Store owner fears proposed law would end brew-on-premises op

[Jimmy]

Passing this along from the x-man

NEW GLASGOW – Charles Patton is ready to go another round with the provincial government over proposed legislation he says will cost his business jobs and income.

As owner of Water ’N’ Wine on Westville Road, New Glasgow, he said proposed changes to the Liquor Control Act are targeting businesses like his because the government isn’t in favour of him allowing customers to brew beer or ferment wine in the back of his store.

“The Nova Scotia Liquor Corporation wants to close us down, basically,” he said at his store Friday. “The police investigated us a while ago because of a complaint that was made and nothing came out of it. We have been getting cease and desist orders from the Nova Scotia Liquor Corporation which we’ve ignored.”

Patton said the fight centres on a “grey area” the Nova Scotia government hopes will be come clearer if it can make changes to the act.

The government is proposing an amendment that would give the Nova Scotia Liquor Corporation authority to obtain an injunction against someone in violation of the act. The NSLC can apply to a judge of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia directly if there is a reason to believe a person or business is likely to, or is continuing to, commit a violation of liquor legislation and regulations.

“They have never been able to make the (current) laws stick in court and they haven’t been successful when they did try,” he said. “Now they are putting a tweak in it to give authority to the NSLC to go directly to a Supreme Court judge.”

Patton said the bone of contention between five business owners like himself and the province is that government officials say people shouldn’t be allowed to operate as a brew-on-premises or in-store winemaking location.

He said he has more than 700 customers who take advantage of his storage space and let their wine ferment in his back shop. His customers buy wine-making kits from him, which aren’t taxable because they’re classified as food, and then pay him a fee for storage and use of equipment.

He said the customers spread the yeast themselves which allows the fermentation to begin and he doesn’t touch the kit once this process has started. Patton said he has a permit from the federal government allowing him to ferment-on-premise, but he’s unsure how much weight this holds against provincial legislation.

Patton said he provides the service of in-store winemaking to his customers because many of them are elderly or don’t have the storage area for the large jugs involved for fermentation.

“If this legislation is successful, it will cost me two employees,” he said. “We are not hurting anyone. It’s been proven again and again that we are not hurting liquor store sales.”

In-store winemaking is common in other provinces, such as Ontario, New Brunswick and P.E.I ., but he believes Nova Scotia is greedy and wants the taxes from the product currently considered a food product, not alcohol.

The legislation has passed second reading legislature and is now in the hands of the legislative amendments committee, which is chaired by Pictou Centre MLA Ross Landry.
Landry said his committee makes recommendations on any changes to a law before it returns to the house and he expects the issue to be addressed again by legislative members in the near future.

Landry said as an MLA, he is concerned about the safety and control of such an alcoholic product. He said people have been known to make beer and wine in the past and circulate it into the mainstream by selling at smaller businesses.

He said it will also help control binge drinking, which often happens with younger adults.

“Nova Scotia has a price set on liquor to help discourage this type of behaviour,” he said, adding it is similar to the tobacco tax.

Liberal MLA Diane Whalen questioned the province’s motives in the legislature earlier this week.

“The reason they are doing this is because there is ambiguity in the law on this and the police haven’t been cracking down on the u-vints and the brew-on-premises stores, or perhaps not uniformly doing so, and the minister wants to clarify that and make sure the NSLC, without any bother to the police forces, can circumvent them and go in and get an injunction,” she said. “I’m not a lawyer, but I call that quasi-police rights to the retail organization; I think it’s wrong.”

http://www.ngnews.ca/News/Local/2011-12 ... peration/1

[sleepyjamie]

NSLC makes me feel like we're living in Nazi Germany

[derek]

NSLC makes me feel like we're living in Nazi Germany

Oh, please... It's nothing like. It's more like a household with a petulant two-year-old.

[jason.loxton]

I wrote Landry and Dexter:

Mr. Landry:

I am a NS NDP supporter and voter, who is currently teaching for the year in Michigan. I am writing in regards to statements that you made to the the New Glasgow News (published Dec. 2nd, 2011).

The article states that:

"[Landry] said people have been known to make beer and wine in the past and circulate it into the mainstream by selling at smaller businesses. He said it will also help control binge drinking, which often happens with younger adults."

In addition to be a long term NDP supporter, I have homebrewed for the past twelve or so years. I began in British Columbia, and started out on premises brewing, since I did not have room in my basement apartment. Despite a passion for homebrewing, I am all too aware of the devastating impact that alcoholism can have on families and communities. Both my uncle and my mother have struggled with alcoholism for most of their lives, and my mother has lived and begged on the streets of Victoria for the past two decades. As such, your clams that the proposed legislation was designed to address alcohol abuse hit a nerve. If it did this, I would support it, however, I am *extremely dubious* that this would be the legislation's effect (or indeed its true intention).

In Nova Scotia, one may currenty freely purchase home brewing supplies from numerous speciality stores, as well as major grocery chains such as the Superstore and Sobeys. There are, to the best of my knowledge, no efforts made to control the purchase of these goods. The legislation as proposed does not target home brewing, but only the provision of space and equipment to individuals lacking these things. I do not know if you home brew, but it requires a fairly large amount of room, specialized equiptment (for high-quality production), and a clean and temperature controlled space. Many people, people who are currently and will remain legally allowed to home brew if this legislation passes, lack those facilities. As far as I can tell, all this is legislation serves to do is penalize those who lack either an appropriate space or the financial ability to purchase expensive equipment.

As a research scientist, I live by data. You make it very clear claims about the expected outcome of the legislation, claims that given the existence of very similar jurisdictions that allow on premise brewing should be very easily answerable. Could you please provide references to support your claims that:

1) That banning on premise brewing would discourage binge drinking, in particular among youth. (Do you have data on the demographic home brewing on or off premises?)
2) That banning on premise brewing would reduce illegal production and commercial distribution of wine and beer (and indeed that there is in fact a widespread problem with such illegal commercial distribution that needs addressing in the first place)

The legislation you propose will inconvenience individuals who are simply doing in rented space what they may legally do at home. It will also cost jobs in a community that needs every job that it can get. If you cannot reply with data to support your justifications for this action, I will assume that you cannot justify your actions. If so, please consider my vote a vote lost to the NDP.

Jason Loxton

[HotBreak]

Just another step along the path towards government control and regulation of everything..... This is the same mentality that argues homebrewing should be illegal. Given enough time, these same people will be trying to legislate our hobby into oblivion. Everyone here should be writing their MLAs expressing their lack of support for this.

[KMcK]

Actually, I think society is going the other way but this is an example of regulators desperately trying to hold on to what ever they still can control, despite having fewer and fewer defensible reasons for doing so.

[ratchet]

I just hope that they (the NSLC) don't succed.

[papercrane]

The text of the amendment if anyone is interested:
http://nslegislature.ca/legc/bills/61st ... d/b120.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Diane Whalen is opposing the amendment since it gives "quasi-police rights to a retail organization", she has her own amendment that would allow the NSLC to issue permits to brew on premise operations, its a private member bill so its probably dead in the water though.

[KMcK]

Diane Whalen is opposing the amendment since it gives "quasi-police rights to a retail organization", she has her own amendment that would allow the NSLC to issue permits to brew on premise operations, its a private member bill so its probably dead in the water though.

Remind her of this whenever the Liberals next get into power. Or, better yet, dig up some old example of the NDP criticizing this sort of thing when they were in opposition.

[papercrane]

Remind her of this whenever the Liberals next get into power. Or, better yet, dig up some old example of the NDP criticizing this sort of thing when they were in opposition.

Just was browsing through her legislative history and it looks like its a pet issue of hers. This is the third time she's brought forward an amendment to allow brew on premise, maybe she's a homebrewer?

[KMcK]

We've discussed this ad nauseam before and concluded that home brewers and on premise brewers are not (for the most part) the same people. I fear that allowing brew on premise will lead to new taxation that home brewing will somehow get tangled up in.

[akr71]

We've discussed this ad nauseam before and concluded that home brewers and on premise brewers are not (for the most part) the same people. I fear that allowing brew on premise will lead to new taxation that home brewing will somehow get tangled up in.

Especially since our ingredients are already HST free, since its considered groceries.

However, my first experience with homebrew was at a BOP, but it was a little more sophisticated than most - rather than kit-n-kilo dumped in a fermenter, this one had a bunch of kettles and you went in a brewed up a partial mash. That always struck me as a great idea for a small business... however, if I decided to do that I have the option that most of you do not - I can cross the marsh into NB and setup shop there, where it is already legal.

[benwedge]

maybe she's a homebrewer?

Probably an alcoholic. Didn't you read the article?

[Graham.C]

We've discussed this ad nauseam before and concluded that home brewers and on premise brewers are not (for the most part) the same people. I fear that allowing brew on premise will lead to new taxation that home brewing will somehow get tangled up in.

Especially since our ingredients are already HST free, since its considered groceries.

However, my first experience with homebrew was at a BOP, but it was a little more sophisticated than most - rather than kit-n-kilo dumped in a fermenter, this one had a bunch of kettles and you went in a brewed up a partial mash. That always struck me as a great idea for a small business... however, if I decided to do that I have the option that most of you do not - I can cross the marsh into NB and setup shop there, where it is already legal.

Does anyone know what the rules around a co-op set up for a club/group are for non-commercial purposes? In NB or NS? Essentially a group brew, but something a bit larger and maybe use 'club' equipment? Probably too expensive to set up, but it was a passing thought.

[papercrane]

Does anyone know what the rules around a co-op set up for a club/group are for non-commercial purposes? In NB or NS? Essentially a group brew, but something a bit larger and maybe use 'club' equipment? Probably too expensive to set up, but it was a passing thought.

I think that until you add yeast its just a malt beverage and outside of the liquor act, maybe some food safety regulations that might apply though.

Edit: I was curious and was looking through the list of NSLC permits and noticed there is one for selling beer kits to the public, maybe that's what a club brew would have to go under?

[derek]

We've discussed this ad nauseam before and concluded that home brewers and on premise brewers are not (for the most part) the same people. I fear that allowing brew on premise will lead to new taxation that home brewing will somehow get tangled up in.

They're not the same people - but my experience is that a significant number of Ontario homebrewers came to homebrewing via brew-on-premise.

I was thinking about the possibility of taxing home-brew, too, and decided that it's not something to worry about. I think that if they start taxing us on the production, they will have to let us actually sell the product - and they _definitely_ don't want that.

[mr x]

Very good letter Jason. I'll be giving Landry a piece of my mind, hopefully in person.

I wonder if it's possible to find out who complained? FOI?

[mr x]

I heard a rumour up north that a certain giant food chain was behind this...

[mr x]

1.PNG

2.PNG

[mr x]

[bluenose]

I must be missing something... why would brew on premises bother Sobeys? They no longer sell homebrew kits in their stores.

[benwedge]

I must be missing something... why would brew on premises bother Sobeys? They no longer sell homebrew kits in their stores.

They're the landlord for many, many NSLC locations. They probably figure BOP = fewer store visits = fewer frivolous spending trips to the adjacent Sobey's, and now they're out $8000 a year or some trivial sum like that.

[mr x]

The dirtbaggery continues:

NEW GLASGOW - David Nowlan says he is being environmentally green and supporting local business when he makes his wine in the back shop of Water N' Wine.

But according the provincial government, he is also doing something illegal.

"Yeah, well I see a lot people talking on cell phones when they're driving," he said while he finished filling bottles with red wine at the New Glasgow business. "It's local, green, economical, the quality is excellent and so is the service."

Nowlan is just one of hundreds of customers of Water n' Wine in New Glasgow that use the business' service to brew their beer or ferment their wine on site rather than doing it at home.

The provincial government recently made amendments to the liquor control act that will give the Nova Scotia Liqour Corporation the right to impose injunctions on such businesses which it says will cut down on illegal sales of alcohol and binge drinking.

Nowlan said he used to make his wine at home after purchasing a kit in such places as Water N' Wine, but he found that doing in the store was much more convenient since their equipment is already sterilized and there is enough storage space to hold his order and many others.

"I don't get why the government is against this," he said. "It's a business and it's putting people to work."

The province's chief medical officer says any law that limits people's consumption to cheap alcohol is a good thing.

Dr. Robert Strang said when Nova Scotia's finance department asked his opinion on whether there should be amendments made to the Liqour Control Act that would specifically target U-Brews and U-Vines, he said he was in favour of such a change.

"It's technically illegal to brew beer or make wine to sell other than from the Nova Scotia Liqour Corporation," he said. "It's a small piece, but is one piece (of legislation) that we need to decrease the consumption of alcohol."

This argument doesn't fly with Charles Patton, who owns Water N' Wine in New Glasgow and expects to be affected the most the legislation when it comes into effect January 4, 2012.

"It's business as usual right now, right or wrong," said Patton shortly after the changes that make Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations' alcohol and gaming division, otherwise known as the NSLC, solely responsible for granting and enforcing liquor licenses in the province. Previously the Utility and Review Board was responsible for granting permanent liquor licenses while the province issued temporary ones.

Under the changes, Patton can continue to legally selling beer and wine making kits, but the NSLC can impose an injunction that could stop him from allowing people to brew their beer or ferment their wine on site.

Patton said he expects a visit from the NSLC in the future and when such an injunction is imposed he is ready to fight it, "all the way to the Supreme Court".

He argues that many of his clients are elderly or don't have the room in their homes to brew or ferment their own products. He said it is a service that he is providing that the provincial government doesn't like because it is not getting any revenue from it like it does from the NSLC.

Pictou East MLA Clarrie MacKinnon said he sees both sides of the argument and knows that Patton is a "good operator", but one bad operator somewhere else can spoil the brew for everyone.

"The operator in New Glasgow is a good person and a good operator, but there are potentially others that are not so good," he said. "You can get 30, 60, 90 bottles available at a cheap rate in large quantities at very low prices."

MacKinnon said the amendment to the act allows the issue to be dealt with in a cost-effective manner.

He said he is aware that other provinces have allowed legislation, but says from he has heard, it has caused more problems.

"In some provinces they have moved in that direction, but we are hearing reports that did open a can of worms on that side as well."

Lisa Murray, media relations spokesman with the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario, said there are currently 600 licensed to ferment on premise facilities in Ontario which are inspected similar to restaurants and bars. Ontario has regulated FOP facilities since 2000.

She said inspectors visit the facilities and make all of the paperwork is correct and that alcohol is not sold on the premises, among other things.

"Sometimes a suspension is issued or the licence is revoked on a business but it usually because of a paperwork issue or the labeling is not done properly," she said.

Murray said what a person does with the beer or wine after it leaves business is not the business owners responsibility.

"If a person decides to drink in a car or do something illegal with it, than becomes a policing issue. Our authority extends only to people that we license."

http://www.ngnews.ca/News/Local/2011-12 ... islation/1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[KMcK]

The province's chief medical officer says any law that limits people's consumption to cheap alcohol is a good thing.

Dr. Robert Strang said when Nova Scotia's finance department asked his opinion on whether there should be amendments made to the Liqour Control Act that would specifically target U-Brews and U-Vines, he said he was in favour of such a change.

"It's technically illegal to brew beer or make wine to sell other than from the Nova Scotia Liqour Corporation," he said. "It's a small piece, but is one piece (of legislation) that we need to decrease the consumption of alcohol."

The finance department is asking a medical doctor about the regulation of business. Is that really how we're governed?

(That was a rhetorical question. I've worked for the province and know how incompetent some departments are.)

[derek]

The dirtbaggery continues:

Pictou East MLA Clarrie MacKinnon said he sees both sides of the argument and knows that Patton is a "good operator", but one bad operator somewhere else can spoil the brew for everyone.
...
He said he is aware that other provinces have allowed legislation, but says from he has heard, it has caused more problems.
...
Ontario has regulated FOP facilities since 2000.

Before "one bad operator...can spoil the brew", doesn't there have to be a bad operator? They don't have any precedent!

Even one example of "it has caused more problems" would be a surprise.

Though I am interested that Ontario has regulated these since 2000, since it is well before that that they made them legal (or at least stopped prosecuting them). I moved from Ontario in 2000, and different friends had been operating two Wine Kitz FOPs for years already. So possibly they did feel there'd been some abuse that required regulation, but they certainly didn't try to close them down.