At the end of prohibition in the 1920s, Ontario introduced the LCBO, a crown corporation that has a quasi-monopoly over all alcohol sales in the province. Until recently, a few private franchises stood as the only exceptions. Over the past decade, sales of alcohol have slowly expanded, as some grocery stores have been allowed to sell wine and beer as of 2015. Throughout this summer and fall, Premier Doug Ford authorized sales of certain alcohols in convenience stores, big-box stores such as Walmart, and even more grocery stores. This process, set to be complete in October, will allow these retailers to sell “wine, beer, cider, and ready-to-drink alcoholic beverages” such as coolers and other canned cocktails, according to the Premier's Newsroom.

This action initiates a major change to an Ontario institution and as a result, has reignited a common Canadian debate amongst Ontario residents: should the provinces be responsible for the distribution of alcohol? Can private companies and individuals participate in this industry? Different provinces have different policies. A Toronto City News analysis explains that in Alberta, for example, alcohol sales are totally privatized. Similarly, in Saskatchewan, one can sell alcohol in private retail stores if they obtain a license to do so. Alternatively, in Quebec, like Ontario, liquor is sold by a Crown corporation with some beer and wine sales allowed in particular grocery stores.

According to the Toronto Star, a poll conducted by Ford’s Conservative Party suggests that over half of provincial residents support the extension of alcohol sales beyond the LCBO and into popular retail stores where these products are more easily accessible. Recently, when LCBO workers went on strike, it became all too clear how the sale of alcohol through one single distributor impacts the consumer. The limited access to alcohol experienced by Ontarians in July made the LCBO and Doug Ford’s expansion plan the talk of the town. The public is divided on the LCBO, and there are good arguments for and against the Crown corporation.

A primary reason for many Ontarians’ support of the LCBO is the belief that provincially regulated alcohol sales keep residents safer. While all Ontario workers who serve alcohol (waiters, bartenders, etc.) must have a Smart Serve certification, employees at the LCBO have more consequential training in selling alcohol safely. They have more vehement regulations for checking identification and thus ensure that fewer minors are able to access alcohol. What’s more, many people believe that LCBO workers pay more detailed attention to their customers' consumption habits - who is buying alcohol, what type, how much, and how often. This record ensures that there is less unregulated overconsumption of alcohol by individuals.

Moreover, many Ontarians believe that if there are more locations where alcohol is accessible, and more easily accessible at that, individuals are at greater risk of drinking too much, drinking and driving, or engaging in disorderly behaviour which can cause disruption and harm to others. One university student in Ontario confessed to me that he was concerned that the expansion of alcohol accessibility would make it far too easy for alcoholics, including those in recovery, to access their drink of choice. This would make it easier for them to relapse and put themselves and those who love them at risk. Recovering alcoholics can avoid going to the LCBO if they want to avoid temptation, but no one can avoid going to grocery or convenience stores.

Interestingly, according to a study conducted by Public Health Canada, the prevalence of alcohol use is of a higher percentage in Quebec than in Alberta or Saskatchewan. Alcohol is provincially regulated in the former province but not in the latter. The latter do, however, have slightly higher usage than British Columbia and Ontario. Moreover, a Statistics Canada poll published in CCSA ’s Canadian Drug Summary states that Newfoundland and Labrador, which has provincially distributed liquor, has the highest per capita consumption of alcohol. In the same poll, Ontario is ranked 7th out of 10.

On the other hand, a differing viewpoint in regards to this subject is that continuing to expand the privatized sale of alcohol will be a huge benefit to store owners, creating more revenue for individuals that will then be returned to the cycle of the Ontario economy naturally. This argument suggests that the elimination of an alcohol monopoly will guarantee more competition between alcohol retailers which would then decrease prices and provide more options for consumers. This argument is attractive to alcohol consumers in Ontario who feel stifled by the lack of choice provided by the LCBO. Consider this: If one was a connoisseur of Scottish whiskeys and wanted greater access to whiskeys not sold by the LCBO, many believe that they should be able to go to a boutique whiskey shop that only sells niche bottles, an activity that is currently impossible due to LCBO’s monopoly, since these stores do not exist.

Similarly, if somebody determined that they could gain significant revenue by opening a boutique whiskey shop which specializes in rare Scottish Whiskey, they should be able to do so, leaving it up to the free market system to determine the success of their business.” Those who subscribe to this argument suggest that the LCBO creates an unnecessary obstacle to those who may want to participate in what can be a highly profitable and popular industry. In addition, privatized liquor sales would also create more choice for small businesses, especially restaurants, for whom alcohol sales are a major source of profit. Expansion of alcohol sales would ensure that restaurants have greater alternatives in choosing how they get their booze and at which price. This could potentially provide businesses with greater profit margins, as their purchasing expenses would not be dictated by the pricing of one sole supplier.

What’s more is that many Ontarians believe that the government should not be in the alcohol business at all. Some argue that the LCBO monopoly is left over from prohibition when nobody was allowed to access alcohol and that this is an unnecessary regulation which restricts freedom of choice. The relevance of this argument is augmented now that there are so many different privately owned businesses that sell cannabis in Ontario. Building off of this perspective, it is relevant to consider cannabis stores when reflecting on this subject. The regulation of cannabis in Ontario suggests that the privatization of alcohol sales would not require total unregulated sales, as the cannabis supplied by most dispensaries is provided and regulated through the government even though the dispensaries are privately owned.

As the expansion of alcohol sales continues at the hands of the Ford government, the discussion surrounding privatized alcohol sales will likely continue to be a popular topic amongst Ontarians. While there are reasons for and against privatization, it is clear that the current expansion is not going to stop anytime soon. So, Ontarians are encouraged to consider the advantages and disadvantages of the LCBO so they can be fully informed on how Ford’s policies will impact them.

PHOTOGRAPH - https://www.lcbo.com/content/lcbo/en/homepage/store-opening-queens-quay.html