Letters: Google's Right to Squeeze
February 23, 2024Welcome to Letters from CAMP, a newsletter on anti-monopoly activity in Canada and abroad, brought to you by the Canadian Anti-Monopoly Project. In this installment we have:
Now let’s dive in.
Google Launches Charter Challenge in Response to Bureau LawsuitSurprising few, Google fired back this week against the Competition Bureau’s lawsuit, denying allegations of abusing its market power in the online advertising business. Focusing on Google’s ad tech dominance, the Bureau suit alleges that the company unlawfully tied together its services to stifle competition and inflate costs and used predatory tactics to drive competitors out of the market. In its response, Google is playing defense on multiple fronts. Not only does it deny having a "substantial degree of market power," let alone abusing it, but Google is also challenging the constitutionality of the proposed financial penalties, calling them an affront to Google’s rights and "contrary to the public interest." The Bureau’s case makes use of Canada’s strengthened competition law, which raised the maximum fine for abuses of dominance above $15 million, a rounding error for a company like Google, to a maximum of 3% of annual global revenue. While Google argues that competition in digital advertising is alive and well, its control over Canada’s ad market suggests otherwise. The Bureau’s investigation has found that Google owns four of the largest ad tech services in the country, giving it an overwhelming market share. Google’s counterargument—claiming the Bureau has misdefined the market—follows a familiar Big Tech playbook: reframe the issue, challenge the legal process, and outlast cash-strapped regulators in court. This case isn’t just about Google. It’s a litmus test for Canada’s new era of competition enforcement. If meaningful fines, passed unanimously by federal lawmakers, are deemed unconstitutional, the largest corporations on the planet will go back to paying parking tickets for potentially billions of dollars of harms and ill-gotten gains. 📚What We’re Reading📚
Canadian Conservatives Pledge to ‘Go Huge’ on Open BankingWith an election on the horizon, Canada’s Conservatives are making a big bet on open banking, pledging to fast-track reforms that would allow fintech startups to compete with Canada’s Big Five banks if elected. Open banking, which makes it easier for Canadians to switch banks, is currently stuck in limbo, delayed by political gridlock and pushback from industry incumbents. The Liberal government had planned to roll out a regulatory framework by 2026, but those efforts have stalled. Now, Conservatives say they’ll be ready to move quickly to break open Canada’s banking sector if they win power. While the focus on tackling Canada’s banking oligopoly from Conservatives is welcome, open banking is just one step needed to improve competition in the financial sector. Strong enforcement of competition laws, fair access to financial infrastructure, and breaking the big bank’s hold on payment services are all part of the anti-monopoly equation. A more competitive, efficient, and dynamic financial system is key to building a more resilient Canadian economy. Whichever party forms the next federal government must be up to the task. 📰 CAMP in the News 📰
Competition Bureau Targets AI-Powered Rent Price FixingIn a move that could provide some relief for renters, the Competition Bureau has launched an investigation into whether AI-driven rent pricing software is allowing landlords to coordinate housing price hikes. This investigation mirrors a similar U.S. antitrust lawsuit, alleging that landlords used RealPage’s YieldStar software to share sensitive pricing data and push rents higher across markets. For renters already struggling with record-high costs, this could be a game-changer as policy makers work to turn the tide of Canada’s housing crisis. AI-driven pricing is often touted as a tool to make markets more efficient. In reality, it can just as easily be a covert form of collusion that keeps rents artificially high. If the Bureau finds wrongdoing, it could lead to not only legal consequences but also a broader push for legislation to ban the use of algorithmic pricing in housing markets. With housing affordability already at crisis levels, renters cannot be asked to bear the cost of collusion. If you have any monopoly tips or stories you'd like to share, drop us a line at hello@antimonopoly.ca
Follow CAMP on Twitter LinkedIn Instagram or Facebook |
Keldon Bester listed as Globe & Mail 2025 Changemaker
The Globe & Mail
CAMP’s Executive Director, Keldon Bester is listed in the Globe and Mail’s 20 emerging leaders reinventing how Canada does business. Once again, we put out the call for nominations from both the business community and across The Globe and Mail, searching for young entrepreneurs, academics, activists and other professionals devoted to making the world a better place. And we found them—paying gig drivers more fairly, giving a boost to Black entrepreneurs, providing safe spaces for Indigenous patients, making patent searches easier, helping break down Canada’s monopolies and more.
Letters: Competition on the Campaign Trail
February 16, 2024Welcome to Letters from CAMP, a newsletter on anti-monopoly activity in Canada and abroad, brought to you by the Canadian Anti-Monopoly Project. In this installment we have:
Now let’s dive in.
What are Liberal Leadership Candidates Saying on Competition?As the race for leadership of Canada’s Liberal party heats up, competition policy promises are starting to pop up on platforms. In the interest of saving you time, CAMP is providing our view on how candidates stack up on this important issue so far and what we hope to see in the future. To date, both Chrystia Freeland and Karina Gould have included commitments related to protecting Canadians from monopolies. In late January, Karina Gould promised to increase the powers of the Competition Bureau as part of her affordability plan, showing a welcome understanding of the harms of mergers and consolidation. Going even further, this week Chrystia Freeland laid out an ambitious commitment to overhaul the Competition Bureau and to break open vertically integrated grocery markets. As CAMP has shown, corporate concentration is endemic to the entire food system, but tackling concentrated power at the grocery aisle is an excellent start. The same cannot be said for Mark Carney, who has so far avoided making any promises on competition. While Carney’s 2022 book Value(s) included discussion of the importance of strong competition policy in a fair economy, that enthusiasm has yet to translate to policy commitments. Silence on the issue to date is notable given the predominance of affordability concerns for Canadians heading into the leadership race. Competition is not an abstract issue — Canadians feel it every time they pay sky-high grocery bills, fight telecom oligopolies for basic services, or see independent businesses struggle against corporate behemoths. With other candidates already staking claims on reforming competition law, we’re on the lookout for Carney to clarify what he’ll do to tackle Canada’s monopoly problem. With debates on the horizon, this will be an early test of whether anti-monopoly policy takes center stage—or is left as an afterthought in the fight for Canada’s economic future. 📚 What We’re Reading 📚
Wall Street and Big Tech’s Coup Against Consumer ProtectionThe Trump administration’s attack on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is rapidly escalating into an all-out war on financial oversight and consumer protection. Created in 2008 after the financial crisis, the agency is being dismantled by the powerful interests it was tasked with protecting Americans from: Big Money and Big Tech. Elon Musk and Trump’s Office of Management and Budget chief Russ Vought have already halted enforcement actions, litigation, and supervision. Nearly all probationary employees have been fired, and reports indicate a plan to purge 95% of the agency’s workforce. Meanwhile, the White House has even set up a tip line encouraging financial firms to report CFPB regulators who continue to enforce consumer protections. This is an unprecedented attack on an institution, but the agency isn’t going down quietly. On Friday, lawyers representing the agency’s staff union won a temporary halt to the firings and the deletion of critical enforcement data. The fate of the CFPB is still uncertain, but the challenge is emblematic of the resistance that is emerging to the rapid fire dismantling of important institutions under the Trump administration. If the CFPB goes down, the consequences for American consumers are clear: expect more fraud, illegal foreclosures, predatory lending, and a free-for-all for financial giants who see customers as little more than revenue streams. The CFPB was one of the key consumer protection defenses for Americans—and now, it’s on life support. An Anti-Monopoly Future for DemocratsIf there’s one lesson to take from the situation in the U.S., it’s that anti-monopoly isn’t just good policy—it’s good politics. As American Economic Liberties Project’s executive director Nidhi Hegde lays out in Democracy Journal, corporate concentration is at the root of affordability crises, wage stagnation, and political instability. Fighting monopolies isn’t just an economic stance—it’s a way to rebuild trust in our democracies. The Biden administration’s anti-monopoly enforcers—like Lina Khan at the FTC and Jonathan Kanter at DOJ—delivered some of the biggest wins of his presidency: stopping mega-mergers, challenging Big Tech, and curbing corporate abuses. But Democrats often failed to frame these victories as part of a cohesive economic vision. Instead, they let corporate lobbying and media spin define their actions as “overreach.” Now, with the CFPB’s possible dismantling, the stakes couldn’t be clearer. The path forward for Democrats isn’t watering down their agenda to appease corporate donors—it’s embracing anti-monopoly as a core economic and political identity. The fight against corporate power is the fight for economic freedom. Will Democrats seize it, or will they let the forces of consolidation continue unchecked? If you have any monopoly tips or stories you'd like to share, drop us a line at hello@antimonopoly.ca
Follow CAMP on Twitter LinkedIn Instagram or Facebook |
Letters: Canada's Tariff Opportunity
February 9, 2024Welcome to Letters from CAMP, a newsletter on anti-monopoly activity in Canada and abroad, brought to you by the Canadian Anti-Monopoly Project. In this installment we have:
Now let’s dive in.
Success in a Tariff World Means Tackling MonopoliesWhat a difference a week makes. Just days after Trump’s tariff threat and down to the wire 30 day pause, Canada is contending with an entirely different economic reality. Canadians’ perception of our southern neighbour has undergone a fundamental shift, leading to calls to boycott American companies and providing a stark reminder of just how dependent we are on foreign firms. Canadians now understand the need to act to make our economy more independent from an increasingly erratic superpower. This is a monopoly problem (or monopsony, if you wanted to be pedantic). By taking the path of least resistance, the U.S. became THE buyer for the Canadian economy. Now, Canada is learning the lesson that so many businesses dependent on massive corporations have: we are not in charge. While this new economic reality is nothing to celebrate, it does present an opportunity to shake loose the thinking that has held a grip on Canadian policy makers for decades and to finally tackle Canada’s monopoly problem. Building a more dynamic and resilient economy means tackling our domestic monopolies at home while mitigating our dependence on monopolies from abroad. Foundational markets key to our economic success - banking, transportation, telecommunications - are locked up by homegrown oligopolies. At the same time, digital markets are controlled by foreign giants increasingly testing the boundaries of our sovereignty. Markets that work for everyday Canadians, not monopolies, must be a top priority in this new economic reality. The economic and policy logic that has dominated Canada for decades is not the answer to the challenges we face today. A program that diverges from our pro-monopoly past is necessary to create a Canadian economy that can be resilient and successful in this new era of uncertainty. Crisis in Consolidated Markets Send U.S. Egg Prices SoaringEgg prices in the U.S. have hit record highs as a devastating avian flu outbreak collides with the realities of a hyper-consolidated industry. Over 20 million chickens were wiped out last quarter, sending wholesale egg prices soaring to over $8.85 USD per dozen in states like California. What makes this crisis worse is the structure of the U.S. egg market. Unlike Canada, where supply management has created a relatively more diverse market of smaller producers, the American egg industry is dominated by a handful of mega-producers like Cal-Maine and Rose Acre Farms, each managing millions of birds. When a single farm is infected, the results are mass culling and mass disruption—removing millions of eggs per day from the market. In contrast, Canada’s smaller, distributed farm model has helped keep egg prices stable despite similar disease pressures. This system prevents the kind of market-wide shock seen in the U.S., proving that strong regulation that supports diverse markets creates more resilient supply chains in times of crisis. The lesson here is clear: bigger isn’t always better when it comes to essential goods. The more concentrated an industry becomes, the more vulnerable it is to disruption—and the higher the costs consumers pay when things go wrong. Big Tech and Big Brother: When Platforms Enable DictatorsTech giants like Apple and Twitter/X have long claimed they defend free speech, but their actions tell a different story. In a blistering op-ed, Russian opposition figures Vladimir Kara-Murza, Yulia Navalnaya, and Ilya Yashin laid out how Big Tech companies have caved to authoritarian regimes by complying with censorship laws. Apple, for instance, removed dozens of independent media apps and VPN services from its Russian App Store—effectively handing control of information flow to the Kremlin. Meanwhile, in the U.S., Elon Musk’s Twitter/X has given us a masterclass in what government-driven censorship actually looks like. As Techdirt reports, Musk—who now holds a special government role—used his dual status as a government official and private platform owner to suppress speech critical of his administration. His actions included labeling criticism as "criminal" and having posts removed—exactly the kind of government interference in speech that First Amendment advocates claim to oppose. These cases expose the double standard in how “free speech” absolutists operate. While they rail against government interference in content moderation, they’re notably silent when corporate-owned platforms actively enable state repression. The reality is that Big Tech isn’t neutral—it makes choices that shape democracy, free expression, and power dynamics worldwide. If you have any monopoly tips or stories you'd like to share, drop us a line at hello@antimonopoly.ca
Follow CAMP on Twitter LinkedIn Instagram or Facebook |
Letters: A Brief Look Back
February 2, 2024Welcome to Letters from CAMP, a newsletter on anti-monopoly activity in Canada and abroad, brought to you by the Canadian Anti-Monopoly Project. In this installment we have:
Now let’s dive in.
CAMP’s 2024 Annual Highlights: Turning the Tide on MonopolyAs 2025 roars into gear, we’re taking a moment at CAMP to look back on what we’ve accomplished in the past year. Looking back, it’s clear that competition law in Canada has undergone a seismic shift. The passage of Bill C-59 brought a second wave of sweeping reforms, overturning the law that had originally been written by the very companies it was intended to police. The past year has shown that real change is possible when policymakers recognize the cost of monopoly power—not just in higher prices, but in the erosion of innovation, worker rights, and the quality of our democracy. Along with leading the competition policy conversation, CAMP also authored insightful reports that put the spotlight on some of the most harmful monopolies in the Canadian economy. In From Plow to Pantry, CAMP laid out how the consolidation of Canada’s food system extends far beyond the grocery shelves, raising prices for consumers and harming producers. Similarly, in The Private Equity Playbook, CAMP fellow Rachel Wasserman showed how buyout private equity has been silently rolling up once fragmented and competitive markets at the expense of all Canadians. While it’s important to recognize wins, the real work lies ahead of us. Canada, like many countries, is headed for a year of unprecedented economic uncertainty. Tackling monopolies at home and abroad will be a part of navigating that uncertainty, but the next win will be even more hard fought. We’re up to the challenge, and we hope you are as well. 📚 What We’re Reading 📚
Lawyers Warn Clients of Tougher Test for Private Equity AcquisitionsPrivate equity firms that have long amassed market power through serial acquisitions are now on the back foot thanks to Canada’s reformed competition laws. As highlighted in law firm McCarthy Tétrault’s 2025 Private Equity Outlook, the new rules, and in particular the structural presumption against mergers in already concentrated markets, means tougher scrutiny for private equity acquisitions. In the firms own words, private equity firms “find themselves facing a steeper hill to climb when faced with the [Competition] Bureau in 2025.” The implications for private equity in Canada are significant. For years, firms have used roll-up acquisitions, systematically acquiring smaller competitors to consolidate control over a market, without triggering alarms. Now, the cumulative impact of these deals will face tougher regulatory examination, making it harder to become dominant in industries like veterinary clinics, funeral homes, and food service. While the real test of the law will be in the years to come, this legal guidance shows that Canada’s competition policy turning point is beginning to take hold. As McCarthy Tétrault notes, this policy is already reshaping acquisition strategies, with financial firms reassessing their long-standing playbook for evading much-needed scrutiny. Lina Khan’s Last Week as Groundbreaking FTC ChairThis week marked the end of the four year tenure of U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chair Lina Khan, capping off one of the most important periods in the agency’s century long history. Khan’s tenure was defined by an unapologetic commitment to reviving antitrust enforcement and a shift in how policy makers think about competition and monopoly. Khan’s FTC took on fights previous enforcers shied away from, showing that Americans can and should be protected from even the most powerful corporations. Under her leadership, the agency banned noncompete clauses, freeing millions of workers from restrictive contracts that locked them into jobs with artificially suppressed wages. She defended American’s access to affordable groceries, leading a challenge to the $24 billion Kroger-Albertsons grocery merger, easily one of the most significant antitrust victories in years. Along with Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter, Khan spearheaded a comprehensive overhaul of rules of merger enforcement, strengthening the standards for how regulators evaluate corporate consolidation. But the biggest indicator of Khan’s success in the role? The constant vitriol hurled at her from the corporate masters of the universe. During her term, the Wall Street Journal penned a record-breaking 124 op-eds attempting to discredit her work at the agency. Khan’s impact will be felt long after she leaves office. The real question now is whether her successors will carry forward the fight or retreat under pressure from corporate titans. Her legacy is a reminder that competition policy isn’t just about economic theory—it’s about power, people, and protecting the public interest. If you have any monopoly tips or stories you'd like to share, drop us a line at hello@antimonopoly.ca
Follow CAMP on Twitter LinkedIn Instagram or Facebook |
The federal government empowers an oligopoly
The Globe & Mail
On January 14, the Honourable Anita Anand, Minister of Transport and Internal Trade, announced the Government of Canada approval of the acquisition of Viterra Limited by global agri-business Bunge Global SA. Through this action the federal government has ignored the critical concerns of several organizations, including farm groups from across the country, underscoring the continued concentration in the grains sector.
The Canadian Anti-Monopoly Project released this statement on hearing of the merger approval:
“The government’s approval of the Bunge-Viterra takeover is a loss for grain farmers that depend on competitive markets to get a fair deal for the fruits of their labour,” said Keldon Bester, Executive Director of CAMP. “The need to place firewalls around Bunge’s ownership of G3 makes it clear that the transaction creates an ongoing conflict of interest at the expense of Canada’s grain farmers. The approval of Bunge-Viterra continues the march of consolidation at all levels of Canada’s food system that has left producers and shoppers with fewer options and less competition in an environment of steadily rising prices.”