April 2025 – Page 2 – Consumer Choice Center

Other provinces should follow Alberta on charter schools

It’s high time for Alberta’s charter school revolution to come to the rest of Canada.

Parents in every province deserve choice and value for their money when it comes to educating the next generation.

It’s simply not fair to try to force parents to keep their kids in failing government-run schools.

It’s also unfair to ask taxpayers to continue to dump billions of additional taxpayer dollars into a system that is broken.

Charter schools, to be clear, are not private schools. They exist within the public school system, but they offer parents more specialization, have a proven track record of better test scores, and keep unions out of the classroom.

Just take a quick look at the sorry state of education in the province of Ontario to understand why it’s time to shake up the system.

Over the past 20 years, Ontario teenagers’ test scores have fallen by 35 points in math and 12 points in reading.

What does that mean? Experts consider a 20-point drop in performance to be equivalent to a whole year’s worth of learning. In other words, today’s 15-year-olds are nearly two years behind their 2003 counterparts in math and more than half a year behind in reading.

Is this decline due to a lack of government investment in education? Hardly. Back in 2022, the year before the study period began, Ontario spent $14.3 billion on education. Last year, that number climbed to $37.6 billion.

That’s a 163% increase — more than double the rate of inflation. And during that time, enrolment remained largely flat, with an unprecedented number of parents choosing to remove their kids from the government-run school system.

Union leaders keep saying that falling test scores are due to a shortfall in funding. But that’s complete nonsense.

If all it took to fix the state of government-run education in Canada today was more government spending, the issue would have been addressed a long time ago.

It’s time for provincial governments to think big. Parents don’t want their kids to be trapped in failing government-run schools. That’s why, for example, student enrolment in independent schools in Canada’s largest province has soared by 40% over the past 20 years, despite no government assistance toward paying tuition.

It’s time for the rest of Canada to adopt the Alberta model.

Back in the late 1990s, the Ralph Klein government saw that Alberta’s government-run schools were falling short and decided to shake up the system.

The government decided to establish the first charter schools in Canada.

Alberta’s charter schools exist within the public system. They don’t charge tuition because they get funding from the provincial government. But, crucially, these schools have far more autonomy when it comes to how they approach teaching. And teachers don’t have to belong to unions.

Charter schools are a huge innovation in another way. They cater to the unique needs of students. Many specialize in areas like educating kids with special needs or offer additional focus and motivation for kids who excel in the arts or sports.

What do the results from Alberta look like?

Students at Alberta’s charter schools outperform those in government-run schools by a full letter grade on standardized testing.

And, as a cherry on top, charter schools in Alberta cost 32% less per enrolled child.

That means better results and savings for taxpayers.

The success of Alberta’s charter schools can be assessed in another way: What does enrolment demand look like? Do parents want to send their kids there?

The answer is that parents are looking to send their kids to charter schools in droves. For every Alberta student in a charter school, two are on the waiting list.

Charter schools have been a smashing success in Alberta — demand is high, test scores are strong, costs are down and parents are happy.

Introducing charter schools in other provinces, like Ontario, should be a no-brainer.

If there was ever a time for more choices in education, it’s now. It’s high time Canada’s provincial politicians make it happen.

Originally published here

Further liberalizing alcohol sales could help Ontario

With the trade war between Canada and the United States ratcheting up by the hour, Canadian governments are about to be awash in red ink.

Provincial governments in particular will face a world of financial hurt, with the feds taking in any tariff revenue and provinces preparing to spend billions to help impacted industries and workers.

Ontario will likely be hit the hardest of any province, with job losses, a recession and big deficits likely on the horizon.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s government needs to be doing everything it can to secure the province’s financial position.

That’s why it’s crucial to make reforms to the way Ontario approaches the sale of alcohol. If the Ford government were to do away with Liquor Control Board of Ontario retail stores, while still maintaining the LCBO as the province’s wholesaler, Ontario taxpayers could save billions.

Consider these facts.

First, Ontario is losing out on over $100 million a year by not allowing private retailers to sell spirits. It makes zero sense for the provincial government to be perfectly comfortable with private retailers selling beer and wine but not spirits.

Second, Ontario wastes $1 million per new LCBO store built when compared to simply allowing a private retailer to fill the void. It’s clear that there’s an appetite out there in the private sector to build new locations where they could sell beer, wine, and spirits at no cost to taxpayers. Why are Ontario taxpayers paying to build new stores when private industry is willing to do so for free?

Third, Ontario could save over $500 million a year if the province stopped operating LCBO locations and allowed the private sector to sell all forms of alcohol, as is the case in Alberta. That’s not to mention the huge windfall the province would get from selling present LCBO locations to private retailers.

In this case, the province could still have the LCBO as the province’s wholesaler, responsible for providing alcohol to private stores in the same way that it provides beer and wine to grocery stores right now and all forms of alcohol to restaurants.

It’s through its role as the province’s wholesaler that the LCBO makes its money, not through running retail locations.

Importantly, keeping the LCBO as the province’s wholesaler means Ford would still have the ability to take American alcohol off the shelves in Ontario should the present trade dispute linger on.

That bargaining chip, which Ford and other premiers have used in the early days of Canada’s present trade conflict with the United States, would still be fully available to the provincial government.

LCBO retail locations were created nearly a century ago to deal with the sale of alcohol after more than a decade of prohibition. Government-run liquor stores were designed for the 1920s, not the 2020s. The rationale for the LCBO retail operations in the 1920s was morality. What’s the reason for its existence today, other than limiting consumer choice and allowing for more government control?

Ford said repeatedly during the provincial election campaign that just wrapped up that he was prepared to spend tens of billions of dollars to deal with the threat of American tariffs. Now, that tariff threat has very much become a reality.

When Finance Minister Peter Bethlenfalvy releases his next budget this spring, it will presumably include all kinds of new spending, which Ford ran on during this year’s provincial election campaign.

But the government was already in a deficit position before the trade conflict and the province is clearly short on cash.

Instead of running massive deficits and passing tens of billions of dollars of additional debt onto future generations, Ford and Bethlenfalvy should be looking for ways to find efficiencies and get the province in a better fiscal position.

In that context, generating savings by ending the LCBO monopoly — while still keeping it as the province’s wholesaler — makes all kinds of sense. After all, it was Ford who introduced more consumer choice for Ontarians by allowing beer and wine to be sold in grocery stores and corner stores. Why shouldn’t he be the very same premier to take the next logical step, both for the sake of consumer choice and for the province’s bottom line?

Originally published here

Thailand’s Nicotine Vape Ban Harms Consumers and Public Health

BANGKOK, TH – Last week, the Thai House of Representatives approved a report proposing three potential approaches to regulating vaping and heated tobacco devices, reinforcing the existing ban, regulating HTPs while maintaining a vape ban, or legalizing both under stern regulations.

However, defying harm reduction efforts, lawmakers dismissed legalization, citing dubious concerns about health concerns, youth access and enforcement challenges. This effort is not just misguided, but an assault on consumer choice and effective harm reduction.

Shrey Madaan and Tarmizi Anuwar, regional representatives of the global consumer advocacy group Consumer Choice Center, criticized Thailand’s denialism that will continue to harm adult consumers.

“Prohibition doesn’t eliminate demand—it fuels black markets. This is evident in countries that have imposed vaping bans, only to see illegal trade flourish,” said Shrey Madaan, India Policy Associate.

“Bhutan’s tobacco ban, once praised as a model for public health, collapsed under the weight of rampant smuggling, forcing the government to reverse course. When governments outlaw safer alternatives while leaving combustible cigarettes on the shelves, they create a perfect storm for organized crime and lost tax revenue,” added Madaan.

The claim that banning vapes and heated tobacco products is essential to protect youth is flawed. Flavored vape products are 2.3 times more effective at helping adult smokers switch from cigarettes. The real health crisis isn’t an alternative nicotine product but continued dominance of the traditional tobacco market.

Thai policymakers are turning blind eye to concrete scientific evidence that establishes vaping and heated tobacco products are significantly safer alternatives to smoking. Public Health England’s finding has suggested that vaping is about 95% less harmful than traditional cigarettes.

Nations like the UK and Sweden have embraced harm reduction, leading to sharp decline in smoking rates and smoking related deaths. Sweden, which permits use of nicotine pouches, snus and vapes has observed a 55% decline in smoking in a decade and has cancer rates 41% lower than Europe’s average. Japan has also observed a drop in cigarette consumption following the introduction of heat-not-burn devices.

“The best solution is not an outright ban but a more holistic approach through education and awareness,” said Tarmizi Anuwar, Malaysia Country Associate.

“An effective approach should focus on consumer education and parental responsibility rather than merely enforcing bans that may ultimately encourage the black market. Awareness campaigns based on facts, rather than fear-based tactics, should be promoted to educate young people about making better choices and the consequences of irresponsible nicotine use. Additionally, parents play a crucial role in monitoring and guiding their children in making informed decisions. Effective regulations must balance consumer freedom with regulatory mechanisms that do not infringe on individuals’ rights to choose,” concluded Anuwar.

Thailand remains a hotspot for cigarette tourism, with smoking rates exceeding 19%, much higher than the global average. Rather than embracing proven harm reduction tools, lawmakers are doubling down on prohibition. Previous attempts at modernizing the law have unfortunately fallen short.

The Consumer Choice Center believes there’s a dire need to focus on smart regulation and consumer awareness. If Thailand truly desires to curb smoking-related deaths, it should follow the science, not outdated fears.

The CCC represents consumers in over 100 countries across the globe. We closely monitor regulatory trends in state and national capitals, as well as other hotspots of regulation, and inform and activate consumers to fight for #ConsumerChoice.

Learn more at consumerchoicecenter.org.

Month: April 2025

Other provinces should follow Alberta on charter schools

Further liberalizing alcohol sales could help Ontario

Thailand’s Nicotine Vape Ban Harms Consumers and Public Health

Follow us

WASHINGTON

BRUSSELS

LONDON

KUALA LUMPUR

OTTAWA