Another Brew-On-Premise Article

[McGruff]

I remember Bob Rae's NDP gov't and their bloody taxes. He did me a great favour back then. I was so mad I started to seriously collect all-grain equipment to make my own beer. Now I drink tax free beer thanks to the NDP

[mr x]

Cost NSLC and Harrington each about $32,000 in legal fees. NSLC offered Harrington $5,000. NSLC spent about $5,000 on private investigators, lol....

from cbc radio

[mr x]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scot ... -fees.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The province’s Crown-owned liquor agency spent more than $30,300 in its short lived bid to shut down some small wine and beer producing shops in the province.

The Nova Scotia Liquor Corp. filed an injunction in January against U-Vint operators which allow customers to ferment wine or brew beer on site.

The spat was over regulatory changes from 2011 that allowed the NSLC file the injunctions. It argued the small shops were allowing practices that are unregulated and unsafe.
Ross Harrington says the U-Vint operators shouldn't have had to fight for compensation in the case.

The fight instantly sparked public outcry, with many calling it a David and Goliath battle against small business. The NSLC was ordered by the NDP to drop the campaign just weeks later.

But during that brief time, NSLC spent $25,000 on lawyer’s fees paid to McInnes Cooper.

It also spent $5,300 to hire private investigators to go into the stores and examine the operations.

Ross Harrington owns Wine Kitz of Halifax, one of the stores that was temporarily told to stop allowing its onsite fermenting and brewing.

“It’s annoying that they’re wasting taxpayer money,” he said.

While Harrington is relieved the dispute was short lived, the U-vint operators are stuck with their own bill.

“Over $31,000,” he estimated. “That’s a pretty bitter pill for a small business.”

The operators asked the NSLC to pay for their legal costs. NSLC first offered 10 per cent as compensation, then upped that to $5,000.

“At a point you have to say enough’s enough. If they’re going to be that cheap about the whole affair, we’re done with them,” Harrington said.

The U-Vint operators accepted the settlement.

“They couldn’t just do the right thing,” said Harrington. “Don’t pick a fight and then leave somebody with damages.”
Surprising benefit

It seems the surge in publicity that came from the short battle has also sparked a boom in business. Just last week, Harrington hired two more employees to keep up with their new customers.

“In February, we were doing 172 kits, which is just goofy. Last month we did 150.”

He credits the public outcry with their win.

“We won the moral victory, we beat the big guy. I cannot hesitate to thank the public of Nova Scotia enough.”

The NSLC declined to comment.

[mr x]

Rick Perkins is gone, boo hoo. Moron.
http://thechronicleherald.ca/opinion/11 ... int-u-turn" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


LETHBRIDGE: What next after the Great U-Vint U-turn?

Could the tale of the Little U-Vints That Thought They Could end up producing unintended consequences for the Nova Scotia Liquor Corp.?

This occurred to me the other week with the abrupt and rather conspicuous exit of corporation executive Rick Perkins. It occurred to me again when it was revealed that the company spent more than $30,000 in their dust-up with the beer- and wine-making retailers.

We don’t know for sure if the departure of Perkins, who was serving as a vice-president at the Crown corporation, had anything to do with the — ahem — “brewhaha” that erupted earlier this year when the company filed an injunction against do-it-yourself beer- and wine-making operations.

But we do know that the whole episode cast a pall over the business, making the Crown corporation look like a bloated, state-owned monolith out to protect revenues by beating up on little guy who was just trying to make a living.

And they did this with a clear mandate from the NDP government, which last year passed a law allowing the Crown corporation to issue injunctions against the fermentation businesses.

As a result, the provincial government has also ended up looking like they were protecting their tax revenues on the backs of jobs and small business.

This is, after all, the same government that’s been riding the Jobs-Start-Here chuckwagon pretty hard throughout its mandate. I don’t see any NDP TV commercials with the theme: Jobs-Start-Here-As-Long-As-They-Don’t-Mess-With-Our-Booze-Taxes.

The government did hear back — and hear back big — on this one.

Thus we had the Great U-Vint U-Turn of 2013. (You couldn’t make this stuff up.) The bad optics were just too much for the government in the run-up to an election.

So, the departure of Perkins did have a certain appearance of making it look like they were doing something to appease public outcry.

In the meantime, we still haven’t seen those promised new regulations for the fermentation retail operations.

And with an election looming, that leaves the government and the liquor corporation vulnerable to attack as opposition parties scour for weak spots and formulate their strategies.

Certainly, the Tories have the corporation in their crosshairs, accusing government of treating small business and customers like “criminals.”

Party Leader Jamie Baillie has questioned rising operating expenses at the liquor company and has been talking about selling wine and beer in grocery stores.

He’s also raised the idea of selling the corporation.

It will be interesting to see how the Liberals address this issue in the election.

The idea of selling the state-owned liquor store is not new. The idea is that you sell it off — the number $4 billion has been suggested — and then you apply that amount directly to the debt.

The money saved on servicing the debt, now the fourth largest provincial expenditure, could be used for services such as health care and education.

Meanwhile, the argument goes, new jobs are being created in the private sector. The government would still receive tax revenue from the product, as it does on fuel, and the laws governing consumption remain the same.

The last time a government looked at a liquor store sell-off was in 2000 when a consultant found there would be no benefit. The government has said it has no intention of selling the liquor corporation to private interests.

The U-Vint operators have reported an increase in their business since the fight with government. They have the public’s support and this won’t escape the eye of opposition parties as talk of election heats up.

Goliath ought to be watching his back.

[mr x]

New rules will lift in-store brewing restrictions

http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia ... strictions" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

New rules for businesses that allow people to make their own wine or beer in-store are brewing, the minister responsible for the Nova Scotia Liquor Corp. said Thursday.

Diana Whalen, also the finance minister, said officials are working on legislation and regulations for U-vints, but she’s not sure if they’ll be ready for the fall session of the legislature, which starts Nov. 28.

“Our intention is very clear,” she said. “That will definitely be addressed very soon.”

The previous NDP government said in February that rules would be developed to allow in-store winemaking and beer brewing. In the weeks prior to that there had been public criticism of the Liquor Corp.’s attempts to get injunctions against two retailers.

In Opposition, the Liberals had supported allowing the businesses to operate.

Whalen was also asked Thursday about the concerns Robert Strang, the province’s chief public health officer, raised this week in regard to the liquor corporation marketing to young women.

Whalen said she’s questioned previous ministers about that issue and plans to talk to liquor corporation officials about their advertising policy.

Karen Casey, education and early childhood development minister, also said she’s be looking into an alcohol-related matter.

During a media scrum, a CBC reporter showed her a photo of a sign outside Fairview Junior High School advertising a movie and martini night fundraiser for the parent-teacher association.

When asked if such an ad was appropriate on the school’s sign, the minister said, “I would take exception to that, absolutely, and I will follow up.”

The department had no information late Thursday afternoon on whether Casey followed up.

Doug Hadley, Halifax regional school board spokesman, said the fundraiser, held Thursday night, included a movie, finger foods and one martini for $20. He said the school hasn’t received any complaints about the event or the ad.

[mr x]

N.S. seeks input on in-store brewing regulations

http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia ... egulations" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Consultations to develop regulations that would allow people in Nova Scotia to make wine or beer in stores will start this week.

The provincial government says it will work with the beer brewing and winemaking industry to develop regulations and standards that are expected to be introduced in the next legislative session.

The deadline for input is Feb. 10.

The right to make beer and wine in so-called U-vint stores flared up a year ago, when the province’s Crown-owned liquor agency sought a court order to prevent the owners of Wine Kitz Halifax and Water ’n’ Wine in New Glasgow from producing wine and beer in their shops.

The previous NDP government later ordered Nova Scotia Liquor Corp. to drop the case in the face of a growing public backlash.

[mr x]

According to Radio1, the government is planning to model the laws after PEI rules.

[chalmers]

Thanks for the article. Any idea how us regular schmoes can get in on these consultations, to have our voice heard?

[mr x]

Probably contact Diana Whalen's office. Might be helpful.

http://www.dianawhalen.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mr x]

Province begins consultations with u-brew, u-vint stores

http://www.novanewsnow.com/News/Local/2 ... t-stores/1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Corey Campbell, manager of the New Minas Wine Kitz, with wine and beer being brewed by customers at the retail store. He said he was thrilled with the Jan. 31 announcement the practice would be made legal and he had already called back two part-time employees who had earlier been laid off. "I got to hire back my staff today, so I'm happy."

The government is following through on a commitment to make u-vint and u-brew operations legal.

Consultations with the industry will begin this week to develop regulations and set standards for ferment-on-premises businesses. Adjustments to the legislation are expected to be introduced during the next legislative session. New regulations will follow.

"We want to eliminate barriers for small businesses and make it easier for them to grow, hire, and help our economy," said Diana Whalen, Minister responsible for the Liquor Control Act. "These changes will bring public demand for this innovative service and support for a growing industry in line with the law."

The issue impacted the New Minas Wine Kitz store, which initially agreed to stop bottling liquor in-store until the NDP government reversed the decision.

Since the initial commitment to develop regulations, provincial officials have looked at existing u-vint models across the country. Stakeholder input will be used to create a regulatory framework that gives Nova Scotians more choice and creates a stable, clear and competitive business environment.

"It is important for government to hear the views of the industry and work together to create socially responsible regulations that will grow businesses," said Whalen.

Consultation kits are being sent to owners and operators across the province for input. The deadline is Feb. 10. For more information, or to provide input, visit http://www.novascotia.ca/finance" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; .

[chalmers]

Perfect, thanks, found it:

http://www.novascotia.ca/finance/en/hom ... ation.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Government of Nova Scotia is following through on a commitment to make u-vint and u-brew operations legal.

Consultations with the industry are taking place to develop regulations and set standards for ferment-on-premises businesses. Adjustments to the legislation are expected to be introduced during the next legislative session. New regulations will follow.

After research and consultations with other provinces and territories, the province has determined that PEI’s existing regulations are the most current and reflect a well-rounded approach. PEI's u-vint and u-brew regulations have operated well since their introduction in 2009 and appear to balance the interests of the industry and the public.

Owners and operators of ferment-on-premises businesses as well as other interested Nova Scotians are asked to review the PEI regulations and policy document to assist the Province in developing regulations for Nova Scotia.

We look forward to your input and any suggestions you may have that would improve on the PEI policy framework.

Please provide comments via email to uvint@gov.ns.ca .

The deadline for receiving feedback is February 10, 2014.

[LeafMan66_67]

Are the PEI rules and regulations readily available?

[mr x]

I believe they are...I'll look.

http://www.gov.pe.ca/law/regulations/pdf/L&14G.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Some stuff on page 21, not sure if that's what you want, or if there is better info...

[LeafMan66_67]

Tks

[mr x]

Ross was just on the radio. Doesn't like the 75 cent per litre stipend law that PEI uses.

[sleepyjamie]

Another govt tax grab so they can buy stuff for their personal offices


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HPhunter]

As a recent switcher from buyer to producer, I am following this with interest. It cost me more in taxes then ingredients to brew, in a fully regulated environment. And the brew for you??? Are they insured properly? Are they registered with CFIA? Why can't I have 20 people pitch yeast and have a bigger brew on premise? I'm not whining just curious where the line is drawn.

[CorneliusAlphonse]

I would like it if you didn't have to pay so much in taxes... Actually Jeff you should definitely write a letter stating that the taxes and fines on small breweries like yourself are just as bad. Your pinion should be worth a fair bit I'd think!

[jherbin]

Just wanted to post to agree with Jeff @ BAB - The NSLC's cut on a product it never has to handle is ludicrous - 50c/Litre...for what? A 50l keg out the door, and $25 off the top straight to the NSLC. At least we're beyond the days when federal excise was another some 33$/hectolitre? (don't remember exact figure). The NSLC really needs to adjust this tax to better reflect the wide range of producer size that has developed in the recent years of microbrewery development in this province. As in, an appropriate tax based on percentage of revenue in relation to cost of production.

[mr x]

I think we all agree that liquor laws need a serious revamping. Unfortunately, you're fighting a government frightened of losing revenue instead of looking at creating jobs. And IMHO, gaslit by the dept of health.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4

[GAM]

As a recent switcher from buyer to producer, I am following this with interest. It cost me more in taxes then ingredients to brew, in a fully regulated environment. And the brew for you??? Are they insured properly? Are they registered with CFIA? Why can't I have 20 people pitch yeast and have a bigger brew on premise? I'm not whining just curious where the line is drawn.

I think you will be able to once they figure the licensing out. I have talked with several people on doing a heck of beer (with enough customers to buy it) and splitting the batch.

Sandy

[mr x]

I've always thought that there should be limits on building size/density, to prevent Walmart/Costco, etc from getting into it. It may sound crazy, but you never know...

[mr x]

EDITORIAL: U-vints good start to reducing red tape

http://thechronicleherald.ca/editorials ... g-red-tape" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

True to its word, the new provincial Liberal government has begun consulting U-vint and U-brew businesses to help fine-tune pending new legislation and regulations that will govern legal, on-site fermenting services at small retailers.

That’s as it should be. At this time last year, after a massive public backlash against the heavy-handed approach of the former NDP government and the Nova Scotia Liquor Corporation, the province was still weeks away from finally backing down on the prosecution of these small businesses. The latter were only providing a service that people wanted and that is legal in many other provinces.

As we argued at the time, the public had had enough of “government’s feeble justifications for a Goliath-sized monopoly going after David-sized entrepreneurs who were simply trying to meet market demand.”

Both then-opposition parties decried the senseless clampdown. To their credit, the Liberals had previously tried to change the status quo through private member’s bills.

A year later, Ross Harrington, owner of the Halifax U-vint that symbolically received the Liberal government’s first consultation package this week, said his business is up by 30 per cent since an NSLC injunction was dropped a year ago. Plus, he’s hired five more part-time workers.

We hope this removal of unnecessary liquor laws marks the beginning of a new trend, one in which government looks to clear away obstacles for Nova Scotia entrepreneurs rather than adding ever more red tape.

Although, in this case, what’s needed is new legislation and regulations, we’d urge the Liberals to use, as much as possible, a minimalist approach in those areas.

In a province where the economy has been far from robust for many years — and our huge debt is a constant drag on provincial finances — the government’s focus needs to be on improving the business climate for growth. Simply put, we have to stop getting in our own way.

One example we’d love to see is a government, rather than concluding a legislature sitting with boasts about how many new laws and regulations were introduced, instead enumerating how many unnecessary laws and regulations were repealed.

Another example of the right approach in government could be seen in Halifax Regional Municipality’s release last year of 17 sets of municipally collected data, on services such as transit and street networks, topography, building uses and zoning, for free public use. The city challenged software developers — via the apps4Halifax contest last fall — to use the data to come up with useful Web or mobile applications.

The city’s goal is to help stimulate young IT entrepreneurs to create apps that the public or city might find useful in terms of accessing, or more efficiently delivering, government services, and that might even form a base for more widely commercially successful software.

The Liberal campaign platform promised all regulations would be tested for “their efficiency and effectiveness.” Let’s get on with it.

[mr x]

Opinion - Graham Steele: Beer, smokes and elephants
Looking at the frames and viewpoints that shape political decisions

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scot ... -1.2507931" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Quick — don't think of an elephant.

You can't help it — you just thought of an elephant. The word evoked a trunk, tusks, a tail, the whole big, beautiful animal.

Don't Think of an Elephant! is the title of a slender volume published in 2004 by the American linguist George Lakoff. But Lakoff wasn't writing about linguistics. He was writing about politics.

Lakoff's theme is that there are "frames" — words, phrases, metaphors — that shape how we see the world. If someone says elephant, we think of an elephant even if we're told not to.

I got to thinking about frames last week when I saw the McNeil government promise on Tuesday to allow U-Vints and then, without any apparent sense of irony, promise on Thursday to tightly regulate e-cigarettes.

They're the same issue — or are they? It depends on the frame.

When I was the minister for the Liquor Control Act, I came up against the issue of U-Vints. These are stores that provide space and supplies for customers to make wine and beer on the store's premises.

I didn't like them. I saw them as a source of cheap alcohol, difficult to monitor and therefore a public health issue.

The store owners went on a public relations offensive with a very different frame. They were just trying to provide a service to seniors living in apartments who didn't have space to home-brew or couldn't carry the heavy carboys.

They also painted themselves as small-scale entrepreneurs who just wanted the government to leave them alone.
Head on a platter

To cut a long story short, they handed me my political head on a platter. Their frame was far more powerful than my frame.

So when the McNeil government announced last Tuesday that U-Vints were going ahead, the Chronicle Herald ran an editorial saying, "We hope this removal of unnecessary liquor laws marks the beginning of a new trend, one in which government looks to clear away obstacles for Nova Scotia entrepreneurs rather than adding ever more red tape."
beer

The Nova Scotia government announced earlier this month it will introduce a law legalizing beer brewing and winemaking at smaller retailers.

There was no acknowledgement that the government might have had any reason to be wary of U-Vints. My frame had been wiped off the map, replaced by the frame of entrepreneurial freedom.

And then, only a couple of days later, the McNeil government announced a get-tough stance on electronic cigarettes.

Health Minister Leo Glavine said the law would be changed to treat e-cigarettes like regular cigarettes. Banned from public places. No sales to minors. Sales from behind the counter. It was, he said, a public health issue.

Sound familiar?

Public reaction was swift and negative. Letters to the editor and online comments pointed out e-cigarettes are not at all like regular cigarettes. The nanny state. Red tape.

One New Glasgow store owner, Shai Conners, vowed to fight. She said she serves nearly 6,000 e-cigarette customers out of her small shop and she ships all over Atlantic Canada.

"I'll fight tooth and nail. I'll fight pretty much to the death right now," she was quoted as saying. "I'm a mother, I have kids and I have mouths to feed."
Fighting frames

Sound familiar?

The story of the underdog is a powerful frame. We root for underdogs. We don't even think about it, we just do. David versus Goliath was already an old story when David fought Goliath. It's deeply embedded in our culture.

Here's another powerful frame: politicians can't be trusted.

I was knocking on doors during my very first election and a woman said, "You're liars! You're all liars!" before slamming the door. I wanted to say to her, "Wait, you don't know me."

Every politician thinks they're different and it's only the other guys who can't be trusted. But the frame of the untrustworthy politician means everybody in elected office starts from a deep hole. There are no exceptions — not me on U-Vints, not Leo Glavine on e-cigarettes, nobody.

I expect Glavine to argue that U-Vints and e-cigarettes aren't the same at all. He'll argue with facts, he'll marshal the anti-smoking lobby, he'll try to shut Shai Conners down.

But he's fighting two powerful frames and he's going to lose.

Graham Steele, good riddance to your dumb ass. You deserved your head on a platter.

[benwedge]

AllNS is reporting that the CFIB is nominating Maureen Macdonald for the Golden Scissors award for cutting red tape. Why? Because she overruled the supreme court injunction against U-Vints... which ruled on a law that she had sponsored earlier in the NDP's tenure. I'm all for giving someone credit when they realize they've made a boneheaded decision and then see the light and change it, but you're premiere award for cutting red tape might be a stretch.