Building BC’s Wine Industry

Understanding Liquor Reform: Discretion, Policy and the Law of Liquor in British Columbia

February 2, 2012 By Shea 1 Comment

A wave of discussion about British Columbia’s liquor laws has recently swamped both social media and the traditional media. Much of this discussion has been prompted by a number of high profile issues surrounding the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch’s (the “LCLB”) refusal to grant a special occasion license to a Whistler pride event and a condition the LCLB placed on the Rio Theatre’s license that it cannot show movies at any time while holding the liquor license. Vancouver’s Mayor, Gregor Robertson, has picked up this issue and has signalled that the city supports the Rio and would like the LCLB to reform the rules. Additional pieces by reform stalwarts Mark Hicken (a lawyer in Vancouver) and Kurtis Kolt (a highly respected independent wine consultant) have further catalyzed the debate.

Amongst all the chatter I have noted a continued misstatement or misapprehension of the legal structures that create and give jurisdiction to both the B.C. Liquor Distribution Branch (the “LDB”) and the LCLB. Calls to reform “liquor laws” are imprecise and regularly inaccurate, which is a problem when asking for change to big powerful bureaucracies. As a lawyer I feel that it is my duty to clarify how the system works so that proponents of change can understand what it is exactly they are asking to be changed. This article is thus meant as a primer for those who are interested in the legal structure of these issues and I hope it will contribute to the dialogue by making discussion more accurate and more precise.

The Legal Structure of the Liquor Bureaucracy in British Columbia

Liquor in British Columbia is governed by two entities, the LDB and the LCLB. Each of these entities was created by an act of the legislature of British Columbia. The LDB was created by the Liquor Distribution Act (the “LDA”) and the LCLB was created by the Liquor Control and Licensing Act (the “LCA”). Both the LDB and LCLB operate under the auspices of the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General.

The LDB is responsible for the sale and distribution of alcohol in the Province and the LCLB is responsible for alcohol licensing and enforcement of offences under the LCA along with license conditions.

These acts give the Lieutenant Governor in Council (i.e. the executive branch of government) the authority to pass regulations. The most important regulation is passed pursuant to the LCA and is called the Liquor Control and Licensing Regulation.

And even further down the chain, the LDB and the LCLB have the legal authority to create certain “policies”. Most policies are not publically published, though they must be made publically available on request. However, this is the meat of where most decisions that impact the industry are made.

Policies are subordinate to the regulations and the legislation. This means that LDB and LCLB policies must be consistent with the acts that grant these entities the authority to create such policies. Additionally, there are a number of legal principles that restrict the creation of policies and the manner in which policies are implemented by the LDB and LCLB. This area of law, known as administrative law, is extremely complex but also fundamentally important to understanding what the LDB and LCLB can and cannot do.

The Acts

The Acts are the source of authority for the LDB and the LCLB. These establish the structure of the organizations and grant them the discretion to make decisions with respect to a very wide array of matters pertaining to liquor.

For example, the LCA prohibits any person from selling liquor without a license and requires licensees to purchase all liquor from the Liquor Distribution Branch.

As a further example, the LDA grants government control of all liquor distribution and retailing in the Province. In particular, it requires all liquor sold in the province to go through the LDB, it requires that title to all liquor be surrendered to the government upon entering the Province, and it places all liability for losses, damages or costs upon importers, retailers and other private entities.

The LDA also grants the general manager of the LDB the authority to create specific restrictions on the storage and movement of liquor, including the physical structure, operations and security measures of all facilities storing liquor prior to retailing (i.e. the ability to govern warehousing in the Province).

The Regulations

The most important regulation is the Liquor Control and Licensing Regulation, which was promulgated pursuant to the LCA. It sets out the various restrictions on license types such as liquor primaries, food primaries, agents, retailers and wineries (both commercial and land based).

For example, these restrictions include (at s. 8(2)) barring granting or transfer of a Liquor Primary License to entities that are predominantly by or directed to minors, motion picture theatres, restaurants and video arcades.

The regulations (s. 14(1)) also grant the LCLB the authority to control the sale of food and the consumption of liquor on premises licensed as Liquor Retail Stores.

The Policies

As I mentioned earlier, the policies are the real meat for the majority of issues in the industry. Examples of policies include the restriction on LRS’s not to sell food or coffee, the LDB “mark up” of 123% for wine, use of inefficient forms and methods to sell and order wine, and the ban on corkage.

Policies must be consistent with the legislation that governs the given agency. In other words, there must both be legislative authority to implement a policy and that policy cannot conflict with other parts of the relevant statutes and regulations.

The Legal Basis for Challenge

The various legal bases for challenging decisions of the LDB and LCLB, including challenging policies, are quite vast. I will only outline the basic parameters of the most important administrative law principles and remedies.

The most important concept to understand in the liquor context is “discretion”. The LDA and the LCA grant the LDB and LCLB quite a broad discretion to make decisions. This includes, for example, the LCLB’s discretion to grant licenses and the LDB’s discretion to set prices, grant a direct shipping exemption to B.C. wineries, or appoint agency stores.

However, there are rules that restrict the exercise of this discretion. It is an abuse of discretion, for example, if the LCLB takes into account irrelevant considerations or fails to take into account relevant considerations, if it makes a decision for an ulterior purpose or in bad faith, or if it fetters its discretion.

This idea of “fettering” discretion is especially important with respect to the LDB and LCLB because most of the issues arise from policies that they create. It is a fettering of discretion to rely on an inflexible policy without considering the individual merits of a particular matter. Many of the complaints I have been reading about in the media arise out of these sorts of inflexible policies. If such policies are too inflexible, and decisions are made in reliance on these inflexible policies, then such decisions are susceptible to a “judicial review”, which is a petition to the court to review the decision made by an agency (in this case the LDB and LCLB).

If this petition is successful the court can “quash” the LDB or LCLB decision and return it to the relevant board for reconsideration. Reconsideration must be made in accordance with the reasons provided by the judge. As such, judges can create parameters that restrict the LDB and LCLB decisions in the future. However, judges cannot, in most cases, tell the LDB and LCLB what to decide. Rather, they can only restrict the manner in which the decision must be made. Courts will also sometimes provide comment on what they view to be reasonable. All of this can lead to the LDB or LCLB reversing its decision.

There are other principles such as bias and procedural fairness that restrict the manner in which the LDB and LCLB can make decisions.

The second fundamental way in which to legally challenge an LDB or LCLB decision is by way of a jurisdictional argument. The LDB and LCLB can only make decisions if they are made in accordance with the authority granted to them under the LDA and LCA, respectively.

In the case of the LDB, there is little, if any, direct legislative authority for most of their policies. Rather, the LDB is operating mostly on a discretionary basis. Since policies are essentially the nuts and bolts of how the LDB is run, these nuts and bolts are subject to the general principles discussed above. That is, the discretion to implement these policies must be exercised reasonably. It is unreasonable, for example, to consider something that is entirely irrelevant to the decision being made. Determining whether or not something is relevant can be complex and requires analysis of the wording and the purpose of the legislation, regulations, and policies at issue.

In conclusion, there are quite a few legal avenues by which the actions and decisions of the LDB and LCLB can be challenged. The arguments can be complex and require lawyers, but this is a proven and effective method to challenge certain decisions. However, one cannot change the acts (the LDA or LCA) or the regulations by legal challenge unless they violate the constitution. That said, courts will provide interpretation of statutory provisions that can be beneficial to those who wish to challenge LDB and LCLB decisions.

The Political Basis for Challenge

While all policies must be reasonable and within jurisdiction, any policy that meets the administrative law requirements will be upheld by the court. The only way to challenge these policies is for the LDB or LCLB to change them internally.

Additionally, if change is to be made to the act then these changes must be made by the provincial legislature. Any change to regulations must be made by the executive (i.e. the Ministry).

The incongruity I have been seeing is that many call for the “law” to be reformed without considering whether they are asking the government to change the act, the regulations or LDB and LCLB policies. Each of these requires a completely different mechanism and involves very different stakeholders. It is also important to consider that any changes to the act are likely to still grant the LDB and LCLB considerable discretion. Thus, the question becomes: what changes are most likely to ensure the consistent results I want in the future?

The LDB and LCLB have always slightly modified their policies over time to ensure that no major challenge is made to their overall structure. Those interested in reform must therefore question whether all they want is a change in a policy or whether they want a change to the structure of the organizations. If structural change is desired, then reformers must ask what is the effective mechanism to both achieve this change and to ensure that changes to the governing act and regulations translate into policies that ‘reformers’ want to see and prevent policies that ‘reformers’ want to avoid.

I would also note that most of the complaints about the LCLB pertain to the regulation and policies, while most of the complaints about the LDB pertain both to policies and to the fundamental restrictions on the industry created by the LDA.

I think it is fundamentally important for those discussing reform to aim their hammers at the correct nail and make sure their efforts land squarely on the appropriate entities. Otherwise, such discussions risk diffusion and present opportunities for political misdirection.

*The author practices law in Vancouver. His profile and contact information can be found by clicking here

Filed Under: Building BC's Wine Industry, Features, Wine Law in British Columbia

Open Barrel: A Manifesto for Consumer Based Reform of British Columbia Liquor Laws

November 19, 2011 By Shea 2 Comments

I recently stumbled upon this “Manifesto” that I wrote a couple years ago, when discussing liquor law issues with various businesspeople in the local industry, as a basis to create a consumer advocacy group to support liquor law reform in British Columbia. Unfortunately, that group did not get off the ground due to a lack of will and cohesion. Nonetheless, I think these thoughts are still relevant today and so I’ve decided to post it on the blog. I had tentatively called this consumer advocacy group “Open Barrel”. I’ve updated a couple of the facts to reflect some changes over the past 2 years.

The Open Barrel Manifesto

Open Barrel is a community of British Columbians who want to develop B.C. as North America’s premier cultural destination for enjoying, tasting, and buying wine.

We have tremendous pride in our local communities, artisanal producers, and local businesses, and we want to share that pride with visitors and locals alike. We also believe that fairness is a fundamental element of the “Canadian way”.

Unfortunately, the current regulatory environment governing wine and liquor sales and distribution in the province is extremely unfair, and favours large corporate interests over local businesses and wineries. We think that in order to make BC both a more sustainable province and a fairer province, the current inconsistencies and inefficiencies within our liquor laws need to be reformed. We propose these reforms because we love British Columbia and we want the true heart of our province – local farmers, winemakers, and businesses – to have the opportunity to succeed and grow our province into an internationally recognized cultural destination.

To achieve this goal we propose reform in five different areas: laws governing restaurants; laws governing private stores, festivals and small producers; the operations of the liquor bureaucracy; restrictions on importing and exporting; and, taxation. This white paper will explain why we think reform is necessary in each of these five categories.

Restaurants

We all love going out to eat. Vancouver is quickly becoming a premier destination in North America for dining out. However, current regulations make it extremely difficult for restaurants to offer high quality wine programs at reasonable prices. Here’s why.

First, restaurants like to differentiate themselves by offering unique wines you don’t normally see on government store shelves. However, regulations currently restrict restaurants from ordering these special wines in quantities of less than 12 bottles (1 case). Furthermore, two restaurants are not allowed to pool their resources to split a case of wine. Why is this important? Many small restaurants simply can’t afford to order entire cases of wine. What is the result? There is far less diversity in wine selection across the city because government regulation has made it too expensive for small restaurants that are passionate about wine to offer unique selections.

You might also wonder why wine prices are so high at restaurants. This is because the government liquor distribution branch does not offer restaurants much of a discount off of retail. So, in order to make money, restaurants have to charge extremely high prices for wine. In almost any other city in North America you can get glasses of wine for $6-$10. Here, you will regularly see the same quality glasses of wine priced at $12-$18. We are concerned that this makes Vancouver uncompetitive at attracting tourists.

Lastly, currently it is illegal to bring your own wine to a restaurant and pay a “corkage” fee. Most cities in North America allow this, especially cities that support a thriving local wine culture such as San Francisco and Seattle. Allowing consumers to bring their own wines fosters wine appreciation and wine culture, and helps develop a niche for restaurants that can’t afford to build large and expensive wine lists. There is currently no logical rationale that denies this practice. Consumers still pay the full retail price of the bottle at the store, so the government does not lose any revenue by allowing corkage. We simply cannot understand why this practice is illegal.

To keep growing Vancouver, and British Columbia, as a destination for food lovers across the globe, these sorts of archaic and illogical rules must be changed. Otherwise, we are simply giving a huge advantage to our competitors in California, Washington, New York, Toronto, and Montreal.

Private Stores, Festivals, and Small Producers

British Columbians love local wine producers. We also love to support smaller artisanal producers, whether these are farmers, sculptors, or wine makers. We are passionate about sustainability and the “small guy”. However, current regulations make it extremely difficult to promote the small guy with festivals, wine tastings, and other special events.

Right now, private liquor retailers are one of the only sources of small production artisanal wines. The BC government liquor stores have very few artisanal products made in small quantities and with organic or sustainable farming practices. Therefore, we rely on private retailers to support these sorts of efforts. However, it is currently illegal for private retailers to host off-site wine tastings where products are offered for sale. We are concerned that this hampers small businesses’ attempts to build their businesses effectively and market smaller production wines. This law applies whether international or local BC wines are being poured. We wonder why doesn’t the government want to support local producers and international producers with sustainable farming practices? These are the things that British Columbians care about.

As an example, during the Olympics – a supposed spotlight on everything British Columbia – all private wine tastings and special events were required to buy all their wines from the BC government liquor stores. This was a monopolistic practice that unfairly hurt local businesses who were not allowed to sell their products to private events. In this environment, dignitaries from France were forced to drink large production, corporate wines rather than smaller artisanal wines because the organizers of their event were not allowed to buy from private stores, even though they wanted to.

Simply put, if the BC Liquor Distribution Board were a private company, the Competition Board of Canada would have barred these practices as illegal use of monopoly power. How can small local businesses compete in this kind of environment?

Bureaucracy

Everyone knows that bureaucracies are inefficient. But, they shouldn’t be unfair. And, we would hope, they should try to consistently reform in order not to harm local businesses. Right now, the liquor bureaucracy has such a labyrinth of rules, regulations, and practices that it is extremely difficult for small businesses to run efficiently and within a fair environment.

Here are some examples. It is illegal both for “agents” (companies that represent wineries) and for non-BC wineries to sell products directly to consumers. If a consumer wants to buy a product that the liquor board does not officially “list”, they have to put in a special request to order the item, and they have to commit to ordering an entire case of wine. This effectively means that agents cannot sell a lot of their products unless the liquor board officially carries them or a private wine store decided to purchase the wines.

Some might believe that this is a fair playing field. However, there have been many instances where consumers have tried to order a case of special order wine and the government employees refuse to place the order. A customer ready and willing to pay money for a product is denied access to that product because the bureaucracy gives government employees the power to deny such requests. The agent who wanted to sell the wine was therefore denied the sale and lost money and the consumer wasn’t allowed to buy what he wanted.

This means that in order to sell wine effectively in the province the agents who represent wineries have to obtain a government liquor store “listing”. Getting listed by the government stores is an extremely difficult, bureaucratic process that can take months and, in the end, relies on the whim of a bureaucrat. Many small wineries simply cannot afford this process, and consumers are denied access to many great wines because of the overly labyrinthine process required to even get that product in a retail store. Only large corporate wineries can consistently afford the cost of obtaining regular listings with the BC government stores. We believe it should be far easier for agents to offer consumers their products. Shouldn’t we as consumers decide what we want to buy?

Many British Columbians also love locally brewed craft beers. Right now, BC government regulations forbid breweries that make under a certain quantity of beer from listing their products in government stores. What does this mean? The government stores prefer huge corporate breweries to our own local microbreweries. The fact that you can find any local beer in the government stores is astonishing. Right now, only the private stores are truly supporting local craft beers – a scene that is growing at an incredible rate. And, given the restrictions on private retailers discussed above, this creates a completely uneven and unfair playing field for our small local brewers to compete against the corporate behemoths.

Vancouver is also becoming a thriving locale for music and arts. However, opening a new arts venue in the city has become a project only for the mega-corporations. Currently, it is nearly impossible to get affordable liquor licenses for new arts venues. A recent entrepreneur’s attempt to do so was met with a $600 000 price tag. What small business has that kind of capital to open a new venue? And, often, it can take months to get license requests approved. Do we really want to see the proliferation of corporate venues? These kinds of prices make the city a completely unfair environment for passionate local entrepreneurs who care about what they are doing. Skipping across the country to Toronto and Montreal reveals the ease with which small businesses can obtain liquor licenses in those cities and contribute to their thriving arts scenes. Do we really want Vancouver to keep its reputation as the “no fun city”?

Importing and Exporting

Any thriving cultural destination has a global mentality. Such a destination is open to new ideas and tends to become a magnet for international passion. Currently, however, British Columbia has all but closed its borders to the international culture of wine. The federal Importation of Intoxicating Liquors Act makes it illegal for anyone except licensed agents to bring wine into the country or even across provincial borders. This law, enacted just after prohibition, is infused with an 80 year old mentality that no longer makes sense. The law prohibits British Columbia wineries from shipping their products directly to consumers in other provinces and it even prohibits local BC residents from bringing a bottle of their favourite BC wine to their relatives in Ontario for Christmas. Are we still really concerned with cartels monopolizing liquor distribution? It is impossible for BC to become a cultural destination when we aren’t even allowed to ship our wines to the tourists that come here to enjoy and discover them (note: a bill to change this law is, finally, before the federal Parliament).

A similar argument applies to international wines. Why can’t consumers in BC buy wine directly from artisanal producers outside of the country? We do not believe that British Columbians have a parochial mentality, so why does the government treat us like we do? Great cultural destinations are open to ideas and products from elsewhere because being open fosters both dialogue and commerce. Currently, almost no one in the United States has even heard of British Columbian wine, and almost no Canadian outside of BC has tasted it. Making BC a cultural destination will change that situation. However, doing so is only possible with reform of the restrictions on importing and exporting wine, which are grossly unfair to British Columbians who want their province to become a North American cultural Mecca.

Taxation

The last item on our list is also one of the most important. Right now, British Columbia has the highest liquor tax in North America at 123%. This means that bottles of wine that cost $20 in Washington regularly cost $40 in BC. Why would anyone in North America travel to British Columbia for wine when it is the most expensive place on the continent to purchase it?

The thriving wine cultures in California and Washington would not have developed if those states imposed a similar tax to British Columbia. In fact, Washington state reformed its liquor laws in the 1970’s (and just this year fully privatized liquor sales in a popular initiative), with such reform corresponding with the huge growth of the Washington wine industry, which is now the second largest in North America, after California.

The government consistently makes the argument that taxes are an important revenue stream. We do not disagree. However, we believe an attitude that does not want to make these taxes more fair and efficient is short sighted. Right now the BC wine industry is tiny. However, if you look at California’s wine industry, which also used to be tiny, it is now a multi-billion dollar enterprise, with a correspondingly massive tax contribution to state coffers. Doesn’t the BC government want to support growth of our local wine industry, from small retailers to local wine producers?

We believe that better prices, fairer taxes and better distribution will create a wine culture in the province that will increase the appetite for fine wine. This can only have a positive effect on the local wine industry.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Open Barrel advocates for liquor law reform because we love our province and we want to see it grow into the premier cultural destination it surely can become. We believe that fair rules and an open minded approach to liquor regulation will create an environment where local businesses, artisanal producers, and British Columbians will thrive. Greater diversity and greater support for entrepreneurial spirit is the necessary catalyst for growing Vancouver into an international city. Doing so is essential for our economy, for our local industries, and for our passion and pride. We hope that you will join us in our endeavor to make British Columbia the cultural envy of North America.

Filed Under: Building BC's Wine Industry, Features

Keeping it Cool: How British Columbia’s Wine Distribution System is a Hazard to Your Health

August 19, 2011 By Shea 3 Comments

While drinking a bottle of wine over a nice dinner at home it is easy to regale oneself with thoughts of an idyllic landscape of undulating hills covered in vines where the grapes soak up the sun in preparation of delivering their delicious nectar to your palate.

It is easy to forget that wine must travel through a series of links in a supply chain that extends from the cellar door of the winery, to the truck that carries the wine to the docks, to the shipping container slowly making its way across the ocean, and then into the local distribution warehouse, which then processes orders from and delivers to retailers.

Thus, experiencing a taste of bottled Tuscan sunshine in your home in Vancouver is a far different experience than drinking it at the winery, and each part of the supply chain process can impact both the quality and the healthfulness of the seemingly innocent bottle sitting on your dinner table.

How does the shipping of wine have anything to do with your health? Let’s take a closer look.

Do You Like Carcinogens in Your Wine?: Understanding Ethyl Carbamate

In 2007 and 2008 the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published a scientific opinion on the impact of ethyl carbamate and hydrocyanic acid in food and beverages.[¹] Ethyl carbamate and its precursor hydrocyanic acid occur naturally in fermented foods and alcoholic beverages including wine, spirits and beer. Previous studies have already established that ethyl carbamate is a carcinogen in animals and is probably carcinogenic in humans.[²]

Ethyl carbamate occurs in wine as a natural by-product of the fermentation process. In particular, the use of certain substances for yeast nutrients and particular strains of yeast impact the concentration of this chemical. However, in all cases, the formation of ethyl carbamate increased exponentially at elevated temperatures, prompting the EFSA to find that controlling the temperature of a liquor or wine bottle is essential to reducing the concentration of the dangerous chemical in the final product ingested by consumers.[³]

The EFSA study found that consumption of alcoholic beverages including wine introduced an increased risk of cancer in humans and concluded that “mitigation measures should be taken to reduce the levels of ethyl carbamate in certain alcoholic beverages.”

The Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO) contributed significant data to the EFSA study based on a concern for the health of the Ontarians to which it sold liquor. Since the findings of the study the LCBO has implemented measures to reduce the concentration of ethyl carbamate in liquor sold to its customers.

There is also federal legislation that sets maximum permissible limits of ethyl carbamate of 30 parts per billion (ppb) for wine, 100ppb for fortified wine, 150ppb for distilled spirits and 400ppb for fruit brandies.

Of Provenance and Parsimony: Temperature in Sea Containers

Wine is a fragile thing. When exposed to temperatures above 40 degrees Celsius the quality of a wine can be altered negatively after only a very short exposure of a few hours. Even at temperatures over 25 degrees Celsius, wine will degrade after longer exposure of days or weeks.

Accordingly, it is essential both for maintaining quality and for avoiding the formation of ethyl carbamate that wine be shipped from the winery to the final customer in a temperature controlled environment. For wines being sent from Europe, this means shipping in temperature controlled containers (also known as “refers”) to ensure optimal quality for the duration of the voyage on truck and over seas.

Shockingly, only 1% of the wine shipped into British Columbia is shipped in a temperature controlled container. This may in some ways be due to the increased costs of shipping in refers, which cost $16,000 versus the $13,000 for regular containers (note that containers hold 12,000 cases of wine so costs per bottle increase if you can’t fill them up).

In 2008, the Wine Supply Chain Council published a summary of various studies that had been conducted measuring the temperature of wine shipped in non-temperature controlled containers. The results were shocking and disturbing.[4]

Wines shipped from Adelaide to the Napa Valley saw wines heat up to 30 degrees Celsius, with the roof of containers reaching levels as high as 50-70 degrees Celsius, especially when in direct sun exposure.[5]

Another experiment found wine shipped from Australia to the UK, Singapore, the USA and Japan fluctuating from 18-30 degrees Celsius. The temperature of the wine changed gradually over a number of days, but the results are clearly well above the appropriate threshold for wine temperature.[6]

Ultimately, the report concluded that exposure to sunlight at some point in the supply chain was inevitable and that as such all wine shipped in non-protected containers would likely be exposed to elevated temperatures. This brings with it the risks of wine flaws and increased levels of ethyl carbamate.[7]

Other studies have shown that wine shipped to cold destinations can reach as low as -15 degrees Celsius in the winter, and wines shipped to and from hot destinations can reach as high as 80 degrees Celsius.[8]

Of Inefficiency and Carelessness: Temperature in Warehouses

Currently there is only a single government bonded warehouse that acts as the distribution hub for all wine shipped into the province: Container World. In addition, all wine sent out for delivery is not shipped directly from the central warehouse, but rather travels through one of several BCLDB distribution warehouses.

Investigation into the warehousing conditions at Container World revealed that they do not use any temperature control in the warehouse. However, the warehouse is of such size that it generally stays at an ambient temperature of 15 degrees Celsius through the year.

However, none of the BCLDB warehouses or the trucks used to ship the wines from Container World to the BCLDB warehouses and then on to the retail customers are temperature controlled. These warehouses are not at all close in size to the Container World warehouse and as such are far more likely to see elevated temperatures.

In addition, while the BCLDB insists that it is their policy to turn wine over in 24 hours, most of my industry sources inform me that this is rarely the case. It is not uncommon for wines to take 1-2 weeks to deliver. This means that some wines will be sitting around in the non-temperature controlled LDB warehouses for enough time to do considerable damage if there is ever a heat spike.

Making the Sale: Temperature and Wine Quality

Cancer isn’t the only hazard posed by poorly shipped and stored wine. As is well known in the wine industry, high temperatures negatively impact the quality of a wine. This reflects negatively both on a winery’s brand and on the retailer and may ultimately turn some consumers off a particular wine forever.

Some of the negative effects of shipping or storing a wine at a high temperature include:

Maderisation (baked taste)
Oxidised
Flat
Lack of fruit
Decrease in intensity of young wine bouquet
Increase in the intensity of the maturation bouquet
Decrease in overall wine quality
High volatile acidity
Re-refermentation
Changes in total acid.[9]

Since almost no wine shipped into B.C. has any guarantee that it has not been exposed to elevated temperatures, it is not uncommon to find these faults in wines in the province. While experts may be able to detect these flaws and return bottles, the average consumer is unlikely to recognize a fault and is more likely to simply write off the wine as a ‘bad wine’, never to purchase it again.

It is simply not possible to have a real wine culture in British Columbia when the basic fidelity and provenance of the product cannot be guaranteed.

Conclusion

Since the EFSA study, the LCBO requires that all liquor be shipped in refers and stored in temperature controlled warehouses. It routinely conducts random tests of wine and liquor for the presence ethyl carbamate and hydrocyanic acid. Why has the BCLDB failed to do the same?

Currently, the warehousing and distribution policies of the BCLDB almost guarantee that wines and liquors will see increased exposure to elevated temperatures and it is likely that wines and liquor sold in B.C. contain higher levels of ethyl carbamate than those products sold in jurisdictions where temperature is controlled all the way.

This, of course, does nothing to protect against wines shipped in non-temperature controlled containers, like 99% of the wine and liquor sold in British Columbia.

Even progressively minded private companies who wish to ship in refers cannot remedy the problem since there is only one bonded warehouse (Container World) in the province and this warehouse is not temperature controlled. Further, the BCLDB warehouses through which all wine must be “distributed” (a supply chain step that makes no sense whatsoever), are not temperature controlled at all. Of course, neither are the trucks by which wine and liquor is delivered from the LDB warehouses to retail.

It may even be that a considerable amount of wine and liquor sold in British Columbia exceeds the maximum permissible level of ethyl carbamate set by the federal government since the BCLDB does not test liquor for the presence of these chemicals. When I called the BCLDB to confirm this, they referred me to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency who told me they do not do any routine inspections on wine or liquor imported into British Columbia.

The failure of the distribution system to protect a wine against elevated temperatures both increases the health risk of exposure to ethyl carbamate and is a fundamental disservice to wineries, wine importers, wine retailers and consumers.

One of my clients likes to remind me that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. In British Columbia, the wine and liquor distribution system has a plethora of weak links that all need fixing. If these issues are not addressed, then all consumers could very well be exposed to an increased risk of cancer. Is that an acceptable personal and social cost British Columbians are prepared to take? I suspect not.

References

1 The EFSA Journal (2007) 551, 1-44 (“EFSA Study”); also see Michael Waldner and Ockert Augustyn, “Ethyl Carbamate in South African Wine” of ARC Infruitec-Nietvoorbij, Stellenbosch and Woolworths Foods Laboratory, Cape Town.
2 EFSA Study p. 28-31, 37.
3 EFSA study p. 19-20.
4 Rene Weiskircher, Wine Supply Chain Council, “Summary of Prior Experiments Regarding Temperature in Sea Containers” August 8, 2008 (“WSCC Study”); also see Leorey Marquez, Simon Dunstall, John Bartholdi and Alejandro McCawley, “Keeping Australian wines ‘cool’ for the world”, CSIRO Mathematics, Informatics and Statistics and the Georgia Institute of Technology, 2009.
5 WSCC Study at p. 4.
6 WSCC Study at p. 5.
7 WSCC Study at p. 7.
8 Danie Meyer, “A Study on the Impact of Shipping/Transportation Conditions and Practices on Wine”, Wynboer (December, 2002) p. 2.
9 Ibid.

Filed Under: Building BC's Wine Industry, Features

Wine in British Columbia: A 25 Year Retrospective

July 30, 2011 By Shea 3 Comments

It is 1986. Expo is in town. Row upon row of Fosch vines blanket one of a handful of wineries in a small corner of the Okanagan Valley. Bars in Vancouver can only have tiny TVs and only a small handful of tiny wine stores, having bid for “independent liquor store” licenses, just opened this year selling only Mission Hill wines. Of these first independent stores was a small shop sitting flush at Davie and Burrard, started by an enterprising Greek restaurantuer and his son, John Clerides, who had been exposed to wine through his father’s restaurant business.

And Then Came NAFTA

In 1994, Canada and the United States ratified the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which required that tariffs on a large number of goods be removed between the two countries. This meant that U.S. wines could now be sold in Canada and it meant that shoppers could bring back wine from the United States (back then British Columbians paid only a flat 15% duty on all wine brought across the border – this changed to the current 123% after lobbying by the Province’s biggest wine agencies (importers) who had a vested interest in preventing true free trade).

NAFTA brought with it stiff competition and serious challenge to B.C.’s wine industry, which had until then relied on protectionism to sell their decidedly very poor quality wines. Government sponsored replanting programs led to thousands upon thousands of old vines being ripped out and vineyards being replanted with today’s Vitis Vinifera varieties.

Along with the replanting of B.C.’s vineyards came government liberalization of the private sector, which could now sell international wines in their retail stores. Thus the original Independent Liquor Stores became bastions for bringing in challenging and high quality wine into the province. Perhaps the most important and innovative of these stores was Marquis Wine Cellars.

Back in the 1980’s and early 90’s, John Clerides at Marquis started bringing in classic wines from California, including some of the top Cabernet blends and the then yet undiscovered great valued Zinfandel wines. True to his Greek/Cypriot roots, John’s mantra has always been to overdeliver to his customers no matter what the price point is and back in the 80’s and 90’s Zinfandels sold for a tiny fraction of what they do today (as did some of the top wines from France’s Rhone Valley). The proximity to California made it easy to bring these wines into the province and so John did (along with Australian classics Peter Lehman and Penfolds), and in the process started building up not only clientele but also an important community of wine lovers in B.C. that would start spreading their influence across the province over the next two decades.

Growing and Building

As his business grew, John, a man with almost no formal wine training, took a course on how to detect flaws in wine. He now likens tasting wine to a top chef tasting ingredients. “You don’t try to sell rotten meat to Hawskworth” he told me, “so you better not try to sell me flawed wine”.

Over time, John expanded his reach, deciding to create shifts in the market rather than wait for them to happen. He began by first sending Michelle Bouffard (now of House Wine consulting) to Burgundy to taste and import some of the great wines of this region. Thus did John begin his stint as one of the top purveyors of Burgundy wines in British Columbia. This continued with trips to Bordeaux (John ships all his wines in separater refer containers from the government supply), the Rhone, Spain, and now the Loire, Oregon and New Zealand.

John, a Hockey fanatic, likens B.C.’s wine industry to the 1972 series between Canada and the U.S.S.R. Everyone thought Canada was the greatest hockey country in the world, and then they were annihilated by completely unknown players from the then Soviet Rupublic. This shook Canadian hockey to its core and sparked huge innovation and increased quality. B.C., says John, is just like Canada’s ill prepared gold medal team – we are comfortable where we are, but we have yet to confront what the world has to offer.

I find myself agreeing with John’s sentiment, particularly considering that it was NAFTA rather than any innovation in the B.C. industry that spurred the change that grew the Province’s wine industry into its now 200 wineries, many of which are producing exceptional quality wines compared to what was happening pre-NAFTA. The question is, will it take another external trauma to take our industry to the next level or will a true visionary emerge that can preempt the next great industry shock? These are the sorts of questions that define an industry, and we’re still waiting here in B.C. for our visionary.

Retailing Wine in 2011

Today, the legacy of the original Independent Liquor Store licensees is the life blood of the private retail market in Vancouver: Marquis Wine Cellars, Kitsilano and Dundarive Wine Cellars (now unfortunately owned by Liquor Stores GP income fund), Broadway Wine Cellars, Everything Wine, and Liberty Wine Merchants. These licensees were given the capability of placing “special orders” for their store (which none of the modern Liquor Retails Store (LRS) licensees can do), meaning that they can source unique wines and order them directly to the store without needing listing approval from the BCLDB and are given a 30% discount off of the BCLDB retail price (LRS’s have 16%). This is the basic reason why these stores have greater selection and better prices. In other words, it was the more liberal and business friendly policies that led to the greatest innovation in the Province’s wine industry. It was, in fact, the bar lobby, who benefited from “off-sales” (i.e. the right to sell liquor to patrons to take-away when the government liquor stores were closed) that prevented the continued issuance of independent liquor store licenses.

The lessons are clear: if we want to grow ourselves into a wine destination, it is time we trust passion over apathy and big business. It is not a question of private vs. public (as it is obvious vested interests in the private sector have impacted the regulatory regime more than any bureaucrat); rather, it is a question of finding the visionaries and the industrious passionistas amongst the banal and profit-driven. Regulate fairly, but let the industry discover itself and innovate. This will only create greater diversity of jobs and a much higher proportion of higher quality wine sales.

Are we ready to convert from Kokanee to small producer wine just as in a country like France? Even the U.S. is rapidly converting into a country of wine drinkers as France, which has seen pressure from various puritanical anti-alcohol groups, is retracting into hard liquor and cheap beer. I don’t think we need statistics to tell us which one of these demographics is about intoxication and which is about community.

Importing Wine in 2011

It is not only the retail sector that has seen change, but also the import sector (Tied House laws prevent retailers from importing wine – unless they can special order through their ILS license – and vice versa). In the past 15 years, the number of agents has exploded from a handful to literally hundreds upon hundreds. It is often the little guys, who start out of passion rather than to make money, who bring in many of the more interesting wines. Yet it is often the little guys who fail and have almost no impact on buying patterns in the Province.

This is a Province dominated by big business interests. The top 5% of importers make 90% of the profits. Most liquor stores, including the government stores and the majority of LRS stores are beholden to these importers and what they bring in, accepting the simple high volume sales mentality that now dominates B.C.’s liquor industry: yellow tail, oyster bay, etc. etc. These are wines that you can sell at massive volumes. And you need massive volumes in order to make the profits to sustain your business (at 16% discount) and repay the cost of your license.

Several years ago the government put a moratorium on new retail licenses. The result? These licenses are now traded for astronomical prices, often in the range from $500,000 to $1,000,000, simply for the right to sell someone a bottle of wine. Thus today’s industry is predominated by stores that sell mass produced high volume wine. Do I blame them? Not really, they have no other option if they want to make a profit.

The Tremors of Change

Even successful independent stores like John Clerides’ Marquis Wine Cellars fight for mainstream recognition. John, an avid user of social media, says that it is hard to get the word out about his store. Sure the industry types and hardcore wine geeks know about his store, but the average person is consistently unaware that his store exists. John puts some of the blame on the media, which simply do not review his wines. Why not? Because there is a strange attitude that media must review what is widely available to people in the government and mass-product liquor stores. Of course, this mentality means that those stores will never stock anything interesting or other than what they are already stocking. The result? A classic race to the bottom. John puts it well when he says “Walmart success is not the success of a city. It is the small businesses that give a city its culture and make it what it is.”

Luckily social media is starting to change this dynamic. Since twitter came on the scene, more and more wine lovers are connecting with each other and with industry types. More and more vision is developing as is more and more solidarity. One need only look at the recent openings of restaurants like l’Abbatoir and Hawksworth to see how the wine scene is maturing. The increasing discussion of liquor reform is also a sign of promise. Yet, it will still take a few visionaries to push the industry to the next level, forcing the bovine BCLDB to adapt to changing circumstances instead of waiting for them to act – an eventuality as likely as the second coming.

Today’s Challenges

So what are the challenges today. Today, very few retailers bother to send employees to travel and taste. Why? because they cannot import wines themselves anyway. The result is a depressingly uneducated retail sector.

What about the customer? As John noted to me, customers have not been taught that wine is about culture and food rather than inebriation. There is a culture shift waiting to happen, but until it does we remain stuck.

Media? The LDB provides sponsorship dollars to certain media and most are poorly paid. As I discussed with John, it is easy in the wine and food industry to give up ethics for free stuff. Journalistic ethics flow easy compared to reporting on politics or business. But there is no valid reason for this to be true. John was particularly unimpressed with the Georgia Straight calling his store “elite”. Anyone who has actually spent any time in Marquis knows that it is not about elitism, but about providing the customer with great value and quality – just like a great butcher would never sell the kind of meat that you can buy at Safeway.

The Future

So how do we move forward?

Embarrass the government. When Jancis Robinson and the Economist lambasted B.C. as a nanny state for allowing Cellared in Canada wine to be sold as B.C. wine, the government moved and made a change. Christy Clark’s government is clearly of this ilk. Embarrass and they shall come.

Cataclysmic failure of the B.C. wine industry. No one wants this to happen. But if it did? Well it would prompt a serious rethinking. If product remained unsold because of the failure to diversify. If GATT rules or a NAFTA challenge required B.C. and the other provinces to eliminate their illegal alcohol markups on foreign grapes, then B.C. wines would not be able to compete for price. This would require a dramatic refocus for both the industry and the regulators.

Consumer revolt. Similar to embarrassing the government, a consumer revolt would force the government’s hand. As an example, there is no reason right now that corkage is illegal except for the fact that restaurants rather than consumers have the ear of the government. These are the things it is time to change. If we do? Well, then the private sector and the government will start listening.

The Final Thought

We have come a long way in 25 years. The question is: are we up to making the next quarter century a cornerstone of Canada’s growth into an internationally respected wine culture? I’ll get back to you in 2036.

Filed Under: Building BC's Wine Industry, Features

Built to Age? – An Osoyoos Larose Vertical

July 16, 2011 By Shea 11 Comments

While B.C. is a region that focuses mostly on easy drinking young wines, there are a few wineries in the Province that have pretensions of doing something greater. In most cases these aspirations go hand in hand with considerable price tags. Tasting big red wines meant to age young is extremely difficult. It is hard for most inexperienced tasters (and even many experienced ones) to determine how a wine will turn out after a decade of aging. So how can we tell whether a producer is puffing smoke or giving the goods? In my case you get a bunch of wine geeks together and put together a vertical.

Bordeaux in British Columbia

Osoyoos Larose is one of the biggest names in the Okanagan. A joint venture between Vincor and Groupe Taillan, the winery represents B.C. making a splash on the international stage, with winemaker Pascal Madevon hailing from Bordeaux. These are wines that have purportedly always been built to age. However, with the vines being planted in 1999, the first few vintages came from purchased fruit, and you have to wonder whether the vines’ youthfulness support making a sophisticated red for long term aging. The winery is located in the Southern Okanagan on the west-facing slopes of Osoyoos Lake. If you want to read about the winemaking techniques, go here.

Unfortunately, on tasting every vintage that Osoyoos Larose has made, it seems as though these wines do not age very well at all. This is surprising since very time I tasted these wines young they seemed to have a density and structure that supported aging. The latest vintage I tasted at Bloom also impressed me for the intensity of its fruit. However, this vertical suggested that these wines will actually fall apart with time.

I note as an important caveat that I do not know what the storage condition was for all these wines, and as such this could have played a role in some of the vintages. Nonetheless, the consistently unpleasing flavours and complete lack of balance in any of the older wines does not bode well.

I also hate criticizing a winery without as full an objective an analysis as I can muster. The results from this tasting, however, were so consistent on both initial tasting, with decanting and with food and across such a wide array of vintages that I feel I have a responsibility to report exactly what I experienced with the wines.

My conclusion? A distinct do not buy. However, that the newer vintages are better may not just be the result of their lack of ageability, but it could also have to do with the increasing age of the vines and the winemakers’ tinkering with the blend and the oak treatment. In other words, there may still be hope.

The Wines

2001: 66% Merlot, 25% Cab Sauv, 9% Cab Franc. Cedar and blackberry chocolate on the nose. Bell pepper palate but pretty good length. The aromatics are actually quite lively. However, this really dries out on the finish and it is well past its prime. No Good.

2002: 57% Merlot, 19% Cab Sauv, 12% Malbec, 7% Cab Franc, 5% Petit Verdot. Quite youthfully dark in colour. This is way more integrated than the 01; however I would not describe this as pleasant to drink and it is still very dried out – i.e. the tannins have overwhelmed the fruit and the wine is on its path towards oblivion. No Good.

2003: 75% Merlot, 11% Cab Sauv, 6% Malbec, 5% Petit Verdot, 3% Cab Franc. This is fruitier on the nose; but when you taste this it is like drinking battery acid – blowsy and unbalanced. No Good.

2004: 68% Merlot, 21% Cab Sauv, 5% Petit Verdot, 4% Cab Franc, 2% Malbec. A meaty and vegetal nose. Smoky. Dry but less drying than the 01 and 02. This is a little green on the palate, but it is not offensive. An ok bottle. I think this is the year that Osoyoos Larose started to get their blend and proportions right. Fair to Good.

2005: 67% Merlot, 23% Cab Sauv, 4% Petit Verdot, 4% Cab Franc, 2% Malbec. Lots of oak and greenness here, and a wet cardboard aroma that suggests this is actually a flawed bottle. Very drying, screwed up palate. Flawed – Not Rated.

2006: 69% Merlot, 20% Cab Sauv, 4% Petit Verdot, 4% Cab Franc, 3% Malbec. Huge oak and a bit bitter. This is more sophisticated than any of the previous vintages, but it is still drying on the palate. Ultimately, though, the wine is somewhat boring – though at least drinking more like a proper wine. Good.

2007: 68% Merlot, 19% Cab Sauv, 6% Malbec, 4% Cab Franc, 3% Petit Verdot. Unequivocally the best wine of the vertical. This had richer, darker fruit and was far more balanced than any of the previous wines. This is definitely a bit oaky, but it is built in a more opulent style. An ok wine, though perhaps not really that enjoyable. The wine is still drying on the finish. Good+ to Very Good.

All the wines are around $50.

The fact that every single vintage had overly drying tannins suggests to me that they are having problems with texture and tannins. Hopefully this will improve as the vines age. Right now, however, I was actually shocked at how poorly these wines showed, particularly those with age. The 2001 was far past its prime, and it was not until the 2006 that I felt these tasted like something drinkable. I wish I had better things to report, but these are the results of this disappointing, and fatiguing, tasting.

The poor quality of these wines stood out even greater after we opened a lower-end 2005 Bordeaux, I took my first sip, sighed and said ‘now that’s wine’.

Filed Under: Building BC's Wine Industry, Features

BC’s First Natural Wines: A Tasting with Racine Wine Imports

June 27, 2011 By Shea 3 Comments

Natural wine is a tough category of wine both to sell and appreciate. Not only are the flavours and textures on display unconventional and a huge challenge to even trained palates but many of the wines are bottled with such low sulphur that it is not necessarily uncommon to encounter a seriously flawed bottle. Once a consumer drinks a wine with intolerable bret, VA or incomplete fermentation, they may never try that wine ever again, nor any other wine associated with the ‘natural wine’ movement. Thus in order for these wines to succeed every member of the entire chain of production and sale has to perform at the top of their abilities, lest the challenges of these wines overwhelm their charms.

Preconceptions, Predilections and Procrusteanism

I recently attended a tasting of ‘natural wines’ hosted by Racine Wine Imports, which was the first trade tasting of its kind in Vancouver and which saw some of the marquis names of the natural wine movement from the Loire, Beaujolais and the Jura being poured for a wide variety of members from Vancouver’s wine trade.

The reactions of the attendees were as revealing as the wines themselves and gave me intriguing insight into both natural wines and the feasibility of these wines in the Vancouver market. I learned that formal WSET training, and its objective criteria, has had a significant impact on Vancouver’s wine scene. There seems to be an accentuated aversion to flaws, marginal ripeness levels, and other similar characteristics. On the other hand, the WSET ‘objectivity’ approach has also seemed to produce tasters who will be willing to consider the unique contribution that imperfect wines can make.

I also encountered a diverse room of people ranging from self-assured individuals who already knew what they wanted to tasters who didn’t mind being challenged and who saw value in challenging their preconceptions. All of these groups nonetheless were able to find some wines that appealed to them and I think that speaks to the breadth of experiences available from natural wines, particularly when we remember that this sort of wine making is in its infancy.

How To Experience Natural Wine

In all honesty I must admit that some of the wines poured were flawed or had not traveled well. However, there were also several wines that were impressive in their simple expressivity and that offered something that has yet to be seen in Vancouver.

I think a lot of people go into tastings like this expecting to be ‘blown away’ or to have ‘revelatory experiences’. If you are looking for an American style hit you over the head moment of glory, then these wines will not fulfill your desires. That is no fault of the wines themselves, which instead focus on simplicity, purity and a basic honesty that so many wines forget about. These are not trophy wines or the greatest wines you will ever taste. They are wines that don’t mind doing one very simple thing very well. The wines that arrived in good condition were unlike anything we’ve yet seen in the Province and I hope that they catch on and that our city grows into a more mature appreciation of wine – for it is only a mature appreciation that will ‘get’ any of these wines.

The Natural Wines to Taste in B.C.

The following wines are those that I think both made it to B.C. in good shape (shipping wines like these pose tremendous problems) and those that express what the so-called ‘natural wine’ movement is all about. They should be available soon at private stores like Kits Wine Cellar and restaurants like L’Abattoir. The agent is, of course, Racine Wine Imports. It helps that pretty much all of these wines are below $30.

Domaines Landron “Amphibolite Nature” Muscadet 2010: Broad and fruity, great balance. Really clean and long and delicious. Excellent. $25

Domaine de la Pepiere Muscadet 2009: Salty and subdued and fruitier than expected for Muscadet. There is good body and length here. Very Good+. $20

Domaine de la Pepier Cuvee Granit 2009: Maybe the best red of the tasting, this is pure cab franc in its aromatics, texture and flavour profile. Excellent. $22

Catherine & Andre Breton La Dilettant N/V: A sparkling Vouvray that is hugely complex, with a great rich midpalate very long and delicious without any sense of heaviness. Excellent. $33.

Catherin & Andre Breton Avis de Vin Fort 2009: Broadly aromatic, pretty light fruits with a delicious and immediate palate. Very Good+. $27.

Catherine & Andre Breton Trinch 2009: This is classic Loire Cab Franc that has fantastic aromatics for this price. Very Good+ to Excellent. $27.

Domaine Thierry Puzelat KO In Cot We Trust Touraine 2008: VA tolerance necessary, but the aromatics on this are pure floral Malbec that is so rare. Very Good+. $31

George Descombes Brouilly 2009: A pretty and very fruity Beaujolais cru that is highly expressive with a long body. This was my favourite of the Descombes, some of which had too much bret for me. This is also listed, which means you can get it at the BCLDB. Very Good+ to Excellent. $28.50.

Filed Under: Building BC's Wine Industry, Features, Natural Wine

Nichol Vineyard or Why the Okanagan Matters

June 13, 2011 By Shea Leave a Comment

On rare occasions it can take only a few days to reshape years of preconceptions. Often such experiences happen unassumingly, perhaps of necessity arising when you’re looking for something else. When I first visited the Okanagan Valley about 7 years ago I knew little but was extremely open minded about new wine. What I encountered then, admittedly at random, were enjoyable wines to a novice palate but nothing that excited me to proceed to that next level of wine appreciation.

Seven years and thousands of wines later and I headed back to the Okanagan for a second time to attend the Forum for Women Entrepeneurs Vine Forum conference on the wine industry and to take in some of the wineries on the Naramata Bench. During my four days in the Valley I tasted through wines of surprising suaveness and sophistication and well ripened high quality fruit, but despite some impressive quality and increasing deliciousness it was a small winery that has been sitting quietly near the northernmost reaches of the Naramata Bench since the early 90’s that made me ask some of the most interesting questions I’ve asked myself about the Okanagan.

The Who, the What and the Why

In wine education most begin approaching a region by asking what it is. What is grown there, what is the climate, what soils predominate, what are the best wineries.

Marketers approach wine mostly from the perspective of a constructed ‘who’. Who makes the wine and what is their story? For most marketers, the what and the why of a winery are derived from the who. This helps to tell a coherent story, create empathy, and forms a base from which to build a consumer’s experience of a particular wine. In many ways this makes sense in a celebrity obsessed culture. We aspire to associate with impressive individuals living a particular lifestyle.

During my time in the Okanagan, which I’ve often criticized for pandering to uneducated palates and a perceived lowest common denominator customer uninterested in challenges, I started to realize that it wasn’t the what or the who of a region that mattered, but the why. I started to ask why does the Okanagan matter? I didn’t think of this question in a commercial sense – a job I’ll leave to the accountants acting as trustees for bankrupt wineries who see only the numbers and none of the passion – but rather I asked myself why we should care about this place. For some reason this has never been a question I’ve truly asked myself, but I now think it is a question that ultimately becomes the raison d’être of any significant wine region.

This has prompted me to think about the Okanagan in a deeper way than I’ve found in most media. Let’s not think about the valley from the perspective of an inferiority complex (whether that manifest as dismissal or as sycophancy and perverted hype), but rather from the perspective of an offering. What does the Okanagan offer to the wine world?

Wine as Life Cycle

While I appreciated, and even enjoyed, some of the Valley’s best made suave and sophisticated wines working in an international style, I found that simplicity and youth can be an offering far greater than sophistication and charm. While there is a place for both, it is humble exuberance that for me drives the greatest wines and wine regions in the world. Strangely, these are qualities that usually come with simple routine and tradition. It’s life’s basic cycles that retain mystery and beauty as time plods forward.

How do you reflect a life cycle in a glass of wine? You must shed the pretence of perfection, and even a certain sense of consistency (I can hear the marketers gasp in horror). You must accept nuance as given rather than manufactured. You must be prepared to let foibles speak. And most importantly the aromas of a wine must be coaxed softly but fully out of a wine to allow it to speak for it is our nose that is the most sensitive to the subtle changes of the earth. Taste is a function of smell: pleasure a function of experience. Diverse experience allows for a greater variety of pleasure, but only if we focus on more than that feeling in our bodies and open our minds to what the sensuous qualities of a wine can tell us about a place.

So why does the Okanagan matter? It matters because of its youth and its potential to be more than what it is aspiring to be. It matters also because of its limits: we can only grow so much in quantity. That leaves us with a dilemma. Do we accept the easy answer that we will often underproduce demand (BC only produces sufficient wine to satisfy 25% of the province’s market)? Or, do we accept the challenge and realize that the only way we can make an impact is by finding the unique mark of our finitude – what are the very few sites and very few wines that say something and say it differently from anywhere else?

Nichol Vineyard: Purity and Deep Varietal Typicity

There was an everyday simplicity to my time at Nichol and a quiet that left time for reflection but didn’t require it. A place where geeking out was unassuming; where all discussion came down to simple moments of silence, punctuated only by smelling and sipping. That such a youthful winery and such a young team (Matt Sherlock in Marketing, Matt Chittick as assistant winemaker and vineyard manager, and Ross Hackworth as head winemaker and proprietor) could teach me that there are those in the Okanagan who understand that the vines’ silence can tell us more than any megaphone you place in front of them, well that’s special and that’s why the Okanagan matters.

I feel I can be frank about these wines. I don’t always feel that. The 2008 reds were tasty and well made but still searching for their meaning. I could taste the quality of fruit underlying the wines, but they seemed somewhat awkward and out of their skin. Everything changed with the 2010 vintage (the vintage that Matt C, who studied in New Zealand and Burgundy, and who I think is a man to watch in the Okanagan, took over as assistant wine maker).

The 2010 whites aren’t the lush hedonistic wine we’ve come to know from the Okanagan. As such they can be jarring initially. But that’s a misnomer. And as your brain readjusts you may realize, just as I did, that these wines speak of something more varietally pure and deep than most of any other whites in the Valley. Both the 2010 Pinot Gris and the 2010 Gewurztraminer stay simple (forget overt oak flavours, batonnage sillyness, and extreme fruit ripeness), but in doing so they bring out more complexities in the varieties than most will be accustomed to in BC. Both are fermented dry, a particularly surprising move with the Gewurztraminer, which is traditionally at least slightly off dry. This is done without aggressiveness or painful acidity. Rather, these are extremely delicious wines that, gasp, both drink well alone and with food. I can personally attest to being very impressed drinking a considerable amount of Gewurztraminer, a grape I almost never enjoy.

If the 2010 whites were enjoyable in their simple complexity, the 2010 reds (still in barrel) prompted me to rethink what was possible in the Okanagan. I should qualify that statement by noting both that these have yet to bottled, and that it was ultimately the Syrah (planted in the early 90’s) that made me rethink my preconceptions about B.C. wine. Nevertheless, the 2010 Syrah smelled nothing like the 2008, instead prompting memories of pepper, spice and game. Much like a Crozes-Hermitage or Saint Joseph, this wine was extremely aromatic and persuasively savory on the palate. Fruit was secondary to the leather, pepper and meat. This is varietally pure cool-climate Syrah made with grapes grown in a quite northerly stretch of the Narmata Bench. Sandy soils (with some clay) keep the phylloxera louse at bay from these own rooted vines, and the risk seems to pay off with what is perhaps the most interesting red wine in the Okanagan. Why is it interesting? Because it is so varietally pure, so aromatic, and so ready to embrace its basic life cycle.

The 2010 Cabernet Franc was also aromatically exciting, and finished with chalky tannins uncommon for the grape in B.C. I had a hard time pronouncing a verdict on the 2010 pinots and blends, except that I see great potential. But analysis of the wines only goes so far.

The 2010 wines from Nichol are the only wines in the Okanagan that I think true wine lovers, nay obsessives, are compelled to experience. These are varietally pure wines that taste like where they are from. They eschew perfection and embrace honesty. How many wineries in the world let alone the Okanagan can lay a claim to that?

Filed Under: Building BC's Wine Industry, Features, Single Winery Focus

BCLDB to Force “Wholesale” Customers to use BCLDB Credit Card for all Purchases

February 16, 2011 By Shea 8 Comments

The BCLDB sent out a bulletin on February 16, 2011 to all so-called wholesale customers, that is, all customers who buy from the BCLDB (liquor stores, restaurants, etc.) to announce that they may soon be required to use a BCLDB credit card to make all their purchases. This forced mode of payment restricts the business choices of all companies that buy from the BCLDB and it eliminates all purchaser’s ability to use their own credit cards with their own bonus plans (such as airmiles).

The BCLDB announced that it is looking to partner with a single financial institution to implement this new credit card. Why is this happening? My guess is because the BCLDB did not hit its revenue target last year and so it is looking for ways to make a quick buck. Partnering with a single financial institution is sure to include a deal that this institution pay a significant amount of money to BCLDB for the privilege of carrying hundreds of millions of dollars of private company debt.

In my opinion, this is another example of a flat out abuse of power by the BCLDB and it infringes on businesses rights. The BCLDB is losing revenue because their stores and service are inferior compared to their private counterparts. Rather than realize that the private sector is doing a better job and seeking to help them succeed (and thus pay more taxes), the BCLDB is implementing another inane policy that only impacts their myopic short term goals.

The real problem here is that this sort of insanity will likely not end with this policy. As the BCLDB continues to lose revenues to private stores that are more efficient, offer better selection and better service they will continue to implement these sort of underhanded and anti-competitive tactics to prop up their lagging revenue.

Is it not time to get rid of this “bully in the playground” – the BCLDB? I say yes.

Filed Under: Building BC's Wine Industry, Wine Law in British Columbia

BC Liquor Law Reform: What is it All About?

January 29, 2011 By Shea 4 Comments

I have been reading the comments in the Scout comment thread under Jake Skakun’s Privatization article and I feel that many people in the BCLDB reform/privatization debate are missing the issue or just don’t understand why so many people in the industry and who have spent time learning about these things are so frustrated with the system. In this article I would like to pull things back to reality and focus on why this debate started in the first place.

The question about privatizing or reforming liquor regulations in BC does not require us to start debating large scale political economy, of which there are dozens upon dozens of perspectives and approaches. Some arguments I’ve read say that privatizing BC Liquor will lead to less safety because all unregulated industries are unsafe. Despite attempts to do so, certainly no one can rationally claim that liquor regulation reform in B.C. is related to lax mining regulation in Chile or elsewhere that benefits private companies over the safety of employees. What matters isn’t some big question about privatization generally in all industries everywhere, but really just about whether it makes sense to privatize (or at least reform) in this particular industry in this particular province.

Whether or not privatization makes sense must be understood from a number of perspectives: tax dollars, consumers, business owners, restaurants, sommeliers, wineries, etc. It is not about business owners vs. union workers. This debate is also not about class – that’s a complete red herring that has led to irrational arguments from all ‘sides’ of this debate. Rather, the debate is about fairness.

To take a big view here, the main problem is the simple one that the regulator is a competitor and therefore is in a conflict of interest. Most of the problems with the BCLDB stem from this conflict of interest. Privatization is one way to remove this conflict of interest and allow the regulator to regulate the industry the way it is supposed to. No other regulatory system in BC works like this because such systems are generally seen to be contrary to natural justice.

This conflict of interest has created a huge number of problems that have created detriments to each of the groups I listed above: consumers, restaurants, sommeliers, BC wineries, and business owners. The BCLDB’s conflict of interest harms each of these groups differently, but it is consistent in negatively impacting each of these groups.

I will go through each group and list some ways that the BCLCB’s conflict of interest impacts them:

1. Consumers have less selection, cannot pay corkage in restaurants, cannot bring wine back with them from vacation (note Alberta only charges a flat $3/bottle in duty for casual importers coming back from vacation), and cannot buy wine direct from wineries outside BC. All of this is effectively a control by the BCLDB on some basic economic freedoms that all consumers should have.

2. Restaurants: Because restaurants do not get wholesale prices, restaurants cannot operate with alcohol margins that are at all similar to any other major city in the world. As I’ve recently learned, most restaurants in BC have to operate at a 45% cost margin. Some go to 50%, a very few push it at 35%. Internationally most restaurants are at 35%. It is harder to keep restaurants open in B.C. and to run good wine programs because of the unfair practice of not allowing restaurants to have wholesale prices.

Additionally, restaurants cannot order directly from importers and private stores, vastly reducing selection and impacting business relationships. Prices are dictated by the BCLDB so restaurants cannot effectively negotiate special deals or more dynamic business relationships. This stilts the industry because the BCLDB does not want competition in an area where it could not compete: service and specialization.

3. Sommeliers: Sommeliers cannot develop good wine programs or take risks because their margins are too low. They cannot split cases of special orders with sommeliers at other restaurants, even though the BCLDB would make the same amount of money from the sale. Why can’t they share costs and make this sort of business relationship? This is another irrational rule. Sommeliers leave Vancouver when they get to a certain level because no restaurant here can afford to pay the good ones to stay. They simply do not make enough money off of developing challenging and extensive wine programs.

4. BC Wineries: If BC wineries want to sell their wine at the BCLDB, they have to take a huge discount hit. The required discount is so high that most BC wineries would not be able to survive by selling their wines through the BCLDB. This means they have to either go through private stores, restaurants or sell direct. So far this has worked ok, but the market is getting more saturated. Wineries need as many sales outlets as possible. The BCLDB rules don’t allow this.

It is illegal for wineries to set up off-site tasting rooms, say in Vancouver. Most other wine regions in the world have off-site tasting rooms. This helps promote the wines. Why is this illegal in BC? Does the government not want to support the industries within its own province? Is it viewing BC wineries as competition to its own BCLDB sales? This makes no sense and is fundamentally unfair and shows a large lack of foresight.

5. Business Owners: Let’s forget about the big corporations. They are actually doing quite well in the current market because the BCLDB structure supports big corporations by buying wines with high sales volumes. The BCLDB is far less interested in small businesses because they cannot stock all their stores uniformly with such products. Thus, the BCLDB will stack case upon case of yellow tail and oyster bay wines (which are basically products that deplete the soils and destroy the environment where they are grown), but they will not bring in that many wines from tiny guys growing interesting biodynamic wines. Who is bringing in these wines to the province? Private wine stores with passionate owners.

Right now it is impossible for a wannabe small business owner to pursue their love and passion and start a small wine shop dedicated to, say, biodynamic Italian Wine, or something like that. The regulations make it impossible to afford or obtain a licence and operate with margins reasonable enough for small businesses (which, remember, often require higher margins than the big retailers who can afford the hit much more given economies of scale).

Private stores (mostly) cannot source their own products, like they do in so many other places. Small business owners also cannot afford to navigate the minefield of BC wine regulations, which can require legal counsel. Small guys can’t afford that. The business model for small businesses in liquor is pretty much an impossible one in B.C. Thus, the winners are the very few big companies that get their high volume products listed in the BCLDB or use large scale corporate economies of scale business models. Why do the top 10 agents in B.C. get 80% of the profits from wine sales in the province? The BCLDB makes that possible. Thus, contrary to what many may believe or what appears to be the case on the surface, the BCLDB policies and regulations actually make it harder, not easier, for small businesses to survive. Those same policies support large companies and huge scale wineries.

The conflict of interest is that the BCLDB wants tax dollars, but they are making consumer’s choices for them because of their particular vision of how to sell wine. The BCLDB is not equipped to create the nuanced choices that become available in an open and private market. They also have no interest in doing so. That is pretty darn unfair.

There are many more arguments, but I just wanted to clarify the problem as the discussion has gone way off course from my perspective. Privatization is one solution, but it is not the only possible solution. The main question is how do we fix this conflict of interest and make the sale of liquor in B.C. more fair? Everything flows from that.

Filed Under: Building BC's Wine Industry, Wine Law in British Columbia

Why We Need to Reform the BCLDB and Privatize Liquor in British Columbia

November 13, 2010 By Shea 45 Comments

The recent open letter written by Jake Skakun for Scout, and the subsequent debate in the comments, has convinced me it is time to write this post in outright support of reform of the British Columbia Liquor Distribution Branch (the “BCLDB”) and privatization of the liquor distribution system in the province.

In this article I will argue that privatization will produce higher tax revenues, a superior liquor distribution system, better selection, better prices, better service and a better wine culture in British Columbia.

I have no affiliations with anyone in the liquor industry and am a completely independent voice in this debate.

The BCLDB is an Affront to Basic Legal Principles

As a lawyer who has a degree of experience dealing with government agencies, I must say that the BC Liquor Distribution Branch may be the most obfuscated body in the entire BC government. It routinely violates principles of administrative law that include open access to information, transparency and fair hearings and decisions. Its markup system underhandedly violates principles of tax law by effectively taxing liquor 123% without requiring a vote in the legislature (i.e. taxation without representation).

Consensus in the legal community across Canada is that the BCLDB (and all provincial liquor monopolies) violate the Canadian Constitution by restricting interprovincial shipments of alcohol. Nearly identical restrictions in U.S. states have been deemed unconstitutional in the US by the United States Supreme Court. The clause in the U.S. constitution that restricts these practices is similar to the clause at issue in the Canadian constitution.

Reforming the BCLDB will Increase Tax Revenues

Internal audits of the retail operations of the BCLDB have revealed (1) that retail operations cost the government $300 million and (2) that sales of liquor at the BCLDB are declining whereas sales at private liquor stores are increasing.

Eliminating the retail operations of the BCLDB would produce the following results:

1. Save the government $300 million a year in operations costs. This would cost unionized workers their jobs, but it is not the government’s duty to pay shelf stockers $20+/hour. Do you think your tax dollars should pay union staff without any knowledge or respect for the products they sell? What value add is that?

2. Increase tax revenues. Not only would the government save $300 million a year in operating costs, it would still receive tax revenue from all the products sold in the province. Given that private retail sales are increasing, this will result in increased revenues. I will examine why private retail sales are increasing and BCLDB sales decreasing in a future section. In hard economic times it is better to increase revenue rather than lose revenue in order to prop up an antiquated union.

3. Level the playing field. Right now the BCLDB is the wholesaler, regulator and main retailer in the province. In other words, it governs its competitors and controls the flow of products to its competitors. This has resulted in anti-competetive practices. For example, the BCLDB regularly takes shipments of wine intended for private stores and puts them in their own stores. The BCLDB regularly short ships product and takes no responsibility for it. The BCLDB has exempted itself from liquor safety inspectors while the private sector is not exempt. By getting out of the retail game, the BCLDB will not have the incentive to distort the market to its advantage.

Better Distribution

It is not just the BCLDB’s retail operations that are problematic. The wholesale operations produce huge problems. The system is setup to make it difficult to obtain products that are not “listed” items – i.e. items the BCLDB has chosen to carry at its stores. Most of the interesting wines in the province are “spec” or “special order” items, which require a case purchase.

Further, wholesalers are afraid to bring product into the province that is not “listed” but is only “spec” or “special order” because it is harder to sell this product due to the regulatory restrictions governing it. This means less selection, a topic I address below. It also means a distorted distribution system controlled by the BCLDB buyers.

One retail operation’s buyers are therefore impacting and restricting the entire wholesale system for all retail operations in the province.

Additionally, all product must go through a government bonded warehouse. This process can take months. If an agent wants product for Christmas season, they have to order it months ahead of time and have inventory sitting around in the government warehouse in hopes it will be purchased. They cannot take as many risks with this business model because of the sheer amount of inventory they are required to carry.

Agents (importers) are also not allowed to access their own product. Only the retailers can access the agent’s product once they decide to purchase it. So wholesalers are effectively cut off from their own inventory.

Further, storage conditions are not guaranteed at this warehouse, which for any specialist merchant is a nightmare of breaking the chain of provenance. Top retailers in the U.S. and Europe would never accept this practice.

Lastly, restaurants cannot order directly from importers/agents, but must order at retail prices through the BCLDB retail stores. They can then apply for a minimal tax benefit after the fact.

Privatization of the wholesale side of liquor would:

1. Create a more efficient distribution system. Agent/Importers would be able to create more nimble business operations and operate on greater margins, increasing revenue, increasing jobs and increasing taxes paid.

2. Allow retailers and restaurants to obtain the product they want when they want. This means both retailers and restaurants could decrease their on hand inventory, creating better business models and increasing the likelihood of a successful business. Small business, employees and tax collectors all win in this situation.

3. Protect the Provenance of Artisanal Products. Provenance is key to ensuring that artisanal products do not spoil. If importers could ensure the quality of the warehouse in which they store their products, this will decrease the amount of damage to the wine and other liquor – such as dried out corks and heat damage. Again, this is a fundamental aspect to any fine liquor operation anywhere in the world.

I would add the caveat that any private wholesale system would have to be set up to avoid the problems encountered in the U.S. where a small number of wholesalers dominate the market. Of course, it is telling that even with this problem the U.S. has better selection, better prices, and better service.

Better Selection

The province is plagued with poor selection compared to our neighbours to the south who have a privatized retail and wholesale system. By way of comparison I looked at the selection of Rhone and Alsace wines at the entire BCLDB chain compared to a top retail store in San Francisco (K&L) and a top retail store in Manhattan (Astor). K&L has 223 wines from the Rhone in stock and 40 from Alsace. Astor has 87 wines from the Rhone currently in stock and 34 from Alsace. The BCLDB is 119 wines from the Rhone and 28 from Alsace in stock across 200 stores. Astor has 1 store and K&L has 3. If you compare the number of Rhone or Alsace wines available in just one major city in the US like SF or NYC, it will far surpass the BCLDB. Even single stores best the entire provincial liquor system for selection.

Go onto the K&L website, or for a broader perspective try wine searcher, and look at the 2000+ wines available from California at various price points. Most of those don’t make it into BC. Let’s consider top CA producers that are not at any BCLDB outlets: Alban, Sine Qua Non, Pax, Saxum, Turley, Harlan, Colgin, Kapscandy, Corrison, Beckmen, Ojai, Line Collado, Philip Togni, Spottswoode, Sean Thackrey etc. etc. If you can find these wines in BC they are at private stores. In California you can either get on a mailing list, go to a auction service like Vinfolio, or simply go to a store like K&L on the release date. There are 0 California wines at the BCLDB that you can’t get in California. The top California wines the BCLDB carries – Ridge, Shafer, Dominus, etc. – are all available easily in San Francisco at grocery stores or an average retail shop. That’s not good selection.

Manhattan and San Francisco have dozens of wine stores selling great wines across the city and have developed wine stores suited to appeal to different niches of consumers (e.g. Terroir SF, Chambers Street Wine NYC). Right now, because of BCLDB retail operations and restrictions on private licenses, there are very few niche private stores in BC. It is impossible for new niche stores to develop because the distribution system severely restricts the kinds of products they can stock.

Only one store in BC (Marquis Wine Cellars) has the ability to source its own wines on its own wine buying trips to Europe. In San Francisco or New York, this is the norm. Some of the world’s best importers operate out of retail operations in the US. For example, Kermit Lynch, North Berkeley Wine in Berkeley, and Chambers Street Wine in Manhattan.

Better Prices

Given that the BCLDB retail operation costs $300 million, and given that private stores are selling more wine per capita over time, if we privatized we could reduce the level of taxation and increase tax revenue at the same time. This would result in better prices, which would increase sales and offer better quality wines for the average individual who doesn’t want to spend over $20 a bottle.

By way of example, at the recent premium spirits release at the BCLDB, Ridgemont Reserve Bourbon was sold for $75. It is $33 at Astor and K&L. When I lived down in Berkeley I regularly bought California wines for 50% of what they cost in BC. To continue my example from the selection argument, Pax is $45 a bottle in CA, it is $150 here (recently discounted to $90 because it cannot sell). I could get Ridge zins for $25 at a grocery store in Berkeley. They are $50 a bottle here and only available at one of the 3 signature stores.

I could also go to my favourite beer store and choose from 600 different beers, sample them in store, and pay about $6 for a 22oz bottle of amazing beer that is (1) unavailable in BC and (2) if it were available would cost $12. Another example is the Deschuttes Jubel ale that just came into the province at $30 retail. I can buy it for $10-$12 in the US at multiple retail outlets.

Better Service

I can best illustrate the problems in service at the BCLDB with an example.

I am not in the industry, but I have personally seen small restaurant and store buyers turned away in the BCLDB stores to keep stock in for the ‘real customers’. This appears to be some sort of pretend solidarity with the proletariat everyday worker. There are many arguments against this practice. However, I have a simple contrast to highlight the hypocracy. When a large steak house in downtown Vancouver went out of business, it returned all its wine stock to the BCLDB. The staff at the then Thurlow and Alberni store were supposed to price discount this wine at 30% and put it on the floor for ‘everyday customers’ to buy – since all of us ultimately own the system it makes sense to let a wide array of customers buy this sort of stock. These were all high end American wines.

However, the staff was ‘too busy’ to put the stock on the floor for a couple days and when the large Italian Kitchen conglomerate came in with an offer to buy all the wine at discount in one swoop, the BCLDB workers thought ‘hey that’s easier than tagging all these wines and putting them on the floor’. The result? Lost revenue for the BCLDB for selling all the wines at a huge discount to a restaurant that would sell the wines to customers for the regular price. Do I blame Italian Kitchen? No – they had a rare opportunity to actually buy wines at a discount and make margins. But the BCLDB employees’ lazyness won out over their supposed principles this time out. And the BCLDB failed in its role to manage the product of a bankrupt licensee and find the best bidder for the liquidated assets. Pretty much no one wins in that situation.

Let us not forget that the average BCLDB employee has close to no knowledge about the products they are selling and the supermarket style shopping experience at most BCLDB outlets. To see how privatization would create better service overall in the city, all one has to do is go into a great wine store in any city in the US to see how it should be done or one of the better private stores here in Vancouver like Marquis or Kits wine.

Service isn’t just about good floor staff, it is also about a good events and promotions program.

The BCLDB has no way of informing customers of new product arriving in the store other than brief website updates with give random new wines listed, even though they get in 100’s of new products regularly. They run tastings with plastic glasses. At the premium spirits release the BCLDB was pouring $200 bourbons and scotches into 1-inch diameter plastic cups. This is mandated by regulation. That neither respects the spirit or the customer.

It is impossible to buy tickets to BCLDB events online and there are very few events run at all. Compare this to the LCBO (Ontario’s liquor monopoly) events and seminars where people are actually taught something about wine or Marquis Wine’s wine maker dinners and you realize that the BCLDB is not interested in educating consumers or building wine culture. They don’t even have a regular tasting tower in their biggest stores (compare this to the LCBO Summerhill store in downtown Toronto where I got my first tastes of great wine for $1 a glass at their regular tasting tower and $4 a glass at their special weekend premium wine tastings.)

Conclusion

All of this (added to the inane regulatory system – which you can read about on Mark Hicken’s winelaw.ca website) amount to an industry where ideas come to die. Imagine any other industry where ideas and creativity are stifled to support a broken system that doesn’t make anyone happy except for the overpaid shelf stockers. Other examples of Canadian lack of competition like this include the telecommunications industry (how long did it take to get a cell phone competitor in Canada? – prices are still 2x the US) and the dairy industry (go to seattle and revel in their vast selection of French, Spanish and Italian cheese that our milk board prevents from entering canada for fear of competing with the big canadian dairies), etc.

How do we make this happen? The liquor industry needs to step up and give us all a platform on which to sign on. But what we can do as consumers is to talk about the issue with our friends, spread knowledge and information and whenever possible complain to the BCLDB and to our MLA. Big movements usually begin with small steps.

Are we, as Canadians, content with a few large corporations benefiting and small businesses suffering? Are we content with compromised tax revenues, poor prices and selection and mind numbingly bad service?

We will forever remain the nanny state if we prop up this sort of mentality. I, for one, prefer innovation and entrepreneurialism over sameness and bureaucracy. Let us make our province a destination for innovators and investors in wine and liquor. Let us privatize.

My Credentials

NB: I’ve moved this section to the end to highlight that I am not listing my credentials as an argument in thesmelves, but as noted, merely by way of background and for context.

By way of background, I am a lawyer here in Vancouver, British Columbia, with a Juris Doctor from the University of British Columbia. I have also previously worked as a law clerk for the British Columbia Court of Appeal, spent half a year as a visiting scholar at UC Berkeley’s Boalt law school, hold a Master’s degree, and have published several articles on social theory, property law and environmental law. I have written this blog for three years and have developed a robust knowledge of the liquor distribution system in British Columbia and the United States during that time. I have also got to meet a large number of members in the liquor industry in BC, Washington and California and heard their stories. As per my legal training, I have also verified all the facts upon which this argument is based and I have done my own legal research to understand how the system works.

I have no affiliations with anyone in the liquor industry and am a completely independent voice in this debate.

Filed Under: Building BC's Wine Industry, Wine Law in British Columbia

Understanding Liquor Reform: Discretion, Policy and the Law of Liquor in British Columbia

Open Barrel: A Manifesto for Consumer Based Reform of British Columbia Liquor Laws

Keeping it Cool: How British Columbia’s Wine Distribution System is a Hazard to Your Health

Wine in British Columbia: A 25 Year Retrospective

Built to Age? – An Osoyoos Larose Vertical

BC’s First Natural Wines: A Tasting with Racine Wine Imports

Nichol Vineyard or Why the Okanagan Matters

BCLDB to Force “Wholesale” Customers to use BCLDB Credit Card for all Purchases

BC Liquor Law Reform: What is it All About?

Why We Need to Reform the BCLDB and Privatize Liquor in British Columbia

Subscribe to Just Grapes

Post Archive

Stream of Consciousness