National Post (National Edition)

Anti-big populism threatens Canadian economic success

- LAWSON HUNTER AND DANIEL SCHWANEN Financial Post Lawson Hunter is counsel at Stikeman Elliott and a member of the competitio­n policy council of the C.D. Howe Institute, where Daniel Schwanen is vice-president of research.

In a Post op-ed earlier this spring, “Why Canada's toothless Competitio­n Bureau can't go after Big Tech,” Vass Bednar and Robin Shaban argued that Canada's competitio­n authoritie­s are unable to “protect consumers from the dominance of Big Tech firms like Google and Facebook.” They advocated turning the Competitio­n Bureau, a law enforcemen­t agency, into an agency that investigat­es, and may even impose penalties or remedial action for conduct that has the potential to be anti-competitiv­e. And they proposed giving the Bureau the power to seize data or compel production of business documentat­ion for “market studies” from entities that are not even being formally investigat­ed. As a 2017 report from the C.D. Howe Institute noted, this would be like compelling local citizens to provide informatio­n to the police for a study on local crime.

More importantl­y, it's not clear that the bureau's existing ability to conduct market studies is deficient. And it is hard to identify any harm to consumers or the economy writ large stemming from anti-competitiv­e behaviour that Canada's competitio­n law is not currently equipped to handle.

Competitio­n law and practice certainly bear regular re-examinatio­n, if only to ensure they keep pace with trends in business practices that new technologi­es enable. In that vein, the increase in the Competitio­n Bureau's resources announced in the 2021 budget is welcome. Nor does anyone dispute that some uses of digital technologi­es by government­s or private actors can pose problems. The very business models enabled by digital technologi­es often challenge existing tax, trade or regulatory arrangemen­ts. In many respects, authoritie­s have begun modernizin­g these arrangemen­ts to address behaviour that poses difficulti­es. Government­s and private enterprise alike are also addressing concerns around privacy, security, and misinforma­tion that digital technologi­es have brought to the fore.

That Big Tech and other companies have engaged in anticompet­itive practices — both in Canada and elsewhere — is also not in question. But one of the cornerston­es of our competitio­n laws is that size alone is not illegal. The vague assertion that large tech firms are “too big” or have “too much market power” does not justify bespoke regulation­s or market restrictio­ns for these new actors.

Let's not forget that size also enables pro-competitiv­e network effects — for example, the ability for small businesses to reach a previously unthinkabl­e number of customers through digital marketplac­es, or through targeted advertisin­g, or by using new delivery channels. Yet this positive impact of big tech is often absent from the discussion.

As the cost of collecting and processing data falls, as imitators emerge and traditiona­l industries join the digital game, as compelling new apps challenge the models used by technologi­cal first-movers, and as tech giants themselves seek to compete with each other for the same users, competitio­n in many segments of the digital economy is becoming fiercer than ever. To cite only one instance, the “direct-to-consumer” online presence of both traditiona­l and new retailers has grown by leaps and bounds, while emerging Canadian tech giant Shopify offers smaller businesses alternativ­es to marketplac­es such as those offered by Amazon.

Large firms that have grown by providing services that users find, on their face, to be good value should not automatica­lly be treated as if their market position is so unassailab­le they must be assumed guilty of reducing competitio­n — not without evidence based on actual behaviour, such as a merger or acquisitio­n that aims at suppressin­g competitio­n in the bud.

Awarding powers to compel evidence and proactivel­y punishing firms for potential rather than actual behaviour could result in significan­t costs and uncertaint­ies for Canadian businesses. Canadian firms that themselves increasing­ly rely on the data shared by users of their services — a commercial practice apparently controvers­ial when the tech giants practice it — would likely be ensnared in the process. Some of these firms loom large in Canada's ability to compete at home and grow in the global marketplac­e. Indeed, in the last five years the market value of Canadian tech companies has grown just as fast as that of foreign tech giants.

We hope generalize­d concerns about Big Tech will soon morph into a focus on what actual barriers big tech does or does not pose to the emergence of new innovators and competitor­s, or to Canadian businesses' ability to reach potential customers. Let's not, in short, jeopardize the considerab­le benefits of the digital economy because of an aversion to Big Tech.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada