Putting the Story Back Together

Dead and Gone… Putting the Story Back Together By Gary Payne, MBA Founder of Funeral Cost Ontario One of the things that has surprised me over the years is how quickly families begin trying to reconstruct a life after someone dies. Most people would probably assume that this begins with memories, but that is not really what I have noticed. It usually begins with questions. Not particularly profound questions, either. More often they are the ordinary details that nobody had much reason to think about while life was unfolding. When did they buy this house? Was that before or after the business started? Did they move here because of work, or was there another reason? Who introduced them? Why did they stop spending summers at the lake? None of these questions seemed especially urgent a few months earlier. Then suddenly they do. What makes this interesting is that no one person usually has all of the answers. One sibling remembers the early years, and another might remember what happened after the children were born. An aunt or uncle can recall why the family moved, while an old neighbour remembers what came before. Everyone seems to be carrying a different part of the story, and it is only when people begin comparing those pieces that they realize how widely the family's history had been distributed all along. I have enjoyed watching and learning as families spend half an hour trying to settle what sounds like a simple question. Did that happen before the move or after it? Was Grandpa already retired? Was Uncle Jim married yet? Someone is convinced it happened one way. Someone else is equally certain it happened another. Eventually another relative remembers a small detail that quietly settles the discussion, and everyone moves on. None of the answers themselves change anything, and nobody is making a decision based on whether something happened in 1986 or 1988. The conversation is really about something else altogether. People are trying to understand how the pieces fit together in a way that matters much more than all of the details. They are rebuilding a timeline that always existed, but was never stored in one place so that the stories that shaped a person don't feel like they are lost. I think that there's an urgency that comes with it and that probably helps explain why these conversations can go on much longer than anyone expects. One answer naturally leads to another question. If they were living there then, was that before Dad started his own business? If that happened first, does anyone remember why they sold the cottage? Suddenly three stories that had always existed independently become connected, and the family's understanding of its own history becomes a little clearer. I do not think this happens because people suddenly become interested in genealogy. It happens because the person who quietly connected many of those pieces is no longer sitting at the table. For years there was always somebody who could settle a disagreement in thirty seconds or explain why one event led to another. Families rarely notice how valuable that kind of knowledge is while it is readily available. The interesting part is that no single person usually replaces them. Instead, the family begins assembling the story together. Each person contributes a memory, a date, a conversation, or a detail that somebody else had forgotten. The finished picture belongs to everyone, even though no one person ever carried all of it. The longer I have watched families work through these conversations, the more I have noticed that they are rarely searching for facts alone. More often they are discovering that a family's history was never kept in one place. It had been living, quietly and imperfectly, across the memories of the people who shared it.

Joint ownership: pros, cons, and alternatives

Joint ownership: pros, cons, and alternatives By Bruno Scanga Financial Columnist Investors looking for an efficient, cost-effective, and quick way to transfer assets to an heir or beneficiary often place assets into joint ownership with right of survivorship. On the surface, this looks like a great way to transfer wealth. Placing non-registered assets into joint ownership is one of the most common attempts to avoid probate, and it may be effective in the right situation. The catch? There can be significant disadvantages with joint ownership that outweigh the benefits. Joint ownership with adult children often misses the mark. Parents think they’re setting up an easy way to transfer assets, by simply adding a child to the account while keeping all other aspects the same. That child may transact on the parent’s behalf while they are alive but won’t personally benefit from the funds until the parent passes away. In that case, when the parent passes away, a resulting trust is presumed to exist which all other references to joint ownership meaning joint ownership with right of survivorship. Joint ownership doesn’t apply in Quebec, means the asset flow through the deceased’s estate, and is distributed according to their will and may be subject to probate, if applicable. Without proper documentation, this can create complications, especially if there are other beneficiaries that believe they have an entitlement to that same asset. Fortunately, there are other options available that help avoid the risks of joint ownership and provide additional benefits as well. Advantages and disadvantages when using joint ownership as a wealth transfer strategy. If considering this strategies, ensure you discuss this with your financial advisor accountant and lawyers. Alternative considerations shows how naming a beneficiary or successor owners with a certain investment contract or insurance guaranteed interest account (GIA) can achieve the same advantages—and more —without the liabilities and risks. Not all investments are governed by the same estate rules. Investments held with banks vs insurance companies or investment companies have different rules in administering estates. Ask the questions to ensure you are not creating more concerns for your executors and family members Safe travels Happy Planning!!

Dying Rich and Too Young

Dying Rich and Too Young Common Sense Health – Diana Gifford-Jones This week, another vintage Gifford-Jones column from well over a decade ago that notes the avoidable – and unavoidable – hazards that can cut a life short. How many legions of men and women work to achieve financial success and then die prematurely of a needless disease? I've seen it too often: patients who are extremely bright, yet babes in the woods on medical matters. In fact, some of their pitfalls, stubbornness and irresponsibility are hard to fathom. One 45-year-old friend repeatedly refused my advice to have a colonoscopy. "They're not going to do that to me!" he said. A few years later he noticed rectal bleeding and still would not agree. Unfortunately, the bleeding was not due to hemorrhoids as he believed but to advanced colon cancer. He travelled abroad for fraudulent treatments and after spending thousands of dollars he died a slow, painful death in middle age. It should never have happened. Why are millions of people still puffing on cigarettes? One wonders, are these people living on another planet? The scientific evidence is overwhelming that inhaling smoke and multiple carcinogens can result in cancer. We can’t prevent many malignancies, but we can most lung cancers by tossing cigarettes away. It's been said it's better to be lucky than good. I was lucky to inherit the longevity gene. And I was lucky to have parents who taught me not to spend it foolishly by following a risky lifestyle. I've been lucky to inherit the gene of thinness. But I also step on the scale every day. My diet isn't perfect but it avoids excessive fats, sugar, processed foods, and it includes ample fibre. I love what I do, and plan to continue until 10 years after I'm dead! Being inactive physically and mentally kills people. I had the lucky break of becoming a journalist. That allowed me to interview Nobel Prize winner Dr. Linus Pauling, among others. He believed humans need high doses of vitamin C and lysine to wipe out coronary death. I'm convinced that without this knowledge I would not have survived to this age. I haven't succumbed to the North American habit of popping a pill for every ache and pain, causing liver and kidney damage. My household has never had an over-the-counter painkiller or any cold remedies on bathroom shelves. Rather, I've followed Sir William Osler's wise advice for treating a cold. You put your hat on the bedpost, go to bed, start sipping whiskey, and when you see two hats you stop. It was Osler's way of telling people they were over-medicating themselves with pills. Suffice to say, sleep will heal many minor ailments. I have limited radiation exposure to CT scans, chest and dental X-rays, unless absolutely needed. Nor do I believe in cholesterol-lowering drugs. Rather, I have used high doses of vitamin C and lysine to keep my arteries open. It’s long been my conclusion that alcohol in moderation is not to be vilified. It lowers blood cholesterol, helps oil the blood, decreasing the risk of blood clot, and is a great relaxant after a busy day. A good sense of humour never killed anyone. It maintains sanity amid today's medical, political and financial matters. Napoleon asked, when promoting an officer to general, "Is he lucky?" In war or peace, Russian roulette often decides who reaches the senior years. I have no delusions. Sooner or later, both luck and hard work lose out. How do I want life to end? I hope it ends suddenly. But too many are coming to a slow, miserable, and agonizing end.

Do Not Panic: Canada Is Not Coming For Your Old Car

Do Not Panic: Canada Is Not Coming For Your Old Car            By Dale Jodoin Columnist                                               A man sees a video online and looks out the window at the old car in his driveway. It is not a show car. It is not something he bought for fun. It is the car that gets him to work, to the grocery store, and to his appointments. It has rust in places. It makes a noise he has learned to ignore. But it is paid for, and these days that means something. Then the video says cars from 1980 or earlier may be scrapped by the government. That is enough to scare a person. For some Canadians, an older car is not a hobby. It is survival. For classic car owners, the same rumour hits another nerve. They think about years spent in garages, parts hunted down, summer car shows, and memories tied to a vehicle that may have belonged to someone they loved. Around Oshawa, where General Motors work has fed families for generations, people understand cars. They understand repair bills. They understand pride in keeping something running. They also understand what it would mean if someone told them their old car was suddenly a problem. So before panic spreads further, the question has to be asked plainly. Is Canada really coming for older cars? From what can be checked, the answer is no. As a journalist, I cannot base an article on hating one government or defending another. That is not the job. The job is to check the claim, follow the facts, and tell readers what is real and what is not. If a real law ever comes forward that hurts poorer drivers, retired people, workers, or classic car owners, then it should be questioned hard. But if a fake video is frightening people for no reason, that also has to be called out. The rumour says Canada is going to start scrapping cars from 1980 or earlier. It says these cars will be treated as dangerous. It says people will not be allowed to fix them. It also says the rule starts on June 1. That is a serious claim. But serious claims need proof. The video that helped spread this claim was checked and found to be AI generated. It was not a real government announcement. That means the June 1 date came from the fake video. There is no real start date for scrapping old cars because there is no verified law ordering it. As of June 19, 2026, I found no federal law that says older cars must be destroyed. I found no national order saying people with older vehicles will lose them. I found no rule saying a car from 1980 or earlier cannot be repaired. Transport Canada still has information about importing older vehicles. Vehicles older than 15 years are treated differently at importation under federal safety rules. That does not mean every old vehicle can automatically be licensed in every province. But it does show that old vehicles are not illegal just because they are old. Now here is the real part. Ontario can still deal with unsafe vehicles. That is not new. If a vehicle has bad brakes, unsafe steering, broken lights, rotten structure, bald tires, or other serious problems, it can be ordered off the road until it is fixed. That applies to old cars and newer cars. There are also real rules about window tint. In Ontario, the driver must be able to see clearly. The windshield and the windows beside the driver cannot be so dark or coated that they block the driver’s view or hide the inside of the vehicle too much from outside. Police can deal with illegal tint. But that is not the same thing as taking away old cars. Classic cars are also recognized in Ontario rules. A historic vehicle is generally at least 30 years old, mostly unchanged from the original product, and used for things like exhibitions, parades, tours, club events, testing, repairs, or sale demonstrations. That does not sound like a government preparing to wipe out the car show world. For people who own older cars, the best advice is simple. Do not panic. Keep the vehicle safe. Keep your paperwork in order. Be careful with dark tints. Understand the difference between regular plates and historic plates. If you are buying or selling an older vehicle, know when a safety certificate is required. There is no real start date because there is no verified law ordering old cars to be scrapped. That is the sentence people need to hear. For poorer Canadians, that old car may be survival. For classic car owners, it may be family history. Both deserve facts, not fear.

I believe in Getting to Know People

I Don't Believe in Networking. I believe in Getting to Know People By Nick Kossovan For most job seekers, job searching is a gruelling test of perseverance against their delusion that spending their time screaming into the digital void of applicant tracking systems, blasting out identical, AI-generated resumes like they're feeding a slot machine, and praying the next pull is 'the one' is a viable job search strategy. Most job seekers' job searches are prolonged because they approach employers like beggars, which is exactly what they are when they ask for a chance instead of offering a solution. Employers don't hire out of charity, nor do they hire to fill seats. They hire because they're bleeding time, money, or efficiency, and therefore need a specific headache taken care of. The moment you stop treating yourself like a commodity looking for a boss and start operating like a service provider looking for a problem, the power dynamic flips. You stop chasing opportunity. You start attracting it. If you want to shorten your job search, change your mindset. Follow these three steps to become an employer magnet. Step 1: Select a Problem Trying to be everything to everyone is one of the biggest mistakes job seekers make. In a desperate hope they'll expand their options, they craft generic resumes filled with vague corporate jargon, such as "results-oriented professional with a diverse background." They assume this versatility makes them attractive, but in reality, it makes them entirely forgettable. When you try to appeal to everyone, you end up appealing to no one. You become a commodity, and commodities are bought at the lowest price. As the old idiom goes, “a jack of all trades is a master of none.” Employers are looking for a scalpel, not a Swiss Army knife. They're looking for a specialist who can step in on day one and dissect a specific, painful operational bottleneck. Becoming an employer magnet requires declaring a specialty by choosing a specific problem to solve. Start by identifying a high-stakes challenge in your industry that you're uniquely equipped to address. Is B2B sales volume declining, thereby affecting revenue? Is a chaotic, unoptimized supply chain affecting timely order fulfillment? Is high turnover in mid-management negatively affecting morale? Is a messy, insecure digital infrastructure a security risk? Narrow your lane. Pinpoint the specific organizational headache that keeps hiring managers up at night. By owning a distinct problem, you distinguish yourself from the majority of job seekers who are merely looking for a paycheque. Step 2: Be the Solution to the Problem Once you've chosen a problem, your professional setup (e.g., resume, LinkedIn profile, digital footprint, cover letters) should reflect your expertise in solving it. This is where most job seekers fall short. They treat their resume and LinkedIn profile as historical records of past activities rather than as evidence of forward-looking capabilities. Employers don't care what you did; they care what you can do for them. The key is to restructure your professional narrative from a list of duties into a repeatable blueprint for success that demonstrates a predictable methodology for achieving measurable outcomes. Today, credentials are less important than tangible execution. According to Liz Ryan, author and former Fortune 500 HR executive who pioneered the pain letter concept, employers don’t hire people because they have impressive resumes; they hire them because their business pain(s) needs to be solved. Being “the solution” means speaking the language of metrics. If the problem you solve is inefficient digital processes, and you state on your resume and LinkedIn profile that you’ve “managed software migration,” the reader will inevitably say to themselves, “So what?” Instead, state: Streamlined legacy workflows, reducing project delivery timelines by 22% and eliminating $95,000 in software redundancies. Quantify your value. Frame your past achievements as evidence that you’ve successfully slain the dragon the employer you’re targeting is currently fighting. Step 3: Market Yourself to Employers as a Solution Your ability to solve an employer’s headache is worthless if you keep it secret. You can’t sit back and wait for employers and recruiters to discover you by accident. Humility doesn’t pay the bills, and hoping to be noticed is an inefficient strategy. “Without promotion, something terrible happens… nothing!” – P.T. Barnum’s promotion philosophy. Attracting employers magnetic-like requires aggressively and strategically marketing your capabilities directly to the decision-makers who are losing sleep over the problem you solve. This means abandoning the lazy “Apply Now” button mentality. First, curate your digital real estate. Use social media platforms, especially LinkedIn, to publish insight-driven commentary on industry trends and problem-solving strategies. Consistently sharing sharp, practical solutions establishes you as an authority. Second, build a proactive outreach strategy. Identify the hiring managers at your target employer who own the problem you solve (there's no need to contact HR). Reach out directly with a concise value proposition. Don't ask for a job. Instead, point out a common challenge their department faces and briefly showcase your proven track record of solving it. This is how you become not just another job seeker but a viable solution worth hiring. Stop looking for a job. Start looking for problems to solve. Position yourself as a solution, then activate the employer magnet by putting yourself in front of employers.

Courage Is Standing Up for Equal Opportunity

Courage Is Standing Up for Equal Opportunity By Mr. ‘X’ ~ John Mutton CENTRAL EXCLUSIVE There are moments in politics when it is easier to remain silent than to speak uncomfortable truths. Those who challenge the prevailing orthodoxy often find themselves criticized, attacked, or misrepresented. That is why I believe Jamil Jivani deserves recognition for raising questions that many Canadians have been reluctant to discuss openly. Throughout his career, Jamil has consistently argued that every Canadian deserves to be judged on character, ability, effort, and merit—not on race, ancestry, or political ideology. Whether one agrees with every aspect of his argument or not, that principle has long been one of the cornerstones of a free and democratic society. His recent campaign questioning federal hiring and diversity policies has generated significant national debate. Supporters view it as a call to restore merit-based decision-making and equal treatment under the law, while critics disagree with his characterization of existing policies. Regardless of where one stands, the discussion itself is an important one in a healthy democracy. Having known Jamil personally, I can say he has never been motivated by hatred or division. Quite the opposite. He believes Canadians of every background should have the same opportunity to succeed without governments creating winners and losers based upon immutable characteristics. Canada has made tremendous progress because generations believed that opportunity should be available to everyone. The goal should never be to replace one form of discrimination with another. Our objective should be fairness for every Canadian. Politics often rewards those who follow the crowd. Leadership requires something different. It requires the willingness to raise difficult questions, accept criticism, and continue the conversation respectfully. Whether Canadians ultimately agree or disagree with Jamil's proposals, he has demonstrated a willingness to engage in debates that many politicians avoid. That courage deserves respect. In the end, Canadians should strive toward a country where government treats every citizen equally, where opportunity is earned through hard work and talent, and where no one isadvantaged or disadvantaged because of their race, religion, or ancestry. Those principles unite Canadians far more than they divide us.

HYPOCRITES SEEDED IN CLARINGTON

By Joe Ingino This week, Clarington Mayor Adrian Foster issued the following statement: "We are seeing a rise in personal attacks, hateful rhetoric, and threatening behavior, both online and in our community. This is not debate or dialogue. These comments are meant to harm. They spread disinformation, target individuals, and are designed to create fear and divide our community. Clarington residents and staff—our friends and neighbours—have been doxxed and subjected to racist, discriminatory, and threatening posts. This is unacceptable. Harassment and hate undermine the values we stand for. If we ignore it, we allow it to grow. Enough is enough. Everyone in Clarington deserves to feel safe and welcome. Our community is built on respect, fairness, and inclusion. Each of us has a responsibility to uphold those values. Choose respect over hostility. Speak up when you see hate. Get your facts from a trustworthy source. If you see hate, speak up and report it. Defend the victims. Hate has no home in Clarington."— End of statement. Well, like the good Mayor wishes, I am reporting it right here.At one time, I thought the world of Adrian. Today, after seeing his actions, I call for his resignation. If he refuses to step down, then I call on voters to remove him.Here is a man who does not return phone calls from the region's only in-print newspaper. Why? Because he has proven himself to be a silent "woke" supporter. A small man, full of contempt. He uses the system to attack his opposition because he lacks the substance to argue his position on important issues.This latest statement stems from an exposé involving members of his community allegedly slaughtering wild animals in the name of religion. This sparked an outcry across Durham Region. During an election year, Foster is attempting to grandstand on the backs of real victims while painting the community at large with a broad brush: either conform and accept what others demand, or risk being labeled. No, Mr. Mayor. You are the one promoting division. You are the one escalating tensions by making sweeping statements such as these.The better approach would be to encourage open dialogue and determine where the hostility exists within the community and toward which groups it is directed.Instead, he chooses to paint everyone with a "woke" brush.He has to go. This is the same mayor who, in my opinion, practices corporate discrimination. Once again, instead of unifying the community, he uses the system to justify what I believe is a lack of understanding of corporate realities while using staff as a shield to defend policies that I view as biased. Adrian, I thought the world of you. I always respected you as one of the last good mayors. You let me down.You let the people of your municipality down. What are people supposed to think? You do not even have the character or professional courtesy to return phone calls from your municipality's only in-print newspaper. Shame on you.If this is how you treat your only in-print newspaper, I can only imagine how quickly you respond to the average person looking for guidance.I must have read this release 20 times.Everything that is wrong with society today is reflected in it.Politicians with limited intellect making general assumptions and painting people with a biased brush.Here's a free suggestion: Hold a series of town hall meetings. Talk to the people. Find out why there is so much hostility and determine toward whom or which groups it is directed. Once you identify the source of the conflict, then work toward a remedy.Instead, he attempts to make himself appear caring while issuing what amounts to a warning shot—that if you do not accept whatever the issue may be, you will be labeled and shunned. Shame on you, Mayor.

Canada Day 2026: Unity and Confidence in a Rapidly Changing World

Canada Day 2026: Unity and Confidence in a Rapidly Changing World by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC FEC, CET, P.Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East Canada Day has always been more than a celebration of fireworks, parades, and summer gatherings. It is a moment to reflect on who we are, where we have come from, and where we are going. As Canadians mark the 159th anniversary of Confederation on July 1, 2026, they do so in a world that is becoming increasingly unpredictable and, in many ways, more dangerous. The international order that brought decades of relative peace and prosperity is under strain. Wars continue in Europe and the Middle East. Strategic rivalry between the United States and China is reshaping global trade and diplomacy. Economic nationalism is replacing globalization. Artificial intelligence is transforming industries and societies at a pace few could have imagined only a decade ago. Climate change is imposing enormous costs, while cyber threats and disinformation challenge democratic institutions everywhere. Canadians cannot afford to ignore these realities. Yet neither should we face them with pessimism. Canada possesses the resources, talent, and democratic traditions needed not merely to survive this period of change, but to thrive. Throughout our history, Canadians have demonstrated resilience in the face of adversity. We have overcome economic crises, world wars, and political divisions. We have built one of the world's most successful integrated multicultural societies. Our achievements have never been accidental. They have been the result of compromise, hard work, and a willingness to put the national interest above narrow differences. That spirit is needed again today. The greatest challenge Canada faces may not come from abroad but from within. Regional grievances, economic frustrations, and political polarization threaten to undermine the unity that has long been our greatest strength. Recent discussions surrounding Alberta's future are evidence that many Canadians feel disconnected from Ottawa and frustrated by policies they believe do not reflect their priorities. These concerns should not be dismissed. A strong federation requires listening and mutual respect. Western Canadians, Atlantic Canadians, Quebecers, and Ontarians all bring legitimate perspectives to the national conversation. However, the answer to disagreement cannot be division. Separation would diminish all of us economically, politically, and strategically. Canada's history has always been one of accommodation and compromise. Confederation itself was an exercise in recognizing differences while embracing common interests. Our diversity—regional, linguistic, and cultural—is not a weakness. It is one of the reasons Canada has endured and prospered. Economic renewal must become a national priority. Canadians have reason to be concerned about declining productivity, housing affordability, and rising public debt. Young families struggle to purchase homes. Businesses face regulatory complexity and international competition. Infrastructure requires modernization, and healthcare systems are under increasing pressure. These challenges demand action rather than complacency. Canada must become more competitive, encourage innovation, accelerate infrastructure projects, and remove barriers to interprovincial trade. It makes little sense that products and professional credentials can move more freely across international borders than between some Canadian provinces. A truly united economy is essential to national prosperity. Canada also possesses remarkable strategic advantages. Our reserves of oil, natural gas, hydroelectric power, uranium, and critical minerals place us in an enviable position as the world seeks secure supplies of energy and materials essential to modern technologies. We should develop these resources responsibly, recognizing that economic growth and environmental stewardship are not mutually exclusive. Artificial intelligence represents another extraordinary opportunity. Canadian researchers helped pioneer the field. With appropriate investment and thoughtful regulation, Canada can become a world leader in the industries that will shape the twenty-first century. However, success will require improving education, supporting research, and preparing workers for a rapidly changing economy. National security must also receive greater attention. The Arctic is no longer a distant frontier but a strategic region attracting growing international interest. Canada's sovereignty cannot be assumed; it must be protected. Modernizing the Canadian Armed Forces, investing in cyber defence, and strengthening critical infrastructure are no longer optional. They are necessities. Generations of Canadians have understood this responsibility. From Vimy Ridge to Juno Beach, from Korea to Afghanistan, Canadians have answered the call to defend freedom and democracy. Their sacrifices remind us that peace and security are never guaranteed. They require vigilance and commitment. For generations, newcomers have enriched our economy, culture, and society. This has become one of our defining characteristics and an important source of national vitality. However, immigration policies must be accompanied by investments in housing, healthcare, infrastructure, and education to ensure that growth remains sustainable and that social cohesion is preserved. Canada's reputation in the world remains strong. We are respected for our commitment to democracy, human rights, and international cooperation. However, respect abroad ultimately depends upon strength and confidence at home. A divided, economically stagnant, or inward-looking Canada cannot effectively influence the world. Perhaps our greatest advantage lies not in our resources or geography, but in the character of Canadians themselves. We are practical people. We value moderation over extremism, compromise over confrontation, and democracy over authoritarianism. We understand that freedom carries responsibilities and that rights are accompanied by obligations. At a time when many societies are becoming increasingly polarized, Canada offers an example of how people of different languages, cultures, religions, and political views can live together under shared institutions and common values. This achievement should never be taken for granted. On this Canada Day, we should celebrate our successes without ignoring our challenges. Patriotism does not mean believing that our country is perfect. It means believing that it is worth improving. It means having confidence in our institutions, faith in our fellow citizens, and optimism about the future. The world is changing rapidly, but the principles that have sustained Canada for nearly 159 years remain unchanged: freedom, democracy, opportunity, mutual respect, and unity. These values carried previous generations through times of uncertainty. They can guide us through the challenges ahead. As Canadians gather with family and friends this July 1, they have every reason to be proud. Not because Canada is flawless, but because it remains one of the most successful democratic experiments in history. In an age marked by instability and division, Canada must stand united, confident, and prepared. That is the true meaning of Canada Day 2026—and that is the promise we owe future generations. Happy Canada Day!

The Changes We Didn't Notice

Dead and Gone… The Changes We Didn't Notice By Gary Payne, MBA Founder of Funeral Cost Ontario One of the things that has surprised me over the years is how often families are caught off guard by changes that happened long before they noticed them. This seems to happen most often after a long illness or a period of care-giving that lasted for months or years. During that time, people's attention is naturally focused on what is directly in front of them. Appointments need to be attended. Routines need to be maintained. Problems need to be solved. Most families become very good at adapting to whatever the situation requires. What makes this interesting is that change is usually gradual. Very few people wake up one morning and decide they are going to stop travelling, stop seeing friends as often, give up a hobby, or reorganize their schedule around someone else's needs. Most of the time these things happen one adjustment at a time. A trip is postponed, a weekly activity is skipped, a standing lunch gets cancelled, or a routine commitment quietly falls away. None of it feels particularly significant in the moment, nor is it because life has simply rearranged itself. The longer a situation continues, the more normal those changes begin to feel. What started as an adjustment becomes a routine. And what started as a temporary accommodation becomes part of everyday life. With a little time, most people stop noticing the changes altogether because the new version of life no longer feels new. Then eventually the situation changes. At first there are other things requiring attention. Arrangements need to be made, maybe paperwork needs to be completed. Families are focused on all of the immediate concerns, and it is often weeks or months later that people begin noticing something else. A trip that was postponed never happened, a favourite hobby that disappeared was never replaced, good friends who used to stop by regularly have not been seen in years, the regular visit to their favourite restaurant that fell out of the routine. I t will be different for everyone but the common thread is what surprises people is not that these things changed. What surprises them is how completely the changes blended into everyday life while they were happening. I think that realization can be tough to describe because it is rarely attached to a single moment. More often it arrives in pieces. Someone notices an empty Saturday, or the who friend reaches out after a long absence. It can be a conversation that revives an old interest. Whatever it is, it is always gradual before people begin recognizing parts of their lives that had quietly moved into the background. This is not necessarily a sad realization and in most cases it is simply an honest one. The years spent caring for someone mattered more than the adjustments which were made for good reasons. Most families would make the same choices again. But that does not change the fact that life was changing at the same time. What I find most interesting is that people often expect the biggest adjustment to be the loss itself. Quite often they discover that another adjustment has been taking place for years. They simply did not have much reason or time to notice it while they were living through it. The longer I have watched families navigate these transitions, the more I have noticed that people are rarely surprised by what they gave up. More often they are surprised by how much they had gradually set aside before they realized it.

Most Will Make it to Retirement

Most Will Make it to Retirement By Bruno Scanga Financial Columnist We know most people will make it to retirement without suffering a major illness but if you are one of the unlucky ones, what happens now? Would you forego 1% of your annual rate of return to eliminate this risk? Sure, you could use your savings or take out a loan to cover the unexpected costs, however, both options will have a significant impact on your retirements plans. If you need to access your registered funds, they are taxed in the year you use them. Accessing those funds prior to retirement is not part of your plan. Pass on that risk to an insurance company. They will take care of the rest with an illness recovery benefit. This is a tax-free lump sum payment to cover any number of unforeseen expenses. No need to submit receipts or to justify the costs. Keep your retirement goals on track If you are diagnosed and survive a major illness like cancer, heart attack, or stroke, you receive an illness recovery benefit payment. This will keep your retirement goals on track. After diagnosis, he/she needs to access 100k from their registered account at age 55 to cover additional costs associated with fighting an unfortunate cancer diagnosis. The impact is significant: Take 1% of your annual rate of return to pay the premium. Your future self and family will be grateful if the worst happens. Safe travel, Happy planning!

Fast Food

Fast Food By Wayne and Tamara I am in a long-distance relationship with a woman, and we see each other nine or ten times a month when she comes to my city for work. We are madly in love with each other and she has made plans to move closer to me. When we met we became lovers first and now are exclusive and serious. However, the problem is she has a lot of old boyfriends, dating buddies, and sex chat friends that still call, email, and text. I have seen messages which ask for sexual favors as if she is a working girl. She says she no longer sex chats with these guys and they are just friends now. I do not believe it. I fear she is going to continue with this sex chatting and see these guys again. She refuses to discuss or explain any more than “you have nothing to worry about.” Yet I worry. What should I do? Colin Colin, let’s assume the way to a man’s heart is through his stomach. You walked into her restaurant and realized she has cooked for lots of other men. You found the cooking tasty, but you know many guys might want another one of her meals. You don’t think she is making it clear enough she will no longer cook for them. That is where your minds diverge. You believe she should make it perfectly clear, and she knows if she made it perfectly clear they wouldn’t still be hanging around the restaurant. The hitch is, you are looking for a home cook and that isn’t on her menu. Wayne & Tamara Actions Speak Louder Okay, here is the background. Seven years ago I met my husband when I was pregnant with my daughter. He took on the role of daddy. Three years later I cheated on him with a black man and as a result had a baby. My husband took on the role of daddy to him as well. Today my husband found out I sent a nude picture to the father of my second child, and now I need to apologize to the man I love and who has been through so much in this marriage. He is on the breaking point, and I think he will divorce me. I want my husband to know I am so sorry, I was wrong, and this is never going to happen again. It’s just that this other man has been coming up everywhere, and my husband is so insecure. How do I show my husband I love him so much, and how do I get trust back? Malina Malina, it’s not paranoia when you think someone is out to get you-and someone is actually out to get you. It is not insecurity if you feel you can’t trust someone who has already betrayed you. Two researchers, Mick Rothbart and Bernadette Park, once gave people a list of 150 traits and asked them how many events it would take to establish each trait. They also asked how many events it would take to disprove the trait. Rothbart and Park learned that the hardest trait to establish is trust, and trust is the easiest trait to destroy. There is a reason we despise turncoats, traitors, and embezzlers. Cheating triggers a disgust in us we cannot get past. When the cheater is someone we share our intimate life with, it is especially difficult. The problem with staying with someone who has broken trust is that they are likely to betray us again. Aside from our children, it is usually impossible to reestablish trust in one who has broken it. You don’t need advice on how to keep your husband. You need to understand why you keep doing this. Unless your husband leaves you, you are unlikely to learn this lesson. Until your husband leaves you, his future is unlikely to change. Wayne & Tamara

What Gifford-Jones Said a Decade Ago

What Gifford-Jones Said a Decade Ago Common Sense Health – Diana Gifford-Jones It has been almost a year since my father penned his final column at the age of 101. To mark the occasion, I offer his own timeless words, this week edited from the forward to his book, 90+ How I Got There! George Bernard Shaw once remarked, “The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion it has taken place.” Today the biggest problem with communication in medicine is that it's the wrong communication, delivered to medical consumers with disastrous results. During the latter years of my surgical practice, I began to realize that big pharma had created a culture of "consumer pillitis" wherein every minor problem required a pill. But no mention was made of unintended consequences. This triggered my interest in natural remedies that had stood the test of time. They have not killed anyone. Prescription drugs, on the other hand, have removed 100,000 North Americans from this planet every year. As a medical journalist I've enjoyed the privilege of interviewing international medical authorities. This had a profound influence on my approach to medical matters. And there's no doubt my two lengthy interviews with Dr. Linus Pauling are among the reasons for writing this book. Pauling's views on vitamin C, and those of Dr. Sydney Bush, represent to me the greatest medical achievement since I graduated 65 years ago from the Harvard Medical School. It may have the potential to help mankind as much as, or more than, any other research. But is still collecting dust in the medical community. It's an appalling tragedy as their findings of C's benefits could save countless lives. Voltaire, who spent time in the French prison Bastille one wrote, “It is dangerous to be right, when the government is wrong.” During my lifetime as a surgeon and medical journalist I learned that Voltaire was right. When my newspaper column tackled controversial medical topics, my popularity with some segments of society and the medical establishment was jeopardized. The written word is dangerous. But as a journalist one should never expect to win a popularity contest. Reporting the facts of medicine is never easy. Multinational companies producing chemical therapies are making billions of dollars supposedly to reduce suffering. But they confuse the public about the cause of heart disease and other medical problems. Sooner or later the truth does emerge. As Winston Churchill wrote, “The truth is inconvertible. Panic may resent it. Ignorance may deride it. Malice may distort it. But there it is." The truth is that we are getting older and living longer. But we all want to live longer well. In this age of degenerative disease, the Gifford-Jones Law states that one bad problem leads to another and another. It's best to avoid them a much as possible. Due to faulty lifestyle decisions, obesity may lead to Type 2 diabetes. Its complications may lead to loss of limbs, blindness and kidney failure. Atherosclerosis due to diabetes may lead to heart attack and sudden death. All may prevent a lengthy and active life. I hope that this book will show how these disasters and other medical pitfalls do not have to happen. They will occur less often if North Americans learn that smart people do at the start of life what fools attempt at the end. Enough said.

Oshawa Should Be Part of Canada’s Defence Supply Chain

Oshawa Should Be Part of Canada’s Defence Supply Chain                By Dale Jodoin Columnist                                               When Canadians hear about military spending, the conversation usually turns to the biggest and most expensive equipment. Fighter jets. Warships. Drones. Missiles. Satellites. Artificial intelligence. Cyber defence. This technology is an important part of modern defence. No serious country can ignore new technology or the threats that come with it. Canada has to be prepared for a world that is changing quickly. But there is another side of the defence that receives far less attention. Every soldier still needs the basics. They need strong boots, warm clothing, rain gear, tents, sleeping bags, backpacks, canteens, medical kits, field kitchens, clean water systems, uniforms, and protective gear. These items do not usually make headlines. They do not sound as exciting as a new aircraft or missile system. But without them, even the most advanced military can struggle. A soldier equipped with inadequate boots faces an immediate disadvantage. A unit without clean drinking water is in trouble. A person sleeping in wet gear during freezing weather will not stay healthy or effective for long. Before any high-tech military plan can work, the people carrying it out have to be clothed, supplied, sheltered, protected, and ready. Oshawa should focus on this aspect. Oshawa has a long history of manufacturing. This city appreciates skilled labour. It understands what happens when excellent jobs disappear. It also understands the importance of real work coming back to the community. For years, Canada has talked about supply chains. People witnessed how quickly shortages and delays could impact daily life during the pandemic. Products were held up. Shelves were thin. Items that once seemed easy to get became harder to find. Now imagine that problem during a military emergency. If Canada suddenly needed more boots, winter clothing, tents, medical supplies, or clean water systems, could we make enough of them here? Would we have to rely on foreign factories, face shipping delays, and contend with other countries putting their needs first? That is a serious question. This is not about turning Oshawa into a war factory. It is about asking whether Canadian workers and Canadian companies should have a larger role in producing the basic equipment our military needs. Not every defence job has to involve missiles, aircraft, or advanced computer systems. Many jobs are practical. Sewing. Cutting. Packing. Repair. Testing. Trucking. Storage. Supply work. Quality control. Those are real jobs. They are understandable jobs. They are the kind of jobs that can support families and strengthen local economies. Canada already has companies that understand outdoor gear, safety equipment, clothing, tools, parts, and cold weather products. As a northern country, Canada should be a leader in producing strong boots, warm coats, waterproof gear, durable tents, and reliable field equipment. This aspect of the defence shouldn't be considered an afterthought. This does not mean Canada should ignore advanced military technology. Drones, communications, cyber defences, surveillance, and modern weapons all matter. The world has changed, and Canada has to change with it. But technology is only part of the defence. The basics keep people going. History has shown that armies do not only run short of ammunition and weapons. They also run short of boots, coats, blankets, tents, food, fuel, medicine, and clean water. Those shortages may not sound dramatic, but they can weaken a force quickly. The public may notice the fighter jet. The soldier notices whether the boots fit. Oshawa should view the situation as both a defensive and economic issue. Defence dollars are already being spent. The question is where that money goes. Does it mainly flow to large foreign suppliers and major corporations, or can more of it support Canadian workers, Canadian factories, and Canadian communities? If Canada is going to spend money on defence, part of that spending should help rebuild practical industry at home. Oshawa has lived through enough economic change to understand the value of steady work. A strong local economy needs more than announcements. It needs industries that can last. It needs opportunities for people who know how to build, repair, move, test, and supply things. Canada should seriously consider the potential for domestic production of basic military equipment. Communities with manufacturing experience should be part of that conversation. Oshawa belongs in that discussion. A strong military is not built only on the newest weapons. It is built on preparation, supply, industry, and people. Sometimes the most important equipment is also the simplest. 

The One Reason You're Not Getting Hired

The One Reason You're Not Getting Hired By Nick Kossovan Getting hired in today's hyper-competitive job market requires drawing a distinct line between your skills and experience and how you can generate revenue or save an employer money. Unlike what many job seekers believe, employers are not charities. Nor do employers design their hiring process to validate a job seeker's self-esteem. The job market is a marketplace in which, as in all marketplaces, profit determines survival. Employment boils down to a single financial transaction: an employer pays money in exchange for a return on their investment. If you're sending out resumes, networking, and attending interviews without receiving job offers, it's because you're not communicating your value in terms of an employer's profitability. In other words, you're not giving employers a compelling reason to hire you. The job market is full of candidates acting like historians, listing their "who cares" responsibilities in chronological order. Employers don't care what you did; they care about what you can do for their bottom line. In business, an employee's value is defined by their impact on the business's profitability. Consider how you act as a consumer. You don't buy a smartphone because the manufacturer worked hard to build it. You buy it because you believe it'll add value and status to your life, streamline communication, and boost productivity. If you didn't believe it would add value, you'd leave it on the shelf. Similarly, a homeowner doesn't invest thousands in an energy-efficient furnace out of sentimentality. They do it to lower their monthly heating bills and increase home equity. Hiring is a form of purchasing, so employers view job seekers through the same lens. What value will the employer derive from hiring you? "Hiring managers don't look at your resume and see potential—they see a massive financial risk. If your resume reads like a historical biography of daily chores, you are positioning yourself as an administrative cost to be minimized." — Episode 3178 of Jeff Altman's podcast, No B.S. Job Search Advice Radio, titled, How to Write a Resume That Proves Your Return on Investment. Breaking the cycle of rejection requires adopting a “Business of One” approach. Instead of viewing yourself as a job seeker, see yourself as a service provider proposing a partnership. Your resume, LinkedIn profile, and cover letter should highlight how your accomplishments deliver measurable value, making it easy for hiring managers to recognize how you'd be an asset to their business's profitability. Incorporate your impact on profitability into every aspect of your job search. Your Resume: Remove meaningless fluff, such as "responsible for managing a team." Use aggressive, metric-based bullet points. Frame your work in dollars, time saved, or percentage gains. For example: "Re-engineered regional call centre workflows, cutting customer wait times by 14% and saving $45,000 in quarterly operational overhead." If you managed a budget, state how you kept it under target. If you built a process, quantify the hours it reclaimed. Present your history as a series of profit enhancements. Your LinkedIn Profile: Treat your headline and "About" section as a sales landing page, not an online obituary. Replace generic labels such as "Experienced Operations Professional" with a clear value proposition: "Operations Leader Specializing in Scaling Call Centre Efficiencies and Reducing Client Churn to Maximize Revenue." Use your "Featured" section to share articles or case studies you've written that explain exactly how you solve costly bottlenecks. When Networking: Never ask someone if they know of any openings; this comes across as desperate and places the burden on them. View networking as a casual consultation conversation. Ask targeted questions about their company's or industry's specific operational challenges. When sharing your background, pivot to outcomes: "In my last role, we noticed a major drop in client retention, so I implemented an automated follow-up system that reclaimed $120,000 in drifting contracts. I imagine advertising agencies are facing similar margin pressures right now." TIP: When meeting someone for the first time, ask yourself: How can I help this person? When Interviewing: Many candidates sink into a defensive crouch during interviews. Turn interviews into a sales meeting, which is what they are. When asked about your strengths, don't offer platitudes about being a "hard worker." Link your traits directly to enhancing their profitability. For example: "My core strength is rigorous process optimization. I look for operational leaks because every broken process represents wasted capital. When you hire me, my primary objective will be to ensure the team's output directly protects and enhances your department's margins." Putting aside all the excuses many job seekers make, if you're not getting interviews and job offers, it's because you're not making a compelling business case for why they should hire you. Without one, employers view you as an unnecessary expense. Employers aren't buying your biography; they're buying a solution to their margin pressures. Shift your narrative from what you'll cost an employer to how much you'll make for an employer. Review your resume, LinkedIn profile, and interview talking points. Ruthlessly remove anything that doesn't clearly articulate a financial return on hiring you. If you want employers to see hiring you as a profitable decision, reframe your professional identity in terms of the bottom line.

Illegal Slaughterhouse Raises Serious Questions About Enforcement in Clarington

Illegal Slaughterhouse Raises Serious Questions About Enforcement in Clarington A controversy unfolding in rural Clarington is raising difficult questions about municipal enforcement, accountability, animal welfare, and public confidence in local government. For months, residents living near a property on Middle Road have raised concerns regarding activities occurring on the site. What began as neighbour observations evolved into questions about land use, environmental impacts, animal welfare, licensing requirements, and municipal enforcement. IMPORTANT NOTE This article reflects documented resident complaints, communications, and public-interest questions. It distinguishes between resident concerns, allegations, and any findings that may have been made by authorities. Readers should rely upon official municipal correspondence and enforcement records for final determinations. TIMELINE OF REPORTED EVENTS • November 26 – Resident communication sent to municipal by-law staff raising concerns and encouraging contact with appropriate animal welfare authorities. • November 27 – Follow-up communication requesting further action and investigation. • April 22 – Resident seeks update from municipal by-law staff regarding conditions at the Middle Road property and reports ongoing concerns. • Subsequent Months – Residents continue raising concerns regarding land alterations, environmental impacts, animal welfare, and compliance issues. • Recent Developments – Residents report being advised that certain activities associated with the operation were not authorized. Confirmation should be obtained from official municipal records. A PATTERN OF COMPLAINTS Communications reviewed by this columnist indicate that residents were contacting municipal staff and seeking updates over an extended period of time. The communications suggest that concerns were not isolated or recent. Residents appear to have been attempting to engage municipal authorities for months while seeking information regarding investigations and enforcement activities. MORE THAN ONE ISSUE While public attention has focused on allegations involving livestock processing, residents also raised concerns regarding: • Land alterations • Pond expansion • Tree removal • Open-air burning • Animal welfare concerns • Potential environmental impacts • Licensing and zoning compliance Taken individually, each issue may involve different regulatory requirements. Taken together, residents argue they warranted a coordinated review by the appropriate authorities. THE ANIMAL WELFARE QUESTION Perhaps the most emotional aspect of the controversy involves concerns regarding the treatment and handling of animals. Residents repeatedly expressed concerns involving animals and sought updates from municipal officials. Whether any animal welfare laws were violated is a matter for the appropriate authorities to determine. However, residents continue to ask whether concerns involving animals were investigated quickly enough. THE QUESTION OF CONSEQUENCES Many residents continue to ask whether earlier intervention could have reduced the number of animals affected. How many animals were processed during the period between the first complaints and any enforcement action? Were provincial animal welfare authorities notified? Were inspections conducted? Could earlier intervention have changed the outcome? These questions are not intended to prejudge any individual or agency. They are questions of public accountability. THE ENFORCEMENT GAP The central public-interest question is whether complaints were addressed in a timely and effective manner. Residents deserve to understand: • When complaints were received • What investigations were undertaken • Which agencies became involved • What violations, if any, were identified • What enforcement actions resulted • Why the process took the amount of time it did TRANSPARENCY MATTERS Municipal governments must often balance investigative confidentiality with public accountability. However, transparency regarding timelines and processes is critical to maintaining public confidence. Residents deserve clear answers regarding what occurred, what was investigated, and what lessons can be learned going forward. THE BIGGER QUESTION Ultimately, this issue has become larger than a single property. It has become a discussion about whether municipal enforcement systems respond quickly, consistently, and effectively when residents raise serious concerns. For many residents, the questions remain straightforward: When were complaints first received? What investigations occurred? What actions were taken? Were all relevant agencies notified? Could the process have moved faster? Those questions deserve answers—not only for the residents affected today, but for every resident who may need to rely upon the same enforcement systems in the future.

THE ULTIMATE HOLIDAY ‘CANADA DAY’

THE ULTIMATE HOLIDAY ‘CANADA DAY’ By Joe Ingino What a great time to be Canadian. ‘Canada Day’. One of the best holiday’s next to Christmas and Remembrance day. Canada Day is a day to reflect on what it means to be Canadian, to share what makes us proud and to celebrate in our own way. This pride is reflected in as many ways as there are Canadians. Canada Day highlights the richness of our land, our diversity, our culture, our contributions, but above all, our people. Since 1868, July 1 is an opportunity for Canadians from all communities to come together. Canada Day celebrates the anniversary of Canadian Confederation, which took place on July 1, 1867. On this date, the British North America Act united the three separate colonies of the Province of Canada (now Ontario and Quebec), Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick into a single unified country called the Dominion of Canada. The Core Reasons for Celebration Birth of a Nation: The holiday is widely recognized as Canada's birthday, marking the country's first steps toward independence from the British Empire. Cultural Pride: It is a time for Canadians to show pride in their history, diversity, culture, and shared values of inclusion.Community Traditions: The day is marked across the country by community events, parades, concerts, barbecues, and firework displays. Historical Evolution - Dominion Day: From 1879 until 1982, the holiday was officially known as Dominion Day.Full Independence: The name was officially changed to Canada Day in 1982. This coincided with the patriation of the Canadian constitution, which severed the final vestiges of legal dependence on the British Parliament. The celebrations start - July 1, 1917: The 50th anniversary of Confederation. The Parliament buildings, under construction, are dedicated to the Fathers of Confederation and to the courage of Canadians who fought in Europe during the First World War. July 1, 1927: The 60th anniversary of Confederation. The Peace Tower Carillon is inaugurated. The Governor General at the time, Viscount Willingdon, lays the cornerstone of the Confederation Building on Wellington Street. From 1958 to 1968: The government organizes celebrations for Canada's national holiday every year. The Secretary of State of Canada is responsible for coordinating these activities. A typical format includes a flag ceremony in the afternoon on the lawns of Parliament Hill and a sunset ceremony in the evenings, followed by a concert of military music and fireworks. From 1968 to 1979 (with the exception of 1976): A large multicultural celebration is presented on Parliament Hill. This concert is broadcast on television across the country. The main celebrations (called "Festival Canada") are held in Canada’s Capital Region throughout July. These celebrations include many cultural, artistic and sport activities, and involve the participation of various municipalities and volunteer associations. 1984: The National Capital Commission (NCC) is given the mandate to organize Canada Day festivities in the capital. 2010: Festivities on Parliament Hill receive the royal treatment when Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh join the festivities to celebrate Canada's 143rd anniversary. 2014: Canadian Heritage organizes the 147th Canada Day celebrations. As we approach Canada's 150th anniversary in 2017, the government has given the Department the mandate to organize Canada Day festivities in the capital. HAPPY CANADA DAY TO ALL

The Unity of Canada Is Paramount: Why the Alberta Referendum Matters to All Canadians

The Unity of Canada Is Paramount: Why the Alberta Referendum Matters to All Canadians by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC FEC, CET, P.Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East Canada is entering a significant moment in its history. With an Alberta referendum on sovereignty now scheduled, Canadians are once again confronted with questions about the future of the federation, regional representation, and national unity. Regardless of one's political views, the referendum is no longer a hypothetical discussion. It is a real political event that will have consequences not only for Albertans but for every Canadian. The fact that a referendum has been scheduled should not be dismissed as a temporary protest or a passing political phenomenon. It reflects genuine frustration felt by many Albertans regarding federal policies, resource development, equalization payments, regulatory burdens, and what is often perceived as inadequate representation within national decision-making. These concerns are real and deserve serious consideration. At the same time, Canadians must carefully examine what is at stake. Alberta has been one of the principal engines of Canada's economy for decades. Its energy resources, agricultural production, innovation, and entrepreneurial culture have generated prosperity that has benefited the entire country. The province's contribution to federal revenues, employment, exports, and investment has been substantial. When Alberta succeeds, Canada benefits. When Alberta struggles, the consequences are felt nationwide. The scheduled referendum therefore represents more than a provincial issue. It raises fundamental questions about Canada's future as a united nation. One of the most immediate concerns is economic uncertainty. Financial markets and investors place a premium on stability and predictability. The referendum itself may create uncertainty regarding future investment decisions, particularly in sectors requiring long-term commitments such as energy, infrastructure, manufacturing, and technology. Businesses considering major projects will naturally ask questions. What would happen if a majority voted in favour of sovereignty? How would negotiations proceed? What would be the status of trade arrangements, transportation corridors, pensions, federal programs, taxation, and public debt? Even if separation never occurs, uncertainty surrounding these issues could influence economic decisions. The energy sector deserves special attention. Alberta's prosperity is closely linked to access to national and international markets. Pipelines, rail networks, ports, and transmission systems cross provincial boundaries. A sovereign Alberta would still require cooperative arrangements with neighbouring jurisdictions and the federal government. What are currently domestic Canadian issues could become international negotiations involving complex legal and political considerations. Another critical dimension concerns Indigenous rights and treaties. Alberta is home to numerous First Nations whose treaty relationships were established with the Crown and are protected under Canada's Constitution. Any movement toward sovereignty would necessarily involve discussions regarding treaty obligations, self-government arrangements, land rights, and constitutional responsibilities. These issues cannot be treated as secondary matters; they are central to any future constitutional discussions. The referendum also carries implications for Canada's international standing. The world is experiencing increasing geopolitical instability. Tensions in Europe, competition among major powers, challenges in the Arctic, and growing economic uncertainty have created a more complex international environment than at any time in recent decades. Canada's strength internationally derives in part from its political stability, economic scale, and territorial unity. Allies and investors value predictability. A period of prolonged constitutional uncertainty could reduce Canada's influence at a time when strong and united democratic nations are needed more than ever. There is also a social dimension that deserves careful consideration. Referendums concerning sovereignty often create intense public debate. Such debates are entirely legitimate in a democracy. However, they can also deepen divisions among citizens, communities, and regions. Canadians have experienced this before. The Quebec referendums of 1980 and 1995 generated passionate discussions about identity, belonging, and the future of the country. While democracy ultimately prevailed, many of those divisions took years to heal. The Alberta referendum has the potential to create similar tensions. It is therefore essential that public discourse remain respectful, factual, and focused on long-term solutions rather than short-term political passions. At the same time, Canadians should avoid the mistake of dismissing Alberta's concerns. Doing so would only reinforce the sense of alienation that has contributed to the current situation. National unity cannot be preserved through rhetoric alone. It requires meaningful action. Federal and provincial leaders must engage in serious discussions about economic competitiveness, energy development, internal trade barriers, fiscal federalism, infrastructure investment, and regional representation. Canadians must be willing to acknowledge that different regions often experience national policies differently. The path forward should be based on dialogue and reform, not threats or ultimatums. Canada's history demonstrates that our federation has evolved through compromise and adaptation. We have faced constitutional crises, regional tensions, economic downturns, and profound social transformations. Each generation has been called upon to strengthen the bonds that unite Canadians while respecting legitimate regional aspirations. This generation faces a similar challenge. The scheduled Alberta referendum should serve as a wake-up call for all Canadians. It should encourage a national conversation about how the federation can better serve every province and territory. It should prompt governments to listen more carefully to regional concerns and seek practical solutions to longstanding grievances. Ultimately, however, Canadians must ask themselves a fundamental question: Are we stronger together or apart? The answer, in my view, remains clear. Canada's diversity has always been its greatest strength. Our federation allows regions with different economies, cultures, histories, and priorities to work together in pursuit of common goals. While disagreements are inevitable, they are best resolved within a united country rather than through fragmentation. The Alberta referendum is now part of Canada's political reality. It deserves serious debate and careful consideration. Nevertheless, it should also remind us of the tremendous value of what we have built together over more than 150 years. At a time of global uncertainty and growing international challenges, the unity of Canada is not merely a constitutional principle. It is a strategic necessity, an economic advantage, and a national responsibility. The future of Alberta matters. The future of Canada matters. And today, more than ever, those futures remain deeply interconnected.

The Things We Thought Would Matter

The Things We Thought Would Matter By Gary Payne, MBA Founder of Funeral Cost Ontario One of the things that has surprised me over the years is how often families are caught off guard by what does not matter. Most of us spend a fair amount of time deciding what is important. We save things. We protect things. We move certain possessions from one house to another because we assume they deserve to make the journey. Over time, some objects acquire a status that feels almost permanent. They become part of the family landscape, and people stop questioning their importance because their importance has simply been accepted for so long. Then something happens, and a family finds itself sorting through a house, opening cupboards, looking through closets, and deciding what stays and what goes. Before it begins, there is often a quiet assumption that certain items will be spoken for immediately. Everybody knows which pieces those are supposed to be. The dining room set. The cabinet. The collection. The things that were always treated as important. And then the family discovers that nobody really wants them. I have seen that happen more than once, and what makes it interesting is not the decision itself, but the surprise that follows. People are often caught off guard that an object which carried such a large presence in family life can suddenly have very little place in anyone's future. The object has not changed. The craftsmanship has not changed. The history has not changed, yet something has shifted. I think part of the surprise comes from the fact that families often confuse significance with attachment. They are related, but they are not the same thing. An object can be significant without anyone wanting to own it. A family can respect its history, appreciate its place in the household, and still have no practical role for it in the next chapter of their lives. That reality shows up in very ordinary ways. I have watched families spend twenty minutes discussing a valuable piece of furniture before agreeing nobody has room for it, then spend much longer talking about a box of handwritten recipe cards that nobody expected to keep. It is not always logical, but it is very human. One thing has value because everyone agreed it did. Another has value because, for reasons that are harder to explain, it still seems to carry a person with it. There is also a generational side to this that families sometimes underestimate. The objects that helped define one household may not fit easily into another. A dining room set that once made sense in a larger home may not make sense in a condo, townhouse, or smaller place already filled with someone else's life. A collection that represented years of care to one person may feel like responsibility to the next. That does not mean people value family less. It usually means they are living differently. What makes these decisions difficult is that nobody wants to be the person who says it out loud too quickly. Nobody wants to make it sound as though the thing did not matter. So families sometimes talk around the obvious for a while. They admire it. They discuss where it came from. They mention how long it was in the house. Then eventually someone says what everyone else may already be thinking: "I just don't have a place for it." That sentence can feel harsher than it is meant to be. In most cases, it is not a rejection of the person who owned it, or of the life built around it. It is simply the point where memory and practicality meet, and practicality has to be given a vote too. The longer I have watched families work through these decisions, the more I have noticed that the item everyone worried about often becomes the easiest decision in the room.

Protecting your nest egg

Protecting your nest egg By Bruno Scanga Financial Columnist You have worked hard over the years to make sure their loved ones will be comfortable—both now and after they’re gone. However, a nest egg can disappear very quickly when it’s passed on to the beneficiaries. This “sudden wealth” approach to transferring hard-earned savings is a real concern for many people. For those who prefer to transfer an inheritance gradually over time, the most common approach in the past has been to establish a trust—either inside or outside a will—to control the estate after death. Trusts can be a very effective wealth transfer vehicle, but there are some drawbacks that should be carefully weighed, such as cost, complexity, and ongoing management. Annuity settlement option There’s another appealing wealth transfer option available to Canadians, which has considerable merit due to its simplicity and flexibility. The annuity settlement option can automatically transfer the proceeds of your client’s insurance contract or policy into an annuity upon their death. The resulting annuity will then make gradual income payments to the named beneficiaries. It’s a simple, inexpensive, and effective wealth-transfer tool. It provides the advantage of replacing a lump-sum death benefit with smaller, scheduled payments while offering savings of legal, estate administration, and probate1 fees. In addition, it can provide increased privacy2 and potential creditor protection. Unlike trusts, which can incur contract preparation costs and annual trustee and accounting fees, the annuity settlement option has no fees or ongoing management requirements. It’s a strategy that’ll appeal to most investors, regardless of whether the amount of the inheritance will be $50,000 or $1 million. With the annuity settlement option, you have complete control over the specific annuity terms. Select an annuity that makes payments to their beneficiaries for the rest of the beneficiaries' lives or for a specific time period following the client’s death. Guarantee options can also be added, guaranteeing potentially up to and even exceeding 100% of the initial investment, to help protect against market volatility and make sure a minimum amount is paid to beneficiaries. This helps avoid a problem with wills that specify an annuity be purchased but are vague as to the type and terms, often leading to confusion or an undesired result. If you decide to change the beneficiaries or terms of the annuity, all you need to do is submit a change form with the annuity carrier. There is no cost to you or of them having to pay a lawyer to amend or redraft their trust agreement. And if there are multiple beneficiaries, that’s not a problem. The annuity settlement option allows your clients to differentiate between beneficiaries, permitting some to receive a lump sum and others to receive an annuity based on the selected terms. A definition to share with clients An annuity is an insurance contract where, in exchange for a single lump-sum deposit, an insurer makes guaranteed regular income payments to the owner of the annuity. These payments contain both interest and a return of principal component. Annuity payments can continue for a chosen period or for the lifetime of one or two people. Richard and Joan—an example Richard and Joan have $400,000 invested in a segregated fund contract, which they want to leave to their son, Scott, in the event of their deaths. But Richard and Joan are concerned about Scott’s ability to manage this money and prefer to have the proceeds and future interest paid out to him over a period. After discussing the situation with their advisor, they select a 10-year term certain annuity settlement option on their segregated fund contract. Now, Richard and Joan have the comfort of knowing their estate will pass gradually to their son over a 10-year period after their deaths. Estate Benefits The annuity settlement option offers many estate benefits: allows clients to control the way their assets are allocated to beneficiaries eliminates the need and cost associated with setting up and managing a formal trust provides an increased level of privacy while avoiding costly probate and estate fees makes sure that younger beneficiaries, such as children or grandchildren, receive a controlled income stream rather than a large lump-sum amount gives parents with disabled children a comprehensive estate-planning tool allows clients to make changes to beneficiaries and settlement options quickly and without fees. Minors and mentally infirm individuals The annuity settlement option may also be effective for minor children or for beneficiaries with an impairment in mental functions. However, instead of naming these people directly as a beneficiary, a trustee (such as a family member) should be named “in trust for” these individuals. Happy planning, safe travels, until next time!

Cold Turkey

Cold Turkey By Wayne and Tamara I dated a girl two years. The first time it ended because she started doing drugs and wouldn’t stop. When she began dating a druggie friend, I continued giving her rides, a place to crash for a night, and money. Then she left him and came back to me. Cautiously I decided to give it another try. Unfortunately I found out she had been dating this other man and me at the same time. It ended once more. Later we started to talk again, but that ended with her taking my time and money, and then leaving. My conscious mind can recognize she is all-around not a good person, much less good for me. I know she has taken much from me and given little in return. My mind seems to have completely gotten over her, but my body can’t seem to. Whenever I see any white car remotely resembling hers, I turn and stare. If I see a girl with the same skin complexion, I can’t help but gaze. When I hear her name, my stomach tightens, and if I see her, I feel immensely downtrodden. I would say without a doubt I am over her, but I can’t help feeling queasy and even jealous when I hear news of her, good or bad. These are all instinctual, involuntary actions. I don’t understand. It is as if my brain has moved on, but my body is still going through the motions of breaking up. I know time is probably the best cure, but it is difficult living like this. Dylan Dylan, warnings not heeded, conscience not listened to, red lights driven through. Sooner or later, they all catch up to you. So will you heed another warning, or will you boldly go where no man should go? Don’t be a lemming, or just another mouse for the snake. Warnings we don’t heed are snakes we feed. When you were with her, you were way overmatched. This is a woman who charms men to support her habits. The queasiness and jealousy you feel are textbook symptoms. Twice you were given ample reason to sever contact, and twice you refused. It’s not her you need to get out of your system, it’s your personal weakness. By spreading out the pain of breaking up, you reinforced it. Like Pavlov’s dog, you trained yourself to salivate at the very thought of her. If you hadn’t spent so much time trying to turn ground beef into steak, you would be over this. Wayne & Tamara Personal Property I have been with my husband four years, married for two. He has never accused me of cheating but insists that every man in a 10 mile radius is hot on my trail. At least once a month we fight about this. I always ask why he doesn't trust me, and he says he does trust me, it's everyone else he doesn't trust. I don't know how to fix this. I have tried so hard. He offered to go to counseling but hasn't saved money for it, and I can't afford it either. I pay for everything else. I am afraid my only option is divorce. I hate that I am tearing apart our family, but I don't know if I can continue. I feel alone, yet we have talked about this many times. I don't think he is capable of change. Vonna Vonna, your husband is trying to exert property rights over you. He is not in love with you, but he is afraid of claim jumpers. Every time he suggests you could be unfaithful he smirches your character. Every day you stay tells him he has the right to do what he is doing. Like all good people you think this is your problem to fix. But it’s not up to you. The only fix is letting him suffer the consequences. Wayne & Tamara