New data from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and a CBC News investigation suggest ongoing problems with country-of-origin signage in Canadian grocery stores. CBC also found questionable Canadian branding in some stores.

no comments (yet)

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here
13 comments in c/buycanadian@lemmy.ca view that post
[–] 1 point 1 year ago

I've been seeing this quite a bit. And there's no excuse.

It takes nothing to have your stock person check the label of the food they are putting out, and making sure it matches with the label the store has for that food. If it's wrong, reprint the label!

They have all the time in the world to put maple leafs on everything, but can't bother to be accurate?

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    I saw one store with yellow Canadian flags on stuff. Looked like they were signalling foreign product but Non USA. Deceptive, but still helpful once you realize the difference between the red leaves and the yellow ones

  • source
  • [–] 34 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Charge them with some form of fraud of even a light form of treason. Selling foriegn goods under the guise they are Canadian is unfair to true Canadian products and fucking disgusting from a national pride perspective.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    I've been saying for years that I'd vote for some random guy that ran on throttling and holding accountable grocery chains and telecoms. Nearly a decade ago I had a friend in Thailand with a full cell phone plan with unlimited data ect. for $8/month, why is it so insanely expensive here?!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

    We supplement rural infrastructure, Canada has a lot more than Thailand

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    That's the telecom's talking point. It's true to some extent, but why do Bell and Rogers keep making record profits every year?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Their goal is profit.

    If we wanted a non-profit we could lightly steer as a populace to ensure it's modern and safe while remaining its most affordable, we would have brought it in as an arms-length crown corp.

    We still can, if we wanted that, but we have to understand the realization of delayed or skipped maintenance on infrastructure and the huge costs we have to support to bring it back into line publicly if we do. The gov can't half-ass anything without blowback.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Canada has poor competition and oligarchy controls

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Yea that balloons municipal budgets to the point they nearly need to run a growth ponzi scheme where they need new suburban developments to pay for the maintenance of existing suburban developments, all well neglecting existing transit and density and making new density nearly illegal to build.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    People will eat it up unfortunately. I still see the Loblaws parking lot full of cars.

  • source
  • 7 comments in c/canada@lemmy.ca view that post
    [–] 29 points 1 year ago

    Sounds like criminal fraud to me.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Take away their license to operate in Canada. Seems seditious to me.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Next up: lobby group with ties to grocer oligopoly pushing to defund the cbc.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    How about if the label is inaccurate they have to give you the product for free. Shit would get fixed overnight.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Sec 6.1 of the SFCA:

    6 (1) It is prohibited for a person to manufacture, prepare, package, label, sell, import or advertise a food commodity in a manner that is false, misleading or deceptive or is likely to create an erroneous impression regarding its character, quality, value, quantity, composition, merit, safety or origin or the method of its manufacture or preparation.

    Penalties outlined in the act:

    39 (1) A person who contravenes a provision of this Act, other than sections 7 and 9, or a provision of the regulations — or fails to do anything the person was ordered to do by, or does anything the person was ordered not to do by, the Minister or an inspector under this Act other than subsection 32(1) — is guilty of an offence and is liable

    (a) on conviction on indictment, to a fine of not more than $5,000,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than two years or to both; or

    (b) on summary conviction, for a first offence, to a fine of not more than $250,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than six months or to both and, for a subsequent offence, to a fine of not more than $500,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than 18 months or to both.

  • source