Still far too high: Why food insecurity in Canada remains a national concern

Although there was a slight decline in the share of individuals living in food-insecure households from 2024 to 2025, the 2025 figures remain among the highest recorded over the past two decades of tracking.

But before we jump to conclusions, it’s worth being clear that this story isn’t about food access. It’s about inadequate incomes.

A crisis hiding in plain sight

Food insecurity can sound abstract. But it’s really not.

It looks like:

And the new data makes it clear that food insecurity is not a marginal issue. It remains widespread across regions, income levels, and demographics.

In 2025, food insecurity decreased slightly in every province and territory except Manitoba, where rates increased. The hardest hit include:

• Nunavut: 56.4%, down from 61.2%
• Alberta: 28.4%, down from 31.3%
• New Brunswick: 28.2%, down from 29.6%
• Manitoba: 27.9%, up from 25.3%

Some households continue to face higher risks than others. That hasn’t changed. Below are the rates of food insecurity for various household types:

• 47.4% of people in single-mother households
• 30.4% of adult individuals (18-64) living alone
• 27.3% of people in couple families with kids
• 13% of seniors living alone

Food insecurity remains more severe for some demographics:

• Black people: 41.3%
• Indigenous people off-reserve: 34.7%
• Arab people: 36.6%
• Newcomers: 26.8%
• Children: 30.8%

And these numbers likely understate the problem. Other groups—like Indigenous people living on reserves, people in remote communities, 2SLGBTQ+ people, and people with disabilities—are known to face even higher risks, even if full data isn’t always available.

The takeaway is dramatic as it is disturbing: food insecurity remains widespread and deeply entrenched, especially for those already most at risk.

The data tells a similar story when it comes to poverty. In 2024, about 4.5 million people—roughly 1 in 9—lived below the poverty line, a figure that has remained largely unchanged from the previous year. Canada is no longer on track to meet its own poverty reduction targets. For a full analysis of the CIS poverty numbers, please refer to Maytree’s report.

What’s driving this?

One could point to food prices and that wouldn’t be wrong. Grocery costs remain high, continuing to strain household budgets. But focusing only on prices misses the bigger picture.

The data reflects three overlapping pressures:

1. Costs are rising faster than incomes

Even where wages have increased, they haven’t kept pace with the cost of living. Rent, food, and utilities all add up faster than paycheques can keep up.

2. Work isn’t enough anymore

The uncomfortable truth is that having a job doesn’t guarantee you can afford enough food. Many households that are experiencing food insecurity rely on employment as their main source of income. Many people who work and experience food insecurity work full-time hours.

3. Supports aren’t keeping up

Governments have introduced new measures—like the Canada Groceries and Essentials Benefit (CGEB). But the benefit isn’t generous enough and it is also temporary. For many households accessing our social safety net, the numbers still don’t add up at the end of the month. And when they don’t, something has to give. Too often, it’s food.

A quick reality check on solutions

Community responses to food insecurity—emergency food services, donations, local drives play a role. They help people get through tough moments. However, emergency programs can’t address the root causes of the food insecurity crisis and are not a substitute for good social policy.

When people don’t have enough income, giving them food for a few days—or even a few weeks—doesn’t fix the underlying issue.

We’ve known this for years, and evidence from years of research reinforces it: when incomes go up, food insecurity goes down.

So, what should we actually do?

Addressing food insecurity at scale means making better policy choices.

Here’s a practical way to think about it:

1. Set a clear goal and follow through

If we can set targets for inflation, deficits, emissions, or economic growth, we can set a target to cut food insecurity in half.

Not as a slogan but as a measurable commitment tied to real policy action.

2. Put more money in people’s pockets

Broad-based tax relief generally provides more benefit to people with higher incomes. For example, suspending federal excise taxes on gasoline until Labour Day will deliver just $59 in savings to households in the lowest income quintile, compared to $211 for those in the highest, according to analysis by the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Poorly-targeted measures like these stop short of making a meaningful difference, especially for the households facing the greatest financial strain today.

We urge targeted income supports directed at people who are currently struggling. In practical terms this can look like:

• Strengthening the CGEB by making it permanent, increasing payment amounts, closing gaps for working-age adults (especially 18–64), and accounting for the higher cost of food and other basics in the north.
• Ensuring the Canada Disability Benefit lifts people with disabilities above the poverty line by increasing the amount, expanding eligibility to ensure more people access the benefit, and simplifying application processes.
• Reforming programs like Employment Insurance and the Canada Workers Benefit so that more workers are protected if they receive low wages or face temporary disruptions due to parental leave or job loss.

3. Take Indigenous food systems seriously

The data only tells a part of the story, especially for Indigenous communities.

Particularly in northern and remote communities, food insecurity for Indigenous Peoples is shaped by access to land, cultural practices, and longstanding systemic barriers.

Supporting Indigenous food sovereignty is about improving food access. It’s also about advancing Indigenous rights, reconciliation, resilience, and long-term solutions that work.

Indigenous leaders and organizations across Right To Food’s network have been clear about what’s needed to address food insecurity in their communities, including stronger Indigenous-led food systems and supporting land-based practices rooted in knowledge, culture, and self determination. These priorities are reflected in Right To Food’s Seeds of Sovereignty report.

Within this understanding, funding salaried land-based roles (hunters, fishers, knowledge keepers) and providing long-term, flexible funding for Indigenous-led food systems would be a good start, with broader actions espoused in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action still needed to fully support this work.

A slightly different perspective

Conversations about poverty and food insecurity in Canada can be delicate and can get polarized quickly. On one hand, there are calls for major new spending. On the other, concerns about fiscal sustainability. Both perspectives are important.

But there’s a practical middle ground, which means investing in solutions that actually reduce the problem.

If a policy lowers food insecurity, improves health outcomes, lowers health care spending, and reduces long-term strain on public systems, that’s not just compassionate, it’s economically prudent. And we know many of these solutions do not contribute significantly to inflation as families receiving benefits typically spend the money on basics.

Governments also have tools available to finance public programs and social investments, including progressive revenue measures and targeted taxation. The question is not simply whether governments can afford to act, but how they choose to allocate public resources and what outcomes they prioritize.

Ignoring food insecurity, meanwhile, carries costs of its own, and they are substantial. Those costs appear in the health care system, in education outcomes, in lost productivity, and in the long-term social and economic consequences of poverty itself.

What this moment demands

This year’s data doesn’t just add another data point but confirms a pattern. Food insecurity has risen sharply in recent years and remains persistently high.

This moment is no longer about responding to short-term shocks. We know prices of basic goods are already increasing due to global volatility related to the war on Iran. The question now is what the federal government chooses to prioritize.

The recent fiscal update includes some positive steps, including movement on income supports. But these measures remain modest relative to the scale of the crisis.

At the same time, broader policy choices — from untargeted tax cuts to increased defence spending — risk crowding out the sustained investments needed to meaningfully reduce poverty, improve income security, and address affordable housing concerns.

With federal budget decisions on the horizon, timing matters. The evidence is clear:

• Millions of people are struggling and living diminished lives.
• The problem remains widespread and persistent across the country.
• We know targeted income security measures work and there’s a need for investment in Indigenous food sovereignty initiatives.

The question isn’t whether solutions exist. It’s whether the federal government is ready to act on them. We’ve outlined a path forward in our pre-budget submission.

Final thought

Canada is an abundant country. We have more than enough food for everyone. If millions of people can’t afford to eat properly, that’s not a supply issue. It’s a policy failure.

And people are organizing in response. Across the country, more than 450 organizations are coming together under the Right To Food banner — frontline groups, community leaders, and advocates who see this crisis every day and are demanding better.

What’s needed now is decisive government action and targeted measures — policies that match the scale of the crisis and the urgency on the ground.

For an in-depth analysis of the CIS data, please check out this brief.