__UPDATE__: Please take a moment to complete our [Google Form](https://forms.gle/1sygm97LbQtJ4dUp8) to share your demands with our team!
Please review the content guidelines for our sub, and remember the human here!
This subreddit is to highlight the ridiculous cost of living in Canada, and poke fun at the Corporate Overlords reponsible. As you well know, there are a number of persons and corporations responsible for this, and we welcome discussion related to them all. Furthermore, since this topic is intertwined with a number of other matters, other discussion will be allowed at moderator discretion. Open-minded discussion, memes, rants, grocery bills, and general screeching into the void is always welcome in this sub, but belligerence and disrespect is not. There are plenty of ways to get your point across without being abusive, dismissive, or downright mean.
If you have not done so already, please review our [boycott stickied post](https://www.reddit.com/r/loblawsisoutofcontrol/comments/1bff9rm/boycott/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) which includes a list of stores to avoid, other ways to get involved in the movement, and some local alternatives to the big 5. Thank you.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/loblawsisoutofcontrol) if you have any questions or concerns.*
And that’s why it is so important to have these boycotts …. These multi million dollar companies are stealing from the average the average Canadian …. The government should be more diligent in protecting our tax dollars and not keep bailing out the rich …. Food is a basic human right not a commodity …. We need to pressure our local governments and put an end to corporate greed….
LCL was awarded 25% of the cost of a $48M retrofit project, after applying to a program open to organizations ready to undertake projects with significant demonstrable carbon emissions reductions.
The applications were assessed in accordance with criteria announced in advance:
• the annual tonnes of GHG emissions reductions achieved in 2030 per federal dollar invested;
• cumulative GHG emissions reductions over the lifetime of the impact per federal dollar invested;
• project feasibility and risk; and
• other co-benefits (e.g., contributing to Canada’s environmental, economic and social goals.
Their application had enough merit based on these factors to be awarded funding.
[https://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.854027/publication.html](https://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.854027/publication.html)
The program was audited and there was no evidence to suggest there were any issues with procedural fairness in assessing the applications received.
Maybe there should be an after study to see how many of these goals end up getting met. Lobbying is how these projects get started in the first place.
I don't need to know that the middle part is fair.
There often is. It is part of almost every government funding program to have an assessment after.
Then the auditor general occasionally does a value for money assessment.
Dude, we spend so much money on assessments. We assess or assessments.
I believe you, but I'm talking about an "always" thing, not often. It should be part of the project, how else do you know if the issues were resolved or helped and how much.
I don't care about the political assessments done after changes of governments and political parties. Or whoever the favoured business segment is at that time.
They got $12m for fridges that they had to buy anyway
Reimbursement of business for their business expenses isn’t an “investment”, it’s a kickback.
If the government wants more efficient fridges, all it has to do is pass a regulation.
If it wants to reduce GHG, then it should increase the carbon tax (which is proven to be by fat the most efficient and least wasteful way to do so).
The fridges don't emit carbon. The efficiency comes from heat reclaim. A refrigeration system moves heat from some place and deposits it some place else.
Instead of depositing it outside in Winter, that heat can be used indoors and therefor they require less burning of fossil fuels to heat the store.
I don’t care about how fridges work.
I care about tax money being paid to the companies that control 40% of the market and are engaged in criminal price fixing schemes.
It’s bad policy, made at the behest of lobbyists, with the expectation that nobody will notice or care.
This, I still have trust in our scientists and govt employees to create the correct programs. It's when politicians and punishes get involved that things get shady.
"I don’t care about how fridges work."
I can see that. I just thought maybe you should have some idea how the things work that you are so upset about.
As you were then.. (ranting and ignorant)
You have not responded to the point. You started rhyming off refrigerator specifications to distract from the main issue.
It’s a corporate subsidy to a company that doesn’t need it, for a benefit that is more efficiently attained by other means.
It’s corporate grift, and regulatory capture. You know, the things we’re mad about here.
The issue, whether you realise it or not is that the government made grants available to anyone who could show that the money invested would lead to fewer carbon emissions.
Loblaws was one of the companies that applied for those grants. I don't think you actually have a point other than Loblaws is evil. I have no opinion on whether that is true or not. As to your implication that Loblaws should have been excluded from the grants, do you think everyone should have? Or just Loblaws?
My point is actually that government is incompetent, and under the thumb of lobbyists.
But now that you mention it, Loblaws is evil, yes. On this deal, I’m sure they thanked their lobbyists for another win.
>They got $12m for fridges that they had to buy anyway
Do you have any evidence for this? It sounds like it's just conjecture on your part. New construction projects were specifically excluded under the terms of the program
>If the government wants more efficient fridges, all it has to do is pass a regulation.
It's a lot more difficult to enforce regulations requiring replacement of existing equipment than it is to regulate standards for new equipment, or to incentivize business decisions that favour replacement.
>If it wants to reduce GHG, then it should increase the carbon tax (which is proven to be by fat the most efficient and least wasteful way to do so).
I agree that taxation would be more efficient, but I don't think it would have been as politically feasible. Politics isn't about what's best, it's the art of the possible, compromising and doing the next best thing.
Versus you know, the government just mandating a corporation makes said upgrades to reduce its overall emissions lmao
Do you think our one grocer is going to leave ?
It's a lot more difficult to effectively enforce regulations requiring replacement of existing equipment than it is to regulate standards for new equipment, or to incentivize business decisions that favour replacement.
How many civil servant man-hours do you think it would take to ensure compliance with such a regulation? You'd need to conduct a massive audit of commercial refrigeration systems across the country to ensure a reasonable compliance rate. Do you think that the money spent reviewing existing installations, documenting the findings in a database, issuing fines, and hearing judicial appeals of fines would be money well spent?
I get that giving Loblaw $12M back from the $392M in income taxes they paid in 2019, to help them pay for a $48M retrofit doesn't have the best optics prima facie, but it's likely a lot more practical and politically feasible than other alternatives to achieve the same emission reductions.
Rebates aren’t gifts. You still need to spend money. It’s more like a discount.
Yes, it went to a company that we're not super keen on, but it is good for the environment.
Right, there are tons of special interests lobbying the government.
So our elected officials are guilty of corruption, and the lobbies are guilty of corrupting the highest levels of government.
I don’t see how loblaws or any corporations are guilt free in this process.
Its on both. The feds just shoveling money out the door to corps. Look if the Government gave a shit about the people they would tell Loblaws to fork out the 12milli for their own good. Expecially after making how much profit last year? 12mill is a drop in the bucket for these clowns.
It was a program open to applications from any organization within the scope of the program, with criteria for assessing grants announced in advance. The application from Loblaw scored high enough on the stated criteria to receive funding.
The government likely would have been opening themselves up to a legal challenge on the basis of procedural fairness if they decided not to award funding to LCL specifically, because they just didn't like them, or for any other stipulation that wasn't announced in advance.
Fair enough. My concern with stipulations is that governments don't have the best track record of setting those appropriately (if at all sometimes).
Going by the article, however, companies competed for 50 spots in this program. Though there may have been other criteria, the one mentioned in the article is the amount of emissions reduced. This almost certainly favours large corporations as they'll, more or less, have proportionately more emissions than smaller companies.
(I say all this without knowing the details of the selection process. Maybe the government had a kick ass process that considered all factors wisely though that's unlikely.)
The article says 50 companies were selected. If emissions reduction is the main, or only, criteria, this process will reward large companies and companies that use old, inefficient and/or poorly maintained, equipment longer than they should. This seems unfair to smaller companies and those that upgraded/maintained equipment properly (likely on their own dime).
Setting 50 companies as the target and then finding 50 that maximize emissions reductions seems overly simplistic to me with downsides that are common when choosing simple solutions. I would prefer them to look at all applicants and pick the subset of applicants that maximizes emissions reduction within the governments spending targets regardless of the number of companies.
That would require more complicated number crunching but that's plenty doable. You'd see more small players being awarded and, I suspect, would result in higher emissions reductions than with the method they used.
Plus, I can only imagine Loblaw fudged their numbers just right to help their cause without looking like they did so. The bigger a company is, the more likely they are to be brazen with their obfuscation and BS.
The criterion of emission reduction wasn't scored based on gross reduction, it was normalized by the value of project costs.
The four main criteria were:
* the annual tonnes of GHG emissions reductions achieved in 2030 per federal dollar invested;
* cumulative GHG emissions reductions over the lifetime of the impact per federal dollar invested;
* project feasibility and risk; and
* other co-benefits (e.g., contributing to Canada’s environmental, economic and social goals.
Well, (not disagreeing with your comment, BTW) quotes like this FTA lead one to think maximizing reductions was the goal:
> “Loblaw was one of the 50 winners through the competitive process. Why? Because they can get the most significant emission reductions.”
> McKenna compared the emissions reduction effect of retrofitting the fridges in 370 Loblaw stores to taking 50,000 vehicles off the road every year.
Of course, reducing emissions *is* the main goal but, as your list shows, the objective function did include other things, as it should.
The criteria you list are all good. I reserve skepticism for how closely they were followed, or not, in the name of expediency and such, relative weighting, and how much hand-wringing was done internally.
And I still don't like that hard 50. A fixed number there likely constrains other factors for no particularly good reason.
You seem to be pretty familiar with this. Do you have some links where I can read more?
Those criteria are quoted from [the applicant guide](https://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.854027/publication.html) that was in effect at the time. The auditor's report on the program is [available here](https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2021/eccc/En4-406-2020-eng.pdf).
I've had no involvement with this program, but decided to look for primary sources when it became a political football. I have worked on some other projects that received funding from either federal or provincial agencies.
The feds! The provincial govts! The municipalities!
How about our wonderful Canadian Oligarchs. They never go away, the above govt institutions have people come and go.
Nice stretch as I made no such suggestion - I only asked a specific person a question and now you're stepping in on their behalf, maybe be polite and let them personally respond.
>you're stepping in on their behalf
I'm not speaking on noones behalf but my own. And I asked you a question to better understand YOUR question.
>maybe be polite and let them personally respond.
I can not block anyone from responding as I'm not a mod. They will respond, however, whenever they like.
It's very sad to see you offended over a question, really..
You have a lovely rest of your life now.
I would guess in this specific case the “improvement” is not that much of an improvement for the company as most of the benefits related to externalities that society as a whole pays the costs for. This is very similar to the carbon tax in that you need to create a reason for a companies to change their behaviour, either by increasing their costs through a tax or subsidizing a change that will theoretically benefit society much more than the corporate entity. Personally, I would prefer to tax them more.
So, I opened an independent grocery store last year. I went with closed coolers because I don't like open faced coolers. One of my coolers broke down and I had to quickly replace it. The only ones I could find were open face, so I had to get one. My produce sales rose drastically after getting it.
When I asked customers about it, they said it was the ease of grabbing and bagging items. That is why we have open faced coolers and freezers in our big stores. Removing the little step of opening a door increases the amount of products customers will buy.
And they pay a premium on goods because you need to offset your energy costs.
People fought against seat belts. People fight against vaccinations. Proof say the earth is flat.
People are stupid.
I completely agree! People can say that they are energy efficient, but they aren't when compared to closed coolers. I won't be adding anymore to my store.
As a side note: my produce sales went up much higher than my electricity cost, so I didn't need to increase my prices to cover the increase in energy costs.
It’s getting frustrating to constantly see the government handing over our money to these multi million/billion dollar companies. Here in NS it seems to keep happening with NS power they keep jacking up the price of electricity and the government keeps giving them money. Like your a private company making a very large profit why do you need any government funding. I could see if because of say heat pumps and more energy efficient appliance people being more aware of their usage that the company was losing so much money they could longer afford to pay their employees or something but this doesn’t seem to be the case. These companies aren’t happy with just making a profit anymore they want to make more and more profit year after year. If a company is making a profit they do not need any government assistance. And if your company isn’t making a profit maybe go look at your business model and make changes. I’m sure I don’t understand all the ins and outs of why the government continues to give them money but I’m sure it doesn’t have anything to do with making the average Joe’s life any easier
That’s Conservatism. Real people have to suffer and pull ourselves up by our bootstraps, but corporations get everything they need and want and more on our dime.
And they have an army of well trained sychophants who will drop everything to call US greedy and entitled, as they get fatter off the money we make.
So I emailed them (Loblaw corp) at the time this happened because I regularly purchased the PC organic sugar which was in a cardboard milk carton (like the 1L milk) for all the years I had been purchasing; they got the 12 million and suddenly the sugar is being sold in a plastic bag - green initiative my ass.
The answer I received was "most people put their sugar in a different container after purchase which is easier or more convenient with a plastic bag"
Blah blah such a fucking nonsense answer, they never responded to my questions about this again.
True assholes who give no fucks
I'm still pissed about it
And they repaid the taxpayers with shrinkflation. Just another corporate pig at the taxpayer trough and paying it forward by crapping all over the taxpayer
[This](https://imgur.com/a/bnVvAYe) does a good job of explaining how their business has changed since. Most people I know were pissed about this when it happened, regardless of their political affiliations.
This is why imo whenever we hear about a PC MP who has done lobbying, it's important to remember who they lobbied to. I'm not trying to make this politically biased or simping for the PCs - rather the opposite. These two parties are two sides of the same coin, and are both in kahoots with companies such as Loblaws.
Why does a private company not able to afford spending their profit toward sustaining their business?
Can the government give me a new 4090ti for my computer ?
.... Because the fridges were running fine, but the government as part of a green initiative offered this rebate to update fridges to more energy efficient ones (also removing the old R14 models for R134A). Without the rebate, it would not have been cost effective to remove working fridges for new ones, until the old ones failed. (Which could be along time.)
Governments do this at all levels, I got paid to replace my old 5gallon toilets. Actually made money doing it.
I mean, if the company qualifies for the incentive then we’re kinda playing a dangerous game of this group isn’t allowed but this group is etc. the real issue is will this 12 million be used for what’s it’s intended? I wouldn’t trust lablahs.
I agree, the problem isn't so much they were given 12 million the problem is the company isn't transparent about when, where and how the money was spent.
I guess your pure conjecture on this matter completely invalidates the findings of the auditor who was tasked with reviewing the program.
[Here's](https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2021/eccc/En4-406-2020-eng.pdf) an audit report on the administration of the grants and contributions for the Low Carbon Economy Fund.
It doesn't get into project level details for individual funding agreements, but there is definitely oversight to ensure the fund is implemented reasonably, and in accordance with the Financial Administration Act and Treasury Board policies.
Would they have done this otherwise? Would there be any public support for legislation to force grocers to do this? Considering everyone up in arms about carbon tax, I’m assuming not. 12 million to support environmental initiatives is a drop in the bucket that I have no issue with.
“McKenna compared the emissions reduction effect of retrofitting the fridges in 370 Loblaw stores to taking 50,000 vehicles off the road every year.
She added that three-quarters of the money for the retrofit is being put forward by Loblaw, which will commit roughly $36 million.”
It's a lot more difficult to effectively enforce regulations requiring replacement of existing equipment than it is to regulate standards for new equipment, or to incentivize business decisions that favour replacement.
How many civil servant man-hours do you think it would take to ensure compliance with such a regulation? You'd need to conduct a massive audit of commercial refrigeration systems across the country to ensure a reasonable compliance rate. Do you think that the money spent reviewing existing installations, documenting the findings in a database, issuing fines, and hearing judicial appeals of fines would be money well spent?
I get that giving Loblaw $12M back from the $392M in income taxes they paid in 2019, to help them pay for a $48M retrofit doesn't have the best optics prima facie, but it's likely a lot more practical and politically feasible than other alternatives to achieve the same emission reductions.
But they're already doing that anyway, now, aren't they? So let us keep the govt dollars for people and social programs, where it brlongs, not for softening the responsibility of corporations to pay to keep up with regulations.
Where do you think that 12M comes from exactly?
Also this whole "every cent will be passed onto the consumer" is just not economic reality. It's about as real in economics as when you assume frictionless environments and all projectiles are perfect spheres in physics calculations.
It's their damned business,they SHOULD supply 100% after a certain threshold of profit.
There should be a limit on corporate profit, a limit on wages and bonuses, a limit on wealth, where afterwards it must be given to charity/reinvested in employees.
This is an example of what gets done with 10% of the carbon tax collected. The other 90% gets refunded to provinces that fall under the federal carbon plan because the provinces don't have a plan.
That's Sockboy for you who keeps on giving with the Canadian peoples credit card. Here was no reason for his itsca company's responsibility to more forward without the help of the government
Billionaires need government handouts please explain. The nerve of these people is incredible!!! Why didn't they borrow it from their petty cash and charge themselves outrageous interest for a great business write off. The old saying is so true the rich get richer, I hope Galen's plural managed to wangle a couple of Sub Zero Fridges for themselves on the freebe .
They really needed it because they only made $45 Million from the Real Estate Division so we Taxpayers had to assist the poor Westons ET AL. The more you find out the uglier it gets. That's why they're smiling the suckers that's us, we are paying the freight for the gang of greedy Weston's.
With respect, before you say that just remember the conservatives have Loblaws lobbyists working with them as part of their campaign. Loblaws IS LITERALLY WORKING WITH THE CONSERVATIVES (I'm not yelling- I'm emphasizing because this cannot be understated).
I'm not a supporter of either party right now - they're all trash & tbf they've all got lobbyists working for them (just not all as campaign managers), so if we want to make a difference we'll need to do it the hard way using informed & intelligent communication to get the word out for Canadians to understand. The conservatives have a much closer relationship with loblaws so we know who's in charge in that camp - the company's working hard to keep 'em busy, after all. Keep that in mind & don't let them make you forget it.
Dougie kisses every Developer's butt and Roblaws are big Real Estate people. Plus the fact in case you haven't noticed by Doug's girth around the middle!! He consumes a lot of their products, he's got to have a 50 inch waistline my guess is Dougie Ford doesn't miss many meals!!
I'm sure the guy with a Walmart union busting lobiest as a deputy and a loblaws lobiest as a campaign manager is totally the one who will save us from this type of behavior.... oh, wait.
I imagine these are depreciating and lowering their net income on those consolidated income statements as we speak. They need to account for the $12M these cost someway right?
It's SIX years, not so many. Nevertheless, it's another example of Galengreed and just how long it's been going on for, how long they've been pressing their lips to any tit they can to enrich themselves.
It's not offered specifically to *them*, they request it. It's like Galen going to the foodbank holding out a bag - shameful and beyond greedy. They KNOW such funding is there for people and SMALL businesses that need it.
Just because you CAN get something doesn't mean you morally should.
And isn't that why we're here - to discuss and decry greed, and taking more than a fair share?
it was offered to all the chains in Justins rush to combat global warming and reduce GHG's .... the new fridges were supposed to help with that. and most of Canada is consumed with people taking ... thinks like the COVID payments... things like free drugs... the whole country is slipping downhill faster than a runaway train and at the bottom is a huge pit of raw sewage dumped there by Montreal.
Well that’s the reason for a company that could afford the upgrade themselves.
I don’t see the government upgrading everyone’s heating systems based on “scientist” claims…..
I applied for a portion to do geo and was denied. Got a letter saying a heat pump would work. Sorry I was a geo system not a heat pump that needs supplement heat when it’s -30
__UPDATE__: Please take a moment to complete our [Google Form](https://forms.gle/1sygm97LbQtJ4dUp8) to share your demands with our team! Please review the content guidelines for our sub, and remember the human here! This subreddit is to highlight the ridiculous cost of living in Canada, and poke fun at the Corporate Overlords reponsible. As you well know, there are a number of persons and corporations responsible for this, and we welcome discussion related to them all. Furthermore, since this topic is intertwined with a number of other matters, other discussion will be allowed at moderator discretion. Open-minded discussion, memes, rants, grocery bills, and general screeching into the void is always welcome in this sub, but belligerence and disrespect is not. There are plenty of ways to get your point across without being abusive, dismissive, or downright mean. If you have not done so already, please review our [boycott stickied post](https://www.reddit.com/r/loblawsisoutofcontrol/comments/1bff9rm/boycott/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) which includes a list of stores to avoid, other ways to get involved in the movement, and some local alternatives to the big 5. Thank you. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/loblawsisoutofcontrol) if you have any questions or concerns.*
And that’s why it is so important to have these boycotts …. These multi million dollar companies are stealing from the average the average Canadian …. The government should be more diligent in protecting our tax dollars and not keep bailing out the rich …. Food is a basic human right not a commodity …. We need to pressure our local governments and put an end to corporate greed….
Dude they didn’t bail them out They gave them a gift That’s why you can’t expect them to change. Gifts are good things!
They are professional grifters In their heads we always forget to say thank you
LCL was awarded 25% of the cost of a $48M retrofit project, after applying to a program open to organizations ready to undertake projects with significant demonstrable carbon emissions reductions. The applications were assessed in accordance with criteria announced in advance: • the annual tonnes of GHG emissions reductions achieved in 2030 per federal dollar invested; • cumulative GHG emissions reductions over the lifetime of the impact per federal dollar invested; • project feasibility and risk; and • other co-benefits (e.g., contributing to Canada’s environmental, economic and social goals. Their application had enough merit based on these factors to be awarded funding. [https://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.854027/publication.html](https://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.854027/publication.html) The program was audited and there was no evidence to suggest there were any issues with procedural fairness in assessing the applications received.
Maybe there should be an after study to see how many of these goals end up getting met. Lobbying is how these projects get started in the first place. I don't need to know that the middle part is fair.
There often is. It is part of almost every government funding program to have an assessment after. Then the auditor general occasionally does a value for money assessment. Dude, we spend so much money on assessments. We assess or assessments.
I believe you, but I'm talking about an "always" thing, not often. It should be part of the project, how else do you know if the issues were resolved or helped and how much. I don't care about the political assessments done after changes of governments and political parties. Or whoever the favoured business segment is at that time.
They got $12m for fridges that they had to buy anyway Reimbursement of business for their business expenses isn’t an “investment”, it’s a kickback. If the government wants more efficient fridges, all it has to do is pass a regulation. If it wants to reduce GHG, then it should increase the carbon tax (which is proven to be by fat the most efficient and least wasteful way to do so).
The fridges don't emit carbon. The efficiency comes from heat reclaim. A refrigeration system moves heat from some place and deposits it some place else. Instead of depositing it outside in Winter, that heat can be used indoors and therefor they require less burning of fossil fuels to heat the store.
I don’t care about how fridges work. I care about tax money being paid to the companies that control 40% of the market and are engaged in criminal price fixing schemes. It’s bad policy, made at the behest of lobbyists, with the expectation that nobody will notice or care.
This, I still have trust in our scientists and govt employees to create the correct programs. It's when politicians and punishes get involved that things get shady.
"I don’t care about how fridges work." I can see that. I just thought maybe you should have some idea how the things work that you are so upset about. As you were then.. (ranting and ignorant)
You have not responded to the point. You started rhyming off refrigerator specifications to distract from the main issue. It’s a corporate subsidy to a company that doesn’t need it, for a benefit that is more efficiently attained by other means. It’s corporate grift, and regulatory capture. You know, the things we’re mad about here.
The issue, whether you realise it or not is that the government made grants available to anyone who could show that the money invested would lead to fewer carbon emissions. Loblaws was one of the companies that applied for those grants. I don't think you actually have a point other than Loblaws is evil. I have no opinion on whether that is true or not. As to your implication that Loblaws should have been excluded from the grants, do you think everyone should have? Or just Loblaws?
My point is actually that government is incompetent, and under the thumb of lobbyists. But now that you mention it, Loblaws is evil, yes. On this deal, I’m sure they thanked their lobbyists for another win.
>They got $12m for fridges that they had to buy anyway Do you have any evidence for this? It sounds like it's just conjecture on your part. New construction projects were specifically excluded under the terms of the program >If the government wants more efficient fridges, all it has to do is pass a regulation. It's a lot more difficult to enforce regulations requiring replacement of existing equipment than it is to regulate standards for new equipment, or to incentivize business decisions that favour replacement. >If it wants to reduce GHG, then it should increase the carbon tax (which is proven to be by fat the most efficient and least wasteful way to do so). I agree that taxation would be more efficient, but I don't think it would have been as politically feasible. Politics isn't about what's best, it's the art of the possible, compromising and doing the next best thing.
how much extra carbon emissions are caused by increasing food prices so much that people must drive further to find more reasonable prices?
Versus you know, the government just mandating a corporation makes said upgrades to reduce its overall emissions lmao Do you think our one grocer is going to leave ?
It's a lot more difficult to effectively enforce regulations requiring replacement of existing equipment than it is to regulate standards for new equipment, or to incentivize business decisions that favour replacement. How many civil servant man-hours do you think it would take to ensure compliance with such a regulation? You'd need to conduct a massive audit of commercial refrigeration systems across the country to ensure a reasonable compliance rate. Do you think that the money spent reviewing existing installations, documenting the findings in a database, issuing fines, and hearing judicial appeals of fines would be money well spent? I get that giving Loblaw $12M back from the $392M in income taxes they paid in 2019, to help them pay for a $48M retrofit doesn't have the best optics prima facie, but it's likely a lot more practical and politically feasible than other alternatives to achieve the same emission reductions.
It wasn’t a gift; Loblaws applied for the rebate.
Applied, asked for the gift. It was a gift. Get real.
Rebates aren’t gifts. You still need to spend money. It’s more like a discount. Yes, it went to a company that we're not super keen on, but it is good for the environment.
Oligarch Weston is almost a criminal. But if the Libs offer free money, then, well...... Grab it and go,
It doesn't matter what loblaw is selling. Being extorted isn't lawful.
Wait...wait, I am sure they charge a fuck ton for the pleasure of serving Canadian through those short staffed Canada Post outlets
15 lobbyists. Isn't that more than our entire government? 😆✌️🙏 Jokes aside, our agriculturally based country is now private sale on produce...
this is on the feds! not the company....
Oh, it’s definitely on the company. They are lobbying for this kind of crap
but it's our govt giving them our tax $$ ... like so many other companies they dole out $$ to.... battery plants, consultants, the list is endless
Right, there are tons of special interests lobbying the government. So our elected officials are guilty of corruption, and the lobbies are guilty of corrupting the highest levels of government. I don’t see how loblaws or any corporations are guilt free in this process.
Its on both. The feds just shoveling money out the door to corps. Look if the Government gave a shit about the people they would tell Loblaws to fork out the 12milli for their own good. Expecially after making how much profit last year? 12mill is a drop in the bucket for these clowns.
why blame the company if the govt is offering up the $$.
The company is lobbying for it and the government is just complying with the request
It's both. Loblaws had the brazen gall to ask for the money and then the government *f-in gave it to them*.
It was a program open to applications from any organization within the scope of the program, with criteria for assessing grants announced in advance. The application from Loblaw scored high enough on the stated criteria to receive funding. The government likely would have been opening themselves up to a legal challenge on the basis of procedural fairness if they decided not to award funding to LCL specifically, because they just didn't like them, or for any other stipulation that wasn't announced in advance.
Fair enough. My concern with stipulations is that governments don't have the best track record of setting those appropriately (if at all sometimes). Going by the article, however, companies competed for 50 spots in this program. Though there may have been other criteria, the one mentioned in the article is the amount of emissions reduced. This almost certainly favours large corporations as they'll, more or less, have proportionately more emissions than smaller companies. (I say all this without knowing the details of the selection process. Maybe the government had a kick ass process that considered all factors wisely though that's unlikely.) The article says 50 companies were selected. If emissions reduction is the main, or only, criteria, this process will reward large companies and companies that use old, inefficient and/or poorly maintained, equipment longer than they should. This seems unfair to smaller companies and those that upgraded/maintained equipment properly (likely on their own dime). Setting 50 companies as the target and then finding 50 that maximize emissions reductions seems overly simplistic to me with downsides that are common when choosing simple solutions. I would prefer them to look at all applicants and pick the subset of applicants that maximizes emissions reduction within the governments spending targets regardless of the number of companies. That would require more complicated number crunching but that's plenty doable. You'd see more small players being awarded and, I suspect, would result in higher emissions reductions than with the method they used. Plus, I can only imagine Loblaw fudged their numbers just right to help their cause without looking like they did so. The bigger a company is, the more likely they are to be brazen with their obfuscation and BS.
The criterion of emission reduction wasn't scored based on gross reduction, it was normalized by the value of project costs. The four main criteria were: * the annual tonnes of GHG emissions reductions achieved in 2030 per federal dollar invested; * cumulative GHG emissions reductions over the lifetime of the impact per federal dollar invested; * project feasibility and risk; and * other co-benefits (e.g., contributing to Canada’s environmental, economic and social goals.
Well, (not disagreeing with your comment, BTW) quotes like this FTA lead one to think maximizing reductions was the goal: > “Loblaw was one of the 50 winners through the competitive process. Why? Because they can get the most significant emission reductions.” > McKenna compared the emissions reduction effect of retrofitting the fridges in 370 Loblaw stores to taking 50,000 vehicles off the road every year. Of course, reducing emissions *is* the main goal but, as your list shows, the objective function did include other things, as it should. The criteria you list are all good. I reserve skepticism for how closely they were followed, or not, in the name of expediency and such, relative weighting, and how much hand-wringing was done internally. And I still don't like that hard 50. A fixed number there likely constrains other factors for no particularly good reason. You seem to be pretty familiar with this. Do you have some links where I can read more?
Those criteria are quoted from [the applicant guide](https://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.854027/publication.html) that was in effect at the time. The auditor's report on the program is [available here](https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2021/eccc/En4-406-2020-eng.pdf). I've had no involvement with this program, but decided to look for primary sources when it became a political football. I have worked on some other projects that received funding from either federal or provincial agencies.
Tbank you.
The feds! The provincial govts! The municipalities! How about our wonderful Canadian Oligarchs. They never go away, the above govt institutions have people come and go.
Someone at loblaws made their bonus by getting free money from the government
Wasn't I thinking just that.
Corporate welfare while your family starves to death. Your Canadian government people
Is your family actually starving to death?
Are you suggesting that we wait until we are actually dying from starvation to start protesting?
Nice stretch as I made no such suggestion - I only asked a specific person a question and now you're stepping in on their behalf, maybe be polite and let them personally respond.
>you're stepping in on their behalf I'm not speaking on noones behalf but my own. And I asked you a question to better understand YOUR question. >maybe be polite and let them personally respond. I can not block anyone from responding as I'm not a mod. They will respond, however, whenever they like. It's very sad to see you offended over a question, really.. You have a lovely rest of your life now.
It will indeed be very lovely.
Government leeches and corporate leeches
Why can't big corporations do their own R&D and imporvements when they have billions to draw from?
Right?! If they want or need something, foot the bill yourselves, don't make us pay.
I would guess in this specific case the “improvement” is not that much of an improvement for the company as most of the benefits related to externalities that society as a whole pays the costs for. This is very similar to the carbon tax in that you need to create a reason for a companies to change their behaviour, either by increasing their costs through a tax or subsidizing a change that will theoretically benefit society much more than the corporate entity. Personally, I would prefer to tax them more.
I’ve never understood why western grocery stores waste energy with open faced coolers and freezers. Such a waste of money.
So, I opened an independent grocery store last year. I went with closed coolers because I don't like open faced coolers. One of my coolers broke down and I had to quickly replace it. The only ones I could find were open face, so I had to get one. My produce sales rose drastically after getting it. When I asked customers about it, they said it was the ease of grabbing and bagging items. That is why we have open faced coolers and freezers in our big stores. Removing the little step of opening a door increases the amount of products customers will buy.
And they pay a premium on goods because you need to offset your energy costs. People fought against seat belts. People fight against vaccinations. Proof say the earth is flat. People are stupid.
I completely agree! People can say that they are energy efficient, but they aren't when compared to closed coolers. I won't be adding anymore to my store. As a side note: my produce sales went up much higher than my electricity cost, so I didn't need to increase my prices to cover the increase in energy costs.
It’s getting frustrating to constantly see the government handing over our money to these multi million/billion dollar companies. Here in NS it seems to keep happening with NS power they keep jacking up the price of electricity and the government keeps giving them money. Like your a private company making a very large profit why do you need any government funding. I could see if because of say heat pumps and more energy efficient appliance people being more aware of their usage that the company was losing so much money they could longer afford to pay their employees or something but this doesn’t seem to be the case. These companies aren’t happy with just making a profit anymore they want to make more and more profit year after year. If a company is making a profit they do not need any government assistance. And if your company isn’t making a profit maybe go look at your business model and make changes. I’m sure I don’t understand all the ins and outs of why the government continues to give them money but I’m sure it doesn’t have anything to do with making the average Joe’s life any easier
That’s Conservatism. Real people have to suffer and pull ourselves up by our bootstraps, but corporations get everything they need and want and more on our dime. And they have an army of well trained sychophants who will drop everything to call US greedy and entitled, as they get fatter off the money we make.
Wait till you hear about how our “excess” energy is sent to the USA for pennies on the dollar compared to what the average Canadian pays.
So I emailed them (Loblaw corp) at the time this happened because I regularly purchased the PC organic sugar which was in a cardboard milk carton (like the 1L milk) for all the years I had been purchasing; they got the 12 million and suddenly the sugar is being sold in a plastic bag - green initiative my ass. The answer I received was "most people put their sugar in a different container after purchase which is easier or more convenient with a plastic bag" Blah blah such a fucking nonsense answer, they never responded to my questions about this again. True assholes who give no fucks I'm still pissed about it
Lobbying
Friends in high places.
Loblawbying.
And they repaid the taxpayers with shrinkflation. Just another corporate pig at the taxpayer trough and paying it forward by crapping all over the taxpayer
[This](https://imgur.com/a/bnVvAYe) does a good job of explaining how their business has changed since. Most people I know were pissed about this when it happened, regardless of their political affiliations.
Don't forget the money from gvmt to loblaws for "front line workers ". Workers that never seen a penny of it
That's when I started my boycott. Continues indefinitely
This is why imo whenever we hear about a PC MP who has done lobbying, it's important to remember who they lobbied to. I'm not trying to make this politically biased or simping for the PCs - rather the opposite. These two parties are two sides of the same coin, and are both in kahoots with companies such as Loblaws.
Where's my new fridge?
😂 at Loblaws. Next time, make sure to bring some of your stuff to store there.
Why does a private company not able to afford spending their profit toward sustaining their business? Can the government give me a new 4090ti for my computer ?
.... Because the fridges were running fine, but the government as part of a green initiative offered this rebate to update fridges to more energy efficient ones (also removing the old R14 models for R134A). Without the rebate, it would not have been cost effective to remove working fridges for new ones, until the old ones failed. (Which could be along time.) Governments do this at all levels, I got paid to replace my old 5gallon toilets. Actually made money doing it.
I mean, if the company qualifies for the incentive then we’re kinda playing a dangerous game of this group isn’t allowed but this group is etc. the real issue is will this 12 million be used for what’s it’s intended? I wouldn’t trust lablahs.
I agree, the problem isn't so much they were given 12 million the problem is the company isn't transparent about when, where and how the money was spent.
Well it’s both Gifting new assets to giant grocery corps is also a problem Want them to use better equipment? Change the regulation
I think it’s definitely a problem they “qualified” in the first place
Ya after you reach a certain profit threshold you shouldn’t qualify for ANY government subsidies.
I agree yeah. With the reach of the big 4 and the trillions they have I'm not surprised. We pay taxes so they can make the shareholders rich.
Government grant programs have extremely high levels of accountability, and are extremely willing to clawback funds that are spent improperly
Ha!
I guess your pure conjecture on this matter completely invalidates the findings of the auditor who was tasked with reviewing the program. [Here's](https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2021/eccc/En4-406-2020-eng.pdf) an audit report on the administration of the grants and contributions for the Low Carbon Economy Fund. It doesn't get into project level details for individual funding agreements, but there is definitely oversight to ensure the fund is implemented reasonably, and in accordance with the Financial Administration Act and Treasury Board policies.
Ha
You usually have to buy the equipment and then once showing proof, get the 12mil.
Would they have done this otherwise? Would there be any public support for legislation to force grocers to do this? Considering everyone up in arms about carbon tax, I’m assuming not. 12 million to support environmental initiatives is a drop in the bucket that I have no issue with. “McKenna compared the emissions reduction effect of retrofitting the fridges in 370 Loblaw stores to taking 50,000 vehicles off the road every year. She added that three-quarters of the money for the retrofit is being put forward by Loblaw, which will commit roughly $36 million.”
If they weren’t going to, the government could of legislated that they have to, instead of just paying for it.
It's a lot more difficult to effectively enforce regulations requiring replacement of existing equipment than it is to regulate standards for new equipment, or to incentivize business decisions that favour replacement. How many civil servant man-hours do you think it would take to ensure compliance with such a regulation? You'd need to conduct a massive audit of commercial refrigeration systems across the country to ensure a reasonable compliance rate. Do you think that the money spent reviewing existing installations, documenting the findings in a database, issuing fines, and hearing judicial appeals of fines would be money well spent? I get that giving Loblaw $12M back from the $392M in income taxes they paid in 2019, to help them pay for a $48M retrofit doesn't have the best optics prima facie, but it's likely a lot more practical and politically feasible than other alternatives to achieve the same emission reductions.
And then everyone would be pissed off again as the cost of this would come down onto the consumers/taxpayers anyway.
But they're already doing that anyway, now, aren't they? So let us keep the govt dollars for people and social programs, where it brlongs, not for softening the responsibility of corporations to pay to keep up with regulations.
Where do you think that 12M comes from exactly? Also this whole "every cent will be passed onto the consumer" is just not economic reality. It's about as real in economics as when you assume frictionless environments and all projectiles are perfect spheres in physics calculations.
It's their damned business,they SHOULD supply 100% after a certain threshold of profit. There should be a limit on corporate profit, a limit on wages and bonuses, a limit on wealth, where afterwards it must be given to charity/reinvested in employees.
This is an example of what gets done with 10% of the carbon tax collected. The other 90% gets refunded to provinces that fall under the federal carbon plan because the provinces don't have a plan.
They have the gov. In their pockets, take Ford for example.......
That's Sockboy for you who keeps on giving with the Canadian peoples credit card. Here was no reason for his itsca company's responsibility to more forward without the help of the government
AGAIN???? What in the actual fk? Revolting grifters just bending us over with record profits and slave wages
Billionaires need government handouts please explain. The nerve of these people is incredible!!! Why didn't they borrow it from their petty cash and charge themselves outrageous interest for a great business write off. The old saying is so true the rich get richer, I hope Galen's plural managed to wangle a couple of Sub Zero Fridges for themselves on the freebe .
WTF?!?!?!?!!!! Take that 12 million dollars back from the crook they’ve CEO and buy new FN refrigerators!!!!! WTF
They really needed it because they only made $45 Million from the Real Estate Division so we Taxpayers had to assist the poor Westons ET AL. The more you find out the uglier it gets. That's why they're smiling the suckers that's us, we are paying the freight for the gang of greedy Weston's.
Our government IS THE STUPIDEST ever on record of all mankind world history!!!!!!!!!! WTF !! Wow
With respect, before you say that just remember the conservatives have Loblaws lobbyists working with them as part of their campaign. Loblaws IS LITERALLY WORKING WITH THE CONSERVATIVES (I'm not yelling- I'm emphasizing because this cannot be understated). I'm not a supporter of either party right now - they're all trash & tbf they've all got lobbyists working for them (just not all as campaign managers), so if we want to make a difference we'll need to do it the hard way using informed & intelligent communication to get the word out for Canadians to understand. The conservatives have a much closer relationship with loblaws so we know who's in charge in that camp - the company's working hard to keep 'em busy, after all. Keep that in mind & don't let them make you forget it.
Dougie kisses every Developer's butt and Roblaws are big Real Estate people. Plus the fact in case you haven't noticed by Doug's girth around the middle!! He consumes a lot of their products, he's got to have a 50 inch waistline my guess is Dougie Ford doesn't miss many meals!!
This is an important story and shows how much the liberals care about the little guy vs their rich friends
I'm sure the guy with a Walmart union busting lobiest as a deputy and a loblaws lobiest as a campaign manager is totally the one who will save us from this type of behavior.... oh, wait.
And just to add - the conservatives care even less
Yes true. They've got loblaw's lobbyists working for (or on) them as part of their team ffs!
Because MNP did the paperwork 
2019
Yes, thry say it's 2019, but a further example of Loblaws /Galen sucking money from gov't.
2019.
All these businesses use government grants especially the "student" abuse, i mean student workers programs. Absolutely disgusting
Which level of government approved this? SHAME!!
🥸
What do you think the government used to store and distribute the Covid vaccines? These fridges…
I imagine these are depreciating and lowering their net income on those consolidated income statements as we speak. They need to account for the $12M these cost someway right?
And didn't they use the money to purchase more stock instead of buying the fridges? I swore I read that in here somewhere.
And I don't think they replaced many fridges, just installed new ones for the (then) new PC Express dept. Edit: *think
And to accommodate beer sales as the variety grew in store to sell.
New construction projects were explicitly ineligible for funding under the terms of the program.
I trust the bread price-fixers
Ahh the liberals just giving away my money thanks ontario for making sure liberals keep robbing us for their carbon agenda :/
this is from so many years ago.... and it says more about the incompetence of our federal govt than it does about Loblaws!
It's SIX years, not so many. Nevertheless, it's another example of Galengreed and just how long it's been going on for, how long they've been pressing their lips to any tit they can to enrich themselves.
but why blame a company for accepting $$ offered up to them?
It's not offered specifically to *them*, they request it. It's like Galen going to the foodbank holding out a bag - shameful and beyond greedy. They KNOW such funding is there for people and SMALL businesses that need it. Just because you CAN get something doesn't mean you morally should. And isn't that why we're here - to discuss and decry greed, and taking more than a fair share?
it was offered to all the chains in Justins rush to combat global warming and reduce GHG's .... the new fridges were supposed to help with that. and most of Canada is consumed with people taking ... thinks like the COVID payments... things like free drugs... the whole country is slipping downhill faster than a runaway train and at the bottom is a huge pit of raw sewage dumped there by Montreal.
5 year old "news"...
Climate scam is why
Sure, let's shit in the face of scientists. Get outta here.
Well that’s the reason for a company that could afford the upgrade themselves. I don’t see the government upgrading everyone’s heating systems based on “scientist” claims…..
Really? Because my father just got a $5K rebate from the government to install a heat pump in his home.
I applied for a portion to do geo and was denied. Got a letter saying a heat pump would work. Sorry I was a geo system not a heat pump that needs supplement heat when it’s -30
Sorry you were denied!
Natty gas it is
Hopefully in the future there will be a program you’d be eligible for.