D8

Stumble Upon

del.icio.us

Digg

Facebook

Print

Email

5 Comment(s)

Court changes will hurt citizens

To The Editor:

The recent comments by the Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench respecting the provincial government's plans to change the legal system by cancelling Small Claims Courts, by limiting Legal Aid and limiting Family Court social workers so those who can't otherwise afford justice will suffer, is not in the best interest of fair justice and such comments should be supported by all citizens.

The basis of our democratic system is justice for all.

The changes to be imposed by the present government are a means to limit the Canadian justice system for both the old and young, healthy and incapacitated and those with limited income.

It will cost more and further delay the hearing of matters which even under the present system see the courts crowded with long waiting periods. Why force people to wait longer or go to court unrepresented?

If you agree the proposed reduction in the legal system should not be implemented, contact your elected representatives or the premier to ask them to take the necessary action to have the present government change its position.

Eric L. Teed,

Past Chairman,

Canadian Bar Association,

National Legal Aid Committee,

Saint John

Liquor monopoly seen as 'good'

To The Editor:

Regarding "Roll back hike in wine prices," editorial, May 5, replacing provincial liquor control boards with privatized systems is not the answer.

Research has shown that privatization makes alcohol more available, leading to higher levels of consumption.

With increased consumption comes increases in alcohol-related harm, such as impaired driving deaths and injuries, other traumas and illnesses.

Government-controlled liquor corporations are responsible for establishing policies and controls around pricing, retail locations, hours of operations and other factors which promote the responsible distribution and sale of alcohol.

These factors all contribute to managing the availability of alcohol and thereby helping to control alcohol-related problems in society.

MADD Canada does not question the legal, responsible consumption of alcohol at moderate levels, but it must be acknowledged that over-consumption of alcohol has a major impact on public health and finances, and comes at a personal cost not only to the drinkers but to a great number of people around them.

Alcohol is no ordinary consumer product and should not be sold as one. Government control of alcohol sales is an effective means of managing alcohol-related harm.

Privatization carries a significant cost to society and is simply not worth the risk.

Andrew Murie,

Chief Executive Officer,

MADD Canada,

Oakville, Ont.

Wine price hike just a tax grab

To The Editor:

I wish to respond to the column "Wine pricing is transparent" from Christopher Evans, VP and Chief Financial Officer of Alcool NB Liquor (ANBL) in the Wednesday's Times & Transcript.

Apparently Mr. Evans was upset that an editorial opinion "Roll back hike in wine prices" on May 5 painted his organization in a bad light. His column was an attempt to justify the pricing policies of ANBL.

Mr. Evans went to great lengths trying to explain and justify the way in which this Crown corporation operates, even crowing that "We are quite proud of the fact NB Liquor has one of the highest 'net incomes as a percentage of sales' measures of all the liquor jurisdictions in the country."

He explained that the corporation gives $0.381 out of every sales dollar to the province and that in fiscal 2008 that translated into almost $145 million!

Sounds very impressive until you realize that the provincial government looks upon NB Liquor as a cash cow!

In fact at the previous budget in 2008, Finance Minister Victor Boudreau ordered NB Liquor to generate an extra $13 million for the province's coffers. We could assume that NB Liquor would look to trim costs and improve efficiencies to bring about this extra profit, but did they?

No, they just increased prices across the board so that the citizens of New Brunswick paid out this extra money. In other words, it was a poorly concealed tax grab!

Now the latest furor is over NB Liquor ordering its wine suppliers to increase their prices. Why? Obviously so they can generate even more profit from the increasing sales of wine to pass on to their masters, the provincial government, and they can hide behind the increases in price by saying that they are merely passing on the cost increases that the wine suppliers charge them. Underhanded? You bet! It's another tax grab from you and me!

Mr. Evans goes to great lengths to try and prove what a shining example he and his Crown corporation are, and how efficiently they operate and manage the sales and distribution of alcoholic beverages in New Brunswick. He almost dislocated his shoulder patting himself on the back, but of course if you have a total monopoly of a business in any given area, it's almost impossible to not make a handsome profit! I wonder how he'd manage in a business with major competitors, increasing rents, property taxes, higher labour costs, shrinking profit margins, increasing advertising costs etc.?

As the T&T editorial correctly states regarding NB Liquor, "Sadly, New Brunswickers are getting used to being gouged by their own corporation and seeing such moves that defy logic and standard good business practice. It's time to end the monopoly."

I agree.

Keith J. Tindale,

Shediac