this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2025
28 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

8141 readers
1890 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


πŸ’΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] StoneyPicton 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I'm a lazy, not so bright contrarian who doesn't know the details enough to have formed a sensible defense. What I do know is that I have a right to express my beliefs through my patronage and I'm currently being inhibited in that effort by the intentional obfuscation of the information I need.

[–] n2burns 3 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Well, you're the one who brought up the charter, so I hoped you would have an idea of specifically how the current standard is violating the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. IANAL, but as I see it:

What I do know is that I have a right to express my beliefs through my patronage

Sure, no arguments here. Section 2(b): 2 Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

and I’m currently being inhibited in that effort by the intentional obfuscation of the information I need.

This is the problem. I'm not sure there's any reason, in the charter or in other law, that a private business has to publicly disclose the origin of their raw materials. Yes, at certain stages they have to disclose to the government, potentially for health & safety, imports/tariffs, etc. And I do believe that labeling requires a manufacturer/distributor to be listed so there is a corporation who can be held responsible for the final product. However, where a company sources their ingredients could almost certainly be considered a trade secret, and outside of new legislation, I can't see manufacturers being forced to disclose this.

[–] StoneyPicton 1 points 4 hours ago

Thank you for adding more substance to my rant. Is the reason for a private business not to disclose the origin of their inputs exactly that by not doing so it deprives me of my right to express my beliefs? Obviously any existing laws or regulations are exactly where I am trying to force change. I don't agree with the protections offered under trade secrets as I am only suggesting they are forced to add a list of countries and only a percentage of the inputs they represent. In addition I'm already tired of corporations hiding too much under the "trade secret" banner. In general I have not been a fan of corporate governance for some time and feel it is time to bring them to heal. I know this opens up a whole can of worms but I would argue it to the end. Thanks again for your thoughts.