But we can’t afford to support families with autistic children. Priorities.
I'm in complete agreement with the above.
BUT
I would say, I fail to understand why the previous government offered any incentives or guarantees to 'The Beer Store' to permit the loosening of a monopoly to which it has no right; and which would be illegal under competition laws
but for the enabling legislation passed to allow it.
I don't believe it was ever necessary to enter into the contract in question.
The only 'penalties' that I think might 'reasonably' be on the table would be to grocers who bid for the licenses to sell based on an understanding of how many would be in the market.
In such case, a partial refund would be in order.
***
That all said, I will come back to
@PinkLucy 's original statement, with which I agree. I think the opportunity to broaden choice is there by simply releasing all the outstanding licenses already agreed to, (another 200-300)
all at once, not charging for them either.
In addition, it is the gov't prerogative to loosen other restrictions on licensees such as selling only Ontario product or only wine priced at or above $10.95 a bottle. These changes can be made penalty-free.
I also expect that the Beer Store, in a hurry to redevelop many of its downtown properties, and unlikely to invest in a lot of replacement locations when their monopoly would end in 10 years anyway, might be open to cracking the downtown Toronto market a bit wider, a bit sooner, without penalty. Though that is only speculation on my part.
ie. no need to incur penalties in the process of giving more choice to consumers.