Kingstonians are working hard to build a vibrant and
sustainable community, with economic growth, quality of life, and culture at
its core. Conflict between these
community goals can sometimes exist and work against the goal of
sustainability. This type of conflict can be seen in the sale and use of alcohol. Alcohol
sales contribute to the economy through local jobs and tourism, and through provincial
government revenue. They can
also contribute to a city’s cultural environment through arts and
entertainment. All of these
things together can have a positive effect on our community. However, the fact remains that alcohol is a
drug, and therefore not an ordinary commodity.
The sale and use of alcohol can also have a corresponding negative
impact on the local community by reducing quality of life and safety, and
increasing costs, e.g. public services.
There is a need to acknowledge this conflict and to balance the benefits
and costs of alcohol in society.
According to the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, the costs
attributable to alcohol in Canada total close to $15 billion for health care,
enforcement and lost productivity. In
Ontario alone costs total $5.3 billion. Despite the revenue generated by
alcohol sales in Ontario, alcohol-related costs including enforcement and
health care are significant. In a
comparison of direct alcohol-related revenue and costs in Ontario in 2002-2003,
the deficit totaled more than $456 million. In addition to enforcement costs, communities such as Kingston are burdened with other municipally funded services including fire,
ambulance, and public works.
An economically strong and vibrant city is built upon a sense of
community and a shared value for quality of life and wellbeing. To achieve this goal we must accurately
weigh the benefits and costs of our collective actions. As
one researcher in B.C. acknowledged, there is a need to maintain a balance
between consumer demand and economic development on the one hand, and
addressing public health and safety issues on the other. In
times of increasing health care costs, these facts should not be ignored. Carefully weighing the costs and benefits of
a substance known to have both positive and negative impacts can be a cost
effective way of reducing demands, often the most expensive demands, on our
health care system.