Guest column: Eliminate 'abusive practices' within food supply chain

[ad_1]

Letters Editorials

Published Jun 23, 2023 • Last updated 37 minutes ago • 3 minute read

From gas to groceries and everything in between, the global chaos we are experiencing is making itself felt here at home. Photo by illustration /Getty Images

Many households are currently grappling with the rising cost of living.

According to a report by Community Food Centres Canada, the poverty rate among working-age single adults in Canada is three times higher than the national average.

Alarmingly, nearly a quarter of working single adults live below the poverty line. This concerning statistic indicates a significant portion of the population is facing financial hardship. Many Canadians are personally experiencing or know someone who is struggling compared to just a year ago.

The increasing expenses of shelter and food, which are fundamental necessities of life, are placing a significant financial burden on Canadians.

Approximately 45 per cent of mortgage holders have variable rates, directly impacted by the Bank of Canada’s efforts to combat inflation. For instance, if an individual has a $300,000 mortgage spread over 25 years, they are currently paying over $7,000 annually just to maintain their home.

As more Canadians renew their mortgages, the number of individuals experiencing increased mortgage payments will inevitably rise. Furthermore, rents across the country are also on the rise.

These escalating costs create a substantial financial burden. In terms of grocery expenses, purchasing the same quantity of food as compared to the previous year would require an average of over $1,100 more. Consequently, individuals would need to allocate over $8,000 to maintain the same quality of life.

Given the difficulty in reducing shelter expenses — unless through relocation or shared accommodations — many Canadians are forced to cut back on their food expenditures.

Despite inflation, most Canadians are spending less on food. This shift is so significant many are quick to blame food companies. There is a growing sentiment food should be free or food prices should be regulated, which is understandable.

As faith in the capitalistic nature of our food economy diminishes, some individuals even propose imposing windfall taxes to discourage companies from excessive profits.

However, while these ideas may be intriguing, they are likely to lead to even worse scenarios for Canadians.

Some Canadians, academics and political leaders have lost sight of the primary purpose of food companies. These companies must generate profits in order to fulfill their mission and continue operating. Profit generation is essential.

The debate surrounding how much profit food companies should be permitted to generate has been intensely discussed. Striking the delicate balance between profit-making and maintaining a food-secure market is unique to the food sector.

Food companies are established to leverage the advantages that size and expertise bring, primarily to enhance efficiency on a large scale. Not everyone has the ability to hunt, fish, cook, process and so on. While it may be theoretically possible for everyone to engage in these activities, efficiency is not guaranteed.

The concept of the experience curve aptly demonstrates that as a food company expands, it accumulates greater experience and achieves improved performance, particularly in terms of cost-effectiveness.

By relying on food companies with an innovative mindset, food systems can enhance their resilience, a perspective that many Canadians have overlooked.

However, numerous market failures have been observed over the years, encompassing issues such as manipulation of bread prices, imposition of “black-out” periods, exploitation of low-paid employees, timing of corporate bonuses, exercise of supply chain bullying by certain grocers and remarkable volatility of food prices.

While the proposition of making food free or implementing a windfall tax may seem tempting, it is unlikely to address any of these problems. Instead, a more robust and authoritative Competition Bureau, in conjunction with the establishment of a Grocer Code of Conduct, holds greater potential for success in enhancing accountability.

While challenges will inevitably persist, elimination of abusive practices within the supply chain and towards consumers is certain to contribute to their mitigation.

And abuse can be quite real for consumers. For instance, Loblaws recently implemented receipt verification in numerous stores across the country without providing a rationale for this decision.

In contrast, Costco has been practicing receipt verification for several years as a means of validating memberships. However, it is worth noting Costco’s approach differs, as they verify receipts for all customers.

Randomly inspecting grocery receipts as customers exit stores is not conducive to fostering a social contract that can build trust between Canadians and the food industry.

Sylvain Charlebois is a professor and senior director of the Agri-Food analytics lab at Dalhousie University.

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notifications—you will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.