New Zealand’s new housing affordability policy offers a roadmap for Canada

Troy Media
-
0
New Zealand’s new housing affordability policy offers a roadmap for Canada

New Zealand’s innovative approach to housing growth offers valuable insights for addressing Canada’s housing affordability crisis

Wendell Cox, Troy Media

There was a time, not so long ago, that house prices tended to be around three times or less that of household incomes in most, if not all, the housing markets of Canada, the United States., Australia, the UK, Ireland and New Zealand. But over the last half-century, some municipal and provincial governments were enticed to adopt measures to stop the expansion of urban areas (sprawl), using urban containment strategies, especially urban growth boundaries and greenbelts.

While perhaps pleasing planners, the results have been disastrous for middle- and lower-income households, sending the price of housing “through the roof,” lowering living standards and even increasing poverty. International research has associated urban containment with escalating the underlying price of land, not only on the urban fringe (where the city meets rural areas) but also throughout the contained area.

Canada’s housing affordability crisis is centred in CMAs subject to urban containment. Vancouver, which routinely places second or third least affordable out of 94 major metropolitan areas in the annual Demographia International Housing Affordability report sponsored by the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, has experienced a tripling of house prices compared to incomes. Over less than two decades, the Toronto CMA has experienced a doubling. Both CMAs are seeing massive net migration, principally to nearby less expensive markets (such as Kitchener-Waterloo, Guelph, London, Nanaimo, Chilliwack and Kelowna), which are also seeing their housing affordability vanish with their Vancouver and Toronto-like policies.

Governments in Canada have adopted densification strategies in recent years on the assumption that making cities more crowded will restore housing affordability. The evidence for that is scant, and the recently elected New Zealand National/ACT/NZ First coalition government has withdrawn its support of that nation’s densification program. Like Canada, New Zealand has seen its house prices escalate compared to household incomes because of its urban containment policies. Auckland has routinely ranked as one of the least affordable markets in the Demographia International Housing Affordability report.

The new government proposes to get at the heart of the issue by addressing the cost of land in its Going for Housing Growth program. Among its recommendations:

            •           Local governments would be required to zone land for 30 years of immediate growth. According to the government, localities have limited growth on their fringes, and the “artificial scarcity limits have driven up the price of land, which has flowed through to house prices.” Noting research indicating that “urban growth boundaries add $600,000 (C$500,000) to the cost of land for houses in Auckland’s fringes”, the government cites the cost of land as the main driver of house price increases.

            •           The policy will rely on a 2020 Act allowing agencies and private developers to establish infrastructure vehicles to finance development-related infrastructure, with the costs being repaid by the beneficiaries over a 50-year period. This removes the infrastructure burden from governments and is similar to the Municipal Utility Districts (MUDs) in Texas and Colorado. MUDs are independent entities empowered to issue bonds and collect fees to finance and manage local infrastructure for new developments.

            •           The government will withdraw its support of the 2021 Medium Density Residential Zoning (densification only) program, making it optional for local councils.

In contrast to approaches solely focused on densification seen elsewhere, National/ACT recognizes that New Zealand’s severely unaffordable housing stems from the high land costs associated with urban containment. Guaranteeing plentiful access to developable land will, according to the government, result in “an abundant availability of developable land inside and at the edge of our cities for housing so that land prices are not inflated by artificial planning restrictions.”

There is much to New Zealand’s policies that could assist in alleviating the housing crisis in Canada.

There is a misconception that Canadian households want higher densities, but most do not. A 2019 survey of younger Canadian households by the Mustel Group and Sotheby’s dispelled “myths about young, urban families’ housing preferences.” On average, across the four metropolitan areas, 83 percent of such families preferred detached houses, but only 56 percent could afford them.

This suggests that households moving to Kitchener-Waterloo and Chilliwack want to not only save money but also to get more house and probably a yard. Detached housing predominates in these affordability sanctuaries compared to Vancouver and Toronto CMAs.

Critics whine about urban expansion, but that is how organic urban growth occurs. Toronto and Vancouver show that urban expansion can be tamed but at an unacceptable cost, proven by the inflated house prices (and related higher rents) and reduced standard of living, which drive more people into poverty.

Finally, as should be obvious, every dollar increase in the cost of housing relative to incomes increases inequality, The policies that have driven the cost of housing “through the roof” have also increased poverty, while relegating many to join waiting lists for subsidized housing.

It is time to prioritize the good of households, not of planning doctrine.

Wendell Cox is a Senior Fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and has been the author or co-author of 19 annual Demographia International Housing Affordability reports.

Canadians are getting poorer at an alarming rate

Troy Media
-
0
Canadians are getting poorer at an alarming rate

The high cost of living is affecting Canadians’ ability to access healthy food

Sylvain Charlebois, Troy Media

Canada appears to be a “trading-down” market, a trend that may persist for some time. Recent data from Statistics Canada on the food retail and service industries and fresh GDP figures paint a dismal picture, especially for those looking to attract more food companies or grocers to our country.

Our population grew by over three percent last year, yet our GDP increased by less than one percent. While other industrialized economies, such as France and Germany, are experiencing worse economic headwinds, Canada’s economy is highly integrated with the United States, the world’s most robust economy at present.

Despite our proximity to this economic superpower, the benefits of our geography seem to have stalled. The most alarming aspect of the January GDP numbers is that Canada’s hottest economic sector is currently the public service, while private investments have stalled, primarily due to higher interest rates.

The gap in GDP per capita between Canada and the U.S. has widened by 106 percent since 2015, and this trend shows no signs of reversing. In other words, despite our growing population, Canada is becoming poorer, not richer.

For those in the food business, this is certainly not good news. Statistics Canada’s reports on food and service sales confirm that consumers are less wealthy while facing higher food and menu prices. As of January 2024, the average Canadian spends $248 a month on food retail sales per capita, down from $258 in January 2023 to $282 in February 2017. These figures are all in real dollars, which makes the situation even worse.

Based on Canada’s Food Price Report 2024, an individual’s monthly expenditure for a healthy diet should be $339. Again, the current average monthly spending is $248. Until July 2021, Canadians spent more on average than the desired budget to support a healthy diet. Since then, it has clearly been a challenge.

Canadians are either wasting less or finding alternative ways to source food outside conventional channels like grocery stores, such as dollar stores and non-traditional grocery discounters. Per capita, food expenditures in our country have never been as low as they are now.

One might think that grocers are struggling with this situation, but they are readjusting their strategies and putting more pressure on suppliers with higher fees and lower prices. These are perfect conditions for a potential price war later this year, so don’t be surprised if it happens.

The data on food service provides a different perspective. On average, Canadians spent $169 at restaurants in January, about the same as last year and an increase from $149 in January 2018. However, these sums are in real dollars. The current retail/service split in Canada is that about 41 percent of all money spent on food is at restaurants, compared to a split closer to 54 percent in the U.S., favouring food service. Given the market’s frugality, it’s surprising to witness such substantial spending at restaurants, where you usually get less value for your money.

The days of uncertainty regarding the balance between working from home and working away from home are long gone. The food economy has, for all intents and purposes, normalized. Food inflation is causing Canadians to spend less at grocery stores, which may seem counterintuitive, but this is what the data is telling us. Currently, about 18 percent of all retail dollars are devoted to food, compared to 21 percent in 2017.

Simply put, the cost of living is a problem for many Canadian households, and trading down is much easier with food. People may be “ordering in” more often to avoid tips and overpriced beverages, for example.

All of this is based on our trust in Statistics Canada, which may not be all that strong. However, Statistics Canada is merely an indicator, and Canadians have no other way to know what is really going on out there other than reading reports from the federal agency. Regardless of how we interpret the data, the numbers are not encouraging.

This is what happens when our population grows, but our collective economic wealth stagnates.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is senior director of the agri-food analytics lab and a professor in food distribution and policy at Dalhousie University.

Social media wants your money

Troy Media
-
0
Social media wants your money

How social media platforms went from connecting people to being all about targeted ads and buying stuff on impulse

Nick Kossovan, Troy Media

The American way (read: capitalism’s primary goal), which greatly influences the Canadian way, has always been about separating you from your money. I’d wager that within moments of the Internet becoming available to the public on April 30, 1993, many asked themselves, “How can I use this new medium to hawk stuff?”

In 1997, SixDegrees launched the first online social networking site, marking the birth of social media. Almost immediately, hucksters, charlatans, snake oil merchants, and outright fraudsters tumbled out of the woodwork alongside corporate advertisers.

Have you seen the online ad for the Bluetooth-enabled Shiatsu foot massager? How about the one for the organic mushroom supplement powder? How about the micro-magnetic slimming earrings? Initially, social media thrived on feel-good content. However, social media companies have bills to pay and profits to make; thus, understandably, monetization became their focus, resulting in social media being flooded with ads for cheap, bright, and shiny items.

Today, you can’t scroll through your feed without being inundated with ads promoting supplements, subscription services, or self-proclaimed “experts” teaching a craft they’ve never mastered.

Remember the days of browsing the Internet and having to visit the seller’s website? The creation of social commerce – the marriage of e-commerce with social media – eliminated the need to venture off. Instagram, Facebook, Pinterest, and TikTok now have native social commerce features baked into their respective platform. This feature, when leveraged by Svengali-like marketing strategies introducing you to products you didn’t know existed, not surprisingly, leads to impulse purchases.

Who knew there was an avocado slicer 3-in-1 tool for hassle-free avocado preparation for only $3.47? According to the ad, there are less than 400 left. At that price, it’s a must-have. Never mind that I can’t recall the last time I ate an avocado.

As kitchen junk drawers, closets, garages, basements, and storage lockers will testify, creating fear of missing out (FOMO) by offering a cheap product and claiming inventory is dwindling is a proven marketing strategy. It’s anyone’s guess what percentage of our online and offline consumerism are impulse buys.

Thanks to social commerce, a “marketer” can present you with a well-priced hoodie as you scroll through TikTok. To take advantage of this deal without overly interrupting your viewing of shuffle dance videos, simply click “Buy.”

I find it exhausting to scroll through my social media feeds, feeling that everyone is trying to sell me something. Social media has become cluttered with “Buy me!” and has become an algorithmic traffic driver for targeted advertising. Then there’s the fakery factor.

            •           Despite all the claims, there’s no “free.” Everything has a price: time (attention) and/or money.

            •           There’s no genuine “I want to help you” advice, only pitches and sales funnels.

            •           The freebies are shallow. A life improvement e-book offered for “free,” in exchange for your email address, is just recycled advice you’ve already heard or read. There’s nothing revolutionary or exclusive about the advice, as was promised.

How many businesses behave on social media irritates me. Naively, I assumed social media would evolve into a people-to-people medium, like the whole world sharing one big kiss, as opposed to the business-to-consumer digital marketplace it has become.

Weight loss programs, get-rich-quick schemes, influencers shilling products that don’t produce results, Facebook friends selling beauty products, salons pushing Botox and fillers and ads that intentionally make asterisk text impossible to read. Companies that stretch the definition of “free,” “guarantee,” and “unlimited.” Products designed to wear out quickly. Subscription-based models for everything. At some level, social media and the Internet thrive on veiled scams.

My angelic side believes that those behind the transformation of social media into a Turkish bazaar simply want what we all want: money to buy time and freedom. Because our economic system works like a Ponzi scheme, everyone, to some degree, tries to make money and move around with their consumerism by taking advantage of others. In other words, who am I to judge those who sin differently than I do?

Considering how social media companies generate revenue, it’s hard to condemn their monetization efforts.

Your role in social media isn’t that of user. You’re the product offered to advertisers and those dreaming of making money on social media. Platforms aggregate your attention (aka views), which they then sell to advertisers. It shouldn’t be surprising that your attention span and actions are being commodified when you’re on social media.

In economics and finance, there’s an adage that’s especially relevant here: “There’s no such thing as a free lunch.” From an economic perspective, nothing is ever free. In general, if something appears to be free, like a social media account, you’re paying for it in some tricky way.

Always consider where your money is going. Consider your life goals more carefully. Don’t social media platforms dictate your dreams. Sadly, social media has replaced the American dream of working hard and making money with the dream of not working hard and making money, resulting in our social media feeds being inundated with shameless attempts to separate us from our money.

Nick Kossovan, a self-described connoisseur of human psychology, writes about what’s on his mind from Toronto.

The use of GLP-1 drugs such as Ozempic is surging among Canadians

Troy Media
-
0
The use of GLP-1 drugs such as Ozempic is surging among Canadians

Canadians’ use of GLP-1 drugs is reshaping the food industry

Sylvain Charlebois, Troy Media

The rise of GLP-1 drugs, as exemplified by the widespread usage of medications like Ozempic, is revolutionizing societal attitudes toward health and dietary habits. A new study conducted by Dalhousie University’s Agri-Food Analytics Lab and Caddle reveals that between 900,000 and 1.4 million Canadians have incorporated these medications into their daily routine.

This trend mirrors a broader North American movement, with projections indicating that up to 30 million adults in the United States may be using GLP-1 drugs by 2030.

The survey reveals a varied user demographic, with a slight majority of males (11 percent compared to 10 percent for females) and millennials taking the lead at 12 percent. Ontario boasts the highest usage rate in Canada at 13 percent, while Prince Edward Island records the lowest at four percent. A majority of users (79 percent) have been using these drugs for more than three months, indicating a significant dependence on them.

The primary reasons for usage are managing type 2 diabetes (57.2 percent) and seeking weight loss (27.2 percent), which reflects a complex interplay between health needs and body image goals. The impact on dietary choices is particularly notable, with 45.5 percent of users reporting reduced food intake, especially high-calorie items. The most significant declines are seen in sweet bakery goods, candies, and carbonated soft drinks, suggesting a shift in eating patterns that challenges traditional food industry sectors.

This data paints a picture of a society grappling with the balance between health pursuits and the convenience of quick solutions. The GLP-1 trend is not just a medical story but presents a rich social, economic, and ethical narrative.

The impact of GLP-1 drugs such as Ozempic goes beyond personal health, indicating a transformation in consumer dietary behaviours. With 45.5 percent of users eating less overall and specific declines in indulgent food categories, this shift is reshaping the food landscape. The survey outlines a 30.6 percent decrease in sweet bakery goods consumption, a 30.4 percent decline in candy consumption, and a 29.7 percent drop in packaged cookie consumption among GLP-1 users. Even the consumption of carbonated soft drinks has decreased by 28.8 percent, underscoring a shift towards healthier beverage choices.

However, the impact of GLP-1 drugs extends beyond food consumption to include significant changes in alcohol intake and dining habits. The survey reveals that 19.2 percent of GLP-1 users have reduced their consumption of alcoholic beverages, suggesting a broader trend towards healthier lifestyle choices encompassing both food and drink.

For the restaurant industry, the ramifications are considerable. The data indicates that 21.6 percent of GLP-1 drug users are dining out less frequently, while 16.4 percent are purchasing fewer groceries. This decline in patronage poses challenges for restaurants, particularly those that rely on high-margin items like snacks and fast foods. To adapt, restaurants may need to innovate their menus to include healthier, lower-calorie options that cater to the dietary preferences of GLP-1 users, such as diabetes-friendly or weight-management dishes.

The shift also has broader cultural implications, signalling a move away from traditional comfort foods and indulgences towards a more health-conscious approach to eating.

The long-term effects on food producers and retailers are profound. The decline in demand for sugary snacks and drinks suggests a trend toward healthier products that cater to the dietary needs of GLP-1 drug users. This presents an opportunity for the food and beverage industry to reassess its offerings, align with evolving consumer demand for healthier options, and innovate and foster growth by developing new product lines that appeal to health-conscious consumers.

The GLP-1 drug trend is reshaping the food industry, driving a cultural shift in consumer preferences toward healthier eating habits. This evolution challenges traditional food sectors and opens new avenues for innovation and adaptation in response to changing dietary trends.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is senior director of the agri-food analytics lab and a professor in food distribution and policy at Dalhousie University.

Two universal truths that lead to a successful job search

Troy Media
-
0
Two universal truths that lead to a successful job search

How to make a memorable impression on potential employers

Nick Kossovan, Troy Media

There’s no shortage of job search advice floating around that contradicts.

            •           Resumes (formatting, length, how to beat the employer’s Applicant Tracking Software (ATS), as if that’s possible)

            •           Cover letters (Include or don’t include?)

            •           Whether using LinkedIn’s #OpenToWork green banner feature makes you appear desperate

            •           Interview advice

All job search advice, including mine, is subject to bias. My first column was titled There Is No Universal Hiring Methodology in which I explained that hiring is more emotional than logical and, therefore, a highly subjective process. Protest all you want; the fact remains that hiring is heavily influenced by biases and gut feelings, resulting in no two recruiters or hiring managers assessing candidates the same way.

What one interviewer rejects, another may accept.

Self-proclaiming career coaches claim that the formula for successful job hunting is A + B + C = “You’re hired!” Predictably, they also claim they have the formula for you to purchase (book, webinar, becoming a client of their coaching service). My question: How can a formula exist with gut instinct being the driving force behind hiring decisions?

I’ve hired:

            •           a candidate was more than 20 minutes late for their interview.

            •           candidates who asked, within five minutes of starting the interview, “How many vacation days will I get?”

            •           candidates who’ve been unemployed for more than nine months.

            •           candidates (lost count of) who were over the age of 50.

            •           a candidate who brought her cat, Duchess, who’d undergone surgery that morning, to the interview. (This hire was a stretch even for me, but I couldn’t ignore her career story, set of skills, and strong personality.)

Another hiring manager would have likely rejected these candidates. Vice versa, candidates I’ve rejected inevitably went on to be hired by hiring managers who didn’t consider why I rejected them relevant.

Rather than trying to juggle all the conflicting job search advice you’re receiving – attempting to please all employers – focus on, better yet embrace, these two universal truisms.

1) Your success depends on what others think of you

Nowadays, the standard “life advice” is to not care what other people think about you. This advice, which I strongly disagree with, has led to the prevalence of self-centred behaviour.

Being successful is highly dependent on your image and what others think of you.

Searching for a job involves actively seeking approval. First you need the employer to approve – like what they see – your resume and LinkedIn profile. Then, to be approved for an in-person interview, you must pass a phone screening. Then, your interviewer must approve you for a second interview or to be hired. All these approvals required someone to think you deserve a “yes.”

If everyone actually didn’t care what others thought of them, social media wouldn’t be flooded with approval-seeking posts, and rejection wouldn’t hurt. Yet, job seekers constantly complain about rejection (not approved) without receiving feedback, suggesting they care what their interviewer thought of them.

As you realize how others perceive you is the key determining factor to your success, you’ll ask yourself: How do people experience me?

Be honest. How do people experience you? How do people feel in your presence?

A challenge:

            •           Solicit the opinion(s) of family members and friends regarding how they perceive you.

            •           Based on the feedback, adjust your behaviour and shift your thinking.

            •           Make it your mission to give those in your presence a memorable interpersonal experience

2) Image is everything

People watch in a mall, restaurant, or on a busy street. You’ll notice that most people don’t take their image seriously or subscribe to the “don’t care what other people think of you” advice.

Whether you like it or not, humans are wired to judge a book by its cover. Therefore, how someone experiences you begins with your appearance. When it comes to interviewing, having an off-putting appearance will overshadow – not in a good way – your answers. When interviewing, you must be the best version of yourself.

Consider this uncomfortable question:

Those times when you aced, at least thought you did, the interview but didn’t get the job, could it have been because of your appearance?

According to research, a person’s opinion of you is formed in just three seconds. Psychologists call it “thin slicing.” Your interviewer will make four snap judgments when meeting you for the first time:

            •           Are you trustworthy?

            •           Intelligence level

            •           Your professionalism

            •           Whether they like you

Everything I mentioned can be influenced, starting with how you dress and by looking your interviewer in the eye. Then, check your mannerisms and communication skills; both are imperative to your job search and career success.

Looking your best gives you the mental state you need more than ever in today’s competitive job market: Confidence.

Commit to the following:

            •           Exercising

            •           Eating healthy

            •           Getting enough sleep

            •           Wearing proper fitting age-appropriate clothes

            •           Smiling (Your teeth’ role in how people perceive you can’t be overstated.)

Hire an image consultant if you need one; it’ll be money well spent.

Don’t underestimate, or worse, deny, the correlation between how your physical appearance impacts your life experiences and opportunities.

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job.

There will never be another program like W5 on Canadian TV

Troy Media
-
0
There will never be another program like W5 on Canadian TV

Michael Taube, Troy Media

W5 has signed off for the last time.

The 58-year-old news magazine television program has aired its final episode in March. The first story examined the 2023 double murder of talented animator/director Daniel Langlois and his partner Dominique Marchand on the island of Dominica. Their brutal deaths may have been related to, of all things, a dispute over an island road. A second story focused on Emily Nash, an 18-year-old who can recall just about every moment in her life with precise detail. This type of supermemory could potentially help advance medical and scientific research into finding a cure for dementia.

The final couple of minutes were a small synopsis of the program’s history. There were a few scenes involving some award-winning investigations, several clips with well-known Canadian celebrities like Jim Carrey and Justin Bieber, a few canned farewells from past hosts like Ken Cavanagh, Eric Malling, and Helen Hutchinson, and a final send-off from three recent hosts – Lloyd Robertson, Kevin Newman, and Avery Haines.

That’s a wrap, folks.

Why was W5 cancelled? It got caught in the unfortunate decision by Bell Media’s parent company, BCE Inc., to cut 4,800 staff in February “at all levels of the company.” There will still be reports under that old banner, but they will be featured in sources like CTV National News and CTVNews.ca.

Assigning blame isn’t difficult. Finding ways to continue producing the type of important work that W5 achieved for decades is.

“It’s disappointing because there’s a shrinking number of places and ability to perform investigative journalism in Canada,” Newman said last month. “As outlets and opportunities for that kind of journalism – which takes time and resources – disappear, I worry that we’re losing an important skill set. It’s a pretty sad day for people who care about the kinds of things that ‘W5’ tackled.”

He’s right. The disappearance of W5, the “gold standard of Canadian broadcast journalism,” as another former host, Lisa LaFlamme, posted on X on Mar. 25, will directly affect the craft of investigative journalism. There are still a few investigative journalists employed by Canadian newspapers, television, radio and other mediums. Alas, it’s not as high a priority as it once was. The fundamental lack of available outlets and money doesn’t help, either.

My sense is we’ll never see another program quite like W5 on Canadian TV again.

W5 first hit the airwaves on Sept. 11, 1966. CTV, which was close to bankruptcy, decided to roll the dice with this program. It was an enormous risk, to put it mildly. CBC’s This Hour Had Seven Days, a news magazine created by Patrick Watson and Douglas Leiterman in 1964, had closed up shop only a few months before W5’s launch. While the two networks obviously had different approaches and financial streams, it seemed unlikely that one would be able to succeed where the other had failed.

Yet, that’s exactly what happened.

The hour-long program, which had been labelled a “documentary series” since 2000 due to CRTC regulations, became one of the most successful shows in Canadian TV history. It won numerous honours, including Gemini Awards, Canadian Screen Awards, RTDNA Canada Awards and a CAJ Award. It helped pave the way for other Canadian news magazine programs like CBC’s The Fifth Estate. It even served as a source of inspiration for CBS’s 60 Minutes, which became a massive American and international success.

A large reason for this was the focus on diverse programming. There were hard-hitting pieces of journalism on domestic and international issues, a focus on politics and current events (which often veered to the political left) and some frothy topics in the worlds of sports and entertainment.

Some of its investigations, which can be accessed on the CTV News website and its YouTube channel, Official W5, included shady businesses and whistleblowers, cases involving the murder of adults and children, law and order, hate crimes, illicit drugs, money laundering, UFO sightings, future of the monarchy and the used car industry.

There were also episodes focusing on political figures like former U.S. President Donald Trump, Jody Wilson-Raybould, Mark Carney, and others. There were also interviews with famous celebrities like Paul McCartney, John Lennon, Yoko Ono, Muhammad Ali, George Chuvalo, Shania Twain, Gordon Lightfoot, Nick Nurse, Jim Henson, Paul Anka, Celine Dion, and John Cleese.

This approach enabled W5 to attract a significant number of regular and occasional viewers in its prime-time slot for decades. It was intelligent and thought-provoking, even if you didn’t always agree with the reporting, analysis, and conclusions. It became a show with something for everyone, utilizing an outside-the-box approach (of sorts) for its subject matter and techniques to acquire as many eyeballs as possible. Finally, it gained a long-standing reputation as an example of quality television.

Duplicating this type of success in today’s Canadian TV landscape seems like a near-impossibility. The award-winning W5 may turn out to be one of the last of its kind.

Michael Taube, a Troy Media syndicated columnist and Washington Times contributor, was a speechwriter for former Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He holds a master’s degree in comparative politics from the London School of Economics.

Poutine a Canadian icon celebrating 60 years of global delight

Troy Media
-
0
Poutine a Canadian icon celebrating 60 years of global delight

A deep dive into the rich history and cultural significance of poutine for Quebec and Canada

Sylvain Charlebois, Troy Media

Poutine, that deliciously indulgent combination of cheese curds, fries, and gravy, is celebrating its 60th anniversary this year. While many attribute its creation to Jean-Claude Roy in Drummondville in 1964, the true origins of poutine can be traced back to Fernand Lachance and his wife Germaine in Warwick, Quebec.

It was at their restaurant, L’Idéal (later Le Lutin qui Rit), where the word “poutine” first appeared on a menu in 1957. At that time, Quebec was under the influence of Maurice Duplessis (premier from 1936 until his death in 1959, except for the war years of 1940–44) and the Catholic Church.

Interestingly, the original poutine didn’t include gravy, as Fernand wasn’t a fan. It wasn’t until around 1962 that Germaine added her sauce as a side dish, completing the iconic trio of ingredients. However, in 1964, Roy, a professional saucier, was the first to combine all three main ingredients: cheese curds, gravy, and fries. This historical account is detailed in my book Poutine Nation, released in 2021.

The dish’s popularity grew rapidly, with chip trucks spreading it across rural Quebec. In 1972, Ashton Leblond, the founder of the Ashton restaurants, further popularized poutine in the Quebec City region, emphasizing the importance of Quebec’s cheese curds in the dish.

Today, poutine can be found on menus worldwide, from Washington to Shanghai, forever associated with Quebec and Canadian cuisine. Despite its global popularity, poutine has yet to receive the recognition it deserves on the international stage. UNESCO, the United Nations’ cultural agency, has been declaring intangible cultural heritage since 2003, including dishes like Neapolitan pizza, French baguette, and Chinese traditional tea. Canada, however, has not signed this convention, meaning no Canadian dish is currently on UNESCO’s list.

Canada has the opportunity to change this by becoming a signatory to the convention and nominating poutine as the first Canadian dish to be declared an Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity by UNESCO. Poutine’s journey from a humble rural Quebec dish to a global culinary icon is a testament to its cultural significance, deserving of recognition on the world stage.

Poutine’s success story is one of resilience and adaptation. It has evolved over the years, with variations that include toppings like pulled pork, foie gras, and even lobster. Despite these modern twists, the core elements of poutine remain unchanged, a testament to its enduring appeal.

Part of what makes poutine so special is its ability to bring people together. Whether you’re enjoying it at a roadside chip truck in rural Quebec or a trendy restaurant in a cosmopolitan city, poutine has a way of creating a sense of shared experience. It’s a dish that transcends borders and cultures, bringing a little piece of Quebec and Canada wherever it goes. Yes, it may be disgustingly unhealthy, but it is indeed iconic.

In addition to its cultural significance, poutine is also economically important. It has become a symbol of Canadian identity, attracting tourists from around the world who want to experience this iconic dish firsthand. In Quebec, poutine is not just a dish; it’s an industry supporting cheese curd producers, potato farmers, and restaurateurs across the province.

As we celebrate poutine’s 60th anniversary, let’s not just enjoy this delicious dish but also reflect on its cultural and economic impact. Let’s recognize poutine for what it is: a true Canadian success story and a culinary masterpiece that deserves its place among the world’s most beloved dishes.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is senior director of the agri-food analytics lab and a professor in food distribution and policy at Dalhousie University.

Candidate assignments the new norm for job applicants

Troy Media
-
0
Candidate assignments the new norm for job applicants

Nick Kossovan

Troy Media

Many job seekers spend their time and energy focusing on job searching factors beyond their control, namely how an employer designed their hiring process.

Regular readers of this column know I stress the truism that employers own their hiring process, not the job seeker. Hence, rather than criticizing an employer’s hiring process, job seekers should work with it. Criticism or wishful thinking won’t get you hired.

The latest complaint: Employers are increasingly asking candidates to complete an assignment. This ask isn’t new.

Early in my career, I applied for a technical writer position to write instruction manuals for the employer’s line of software. After the initial interview, I was asked to write instructions, following the company’s internal style guide, consisting of a maximum of eight steps on anything (e.g., a recipe, changing a tire, repotting a plant).

The employer’s ask made sense. They wanted to evaluate my methodical thought process and ability to write comprehensive instructions. I gladly did the assignment. (No, I didn’t get the job.)

There’s obvious merit in asking candidates vying for a position that involves writing, delivering presentations, or analyzing data to complete an assignment. However, candidates are increasingly being asked to complete an assignment for a broader range of jobs.

Why?

Because in recent years, there’s been an uptick in the number of fraudulent candidates populating the job market.

Forbes recently headlined an article 70 Percent Of Workers Lie On Resumes, New Study Shows. Essentially, 70 percent indicates the likelihood that the candidate the hiring manager is interviewing is likely to be lying or exaggerating about some aspect of their background. Hence, understandably, employers are taking longer to hire due to their increased diligence in weeding out fraudulent candidates.

There are many reasons a person lies on their resume. The most common, in my opinion:

            •           Desperate need of a job.

            •           Believe they’ll get away with their lies.

            •           Too lazy to do the work to obtain the required education, skills and experience, and

            •           Feel entitled to “success shortcuts.”

There’s no justifiable reason to lie on your resume, LinkedIn profile, or any time throughout an employer’s hiring process. However, as the Forbes article points out, many people’s moral compass tells them it’s okay to lie to employers; thus, lying on resumes, and it can be assumed LinkedIn profiles, is common. Sadly, this practice of lying is detrimental to job seekers who present honest and transparent resumes. They’re competing against fraudulent candidates who, unjust as the reality is, have a greater chance of being selected for an interview because their lies and exaggerations make them more appealing.

Employers are catching on that the [insert position] they hired several months ago, who regurgitated current buzzwords, exhibited just the right amount of boastfulness, just south of being arrogant, and bragged of past successes, implying they’d do the same for the employer, was all talk. As a result of such bad hires, employers are increasingly asking candidates to complete an assignment.

Employers understand an assignment isn’t foolproof due diligence. The candidate can still use AI, seek help from friends, submit someone else’s work, etc. Even so, requiring candidates to complete an assignment as a due diligence step is better than nothing.

After empathizing with the reason(s) why an employer makes completing an assignment part of their hiring process, the question becomes: Should you spend unpaid time doing the assignment?

The argument that candidates are exploited by not being paid for their time is mute since the assignment is voluntary. Additionally, I’ve yet to be presented with solid evidence that employers are using work created by candidates.

Obviously, there’s no definitive yes or no answer other than you should only do an assignment if you see it as an opportunity to demonstrate your capabilities. To be competitive with other candidates doing the same assignment, you must give 100 percent.

One time, I had a candidate offer to do an assignment. She strategically created an opportunity to demonstrate her skills by offering to analyze and write a recommendation report based on six months’ data. Impressed by her proactiveness, I took her up on her offer and ended up hiring her. (This is how you compete in today’s job market.)

An assignment allows the employer to assess a candidate in four ways:

            •           Are they the real deal?

            •           Are they genuinely interested in the position?

            •           How will they tailor projects to support their brand?

            •           Work ethic: Are they fully committed to tasks, or just do the minimum?

When you accept an assignment, make sure you:

            •           Understand the purpose of the assignment and what skills are being evaluated.

            •           Know the deadline, format, length, and mediums you can use. (Don’t assume!)

            •           You own your work.

Don’t view being asked to do an assignment as a dichotomy between your feelings about the employer’s request and your wanting the job. The yin-yang is simple: Either you want the job or don’t. Either you respect the employer’s right to design their hiring processes as they see fit, or you don’t.

Because job seekers don’t control the hiring process, no grey area exists.

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job.

Rising cocoa prices challenging Easter chocolate traditions

Troy Media
-
0
Rising cocoa prices challenging Easter chocolate traditions

Soaring cocoa prices are leading to shrinkflation and skimpflation of your favourite Easter treat

Sylvain Charlebois, Troy Media

As Easter approaches, families and chocolate enthusiasts look forward to indulging in their favourite cocoa-based treats, a tradition that marks this festive season. However, this year’s celebrations are set against a backdrop of soaring cocoa prices, marking a significant challenge not just for consumers but for the entire chocolate industry.

The current situation presents a complex mix of environmental, economic, and market dynamics that have pushed cocoa prices to record highs, affecting everything from production to the end consumer experience.

The price of cocoa has skyrocketed, now almost 40 percent higher than its previous record set 47 years ago. Cocoa contracts recently reached an unprecedented $7.06 per metric ton, doubling since November and surpassing the record highs of $3.83 in 2011 and $5.11 in 1977. This surge is attributed to a combination of factors, including the rising cases of black pod disease in key producing regions like the Ivory Coast and Ghana, which account for almost 60 percent of global cocoa production. Additionally, heavy rains have disrupted the transportation of supplies to ports for shipment, while speculative trading further inflates prices.

Despite the steep increase in costs, global demand for cocoa remains unwavering, particularly as emerging markets’ growing middle class continues to desire chocolate products. Major companies such as Barry Callebaut are responding by aggressively purchasing futures, anticipating continued demand.

The industry’s giants, including Hershey and Mondelez (the company behind Cadbury), are signalling the strain of rising cocoa prices on their operations. Hershey has warned of potential profit impacts, while Mondelez reports declining sales volumes as consumers tighten their belts. This scenario suggests that chocolate manufacturers, retailers, and chocolatiers will likely pass these increased costs on to consumers. However, the strategy extends beyond mere price hikes.

In Canada, we estimate that chocolate bars have increased by more than three percent in just one month. Also, “shrinkflation” has led to noticeable reductions in the size of several beloved chocolate bars and products to maintain existing price points.

Over the past 12 months, notable changes include the shrinking of the well-known Cadbury eggs by 12.9 percent, from 39 grams to 34 grams. Similarly, the 400-gram Nutella jar has been downsized to 365 grams; the Toblerone bar, once 400 grams, now weighs 360 grams; and the Oh Henry bar has gone from 62.5 grams to 58 grams, a 7.2 percent reduction. Other popular treats like Coffee Crisps and Hershey’s Chipits have reduced their sizes by 10 percent.

One of the more significant adjustments is M&Ms, where one kilogram bags have been reduced to 800 grams – a 20 percent reduction – with prices remaining unchanged. This list is not exhaustive; many more products likely have been affected by shrinkflation, signalling a widespread strategy to cope with economic pressures while keeping consumer prices stable.

Beyond shrinkflation, the industry is also embracing “skimpflation,” where manufacturers reformulate products with cheaper ingredients to cut costs. This strategy involves replacing cocoa with artificial flavours and other novel ingredients, subtly altering ingredient lists without most consumers noticing. Skimpflation is harder to trace and, coupled with the end of the shrinkflation cycle for most products, presents a new challenge for discerning consumers.

The current cocoa price crisis underscores a broader conversation about sustainability, consumer awareness, and the future of food manufacturing. While chocolate is not essential for survival, it represents a cherished indulgence for many. The ongoing changes in the industry mean consumers must be more vigilant and informed about their purchases, acknowledging that they might receive less value for the same price, especially concerning cocoa-based products.

As we navigate this Easter season, the joy of chocolate consumption comes with a heightened awareness of the complexities behind our favourite treats. The situation calls for a balanced approach from all stakeholders – producers, consumers, and policymakers alike – to ensure the long-term sustainability of cocoa production and the preservation of our cherished chocolate traditions amidst these economic challenges.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is senior director of the agri-food analytics lab and a professor in food distribution and policy at Dalhousie University.

Restaurant chain’s two percent “carbon fee” on all orders sparks controversy

Daily Herald Contributor
-
0
Restaurant chain’s two percent “carbon fee” on all orders sparks controversy

Goodfella’s PR disaster serves as a warning about the challenges of incorporating environmental responsibility into business practices

Sylvain Charlebois, Troy Media

A recent initiative by a Toronto-based restaurant chain, Goodfella’s, which operates seven establishments known for their wood-oven pizzas, has sparked considerable debate. The chain introduced a two percent “carbon fee” on all orders, ostensibly to contribute to carbon capture efforts by supporting Tree Canada’s National Greening program, which aims to reforest areas in need.

Its decision, revealed by a CTV News report, ignited a flurry of social media criticism. The chain has since changed its policy and now offers an opt-out option.

The policy was implemented at the point of sale, with receipts clearly stating the intention behind the levy: to offset the carbon footprint associated with dining by investing in environmental sustainability. While the legal standing of this surcharge is not in question – provided it is not characterized as a tax – the public’s response was predictably divisive. The concepts of ‘carbon’ and ‘fee’ alone are sufficient to provoke a public outcry, particularly in a climate of heightened sensitivity towards both food prices and environmental politics.

This situation intersected with several broader socio-economic issues. First, it underscores the volatile nature of consumer attitudes towards food pricing, an area already under scrutiny due to incidents like Wendy’s dynamic pricing controversy, which was perceived as an unfair price inflation tactic. Goodfella’s introduction of a carbon fee, regardless of its noble intent, was received with skepticism, with some interpreting it as yet another financial burden.

Furthermore, the initiative touched upon the politically charged debate surrounding carbon taxation. With Ottawa’s carbon tax policy serving as a contentious cornerstone of Canada’s environmental strategy, the imposition of a similar charge by a private entity can be polarizing. Consumer reaction to Goodfella’s initiative is indicative of a broader discomfort with policies perceived as mandating lifestyle changes, particularly when the public discourse around carbon emissions and climate change is so fragmented.

Goodfella’s implementation of this initiative also deserves criticism. The absence of an opt-out mechanism at the beginning or clear pre-dining communication about the fee suggests a lack of transparency, which is crucial in fostering consumer trust. In the current climate, any policy perceived as inflating costs is met with intense scrutiny. The restaurant industry, competitive and customer-oriented, is especially susceptible to backlash over perceived financial impositions.

Trust is another critical factor. The onus is on Goodfella’s to ensure that the collected fees are transparently and effectively channelled towards the intended environmental projects. This is analogous to the broader issue of tip distribution within the service industry, where there is growing concern over whether gratuities reach the intended recipients.

Ultimately, Goodfella’s initiative raises important questions about the effectiveness and acceptance of environmental surcharges within the restaurant industry. The critical response to this policy suggests a misalignment between the chain’s intentions and consumer expectations. While addressing the carbon footprint of dining is commendable, the approach to doing so must consider consumer sentiment, especially in a leisure context where patrons seek respite from broader societal concerns.

If this initiative was intended as a publicity stunt, it reveals a strategic miscalculation and underscores the need for deeper insight into modern marketing trends. The complexities of consumer behaviour, particularly when tied to political and environmental matters, demand a sophisticated approach.

Ultimately, Goodfella’s situation serves as a warning about the challenges of incorporating environmental responsibility into business practices. It highlights the importance of clear strategy, engaging with customers, and being sensitive to the wider social and political environment.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is senior director of the agri-food analytics lab and a professor in food distribution and policy at Dalhousie University.

1234...22Page 3 of 22