 |
 |
|
 |
||
      |
||
|
|
|||||
|
MADD Canada Releases May 27, 2003
In a recent exchange of correspondence, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) Canada stated their 'disappointment' in the Minister Rich Coleman's rationale for the Government's new alcohol policies and regulations. In a letter dated May 8, 2003, National Executive Director Andrew Murie stated: "Your rationale's for these policies and regulation changes are weak and are certainly not consistent with the wide body of empirical evidence, which shows increased alcohol availability and alcohol density lead to increased alcohol harm, including impaired driving." Mr. Murie says of the exchange with Minister Coleman: "When we met with the Premier and his Ministers in February, we were assured by Minister Coleman that he would produce the policy background papers and documents that formed the basis for his Department's policy direction. From what he provided, we can see that the Minister is not as briefed as he should be in making the serious policy decisions he has made regarding alcohol retail issues." "From what we see, the Solicitor General's approach to the Government's alcohol policy is not sound," Mr. Murie adds. "We are disappointed with the lack of research and review conducted by the Government, this department and this Minister." "What we want of the Minister and this Government is for them to rethink the policy direction they are taking. Consider the whole body of evidence available, consult with stakeholders who have the expertise and experience with these issues, and look to the examples of other provinces like Ontario, which has just gone through an extensive review of its alcohol policies," says Mr. Murie. The complete texts of the correspondence exchange between MADD Canada and BC Solicitor General Rich Coleman is available on the MADD Canada website - www.madd.ca. For a copy of the correspondence, visit www.madd.ca, or call: Andrew Murie, National Executive Director Letter sent from Andrew Murie to Minister Rich Coleman, dated May 8, 2003: Dear Minister Coleman: I am in receipt of your letter of April 11, 2003. I am disappointed in your response that you are not open to comments or suggestions on your changes to the Liquor Licensing Regulations. Your rationale for these policies and regulation changes are weak and are certainly not consistent with the wide body of empirical evidence, which shows increased alcohol availability and alcohol density lead to increased alcohol harms, including impaired driving. I am baffled as to why you would compare British Columbia with Alberta as a rationale to justify the privatization of British Columbia liquor stores. Why wouldn't you want to compare your drinking and driving statistics to Ontario, which has the safest roads in North America? The people of British Columbia should expect the best, not a comparison to the lowest denominator in Canada. You also failed to mention in your comparison with Alberta that: * Criminal Code impaired driving offences per 100,000 population
last year were 299 in British Columbia and 475 in Alberta. The
Canadian average is 291 (Statistics Canada, July 2002) Trevor Harrison (Associate Professor in Sociology of Lethbridge) described the privatization of Alberta's liquor stores, as "all in all, given Alberta's experience in privatizing liquor, British Columbian's might want to give the idea some sober second thought." Dr. Norman Glesbrecht (Canadian Centre for addiction and Mental Health), says "alcohol is a unique commodity that requires unique controls, that can be best done through a government run system, rather than through a private system." Minister Coleman, you are the Minister of Public Safety, you have a public responsibility to ensure the safety of the citizens of British Columbia. Your new policies and regulations are based on increased sales and profitability for the alcohol and hospitality industry, not in the best interest of the public. Your reforms will increase alcohol harms at a time when the youth population will increase 11% by 2010 and the number of alcohol related deaths in Canada is on the rise. I would urge you, Minister Coleman, to reconsider these changes before it is too late. I have enclosed for your education, a publication produced by MADD Canada, entitled, "The Real Facts of Alcohol Use, Injuries and Death" (www.madd.ca). Sincerely, Letter from Minister Rich Coleman to Andrew Murie, dated April 11, 2003: Dear Mr. Murie: I received your letter regarding background information that we considered in making changes to the liquor regulations. I am pleased to provide you with the information that was referenced in making the recent changes to liquor policy. I appreciate your offer to comment, however, the liquor licensing regulations which allow the increase in private retail outlets came into effect in August 2002 and the regulations that included changes to the maximum operating hours came into effect on December 2, 2002. While there may be some policy decisions to be made in the future, I expect that they will be based on the same information and follow a similar policy direction. In deciding to move forward with more private liquor stores, we took into account the range of views held by stakeholders. We also looked to the experience in other jurisdictions. Alberta privatized liquor sales in 1993. Since that time, the number of outlets has grown from 304 to 907, almost a three-fold increase, yet the change in the volume of liquor sold has been more measured and aligns with changes in population, economic growth and the increased consumption of wine with media. From 1992 to 2000, the volume increased by 19 per cent, mostly due to an increase in the sale of coolers and wine. During the same period, there was a 14 per cent growth in population and 46 per cent growth in GDP. During the same period in British Columbia, liquor sales increased by 4 per cent, population grew by 17 per cent and GDP by 23 per cent. British Columbia's figures understate wins sales because they do not reflect the 19% of wine produced at uvins. If uvins wine figures were included, sales patterns over the eight years for both provinces would be very similar despite the different sales models. We also looked at the impact of privatization on the incidence of drinking and driving. Alberta Transportation reports that the percentage of drinking drivers who were fatally injured dropped from 39 per cent in the period 1990 - 1995 to 34 per cent in 1999. Over the same period, the percentage of all motor vehicle crash fatalities involving a drinking driver dropped by 18 per cent, and the percentage of drivers in serious injury crashes that involved alcohol decreased by 4.2 per cent. In deciding to allow applications for longer hours, we considered several competing views. A view held by some local governments and police, based on their experience, is that longer hours allow a more gradual dispersal of patrons. They believe this in turn helps to reduce community disturbances and in smaller communities allows the few available taxis to return for multiple trips while the patrons wait inside the establishment. One northern British Columbia community in particular noted the problem of forcing everyone out into the cold at 2:00 a.m. to wait for taxis, which sometimes resulted in people making poor choices about drinking and driving. Others believe that in the absence of licensed and inspected facilities, patrons looking for venues at this time of the night were resorting to unlicensed and often unsafe 'booze cafes'. The change in hours is not an automatic right for any licence holder, nor is it a simple process. Bars will only be allowed to stay open until 4 a.m. if the local government and community supports it and if it is approved by the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch. Establishments that create a community disturbance can expect to have their licence reviewed by the general manager for either a roll back of hours or other measures to address the problem. Given the potential benefits and the controls in place, on balance, we decided it was not contrary to the public interest to permit the later hours in some circumstances. My primary focus in regulating liquor is to ensure liquor establishments in this province operate in a safe and responsible way. Since 2001, we have increased the number of liquor inspectors from 29 to 40 and changed the responsibilities of inspectors to increase the time they devote to compliance activities by 40 per cent; the equivalent of adding 12 more inspectors. The enforcement program has been strengthened and the penalties for disregarding the regulations have increased. The total days of licence suspensions in 2000 was 105 days. As of 2002, this number has increased to 425, with an additional $140,000 being assessed in monetary penalties. As well, last October I and my colleague the Honourable Rick Thorpe, the Minister responsible for the Liquor Distribution Branch, directed our ministries to research and identify new alcohol consumption-related public safety and social responsibility initiatives and make recommendations on what may have relevance for British Columbia. I expect to be discussing this work with staff in the coming weeks to look at what other initiatives British Columbia could undertake in addition to impaired driving strategies. Thank you for your interest. Sincerely yours, pc. Premier Gordon Campbell
|
|
|
||
|
MADD Canada | Victim Services | News| Research Library | Volunteering | Youth | Donate |
|||||
© 2004 MADD Canada - Privacy and Copyright declarations. |
|||||
