A new policy directive released by the B.C. Liquor Control and Licensing Branch (LCLB) will ban dozens of liquor-serving establishments from hosting all-ages events.
The policy, which goes into effect on Jan. 15, was developed to stop minors from drinking before attending all-ages club and concert events, according to LCLB general manager Karen Ayers.
Before the change, venues like the Rickshaw in Vancouver were able to request temporary "de-licensing" for all-ages shows. As long as the alcohol was locked away, says Rickshaw owner David Duprey, minors could enjoy live performances at his venue every month.
Not anymore. "Minors attending these events have been found to be consuming liquor either prior to entering or outside the establishment during the course of the event," reads part of the policy, released on Nov. 27. "De-licensing for these types of events is no longer permitted."
"They're shutting us off because kids are drinking before they come to see a show," says Duprey -- a move he called "arbitrary" and "silly."
Venues with a "theatre" designation, such as the Orpheum and the Rio, will continue to be able to host minors. But the Rickshaw, which is designated as a "cabaret," will be impacted by the policy. Vancouver's Wise Hall, Venue and the Anza Club will also be limited to 19+ events.
Corinne Lea, owner and general manager of the Rio Theatre, says that although her business is not directly affected, she opposes the policy. In a statement released Monday, Lea said the change "will negatively affect live venues, youth culture, and the local music and entertainment industry in B.C."
"When young people attend a licensed venue, staff are trained to recognize signs of intoxication and ensure that young people are not sneaking alcohol inside," reads Lea's letter to the media. Last year, Lea campaigned against an LCLB policy that banned her business from screening films. "Now that they are excluded from cultural events at local venues, some of which they may have attended with parents, where will they go? Not likely somewhere with responsible business owners and staff concerned for their safety"
Duprey echoed Lea's concern about minors seeking unsafe alternatives to the Rickshaw.
"We have professional security guards. Their job is to make sure no outside alcohol comes in," he says. "It just means 18-year-olds will see music in illegal after-hours venues, where they're not going to have trained doormen."
The LCLB says there is no single event or venue that triggered the policy directive.
"The changes are a result of general concerns by local governments, parents and police," says Ayers, adding that police resources in Vancouver were being ineffectively used to supervise intoxicated minors. "I fully appreciate that this will have an impact on a small number of liquor primary nightclubs and bars, however the branch has a responsibility to act to protect public safety and the public interest."
Duprey called for independent oversight body so that affected businesses can launch a formal objection. "This decision was not vetted by anybody in the industry," says Duprey, an active member of Barwatch, a nightclub association which was not consulted by the LCLB. "They didn't take it to the stakeholders and say 'Hey, we've got a concern,' they just did it."
Sarah Berman is a freelance reporter based in Vancouver.





5
Login or register to post comments
Kreditanstalt
18 weeks ago
Authoritarianism.
"Minors attending these events have been found to be consuming liquor either prior to entering or outside the establishment during the course of the event..."
More laws. I have a novel idea. How about just letting people be responsible for their own behaviour? That would be refreshing...
alive
18 weeks ago
an ounce of prevention ....
I wonder if "Kreditanstalt'en" happens to make a living supplying nightsticks to the police?
Skywalker
18 weeks ago
Or...
...he sells booze and doesn't want to be inconvenienced in his business having to check if they are minors.
KDH
18 weeks ago
Unnecessary and doesn't change anything
This is odd. Here's why: If I want to use my backyard barn or community hall to hold an all ages dance party, there is nothing the government or the LCLB can do about it as the LCLB has no jurisdiction over venues without liquor licenses. Heck, I could hold an ecstasy-fueled all ages dance party all night and they couldn't touch my event as long as it complied with noise bylaws and I'm not dealing the drugs.
So in light of this I'm struggling to understand what the LCLB thinks they will achieve with this. All this is doing is disadvantaging licensed venues from getting into the market for all ages dances that non-licensed venues already have. This policy will not reduce the incidence of all age dance parties, but merely shift where these events occur. Meanwhile this unnecessary regulation just burdens the organizers of these events and the nightclub owners struggling to find business opportunities.
I'm having a hard time understanding what the hell was going through the minds of those who came up with this policy as it achieves absolutely nothing, while unnecessarily inconveniencing everyone.
Hakuin
18 weeks ago
S'right KDH
But it sure looks good to the hicks. Perhaps the only base the soon-to-be wiped out Socredlieberals have left is the bible thumping cretins that propelled their original godfather into power eons ago - long may Whackky rot!