots of money to create hip & happening tasting rooms, is the recommendation that would, "allow private and public retail liquor stores to sell growlers (refillable bottles) and operate refilling stations."<br />
<br />
This could be construed as a negative because, for starters, giving liquors stores the ability to sell and refill growlers, be them private or government run, could potentially draw customers away from the above mentioned tasting rooms which could cut down on consumers, specifically beer tourists, buying other merchandise and products offered in the tasting room.<br />
<br />
Secondly, growler fills are a unique way of connecting the consumer directly to the manufacturer and those who work directly for the breweries. By allowing liquor stores to sell and fill growlers, the beers being poured may not receive the same respect from the retail outlets and the staff pouring or selling the beers may or may not be knowledgeable about the products on the same level that brewery employees will be expected to be. Control of the product will be relinquished to a third party whose only interest in the beer could be to sell it to make a profit.<br />
<br />
On the other side of the coin is the fact that by allowing liquor stores to sell and refill growlers, breweries will have more outlets to market and sell their products, but, if the listing process for government stores remains the same, the added opportunity will most likely be at the expense of another product which will have to be de-listed to make room for the growler sku on government liquor store shelves.<br />
<br />
I also think that Yap missed a few opportunities to help support local breweries. The first one that comes to mind is recommending that the government appoint a special beer envoy, like the did for the wine industry last February, with the "<span style="text-indent: -24px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">with a mandate to work to complement existing efforts to open up domestic markets" for B.C. beers (<a href="http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_releases_2009-2013/2013EMNG0026-000222.htm" target="_blank">see announcement here</a>)</span><span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">. </span><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">I am not sure if this would benefit all craft breweries, as many are small scale and have trouble keeping up with local demand, but it would help those who are growing and looking to expand their markets and customer base outside the province.</span></span><br />
<span style="text-indent: -24px;"><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="text-indent: -24px;"><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">Along those same lines, I do not know why the government is recommending to</span></span> "work with other Canadian wine-producing jurisdictions to <span style="text-indent: -24px;">jointly develop thematic wine promotions in each jurisdiction’s liquor stores to </span><span style="text-indent: -24px;">promote Canadian wine," and not apply the same recommendation to craft beer to jointly promote Canadian craft beer as well especially considering that other craft beer jurisdictions across the country are starting to come into their own and flourish like ours has in BC.</span><br />
<span style="text-indent: -24px;"><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"> </span></span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span><br />
I am sure there are a few more negatives among the 73 recommendations as far as the manufacturing side of things goes, but for me, those are the highlights, or maybe more appropriately, the low lights of the report. If there are more that are obvious that I have missed out on, I would love to hear from brewers, brewery owners, managers, etc to get their perspective.<br />
<br />Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-36932266173573112282014-02-03T09:49:00.000-08:002014-02-03T10:00:16.084-08:00The Beer is Out of the Garden! Yap's Report Revealed & Some Good News for Craft BreweriesFriday the BC Liberals finally quit teasing us and released John Yap's BC Liquor Policy Review in full for all to see what came out of the massive consultation process that took place between Yap and BC liquor stakeholders, including the general public, last August through October.<br />
<br />
Yap's<a href="http://www2.gov.bc.ca/local/haveyoursay/Docs/liquor_policy_review_report.pdf" target="_blank"> final report</a> was released in full as a part of a <a href="http://www.newsroom.gov.bc.ca/2014/01/liquor-report-out-removes-beer-garden-festival-barriers.html" target="_blank">third announcement</a> from the Liberals which highlighted proposed recommended liquor policy changes in regards to beer gardens at festivals, special occasions licenses (SOL) and U-brew/homebrew, among other things. The announcement also stated that all 73 of Yap's recommendations have "the full support" of the BC Liberal Government and that "significant policy work and implementation planning," will be done over the coming months to change these recommendations into official policy and law.<br />
<br />
These recommendations, at this point in the process, look like they could prompt the government to take some significant steps towards modernizing our antiquated liquor policies and move towards treating adults who consume alcohol like, well, adults. When all is said and done, we may have more European-style liquor policies than 1920's Prohibition controls and consumers will have more freedoms and opportunities to enjoy a drink on a broader stage than is now allowed in our Nanny State.<br />
<br />
Much depends on the actual policy that is drafted and if the Liberals hedge their bets and play it safe, like they seem to be doing with the idea of <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2013/11/recommendations-for-booze-in-grocery.html" target="_blank">selling alcohol in grocery stores</a>, these recommendations may not have much impact at all. But lets see the pint glass as half full at this point and move forward with the expectation that the government are really committed to making meaningful changes in regards to modernizing BC liquor policy.<br />
<br />
Some of the more controversial recommendations, like booze in grocery stores, the return of happy hours, no more fenced beer gardens at festivals and allowing kids in pubs during the day, are grabbing all the media attention but I think these sexier policy changes will have little impact on craft beer sales and may, in the case of grocery store sales and happy hours, have a slight negative effect (more on that in my next post).<br />
<br />
As an alcohol consumer who lives in BC, I am grateful that these headline-grabbing proposals have been "supported", but as a supporter of the local craft beer scene, I see many of the "lesser" or more boring recommendations, if they are followed through on, as being more beneficial to our BC craft breweries which will have the trickle down effect of being beneficial to craft beer consumers in this province. It looks like the BC Liberals are beginning to address the fact that they have basically ignored craft beer industry while putting the wine industry up on a pedestal, giving it and the BC wine consumers preferred treatment.<br />
<br />
I think the following recommendations, if the government does follow through and create meaningful and effective policy changes, coupled with a change of attitude and commitment to support our craft beer industry in the same way they have supported the wine folks, will help strengthen our local craft beer community which is essential if all these new and soon-to-be-opened breweries are going to survive.<br />
<br />
These are some of the most important recommendations I think will have a positive influence on the BC craft beer scene:<br />
<ul>
<li>LDB should improve its marketing of B.C. liquor products in stores, developing new opportunities for product placement and innovative promotional and educational materials. </li>
<li>Government should work with industry and tourism associations to develop promotional materials such as maps, apps and brochures on B.C. wineries, breweries and distilleries.</li>
<li>Government should discuss establishing a quality assurance program for B.C. craft beer and artisan-distilled spirits (similar to the VQA wine program). </li>
<li>Manufacturers should be able to establish low-risk tasting venues such as a picnic area as part of their existing licence without the need to apply for a specific endorsement. Government should work with industry, local government and First Nations to increase flexibility for tasting options for manufacturers while being sensitive to potential negative impacts, such as noise, on the community.</li>
<li>Government should consult with industry and review the minimum requirements to obtain a brewery, winery or distillery licence. Government should also consider how these requirements are regulated by LCLB and LDB to ensure transparency and an effective regulatory system.</li>
<li>Government should permit B.C. liquor manufacturers to offer products for sample and sale at temporary off-site retail locations (e.g., farmers’ markets), with appropriate conditions. The decision about whether to allow vintners, brewers and distillers to showcase their products at a particular location will be left to the location management (e.g., farmers’ market association). </li>
<li>Allow patrons to buy bottles of liquor to take home that are showcased at festivals or competitions. Consider amending SOLs issued to festivals and competitions, or allow BC Liquor or private retail stores to operate a temporary store on site as the means to provide for these sales.</li>
<li>Allow manufacturers to have off-site locations where they can sample and sell their products to the public (e.g., permanent tasting rooms in a downtown store).</li>
<li>LDB warehousing and distribution systems should be modernized and streamlined. The wholesale ordering processes should be improved with the goal of better and more efficient service to clients.</li>
</ul>
<div>
Our breweries can make the best beer in the world, but if they do not have the opportunity to operate and creatively market/distribute their products, free of bureaucratic red tape and stifling liquor policies, and get those beers to consumers at a competitive price, they will struggle to survive. These recommendations help highlight quality BC craft products, create more avenues for craft breweries to get their beers directly to their consumers and hopefully will help improve distribution via the Liquor Distribution Branch.<br />
<br />
I am particularly excited by the governments commitment to "develop new opportunities for product placement and innovative promotional and educational materials," for BC made liquor products. It is one of the items I personally presented to Yap & Co. during our CAMRA presentation. I have been appalled in the past when government bureaucrats have been heading to the US to lure American craft breweries up here to compete with our local craft breweries when our BC craft breweries are struggling to get listed and sold via our BC Liquor Store outlets (<a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2013/03/local-breweries-feel-slighted-by-ldbs.html" target="_blank">read here</a>).<br />
<br />
I also love the fact that the recommendations are looking for more creative ways of breweries getting their products to their consumers, via farmer's markets, off-site tasting room locations and "low-risk tasting venues such as picnic area".<br />
<br />
Many of the recommendations are vague and the word "should" appears far too often, so we need to hold off on the celebrations and congratulating the government until we see just what comes down the policy pipeline. The real proof will come when the policies are actually drafted and will depend a lot on whether or not the government bureaucrats, who will be advising the politicians on how to write the policy and proceed, are on board and in agreement that changes need to be made. The LCLB and LDB will also need to change the culture of how they operate and make the shift from being Big Brother, Hell bent on imposing their will unchallenged and in an arbitrary manner, to industry supporters who do what they can to help our home-grown booze industry flourish while maintaining public safety and promoting health awareness.<br />
<br />
<i>Posts soon on: some of the recommendations that could be seen as negative for the BC craft beer industry; the one recommendation that may change the culture of paranoia and fear in this province among licensees and the official recognition that homebrewing is legitimate.</i><br />
<br /></div>
Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-86155590176686393542013-12-12T12:03:00.000-08:002013-12-12T12:12:23.059-08:00CAMRA BC Craft Beer at Farmers Market Campaign Close to Reality Yesterday, Premier Christy Clark made an announcement highlighting government support for 12 recommendations made by Parliamentary Secretary John Yap in his report to Justice Minister and Attorney <br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgouzT9epiHHe6k5gDbJQvyHr79bnU_ALtG_YlbjvFLsXdlb-PPYOi_Fz9R7585cMi9OZWYdRWWbZp9OBqcj_7XxL5f7p46GuMAKXY9p2V9exG5xaV0-vHJCeFj_7FO9Q2RjooRuncQSsQ/s1600/camramarket.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgouzT9epiHHe6k5gDbJQvyHr79bnU_ALtG_YlbjvFLsXdlb-PPYOi_Fz9R7585cMi9OZWYdRWWbZp9OBqcj_7XxL5f7p46GuMAKXY9p2V9exG5xaV0-vHJCeFj_7FO9Q2RjooRuncQSsQ/s320/camramarket.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Clever CAMRA BC campaign, spearheaded by Vancouver<br />
president, Adam Chatburn, put craft beer at farmers markets<br />
on the Liberal radar</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
General Suzanne Anton related to liquor policy changes.<br />
<br />
One recommendation endorsed by Clark's Liberals, the allowance of tastings and sales of craft beer at local farmers markets, has the executive for the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA) of BC smiling from ear to ear and I should know as I am one of those executive members.<br />
<br />
In a <a href="http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_releases_2013-2017/2013PREM0137-001869.htm" target="_blank">press release</a> from the Office of the Premier and Minister of Justice, it was announced that, "(m)<span style="font-family: inherit;">anufacturers</span><span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">will be able to sample and sell their made-in-B.C. liquor at venues such as farmers’ markets, festivals and off-site tasting rooms.</span><span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">"</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
This announcement, which the government hopes will help, "<span style="font-size: 16px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">growth of the wine, craft brewery and craft distillery industries by allowing the sale of products at locations like farmers’ markets," and help promote BC tourism, as many visitors to our province take in local farmers markets and festivals,</span></span> is one CAMRA BC has been pushing for and I do believe CAMRA's campaign to get BC craft beer into BC farmers markets has played a huge role in making this idea a reality.<br />
<br />
It all started last March when CAMRA BC representatives met with several NDP MLAs in Victoria to present a <a href="http://camravancouver.ca/advocacy/bc-legislature-meeting/" target="_blank">list of wants</a> to who CAMRA thought were going to be the ruling party after May's provincial election.<br />
<br />
On that list was the idea of having craft beer and wine made available for sale at local farmers markets, an idea, that at the time, was a pipe dream at best.<br />
<br />
Well, as we all know, the NDP failed miserably in the election, but that did not deter CAMRA BC, specifically Vancouver president Adam Chatburn who took this on and pushed further by securing booth space at several Vancouver-area farmers markets this past summer. <br />
<br />
Chatburn <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2013/06/free-samples-of-cask-beer-camra.html" target="_blank">cleverly drew people to the CAMRA booth</a> by having an empty cask of beer on the table with a sign, "Free Samples", and once at the table, market goers could see in fine print, "not available here" at which time Chatburn and his CAMRA representatives educated their audience on how BC liquor policy made this sort of activity illegal and offered them form letters to sign requesting that craft beer be allowed for sale at farmers markets.<br />
<br />
According to Chatburn, that <a href="http://camravancouver.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Farmers-Market-Letter.pdf" target="_blank">letter writing campaign </a>resulted in Yap and Anton receiving over 400 letters, a number large enough to immediately get the attention of any politician and in this time of liquor policy review in the province, I can guarantee you Yap and his team were looking at this idea before the consultation even began.<br />
<br />
In fact, I had been told from a very reliable and well connected source that beer and wine in farmers markets had already been rubber stamped as a "go" before the consultation was even in full swing and that this would be one of the first announcements, something that appears to be true. The fact that Clark herself made the announcement tells me this is a done deal as Anton is not going to upstage and over-rule her boss by watering down the recommendation or by putting the kibosh on the idea.<br />
<br />
The farmers market idea was also apart of the CAMRA BC presentation to Yap and his team during the stakeholder meeting phase of the review and I can tell you the idea was very well received and I, for one, was surprised when it became apparent that the Liberals were considering allowing free samples to be given out as well, which, as you can see by yesterday's announcement, seems to be what is coming down the pipe.<br />
<br />
I know this is apparent victory is not 100% due to CAMRA BC and Chatburn pushing as the wine industry were advocating for BC wine sales at the markets as well, and now that Christy Clark is representing Westside-Kelowna, prime wine country, the wine folks will even have more influence on the Liberals than before. Having said that, CAMRA BC members should be proud of what their executives have done to put this on the Liberal radar, especially Chatburn and his Vancouver Executive who took this on and raised awareness by getting the booths at the markets.<br />
<br />
This is why CAMRA exists, to advocate on behalf of the craft beer consumer of BC, and it appears they have chalked up one major victory for those of us who enjoy great BC craft beer.<br />
<br />
Lets hope they have many more successes!Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-80228053961479222382013-11-29T05:53:00.001-08:002013-11-29T05:53:18.002-08:00Recommendations for Booze in Grocery Stores Miss the MarkIn a week where the BC Liberals got hammered for allowing BC Hydro to raise rates 28% over the next five years and for letting BC Ferries executives keep their ridiculous bonuses while cutting ferry services to isolated, ferry-dependant, coastal towns, Parliamentary Secretary John Yap announced that he has recommended to the Attorney General and Justice Minister, Suzanne Anton, that liquor policies should be changed to allow alcohol to be sold in supermarkets.<br />
<br />
Hallelujah.<br />
<br />
But before you start dreaming of skipping down the aisles of your local Safeway, plucking bread off the self with you right hand and your favourite craft beer off the other shelf with your left, read the official new release <a href="http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_releases_2013-2017/2013JAG0359-001784.htm" target="_blank">here</a> and realize that this recommendation is not quite what it appears to be and, when you get right down to it, is quite disappointing.<br />
<br />
After looking at this, my <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2013/09/bc-liquor-policy-review-appears-genuine.html" target="_blank">previously posted "cautious optimism"</a> has been dampened as it looks like instead of being brave, bold, and truly going for it, Yap is going to play it safe with his recommendations.<br />
<br />
It is one of those announcements that looks brilliant when you read the headline, but when you actually get to the details as to what is happening you realize the government is just attempting to pull one over on the public, like when the Liberals announced, "<a href="http://www.theprovince.com/business/Cancelled+bonuses+Ferries+bosses+become+part+their+base+salaries+instead/9172676/story.html" target="_blank">Ferry Executives Have Bonuses Cut</a>," when in fact what really happened was that the bonuses were just rolled into the executives' wage packages and had not been cut at all.<br />
<br />
In fact, if Anton follows Yap's recommendation, it will achieve, at best, little more than just switching the physical location of private retail liquor stores (LRS), making it more convenient for some and less for others, depending on their shopping needs and, at worst, will have little impact at all as the hassle, cost and logistics of putting alcohol in retail grocery stores will not be worth it for most.<br />
<br />
Let's start by looking at the recommendation and play out what this whole thing will look like assuming it gets past the Attorney General.<br />
<br />
Yes, Yap is recommending that alcohol be sold in grocery stores, but the news release states that, "i<span style="font-family: inherit;">n doing this, B.C. should maintain the current cap on the total number of retail outlets in the province."</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Say what?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">So Superstore may be allowed to soon sell booze, but only if they can manage to buy up an existing liquor retail license, a license with an already-inflated value, which will increased ten-fold in price because those who have them know that there soon will be people with very deep pockets who want them. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">It also means that convenience of getting your beer with your groceries may be at the cost of you being able to go into your small, uncrowded, private retail liquor store (LRS) when you only want to buy a six pack and don't want groceries because that LRS may no longer exist due to having sold their license for stupid amounts of money to a large retail grocery chain.</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">What Yap has heard is that consumers want to have the convenience of being able to buy booze with their groceries. I am sure not many of those same consumers he heard from said, "but please take away some of the LRS locations so that I am forced to go into a crowded grocery store even when I don't want to." </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Yap has put the lid on liquor retail outlets to keep those who think more liquor retail outlets will lead to decreased public safety and increased public harm off the backs of the Liberals. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">And even if someone is willing to sell their valuable LRS license to a grocery store, there are <a href="http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/lclb/docs-forms/sum-changes-lcla.pdf" target="_blank">current restrictions</a> in place as to how that license can be transferred, those restrictions, which were announced just last February, being, "</span>(LRS) licensees can continue to apply to relocate their store anywhere within the same municipality or up to 5 kilometres away provided the proposed site is more than one km from an existing LRS or LRS relocation application already in progress."<br />
<br />
Think about small, isolated towns, like say, Powell River, where I live, where there are less than a handful of LRS locations, one being within a kilometre of all the grocery stores in town. If one of those grocery stores wants to sell alcohol, they have to buy that one LRS license, which is close by, or forget about it because they would be violating the above mentioned policy. This distance between LRS locations will come into play frequently, both in rural and urban settings, and really limit which grocery stores can get involved in the sale of alcohol and which cannot unless Yap is recommending to change that policy as well, which very well might be the case.<br />
<br />
And even if the grocery outlet manages to find an LRS license to buy, and has a location to which it can be legally moved to, they then have to look at building a "store within a store" in order to segregate the booze in order to keep it away from minors and those who find alcohol offensive or too much of a temptation. I am not sure just how separate from groceries Yap feels the alcohol needs to be, but if you go by the track record of the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch (LCLB) and the Liquor Distribution Branch (LDB), stores will have to build a full-on bank vault to ensure little Johnny doesn't get his hands on the booze, even though we have laws in place requiring two pieces of ID be shown if the customer appears under 25 years of age.<br />
<br />
You have to be 18 to buy cigarettes, yet all you have to do is ask the cashier to get you some, show ID and off you go. For alcohol, you need complete separation for some reason.<br />
<br />
So add the price of store renovation on top of buying a LRS license to the tally for the grocery store.<br />
<br />
Next consider that the price of the booze is still going to be highly regulated and profit margins dictated by the LDB who basically set the price structure for alcohol in BC. Alcohol cannot be used as a lost leader to get folks in the store, like in many places in the US, because minimum prices will be set and the stores have to stay competitive with existing LRS locations and government liquor stores (GLS), therefore keep their prices in line with other LRS-GLS outlets, so profits may be marginal.<br />
<br />
Add to the cost of being able to sell booze in grocery stores the added hassle of having the LCLB and their often overzealous liquor inspectors lurking about, not to mention the undercover, under-aged, 18-going-on-36 folks the LCLB send into LRSs to try to entrap them to sell booze to minors, which brings about massive fines.<br />
<br />
This idea sounds less and less attractive if you are a grocery store owner, doesn't it? <br />
<br />
Don't get me wrong, I am all for alcohol to be sold in grocery stores. In fact, I am all for the more Quebec style where beer and wine can be bought in corner stores, which is truly convenient. I feel downcast and disheartened by the restrictions and cautiousness of these proposed recommendations. It sounds to me like Yap really did not hear what the consumers wanted and if he did, was too afraid of criticism from those opposed to really make meaningful recommendations for change.<br />
<br />
Lets hope I am wrong, this all works out and the rest of the 69 recommendations he has passed on to Anton are truly inspired, bold and actually will bring about some modernization to our liquor policies.<br />
<br />
Next post...a look at the alarmist arguments against this idea.Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-826637739916486721.post-79584583526446612982013-11-28T15:33:00.001-08:002013-11-28T15:33:48.339-08:00My Guesses Re Liquor Law Changes - Part IIA few days ago I wrote a <a href="http://eastsidebeer.blogspot.ca/2013/11/my-guesses-as-to-what-will-come-out-of.html" target="_blank">post about some of the "quick win"</a> changes I thought we would see come out of the BC liquor policy review and now I want to look at some of the bigger, more complicated and controversial changes I think will occur down the road.<br />
<br />
It seems I am a day late in posting though as Mr Yap has stolen the thunder and <a href="http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_releases_2013-2017/2013JAG0359-001784.htm" target="_blank">announced that he has recommended that booze be sold in BC supermarkets</a>, due to overwhelming public support for the idea. <a href="http://globalnews.ca/news/996736/liquor-policy-review-recommends-selling-liquor-at-grocery-stores/" target="_blank">Mainstream media</a>, <a href="http://barleymowat.com/2013/11/28/first-tidbit-from-the-liquor-policy-review/" target="_blank">blogs</a> and and social media are all onto Yap's lone reveal in regards to the 70 recommendations he put in his report to to Attorney General and Justice Minister Suzanne Anton.<br />
<br />
It became very apparent to me and others who met with Yap and who followed the <a href="http://engage.gov.bc.ca/liquorpolicyreview/" target="_blank">#bcliquor review</a> process that the sale of alcohol in BC supermarkets, once thought to be an impossibility, was definitely one the table and being considered. But Yap's announcement does not guarantee anything as the idea has to be approved by Anton and the rest of the Liberal brain trust.<br />
<br />
Personally, I think it will happen, but we will only see alcohol sold in larger retail chains, with them having to build a store within a store, to ensure limited access to minors and to segregate the booze from shoppers who may struggle with addictions issues and from those who find the presence of alcohol troubling. As well, the store will have to secure a liquor retail license, which looks like it will be no easy task as Yap has recommended not to increase the number of licenses above what now exists.<br />
<br />
I also think you will see the government keep a stranglehold on minimum pricing for booze so that these large retail chains do not sell alcohol at rock bottom prices. It will take the government until 2015 to roll this out, working out the bugs with few trial runs, but I honestly think you will see at least some version of booze in supermarkets, Costco outlets, Walmart, etc., by the end of 2015.<br />
<br />
I also do not think as many outlets will not even bother looking into selling booze as it is going to be a major hassle and expense to build a segregated area for booze, deal with the LDB, put up with liquor inspectors and all the other joys that come with selling booze in this province.<br />
<br />
And, of course, they are going to have to obtain a license to sell booze and, as I mentioned, this will not be an easy proposition.<br />
<br />
I am going to write another post in the next day or to talk about the whole concept of booze in supermarkets and address some of the ridiculous ideas being floated by those against the idea, like the <a href="http://ablebc.ca/" target="_blank">Alliance of Beverage Licensees </a>(ABLE), health authorities and temperance movements.<br />
<br />
Another change I think will be implemented, but that will take a long time to come into play is one that <b>simplifies the liquor license system</b>. I think the government will move towards a one-license system, but will start the move by making changes that will allow food primary licensees apply for endorsements to their existing licenses that would allow them to operate as a liquor primary after a certain hour in the evening and that will allow liquor primary licensees apply for endorsements that will allow them to have minors in their establishments, in the company of responsible, sober adults, up to a certain point in the day.<br />
<br />
In the end, I think the Liberals will work towards a license to simply sell booze and the licensee will decide what type of establishment and clientele they want. The restrictions will be listed on the license, an example possibly being "mixed ages until 6 PM, +19 only after", so as to put all licensees on a level playing field. I think you will also see the silly restrictions on dancing in restaurants, music in restaurants, etc., removed.<br />
<br />
The lines are so blurred right now as to who is a bar and who is a restaurant. Think about it. The law allows me to take my 3-year-old daughter into a restaurant with dozens of beer taps, a large selection of wines, spirits and hundreds of seats, even when it is packed and happening at 8 PM, yet the law forbids me to take her into a quiet, mellow neighbourhood pub on a Sunday afternoon to enjoy a brunch.<br />
<br />
Another major change I think we will see is <b>the process for getting a listing in government liquor stores (GLS) modified</b> to help support small, local manufacturers and to better give BC consumers access to locally produced beers, wines and spirits.<br />
<br />
Many local breweries, smaller wineries and artisan distilleries cannot sell via GLS outlets because they do not meet the outdated production thresholds that are in place to get a listing. The current model is based on large production manufacturers, you need to produce enough of a product to supply 40 GLS locations, virtually making it impossible for small, local breweries, wineries and distilleries to sell via the BC Liquor Stores. Some GLS outlets are forced to break the law to put their local products on their shelves. I think they are going to give the local GLS management more freedom to stock what they want to stock, as opposed to what they are told they can sell by LDB head office, giving the consumers what they want, as opposed to allowing some bureaucrat with little-to-no-knowledge of some products decide what the consumers want. <br />
<br />
To compliment this, I think the LDB will be directed to create special areas to highlight BC products, beyond the current BC wine sections, and put more emphasis on promoting BC products. I think local manufacturers will also be able to deliver directly to GLS locations.<br />
<br />
Lastly, I think you will see the LCLB and their <b>liquor inspectors be stripped of some of their current powers</b>. The LCLB and their enforcement folks have long been the law, END of STORY. Liquor inspectors now have huge discretionary powers to interpret the often ambiguous and poorly worded liquor policies as they see fit and to enforce as they see fit. There is no current appeal process if a liquor inspector nails a licensee with an infraction and only through an expensive judicial review can a licensee defend themselves.<br />
<br />
Because the liquor inspectors operate without fear of being held accountable for their often bizarre and random rulings, there is a fear amongst licensees in regards to getting on the wrong side of the LCLB and their inspectors. I think you will see an independent review board set up that will be relatively inexpensive to access and which will deal with licensee appeals to decisions made by inspectors. Yap seemed very interested in the subject of curtailing LCLB powers and increasing training and knowledge among liquor inspectors to help rid the province of this culture of fear among business owners selling booze in regards to their often random and arbitrary liquor inspectors who can currently shut them down with no recourse by the licensee.<br />
<br />
These ideas are not based in fact, just my thoughts and they are just a drop in the bucket compared to what may be in Yap's recommendations. As I mentioned, there have been 70 recommendations put forward and no one but Yap, his team and the office of the Justice Minister and Attorney General know exactly what they are. I hope they make the report public soon so we can have some real debate and discussion about what may happen in the next few years in regards to liquor policies in this province.<br />
<br />
<br />Paddy Treavorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16360223916204727525noreply@blogger.com0