Inside the corporate battle over your pet’s health
CBC
CAMP fellow Rachel Wasserman, participates in the discussion about independent vet clinics are being gobbled up by multinational corporations and private equity in this episode of The Fifth Estate.
Letters: Rates of Return
January 18, 2026Welcome 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 instalment we have:
If you enjoy Letters, please considering sharing and supporting CAMP. Now let’s dive in.
CAMP to the CRTC: Don’t Back Down on Home Internet CompetitionInternet access is all but essential to everyday life, but Canadians continue to pay some of the highest pricesin the world for it. One reason is that the infrastructure for internet access, thousands of kilometres of fibre optic cables, exchange points, towers, and more, are expensive to build and maintain. Another reason is that the vast majority of it is owned by the Big 3 - Bell, Rogers and TELUS - who capture nearly 90% of the ISP market. Bad experiences with the telcos are as Canadian as maple syrup, and unlike the recent burst of competition we’ve seen in wireless, wireline prices remain stubbornly high. To counteract this, Canada’s telecom regulator, the CRTC, introduces competition into the market through its wholesale access system. The system requires the Big 3 to sell bandwidth in bulk to independent ISPs at regulated wholesale rates set by the CRTC. How aggressively independent ISPs can compete is a function of where the CRTC sets that wholesale rates, with lower rates allowing for lower prices. But over the holidays, the CRTC asked the industry and Canadians whether the wholesale rate should be increased. Unsurprisingly, CAMP had some thoughts to share. In our submission to the CRTC, CAMP argued that not only should the wholesale rate not increase, but that it should be brought down to allow for more intense competition. Until 2019, the market share for independent ISPs was growing steadily. But that growth has been replaced by steady decline and the roll up of independent ISPs after the CRTC flip-flopped on wholesale rates and created uncertainty for the entrepreneurs who were offering Canadians some competitive relief. To reverse this troubling trend, CAMP calls on the CRTC to do everything it can to bring wholesale rates down and provide certainty to those looking to build new competitors. CAMP is glad to be one of the few organizations fighting for the interests of consumers in front of the CRTC, and our submission in this proceeding is the preview of what will surely be an active year on the consumer protection front. 📰 CAMP in the News 📰
A Special Price, Just for YouThe days of price tags may be over as we move towards a world of highly personalized, down to the individual, pricing. This week, in a piece for the Walrus, SHIELD Institute managing director and CAMP Advisory Board member Vass Bednar writes that this world is already here. Recent work by Consumer Reports and Groundwork in the U.S. found Instacart prices could vary by as much as 23% between customers. This week, Google announced its “Universal Commerce Protocol” which will use Google’s vast trove of personal data to help retailers set and change prices dynamically, offer deals and discounts to close sales, and upsell consumers automatically and at scale. If you went into a store and the staff asked you for your income, five years of purchase history, and distance from home before giving you the price of a good you might be put off, but that’s where we’re headed when it comes to e-commerce. Companies will say they’re only using this to offer discounts, never to raise the price. But discounts and loyalty programs can also be weaponized. There’s nothing stopping companies from jacking up base prices so that “discounts” for things like using a specific payment method, setting up automatic renewal, or signing your data away become practically mandatory. CAMP’s already taken a stance on algorithmic price setting: it should be transparent for all customers, should not be based on sensitive data, and should not centralize pricing decisions across competitors. Pushback against these opaque and discriminatory prices is beginning. In Canada, the Manitoba Government has the practice in its sights for 2026 and Canada’s Competition Bureau is looking into its potential harms to competition. When markets work well, consumers get a fair deal. A key ingredient of working markets is the transparency that allows purchasers to weigh products and services against one another and drive competition. As the use of highly dynamic and personalized pricing explodes, we need to open up these black boxes to make sure Canadians aren’t being taken for a ride. 📚 What We’re Reading 📚
The Long March Against Google’s MonopoliesWhile Google scored serious antitrust wins in 2025, parallel challenges continue to emerge. Now that the U.S. DOJ made the case for the harms of Google’s decades long anticompetitive practices in online advertising, some of the victims are seeking restitution. A host of large online publishers including Vox Media, the Atlantic, Penske Media Group, and Advance Media Group (Condé Nast) are lining up to sue Google for its outsized piece of the online advertising pie. Regulators outside the U.S. remain active as well. The E.U. has ruled that Google abused its dominance in online advertising and a remedy is forthcoming, and the Competition Bureau is set to start its trial against Google next year. Google’s online advertising empire was built with what is a now textbook Big Tech strategy: claim its systems are neutral marketplaces, buy or shut out competitors, and become inescapable infrastructure for the market. Once dominance is achieved, the extraction begins; squeezing customers on costs and blocking calls for greater transparency. Now, with the launch of its Universal Commerce Protocol, Google is hoping to repeat this process with the very act of pricing, one of the most important functions in markets. The retail giants eager to partner with Google on this new frontier should heed the warnings of others left in the wake of Google’s dominance. These lawsuits are justified, but the damages they seek to address are in the rearview mirror. We need restitution for past harms, but we also need to protect the future of competition in existing and emerging markets. Here, the impending remedy decision in U.S. DOJ’s online advertising case against Google gives us some hope. Proposed remedies break open Google’s online advertising stack so they can’t represent buyers and sellers while also owning the marketplace in which these parties come together. Policy makers have a tendency to look backwards, but we need to shift our attention to the next frontier that these companies are seeking to dominate. 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 |
CAMP defends wholesale system that provides much-needed home internet competition for Canadians
Canadians know that we pay too much for home internet services. While wireless prices have declined in recent years, the cost to connect in our homes has stayed stubbornly high. To promote competition in Canada's home internet market, Canada's telecom regulator, the CRTC, requires large telecom companies to lease their networks to competitors at regulated wholesale rates. This allows smaller firms to offer diverse internet options to consumers without duplicating infrastructure.
Over the holidays, the CRTC asked whether the mark up on these wholesale rates charged to independent competitors should be raised from 30% to 40%. In response, CAMP argued that the CRTC should reject industry calls to maintain or increase the 30% markup, suggesting instead that it be reduced to reflect gains in efficiency of service delivery.
The last thing that Canadians struggling with the cost of living need is an increase in their monthly internet bill. To protect competition for home internet services, the CRTC must ensure that wholesale rates remain low enough for independent competitors to offer viable and competitive retail prices.
Check out CAMP's full response to the CRTC here
Telecom complaints soar as Canadians rail over billing issues
CBC
Canada’s telecom watchdog says complaints about cellphone, internet and television services shot up by 17 per cent from 2024 to 2025, with the chief gripe being about unclear or incorrect billing.
Letters: New Year New Monopoly
January 11, 2026Welcome 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 instalment we have:
If you enjoy Letters, please considering sharing and supporting CAMP. Now let’s dive in.
Wishing You a Very Anti-Monopoly Year AheadAs we think about the year ahead and all the unknowns it holds, we’re also looking back on the wins and losses that occurred in the last year. 2025 was a rollercoaster of a year, throwing Canada and countries around the world into new frontiers of uncertainty. But amid the chaos there were signs of progress and potential that we can all build on in 2026. Around the world, regulators realize the importance of competition and taking the danger of monopolies seriously. Despite trade disruptions and threats to hold sovereignty hostage, 2025 saw several countries develop and implement new policies to push back against domestic and global gatekeepers that stand in the way of fair economies and democracies. Looking back on the year in anti-monopoly in Canada, CAMP has put together a summary of our own contributions to this fight. Through research, commentary, and advocacy, CAMP pushed policymakers to protect Canadians in sectors ranging from airlines to agriculture. We’re glad to see that these efforts are beginning to bear fruit. 2025 saw major grocers abandon competition-killing property controls following Competition Bureau scrutiny, emerging public interest challenges to monopolies, and reforms in important sectors like banking to open markets up to competition. The pace of change can be frustrating, but actions are now in motion that will begin to deliver real benefits to everyday Canadians. In 2026, CAMP will build on this momentum by focusing our efforts on what we think are some of the most important next steps for the anti-monopoly movement. That means using anti-monopoly policy to make life more affordable for Canadians and mitigating risks to our country’s sovereignty. To accomplish both, Canada needs a strong competition cop to enforce our laws and protect the interests of consumers, workers and entrepreneurs. We don’t yet know the highs and lows that 2026 will bring, but with help from allies at home and abroad, CAMP is poised to make 2026 a very anti-monopoly year. 📰 CAMP in the News 📰
Public Interest Competition Law Challenges Begin to Ramp UpIn the last days of 2025, the table was being set for two very important competition law fights in 2026. Just days before Christmas, two Canadian civil society institutions, the Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC) and the Consumers Council of Canada (CCC), filed applications to have their competition cases heard before the Competition Tribunal. These applications were made possible by the new private right of action introduced in 2024 that allows for third parties to bring competition complaints before the Competition Tribunal based on the public interest. Whether these applications are heard, and the outcome of these cases if they are, will have a major impact on the future of competition law in Canada. Both cases strike at important gatekeepers in different parts of the Canadian economy. CIPPIC’s applicationtargets Apple’s practices around the iOS App Store, which has near total control over what and how applications can be installed on Apple mobile devices, and how developers bring those applications to market. CIPPIC alleges Apple has abused its dominant position by engaging in exclusive dealing, tied selling, and charging excessive monopoly tolls. The Consumer Council application targets Live Nation, the infamous owner of Ticketmaster and many of Canada’s major entertainment venues. CCC alleges this monopoly has allowed Live Nation to drive up ticket prices, cut competitors out of the market, and funnel business to Ticketmaster at the expense of consumers and artists. These applications are setting 2026 up as a critical year for enforcement of Canada’s newly reformed competition laws. For years, CAMP argued that Canada needed a robust private access regime that allowed organizations other than the Competition Bureau to bring anti-monopoly cases and we are thrilled to see these new laws in action. But we can’t celebrate yet. Should the Competition Tribunal reject these applications, we might be back to square one on creating new avenues to challenge monopolies in the Canadian economy. CAMP will be watching closely as these cases progress and providing Letters readers with a window into this exciting and evolving area of Canadian competition law. 📚 What We’re Reading 📚
Canada Isn’t Off the Hook for Netflix-Warner Bros.The proposed sale of American media conglomerate Warner Bros. Discovery continues to grind on, with the company’s board recently rejecting Paramount’s competing hostile takeover bid in favour of Netflix’s $72 billion offer. The transaction puts several important entertainment and news industry holdings in play, including Warner Bros. movie production arm, competitor streaming service HBO Max, and cable news channels such as CNN. If authorities allow Warner Bros. to be acquired by either Netflix or Paramount, the transaction would mark another step in the monopolization of the North American media landscape. In a piece for the Winnipeg Free Press, CAMP executive director Keldon Bester and competition lawyer Josh Krane argue that while the companies involved are American, the shockwaves of the transaction will be felt in Canada and authorities have a responsibility to act. The takeover of Warner Bros. would reduce choice and competition for Canadians who enjoy streaming services, reduce employment for Canadian artists and production staff who make content for streaming services, and reduce supply for the Canadian companies who distribute and exhibit films for audiences who value seeing movies in person. With this level of potential impact in the Canadian entertainment market, the Competition Bureau cannot shrug its shoulders and declare this a problem for the Americans to solve. While the takeover is a lose-lose-lose for Canadians and Americans alike, the incentives for making it happen are clear for Warner Bros. executives. CEO David Zaslav alone stands to pocket as much as $500 million should he be able to sell off the company he’s led since 2022. But even the potential buyers should beware, as it was a misguided appetite for mergers that put Warner Bros., whose major business lines continue to churn out critical and financial successes, in a financially precarious position. In a tale as old as time, the debt taken on to support past consolidation is coming back to haunt the acquirer and keep the consolidation train running. Whether Netflix or Paramount comes out ahead in the boardroom battle over Warner Bros., Canadian authorities need to defend the interests of Canadian viewers, creators, and exhibitors. 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 |
2025 CAMP Annual Highlights
Amid unprecedented global uncertainty, the fight against monopoly in Canada continued apace in 2025. With new competition laws on the books, Canadians saw an uptick in legal fights against the monopolies, legislation to foster competition in key sectors, and a renewed focus on mitigating our dependence on foreign giants.
In 2025, CAMP was able to expand its efforts to push back against monopolies through research, regulatory interventions, and commentary on sectors ranging from agriculture to online advertising. Looking back on another year in the fight for a more free, fair, and democratic economy, CAMP has pulled together a brief summary of our accomplishments in the past year.
