Earlier this year, the federal government announced that it would eliminate funding for consumer associations across the country, representing a savings of $5 million.

And yet, after cutting the program, Minister of Industry committed to finding a way to ensure that civil society organizations have access to funding. However, the budget announced today includes no funding for consumer associations.

“In the end, consumers are the ones who will pay the price,” says Christian Corbeil, general manager of Option consommateurs. “Large corporations will have free reign to propose policies to elected officials that serve their own interests, without a watchdog to ensure that consumers get their money’s worth.”

From rising grocery costs to hidden fees on phone bills, to difficulty obtaining refunds for cancelled flights, bank fraud and greenwashing, consumer associations in Ottawa defend citizens on many fronts.

“Without the resources to do our work and advocate for the sustainability or safety of consumer products, it is people’s health and well-being that will suffer,” explains Cori Ferguson, executive director of the Consumers Council of Canada.

The funding program eliminated earlier this year helped consumer associations make gains on electronic devices and appliance repairability, the regulation of tip prompts and clearer price displays in grocery stores, expertise which will undoubtedly be lost.

“At a time when Canadians are struggling with affordability, consumers deserve a strong, independent voice in the decisions that affect their lives. Without meaningful support for consumer advocacy, industry interests risk overshadowing the public interest. This budget represents a missed opportunity to ensure that consumers have a seat at the table,” says Tahira Dawood, Acting General Counsel at the Public Interest Advocacy Centre.

Without support from Ottawa, consumer associations in Canada may have to significantly scale back their activities or even close their doors.

Signatory organizations

Option consommateurs

Consumers Council of Canada

Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC)

Forum for Research and Policy in Communications

Consumer’s Association of Canada (CAC) Manitoba

Car help Canada

Canadian Anti-Monopoly Project (CAMP)

Automobile Protection Association (APA)

Fashion Takes Action

Union des consommateurs

Équiterre

Quebec Environmental Law Centre (CQDE)

Coalition des associations de consommateurs du Québec (CACQ)

-30-

The post Federal Budget Leaves Consumers Behind appeared first on Public Interest Advocacy Centre.

In its letter to Committee Chair, the Honourable Karina Gould, and members of the Committee, PIAC reiterated its serious concerns about the elimination of the Office of Consumer Affairs (OCA) and the Canadian Consumer Protection Initiative (CCPI), and the potential consequences for consumer representation in Canada.

For 50 years, PIAC has advocated for the interests of Canadian consumers, particularly lower-income and vulnerable consumers. Through our legal and research work, including our regular participation in regulatory proceedings and government consultations, PIAC has worked to ensure that consumers have a meaningful voice in decisions affecting their rights.

Funding administered through OCA has supported important consumer research on issues such as communications affordability, privacy, broadband advertising, grocery competition and many other issues affecting consumers. These studies have informed PIAC’s advocacy and assisted us in presenting relevant evidence and recommendations that protect and advance consumer interests.

The loss of this funding threatens the ability of consumer organizations to continue this work. This would directly impact Canadians who would lose an important channel through which their concerns about affordability, access to essential services, privacy, unfair treatment and many other issues reach decisionmakers.

PIAC’s Key Recommendations

• Establish funding of at least $5 million annually for independent consumer organizations, indexed to inflation, beginning in 2027–28. Provide this funding on a stable basis through renewable five-year agreements.
• Prevent an interruption in funding after March 2027. Maintain the current OCA office or establish a clearly mandated and adequately resourced federal funding office, and provide bridge funding until the permanent arrangements are operational.
• Establish a formal framework for ongoing consultation and engagement with consumer organizations to ensure that consumer interests are consistently represented in federal policy and regulatory decision-making.

As new technologies, including artificial intelligence, create additional challenges for consumers, the need for research and effective consumer representation remains critical. We emphasize that while government regulators and enforcement agencies perform important functions, they do not replace the independent perspective that consumer advocacy organizations bring to policy development. PIAC urges the federal government to recognize the importance of consumer advocacy and ensure that organizations representing Canadians have the resources necessary to continue their work.

For the full letter, see here.

The post PIAC Calls for Sustainable Funding for Consumer Advocacy Groups appeared first on Public Interest Advocacy Centre.

Drawing on focus group findings, the report examines gaps in consumer awareness and provides a consumer-friendly overview of the Canadian customs system. It defines key terms, identifies the main participants in the customs clearance process and explains the role of the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) as the primary federal agency overseeing the customs regime. The report distinguishes between duties and fees collected by the CBSA and fees charged by customs brokers for their clearance services. It also explains relevant legislation and the obligations of consumers and retailers involved in international shipments.

“An online purchase that appears affordable can become considerably more expensive once applicable duties, taxes and brokerage fees are added,” said Tahira Dawood, PIAC’s Acting General Counsel. “Simplified, clear, and well-publicized practices related to the customs regime can play an instrumental role in reducing this information gap and enabling consumers to better understand the overall cost of their purchase.”

“As online shopping becomes increasingly popular among Canadians, it is critical that we understand the role of our customs system,” said Joshua Fichman-Goldberg, a report contributor and PIAC’s Public Interest Articling Fellow at the time the report was written. “According to our findings, consumers are confused about fees owed at customs and are surprised when additional sums may be owed upon shipment. Consumers deserve a clearer framework and better explanations from online platforms, retailers, federal government agencies and regulators who oversee the regime.”

The report provides a set of recommendations for federal departments and agencies to improve transparency and consumer understanding of Canada’s customs system. The report also recommends streamlining new digital customs clearance systems to reduce uncertainty for small retailers. PIAC’s research highlights the importance of the customs system beyond revenue collection for monitoring the safety and security of goods moving across borders. These concerns further underscore the need for more awareness of consumers’ rights and obligations when purchasing and shipping goods internationally.

A copy of the report, “Brokering a New Era of Consumer Education on Customs Duties and Customs Brokers” is available here. A French version of this report is available here.

For more information, please contact:

Tahira Dawood

Acting General Counsel

Public Interest Advocacy Centre

1-877-613-PIAC (7422) – tdawood@piac.ca

— 30 —

The post PIAC Report Highlights Gaps in Canadian Consumers’ Awareness of Customs Rules as Cross-Border Online Shopping Grows appeared first on Public Interest Advocacy Centre.

PIAC highlighted the challenges consumers face in comparing grocery prices and recognizing when they are getting less value for their money. While loyalty programs and member-only offers can provide savings, complicated conditions, digital requirements and data-sharing demands may put those savings out of reach for some shoppers. PIAC recommended that the Bureau examine the practical implications of retail pricing practices for consumers in the Canadian grocery market. That could be done with further consumer-centric research and analysis, including research involving lower-income and vulnerable consumers.

Personalized pricing may also allow retailers to charge more to consumers who have fewer alternatives. PIAC commented on how shrinkflation—smaller quantities for the same price—and skimpflation—lower quality for the same price—can make it harder to spot reductions in value and choose better alternatives. PIAC discussed how standardized unit pricing can help consumers compare products and package sizes, while emphasizing that it cannot, on its own, reveal reductions in product quality.

PIAC recommended the following:

• Require standardized unit pricing in stores and online: Packaged groceries should display both their selling price and their price per standard unit, such as per 100 grams. Comparable products should use the same measure so shoppers can easily compare value across package sizes. These requirements should cover regular, sale and member prices, as applicable.
• Make discounts and their conditions easier to understand: Member and non-member prices should appear side by side, with the conditions for receiving a discount immediately beside the offer. A member or targeted price should be presented as a conditional discount, separate from the generally available public price, rather than replacing it. This would give consumers a clear benchmark for assessing savings.
• Protect consumers’ personal information: Access to an advertised grocery price should not depend on consenting to marketing, third-party data sharing or other uses of personal information that are unnecessary to administer the discount. Where data collection is necessary, retailers should clearly explain what information they collect, how it will be used and shared, how long it will be retained for, and whether it will be used to select or calculate prices.
• Require clear notices for shrinkflation and material skimpflation: Where the quantity, volume and/or count of a familiar prepackaged grocery product decreases and its unit price increases, a clear notice should appear beside the shelf price and on the product’s online page. PIAC also asked for a more comprehensive disclosure requirement related to skimpflation that could be harder to detect by consumers.
• Protect consumers against unfair personalized and algorithmic pricing: Retailers should not be permitted to charge a consumer more than the public price, or more than otherwise comparable shoppers, because personal or behavioural data suggest that the consumer is willing to pay more or unlikely to switch stores.
• Strong oversight, redress and implementation: PIAC submitted that compliance should not depend on individual consumer complaints. Relevant governments and regulators should proactively monitor compliance and coordinate their efforts to ensure that the framework operates effectively.

For PIAC’s submission, and more details, see here.

The post PIAC calls for greater transparency—and fewer barriers to grocery savings appeared first on Public Interest Advocacy Centre.

This appeal raises important questions about consumer redress where a manufacturer is alleged to have known that a product contained a dangerous defect, including when consumers may recover economic losses in negligence.

The Ontario Court of Appeal found that the alleged diminished value of the unrepaired vehicles was not a recoverable loss. It also set aside the motion judge’s certification of the negligent design and manufacture claims because neither appellant had incurred a recoverable loss. As a result, the certification order was set aside.

PIAC’s intervention will bring a distinct consumer perspective to the issues before the Supreme Court of Canada. PIAC will focus on the importance of public safety and consumer protection, the imbalances in information and bargaining power between manufacturers and consumers, and the significant differences between manufacturer-consumer relationships and commercial arrangements involving sophisticated contracting parties. Consumers generally do not contract directly with manufacturers and often have less information and bargaining power.

PIAC will argue that limiting consumers’ recovery in this context creates an unacceptable moral hazard whereby consumers are left to bear the entire risk of real physical harm.

PIAC looks forward to assisting the Court on these important consumer protection issues. Watch this space and follow PIAC on our social media for more updates.

For more details, see here: Supreme Court of Canada case page

The post PIAC Granted Leave to Intervene in Supreme Court of Canada Appeal Concerning Alleged Dangerous Defects appeared first on Public Interest Advocacy Centre.

PIAC’s submission pointed to the underlying gaps that should be considered to have a more comprehensive national anti-fraud policy. PIAC also submitted that the measures being presently considered do not go far enough in terms of raising consumer awareness, as well as protecting against fraud. Consumer losses and liability are key issues that should be a central part of any anti-fraud strategy.

Importantly, PIAC noted that we need practical steps planned and executed to make any changes work, just peripheral discussion on these issues does not and cannot do much. Consumers have been suffering from fraud, particularly vulnerable consumers, including seniors with limited to no redress. Consumers in these cases are often left with considerable liabilities and/or losses that could in some cases jeopardize their entire life savings. It is about time for some clear and concrete action.

Last year in December 2025, PIAC appeared before the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Commerce and the Economy (BANC Committee) to discuss its views and concerns regarding Bill C-15, Division 16 (Bank Act, Consumer-targeted Fraud). The written brief submitted to the BANC Committee was sent with these comments.

See here for PIAC’s comments to the National Anti-Fraud Strategy consultation.

For PIAC’s Comments to the BANC Committee on Bill C-15, Division 16 (Bank Act, Consumer-targeted Fraud), see here.

The post PIAC Commented on the National Anti-Fraud Strategy appeared first on Public Interest Advocacy Centre.

“Consumer liability waivers remove the right of nearly all Canadians to seek appropriate legal redress when they are injured or even killed while skiing, hiking, ziplining, trampolining, rock climbing and nearly every other type of recreational activity,” said John Lawford, Special Counsel to PIAC and co-author of the report. “In my over twenty years of advocacy I have never seen such an egregious and unnecessary tilting of the playing field against consumers,” he added.

PIAC’s report details how the law in all of Canada’s ‘common law’ based provinces (with the notable exception of Québec) and territories allow companies offering recreational, sporting and tourism services to completely disclaim any legal liability and possible payment of damages or other compensation to their customers, by use of a signed waiver or even a posted notice, even if the company is negligent and even if it admits its own failure to follow safe practice.

The report outlines the long and twisted history of the liability waivers in Canadian law, the banning of such waivers in many other countries, including the United Kingdom, upon which Canadian ‘common law’ and many statutes are based, and possible reforms to both the law and the regulation of the main sporting, recreational and tourism industries to ensure appropriate consumer compensation for injuries and fatalities suffered in these sectors.

A copy of the report, “Consumer Liability Waivers – An Accident Waiting to Happen?”, is available from the PIAC website. A French translation of an abridged version of the report is in preparation and will be posted as soon as it is available.

For more information, please contact:

John Lawford
Special Counsel to PIAC
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
(613) 562-4002
jlawford@piac.ca

— 30 —

The post PIAC Report – Liability Waivers – An Accident Waiting to Happen? appeared first on Public Interest Advocacy Centre.

The post We Fight for That podcast, Episode 32 – The Big Fix appeared first on Public Interest Advocacy Centre.