The recent Supreme Court of Canada decision upholding New Brunswick’s law limiting the import of booze from Quebec is a huge victory for those who believe in regulation in the public interest. Unfortunately, the case is being reported as an attack on freedom because New Brunswickers won’t be able to cross the border to buy large quantities of cheap Quebec beer.
But the Supreme Court decision goes far beyond this minor issue. It goes to the heart of the debate about so-called “free trade.” I say so-called because modern free trade agreements are really about removing any barriers, not just tariffs, to trade.
The Ontario government intervened in the case on the side of New Brunswick with a brilliant statement of what was at stake. It said that if the New Brunswick law was overturned, “it would constitutionalize a particular economic philosophy that views unfettered trade as a supreme good to be facilitated, and government regulation of goods as an evil to be minimized.” The Supreme Court’s 9-0 decision in favour of New Brunswick is likely to stand for decades.
The decision provides powerful protection for provinces determined to protect the environment, health and other values. But the fact that it dealt with alcohol is particularly important. Governments put high taxes on alcohol mostly to raise more revenue. But there is another benefit: it reduces consumption and the carnage caused by over-drinking.
A study of BC’s minimum pricing legislation showed that just a 10 per cent increase in average minimum prices was “significantly associated” with a 32 per cent decline in alcohol-caused deaths and a nine per cent drop in alcohol-related hospital admissions.
People don’t like to talk about the harmful effects of alcohol, preferring to cite reports (sometimes paid for by the wine industry) that say drinking is good for you. That is understandable. People like to drink. But objective studies tell us there is no completely safe consumption level. And over-consumption is deadly and debilitating.
A recent study in the British medical journal The Lancet found that 38 per cent of 57,000 cases of early onset dementia were directly related to alcohol consumption. And these were just people who had been admitted to hospital for alcohol abuse. Previous studies have shown that even moderate drinking can impact brain health.
There is more and more evidence of the cancer-causing effects of alcohol. The Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs stated, “It is toxic, carcinogenic, [birth defect-causing]...”
Combined studies identify 60 diseases made worse by alcohol. Canadians drink 50 per cent more than the global average, with almost one in four (above age 15) engaged in dangerous binge drinking. The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health has declared it one of the greatest public health threats to the country.
Young people are especially vulnerable and relentlessly targeted. The alcohol industry spends billions worldwide every year persuading young people to drink. Six of the 10 largest players in the music sponsorship market are multinational booze companies. Given that alcohol is the major cause of early death for young people due to alcohol-related car accidents, violence, and disease, a counter campaign of similar scope seems desperately needed.
The Supreme Court decision preserved the right of provinces to use pricing to decrease consumption. Now all they have to do is to get serious about using it.
Murray Dobbin is a Powell River freelance writer and social commentator.
