Article content continued

A New Brunswick man learned this the hard way and his case will be heard in front of the country’s highest court Dec. 6-7.

In 2012, the RCMP arrested Gerard Comeau on his return to New Brunswick after he had bought alcohol in Quebec.

He was fined for violating New Brunswick law, which limits the amount of booze that can be brought into the province from elsewhere in Canada.

Comeau contested the ticket, arguing Sec. 121 of the Constitution Act, 1867, mandates that all Canadian goods be admitted freely across the country.

His lawyers argued the fathers of Confederation wanted a single market for all products made in Canada.

The Ipsos poll suggested about 25 per cent of Canadians heard about the Comeau case, and 78 per cent of respondents said the New Brunswick man should win.

Eighty-four per cent of respondents said Canadians should be permitted to order wine from any winery in the country, while 78 per cent said they should be allowed to bring any amount of wine or beer purchased in one province into another province.

Fewer than 15 per cent of respondents said they strongly agreed or somewhat agreed alcohol monopolies should be maintained.

Howard Anglin, executive director of the Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF), said provinces continue to enforce “prohibition-era” laws on alcohol because of inertia and fear of change.

The CCF is a charity that raised money to fund the legal team defending Comeau. Anglin said provincial governments can continue to receive the same revenues from alcohol by taxing beer and liquor sales as opposed to running liquor stores.