Some of the authors of the CCSA Report (that advocates much lower drinking guidelines) have documented connections to temperance organizations and strong anti-alcohol views which are out of step with most wine consumers and the general public. See the discussion below for why we say this.

We believe that it is inappropriate for individuals with a strong anti-alcohol agenda to be part of an advisory group such as CCSA that is tasked with providing unbiased liquor and health policy recommendations.

Connections to Movendi

Three of the authors of the CCSA Report disclosed connections to an organization named Movendi in the “Disclosure of Affiliations and Interests” document that was released with the Report. These three individuals are all part of the Canadian Institute for Substance Use Research (CISUR) which is located at the University of Victoria. The three are Tim Naimi (who is CISUR’s Director), Tim Stockwell (CISUR’s former Director) and Adam Sherk. 

Each of them disclosed that they were a “member of an independent group of academics who voluntarily provide their time to prepare research reports on different topics relating to alcohol and health”. Travel, accommodation and meals for the meetings of this group (which were recently held in Sweden and Iceland) are disclosed as being provided by Movendi International which is innocuously described as being “a Sweden-based international organization dedicated to promoting reduced alcohol use”.

While CCSA found that there was a potential conflict of interest here, they determined that it was of “low significance”. This conclusion seems dubious.

It is important to note that Movendi is not merely an organization “dedicated to promoting reduced alcohol use”. Movendi was originally created in the 19^th century as the “Independent Order of Good Templars”, a fraternal organization dedicated to promoting temperance, which campaigned strongly (and successfully) in favour of Prohibition.

You can read about its history on Wikipedia and on their own website. In an attempt to modernize its image, it later changed its name to the “International Organization of Good Templars” and then eventually to “Movendi International”.  Today, their website has removed most references to its original name and downplays its anti-alcohol roots.

However, the constitution of the organization still requires that members pledge themselves to a lifetime of abstinence from alcohol (and drugs). Indeed, the history section of their web site proudly states that the organization’s “dream” is that “the temperance cause really lies at the root of all social and political progression” … a rather stunning declaration when considered in light of other social and political issues.

The affiliations with Movendi appear to be very strong. In the list of scientific articles on the Movendi site under the section “Alcohol Or Health” (note the presumptive use of “Or” not “And”), Tim Stockwell and Tim Naimi are listed as co-authors of all six Movendi scientific reports that have been produced in the past 10 years, a level of involvement which appears to far exceed the CCSA’s statement that the involvement is “limited in duration and frequency”. 

These temperance connections have been the subject of criticism in two newspaper articles in Quebec, both published in Le Devoir.

Connections to CAPE Project

In addition, six of the authors of the CCSA Report are also named as Researchers on the Canadian Alcohol Policy Evaluation project which is coordinated by CISUR at the University of Victoria. Those six individuals are Tim Naimi, Tim Stockwell, Adam Sherk, Mark Asbridge, Kevin Shield, and Kara Thompson.

The CAPE project purports to provide “rigorous assessments of how well provincial, territorial and the federal government in Canada is implementing policies proven to reduce harm from alcohol use”. However, it is our position that the policies promoted by CAPE have not been proven to reduce harm, are extreme measures, and make little sense from a public policy perspective. 

This project has not received as much media attention as the CCSA Report. However, its recommendations would likely prove to be even more shocking for most Canadians as they reflect a strong anti-alcohol agenda. For example, the CAPE project advocates for the following:

• Increase minimum drinking age to 21, and restrict availability of alcohol to those under 25.
• Ban parents from allowing those under 21 from drinking in their own homes.
• Move back to a 100% government monopoly system for alcohol retail.
• Increase minimum retail level markups to at least 100% on all alcohol products, which would dramatically increase retail prices. 
• Reduce the number of alcohol retailers.
• Reduce the hours of sale for alcohol to 11 am to 8 pm.
• Prohibit alcohol takeout and home delivery.
• Introduce or increase the taxation of alcohol from small producers such as estate wineries and craft distilleries.
• Eliminate U-brews and U-vins.
• Restrict all alcohol advertising and marketing.
• Introduce warning labels on all alcohol products.
• Increase taxpayer funding for all of the recommended measures including funding for “monitoring” programs such as their own CAPE project.

It is likely not a coincidence that there is considerable overlap between the CAPE policy recommendations set out above and those contained in the various scientific papers created by Movendi and the CISUR authors. Both reflect a strong anti-alcohol agenda which is out of step with the values and approach of most Canadians. It is our view that the formulation of liquor policy should be balanced and thoughtful. We believe that it is inappropriate for individuals with a strong anti-alcohol agenda to be part of an advisory group such as CCSA that is tasked with providing unbiased liquor and health policy recommendations