Please be advised that this site is not affiliated with the Service Canada office.
It was created to provide general EI information only.
When it comes to lowering high grocery prices, Canadians know what to do. So does the Competition Bureau. Both understand that the solution to rising prices involves increasing competition through policy reform.
Unfortunately, though, our attention is currently diverted toward parliamentary wrangling with CEOs. So we’ve watched grocery industry executives appear before Parliament to explain themselves, only to have them clam up when things cut too close to the bone.
Those details were due in writing. The CEOs will also be back for another round of questioning about those plans in the near future, though they’re not likely to offer any more fulsome responses than they did in round one.
Canadian consumers are well aware of that. So the Competition Bureau asked them for their ideas, and they delivered.
Consumers also expressed concerns about large grocers gobbling up smaller ones, and about “shrinkflation”— the duplicitous practice of grocers reducing package size, but maintaining the same price.
Not-so-coincidentally, the bureau echoed Canadians’ concerns in a report released in June. Among its main recommendations, it advised governments to adopt policies that make it easier for international grocers to set up shop here, and for independent businesses to compete against the grocery giants.
The bureau also recommended the provinces limit property controls, which allow grocery giants to restrict real estate leasing to competitors, thereby reducing competition. And in an effort to eliminate shrinkflation, the bureau advised governments to consider harmonized unit pricing, which would require grocers to display the price of a product based on standard package size.
Finally, in response to Canadians’ concerns about large grocers swallowing smaller ones, the bureau noted the Competition Act limits its ability to intervene in mergers.
It expressed the same concern in a March report on competition policy, noting that “the Act’s merger review framework is weak,” and it therefore recommended legislative changes that would allow for greater premerger disclosure, including oral examinations under oath.
The Organization for Economic Development and Co-operation made a similar recommendation in 2016, saying it could “enhance transparency and openness in the policy-making process,” which is precisely what Canadians want.
Much like all of the bureau’s — and Canadians’ — recommendations, that will require, not more fruitless exchanges with CEOs, but fruitful policy change, at both the federal and provincial levels.
And as the bureau said in March, “now is the time … to put into place a more effective competition policy, one that works for all Canadians.”