Consumers unaware When charges of retail price irregularity arise, consumers are often unaware of their own victimization. Since 1995, Canada's anti-dumping orders have limited the importation of refined sugar, effectively removing American refiners and leaving the entire Canadian market with no meaningful competition. The CSUC argues that the control of sugar in Canada affects their cost-effectiveness, and that consumers ultimately pay higher prices for everything from cookies and confectionary to processed foods. This kind of threat would be the true wake-up call. What chances its stands of seeing an investigation is a question that Martin Richardson cannot answer.
Sugar is one of the few sectors in which a major antitrust investigation was launched.
Evidence of wrongdoing is difficult to secure, mainly because the victims of anti-trust are the general public, millions of people who don't know that they are being denied a potential consumer advantage. Proving that a breach of trust has occurred requires inside information, usually from a small number of powerful participants, proof that is nearly impossible to obtain. For example, the landmark 1998 Archer Daniels Midland case in the US demonstrated that consumers were paying more than 3 cents extra per kilogram of the ingredient, lysine, than they were before the collusion began. The hard-copy evidence that proved this was cryptic, and the need for evidence forced informants to resort to wearing wires and other types of surreptitious tactics. Richdale believes it has already had an effect on the retail market.