Mayor's Behavior Sparks Controversy and Concern in Pickering Community

By Lisa Robinson - Pickering City Councillor In recent months, the Pickering community has been rocked by a series of disturbing events surrounding Mayor Kevin Ashe's conduct, raising serious questions about his leadership, respect, and community values. Reports have surfaced detailing instances of the Mayor engaging in derogatory labeling, online bullying, and enabling other councilors to gang up on individuals, all of which have deeply troubled residents and stakeholders alike. The controversy began when multiple accounts emerged of Mayor Ashe using disparaging language to describe anyone who supports me, Councillor Lisa Robinson, or who opposes Mayor and Council’s narrative on controversial topics, from Pickering residents and the wider Durham region. Terms such as "nut cases," "conspiracy theorists”, “crazies" and "mentally challenged" were reportedly used by the Mayor, causing understandable outrage among those targeted and the broader community. Such derogatory remarks not only sow division but also undermine the principles of respect and inclusivity that are essential for fostering a healthy and harmonious community. Adding to the concern is the Mayor's purported advocacy for mental health, a stance that appears incongruent with his reported behavior. Advocating for mental health necessitates not only empathy and support, but also a commitment to combatting stigma and discrimination. By engaging in language that stigmatizes and belittles others, the Mayor not only fails to uphold these values but also undermines efforts to promote mental well-being within the community. Furthermore, reports have surfaced of the Mayor's involvement in online bullying, perpetuating a toxic environment that is antithetical to the spirit of constructive dialogue and mutual respect. In today's interconnected world, online platforms play a significant role in shaping public discourse, making it imperative for leaders to model respectful and responsible behavior. Telling constituents to go pour themselves another drink, or further labeling them as “transphobes” or “homophobes” for wanting their politicians of Pickering to remain neutral is beyond disturbing. The Mayor's alleged participation in this kind of online harassment not only sets a harmful example for residents, particularly young people, but also erodes trust in our local municipal government. Equally troubling are accounts suggesting that the Mayor has enabled other councilors to gang up on individuals, further exacerbating tensions within the community. Instead of fostering an environment where diverse perspectives are valued and respected, such behavior fosters a culture of intimidation and exclusion, silencing dissenting voices and stifling meaningful debate. In a democratic society, the right to express differing opinions and hold elected officials accountable is sacrosanct, and any attempts to suppress this right must be met with firm condemnation. In addition to the troubling reports of Mayor Ashe’s behavior, recent actions taken by both him and the City Council have further fueled concerns about transparency and accountability within local governance. Changes to delegation times, reducing them from 10 minutes to 5 minutes, place undue restrictions on residents' ability to fully express their concerns and engage with elected officials. Furthermore, imposing stipulations on delegates from outside Pickering, even if they represent Pickering residents, makes it next to impossible to address council if you have an opposing view. This is a disservice to the principles of inclusivity and equal representation, or as I like to say a smack across the face of democracy. The elimination of question period and attendees' recording within the chamber, as well as the loss of the ability for citizens to bring non-agenda items forward, further diminishes transparency and public participation in local decision-making processes. These actions not only undermine the democratic rights of Pickering residents but also create barriers to meaningful civic engagement and accountability. In response to mounting public outcry, concerned residents and community leaders are calling for accountability and transparency from Mayor Kevin Ashe and the City Council. It is imperative that elected officials be held to the highest standards of conduct, and any breaches of these standards must be met with swift and appropriate consequences. Additionally, in my humble opinion steps must be taken to reverse the changes that limit public participation and transparency, ensuring that the voices of all residents are heard and valued in Pickering. This is another issue throughout my time in office that I have consistently advocated for. Improved public engagement across all aspects of municipal affairs. We are supposed to be serving the public, not the other way around. My voting history on these issues proves my dedication as the sole Pickering municipal politician advocating for democracy and impartiality for all. I would like to take this moment and extend my apologies for the behavior of the mayor and my colleagues, and to assure you that I will continue to champion the interests of Pickering residents and beyond to uphold the values of democracy. It's time to end this culture of bullying, intimidation and name calling, and instead prioritize listening to and valuing the opinions of all our community members. By doing so, we can foster a stronger, more cohesive community that we can all be proud of. "Strength Does Not Lie In The Absence Of Fear, But In The Courage To Face It Head-On And Rise Above It"

AUTOBAHN

By Rosaldo Russo Allow me to begin this column by thanking the Oshawa/Central newspaper for allowing me the opportunity and access to the press. Not to many if any allow an average person like me to tell the world what I see and think. In my opinion. The Editor/Publisher is a real upstanding type of guy. He shoots from the hip and hold traditional core values. My name is Rosaldo Russo. I came to this great country to make a better life for myself and my family. I thank Canada for everything it has allowed me to do and earn. I worked construction all my life. I know the value of hard work and honesty. I remember as a boy my father always telling me to work hard and buy land. So I did. I remember days when I did not have enough to eat. I go to work... but I did not wait for hand outs. I rounded up my pride my skill and my determination to succeed and went to work. In those days the only benefits we received was the fact we were employed. Before retiring I was the owner and operator of local material supply company that allowed me to retired without worry. Now that I have time to enjoy life. I look around me and have some concern for future generations. I see that the world is finished. Did you hear the latest? Gas prices at an all time high. Government is so good to us...that instead of lowering the gas prices so we can go further. Now, they opted to increase the speed limit on the death traps they call the 400 series highways. Come on people who is doing the thinking... Government thinks that by allowing us to go faster that we use less gas? Ok, stop laughing. But really, I am serious. In Germany on the Autobahn. On any given day. People pass you doing 200km/hr. No problema. German people have the common sense not to drive in the fast lane doing 60km/hr and giving the finger to anyone going 200km/hr. Maybe the Germans are the super race.... How safe is the autobahn? With cars zipping back and forth between lanes and overtaking each other at speeds of 200 kilometers an hour plus, the autobahn can seem intimidating to the uninitiated. But the lack of speed limit is actually justified on the grounds that it makes driving safer. Yes, I guess that if common sense prevails. Going faster may be safer... then again these same Germans never drove in gene pool we drive on the 401 for example. The Prince of New Delhi, that thinks he is still in downtown deli, not respecting the signs posted on the highway and using the emergency lane as his private reserved lane. Or the Asian that thinks he is doing Mach 1 on the fast all while doing 60km/hr not giving a dam about that 14 wheeler on his rear bumper.... Then let’s not forget the red-knecks driving the trucks at 200km/hr with a full load as if he was on the Autobahn. What ever happened to common sense. What happened to common courtesy. To respect. To realizing that the world does not revolve around you. The Autobahn works because of the people using it. The 400 series of highways in Canada are a death trap on any given day. Now, we are going to to an extra 10km/hr. Thanks Trudea.

An Honest Appraisa

l from Wayne & Tamara When Jeff and I met 15 years ago, we truly believed we were soul mates. Till this day we’ve never been bored with each other. We spend hours together talking, playing, laughing, scheming. People say he worships the ground I walk on. He’s always been sexual in a boyish way, and when we first met, he said he no longer lusted after women. He was married to his first wife then, and she later informed me he would always cheat, even on me. Three years into the marriage my 18-year-old son saw Jeff and a woman outside his apartment. Jeff asked my son if he could use his place for a while. Confused, my son agreed and left. I found out about this five years later when my son felt he had to tell me. When confronted Jeff denied it. There was always something suspicious about Jeff. There were cards, letters, and pictures that suggested he was cheating all through the marriage. All of the women seemed to be of the same makeup: weak, uneducated, and single. Jeff denied everything, tearing up the evidence before my eyes. Two years ago a woman called me to say she had been having an affair with Jeff. In fact, on our anniversary, he bought her flowers. We had a knock-down, drag-out fight and he was arrested. Like most wives I dropped all charges. After each episode, Jeff acts his usual cheerful self as if nothing happened. It makes me want to go out and do the same to him, but I just can’t. Mind you, I’m a good-looking woman with style. Men are attracted to me. Maybe it sounds crazy, but when Jeff and I are together, I feel loved. But I also feel betrayed. There was no more evidence of cheating until a few days ago during our wonderful vacation in Belize. I traced a hang up call back to a woman who Jeff was seeing. She said she wouldn’t have been involved unless he was getting a divorce, which he said he was. I’m numb. I haven’t slept in days, I can’t eat, I haven’t spoken 20 words to Jeff. I can’t even imagine a future anymore. Yet I know Jeff will never leave on his own. Everything is in my name and my accounts. I feel sorry for him because I’ve always been the breadwinner. I offered to pay him $10,000 to leave. He refused. He doesn’t want money. If I leave or put him out, what excuse can I give the family? They believe we are just like honeymooners. Telling the truth would destroy him, their relationship with him, everything. Why can’t he be faithful? Hillary Hillary, asking why he can’t be faithful is almost like asking why he can’t be taller. He just isn’t. You feel loved by him. So do all the other women. Making a woman feel loved, overcoming her scruples with lies, is what he is good at. After each episode he acts like nothing happened. That is because nothing has happened to him. He is doing what he has always done. He is like the boss who tells prospective employees they will have to work overtime and on Sundays. Once hired, their complaints fall on deaf ears, and rightfully so. Why? The boss forewarned them and they accepted the terms. Being the breadwinner is your plus. That is why he is with you instead of another woman. He turned down your cash offer because you are worth more to him than $10,000. You are his base of operations. Unwittingly you provide him with the means and leisure to court other women. Your family, like your son, may well know the truth of your relationship. You offered them the image of honeymooners. If you stick with this lie, you will be stuck with it the rest of your life. Wayne & Tamara SEND LETTERS TO: Directanswers@WayneAndTamara.com Wayne & Tamara are the authors of Cheating in a Nutshell and The Young Woman’s Guide to Older Men—available from Amazon, Apple, and booksellers everywhere.

Are the U.S. Presidential Candidates Too Old?

By W. Gifford-Jones MD and Diana Gifford It’s a question on the minds of most Americans, and others too. Biden is 81 and Trump 77. Are they sufficiently health of body and mind to be President? Neither candidate has agreed to a comprehensive and transparent assessment of their mental health. But their state of mind is important, particularly now, when Putin is threatening the use of nuclear weapons. Are they both afraid of getting a D result? And what about being honest with the American public, knowing they face an exhausting campaign? At their ages, with a ton of luck, both have a life expectancy of around eight years. As for the chances of remaining healthy during that time, we would not bet on it. Biden walks with a stiffness now and it will increase with time. Trump faces a greater problem due to obesity. He is a walking model for cardiovascular disease, the big killer. How well do they sleep? We have little doubt that Biden sleeps better. He also appears to be happily married, and that’s a huge plus. If better rested, he will have more energy to deploy his political skills to the campaign. But does Trump ever sleep soundly? How can anyone believe he is happily married? He also must keep one eye on his many legal problems and other eye on his financial debts. Our bet is he tosses around in bed, a big negative for his overall health. What about the inner character and soul of these two candidates? We are grateful to have spent many years of study and work in the US and we have lifelong friends there. But we wonder why half the population adores (or puts up with) Trump who lies through his teeth, demeans women, tried to buy votes, and could not accept a fair defeat. We would suggest that Trump desperately needs a psychiatrist, and we have questions about half the population of this great democracy too. Could not another candidate be found? Dr. Rudolph Tanzi, a professor of neurology at the Harvard Medical School, says we need a neuropsychological examination of both Biden and Trump. This involves a series of 31 tests that can detect dementia and other brain dysfunction. It’s frightening what the figures show. Between the ages of 65 and 69, three percent of people have dementia. By age 90, it increases to a whopping 35 percent! The critical fact that we all, including presidents, have to accept is that getting older is very hazardous for the brain and all other parts of the body. But why do Biden and Trump want this top job at their advanced ages, a job that is so demanding day after day in light of domestic challenges and the Russo-Ukrainian and Israel-Hamas wars? Of course, being President of the greatest country is the obvious answer. Moreover, a ton of privileges go with the task. What will voters and the press have to accept? They must realize that Biden and Trump will continue to make elderly gaffes during interviews and speeches. Other age-related problems need to be anticipated. Trumps family history must also cause some concern. His father suffered from Alzheimer’s disease in his mid 80s. According to the experts, Trumps chances of this disease increase by about 39 per cent. And both candidates must be extremely wary of falling. From 65 to 84, it’s the second leading cause of injury-related deaths. How will this end? We believe there will be a medical tragedy due to their ages. We hope both of them choose healthy and extremely wise vice-presidents. Sign-up at www.docgiff.com to receive our weekly e-newsletter. For comments, contact-us@docgiff.com. Follow us Instagram @docgiff and @diana_gifford_jones

Excuse me I am Canadian

By Dale Jodoin As Canadians, we pride ourselves on being fair, polite, and reasonable. But there comes a point where even the most patient among us can't stay silent anymore. We're beyond fed up with the mess our Prime Minister has made, and the so-called "unbiased" news that keeps covering for him is just adding fuel to the fire. Let's talk about the trucker protest, for starters. Regular Canadians from all walks of life—different races, religions, and backgrounds—came together to stand up against government policies they didn't agree with. What was their reward? Our Prime Minister immediately branded them as racists and extremists. He even went as far as to claim they were getting money from some of the worst hate groups out there. And like clockwork, the news media lapped it up and spit it back out, painting these hardworking Canadians as villains on national TV. But that's just the tip of the iceberg. When people started to question where all the taxpayer money that's been sent overseas was going, the government's response was to shout "racism" from the rooftops. They say we're against freedom because we want accountability for billions of dollars? That’s not just misleading; it’s downright insulting. We have every right to demand transparency about where our money is going, especially when it's going abroad with no clear plan or payback. And when the news finally started reporting on foreign interference in our elections—something incredibly serious—the Prime Minister dismissed those concerns by attacking the character of anyone who dared bring it up. First, he labeled them as racists or homophobic, and then tried to bury the whole thing under a mountain of secrecy. But when documents surfaced proving he knew about the interference all along, he simply shrugged and denied everything. We've had enough of the lies and the sneaky tactics. The Prime Minister is supposed to unite the country, not divide it with false accusations and political games. He's supposed to lead by example, not by manipulation. Our schools aren't immune to this mess either. Public education is pushing political ideologies, teaching kids that communism is something to aspire to. They’re not learning to think critically; they're being taught to conform. Parents are right to be worried. Our children should be getting a balanced education, not being indoctrinated with radical ideas under the guise of progressivism. And let's not forget how all this political drama is hitting us where it hurts the most: our wallets. Housing prices are through the roof, gas prices are a nightmare, and despite our country's efforts to be carbon neutral, we're still getting hammered with carbon taxes. These taxes are supposed to help the environment, but all they're doing is draining our bank accounts and hurting businesses. The young people of this country, the ones who are supposed to be the future, are turning their backs on this Prime Minister. They're tired of empty promises and high costs of living. They want change, and they want it now. When the next election rolls around, don’t be surprised if the Prime Minister tries to play the same old cards, calling anyone who opposes him a racist or extremist. But we know the truth. We’re not extremists. We’re average Canadians, stuck in the middle of a political mess, just looking for fair treatment and a government that actually listens. It's time for a new government. One that will go after the real problems, like the indoctrination in our schools and the unchecked spending. We need a leader who will sit down with provincial heads and tackle our issues head-on, not one who spends his time defending his poor decisions and dividing the nation. We want a country where everyone, young and old, can afford a home and live without financial fear. A country where immigration is managed fairly and education is unbiased. Most importantly, we want a country where no group is set above another, where all Canadians can enjoy a peaceful life. Our patience has run out. It’s time to stop the name-calling, stop the lies, and start fixing what’s been broken. It’s time to kick the real troublemakers out of office and bring in leaders who will restore the fairness and respect Canada is known for. We deserve better, and we’re going to fight for it at the voting booth. Call us what you want, but we believe in a fair Canada, a peaceful Canada, for all.

Guide Your Job Search With These Two Universal Truths

By Nick Kossovan There's no shortage of job search advice floating around that contradicts. · Resumes (formatting, length, how to beat the employer's ATS, as if that's possible) · Cover letters (Include or don't include?) · Whether using LinkedIn's #OpenToWork green banner feature makes you appear desperate. · Interview advice All job search advice, including mine, is subject to bias. My first The Art of Finding Work column was titled There Is No Universal Hiring Methodology. In this column, I explained that hiring is more emotional than logical and, therefore, a highly subjective process. Protest all you want; the fact remains that hiring is heavily influenced by biases and gut feelings, resulting in no two recruiters or hiring managers assessing candidates the same way. One interviewer's deal breaker may not be another's. Self-proclaiming career coaches like to claim that the formula for successful job hunting is A + B + C = "You're hired!" Predictably, they also claim they have the formula for you to purchase (book, webinar, becoming a client of their coaching service). My question: How can a formula exist with gut instinct being the driving force behind hiring decisions? I've hired: · a candidate was more than 20 minutes late for their interview. · candidates who asked, within five minutes of starting the interview, "How many vacation days will I get?" · candidates who've been unemployed for more than nine months. · candidates (lost count of) who were over the age of 50. · a candidate who brought her cat, Duchess, who'd undergone surgery that morning, to the interview. (This hire was a stretch even for me, but I couldn't ignore her career story, set of skills, and strong personality.) Another hiring manager would have likely rejected these candidates. Vice versa, candidates I've rejected inevitably went on to be hired by hiring managers who didn't consider why I rejected them relevant. Rather than trying to juggle all the conflicting job search advice you're receiving—attempting to please all employers—focus on, better yet embrace, these two universal truisms. 1. Your success depends on what others think of you. Nowadays, the standard "life advice" is to not care what other people think about you. This advice, which I strongly disagree with, has led to the prevalence of self-centred behaviour. Being successful is highly dependent on your image and what others think of you. Searching for a job involves actively seeking approval. First you need the employer to approve—like what they see—your resume and LinkedIn profile. Then, to be approved for an in-person interview, you must pass a phone screening. Then, your interviewer must approve you for a second interview or to be hired. All these approvals required someone to think you deserve a "yes." If everyone actually didn't care what others thought of them, social media wouldn't be filled with approval-seeking posts, and rejection wouldn't hurt. Yet, job seekers constantly complain about being rejected (read: not approved) without receiving feedback, suggesting they care what their interviewer thought of them. As you realize how others perceive you is the key determining factor to your success, you'll ask yourself: How do people experience me? Be honest. How do people experience you? How do people feel in your presence? A challenge: 1. Solicit the opinion(s) of family members and friends regarding how they perceive you. 2. Based on the feedback, adjust your behaviour and shift your thinking. 3. Make it your mission to give those in your presence a memorable interpersonal experience. 2. Image is everything. People watch in a mall, restaurant, or on a busy street. You'll notice that most people don't take their image seriously or subscribe to the "don't care what other people think of you" advice. Whether you like it or not, humans are wired to judge a book by its cover. Therefore, how someone experiences you begins with your appearance. When it comes to interviewing, having an off-putting appearance will overshadow—not in a good way—your answers. When interviewing, you must be the best version of yourself. Consider this uncomfortable question: Those times when you aced, at least thought you did, the interview but didn't get the job, could it have been because of your appearance? According to research, a person's opinion of you is formed in just three seconds. Psychologists call it "thin slicing." Your interviewer will make four snap judgments when meeting you for the first time: 1. Are you trustworthy? 2. Intelligence level 3. Your professionalism 4. Whether they like you Everything I mentioned can be influenced, starting with how you dress and by looking your interviewer in the eye. Then, check your mannerisms and communication skills; both are imperative to your job search and career success. Looking your best gives you the mental state you need more than ever in today's competitive job market: Confidence. Commit to the following: · Exercising · Eating healthy · Getting enough sleep · Wearing proper fitting age-appropriate clothes · Smiling (Your teeth' role in how people perceive you can't be overstated.) Hire an image consultant if you need one; it’ll be money well spent. Don't underestimate, or worse, deny, the correlation between how your physical appearance impacts your life experiences and opportunities. _____________________________________________________________________ Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job. You can send him your questions at artoffindingwork@gmail.com

WAKE UP PICKERING YOUR CITY COUNCIL Has Been Slowly REMOVING YOUR RIGHTS

For those of you who are not aware of how things work in the city let me explain. City Council(s) are responsible for the management and administration of their city resources. This means that anything that affects the city, taxes, parks, buildings, development, planning, permits, guidelines, by-laws, parking, committees etc. in the City of Pickering is either, or has been, approved or rejected by your City Council. . A Council that is made up of seven (7) people, three (3) City Councillors, three (3) Regional Councillors and (1) Mayor. Note - the current Pickering council, now in their 2nd year, is made up of 4 councillors having up to 30 plus yrs each on council (Hmmm … the old boys club survives) - 3 first time councilors (women, seems like 2 are being mentored by the old boys club?) HMMM … WHAT HAS YOUR PICKERING COUNCIL DONE THIS PAST 1.5 YEARS? April 22, 2024, Councillor Pickles brought a non-agenda URGENT motion 2nd by Councillor Nagy - non Pickering residents can not delegate (speak) at public meetings unless they are Pickering tax payer (e.g. business owner). - and delegates can only speak to matters on the agenda. Motion Passed with a 5-to-1 Vote Hmmm “not on the agenda”… the agenda comes out the Friday prior to the Monday meeting so does this means that you, the residents, the people of Pickering, who voted these 5 in, will no longer be able to speak on, or bring up any of your concerns by submitting a delegation at least 10 days prior to a council meeting? Hmmm … seems another step to silence Pickering Residents doesn’t it? Councillor Pickles said his motion was necessary to ensure safety & because too many non-resident delegations took away from Pickering residents to delegate and too many seats in chambers. Hmmm … With over 20 years on council, Councillor Pickles should know that there is no limit to the number of delegations allowed and rarely has chambers been too full to accommodate Pickering residents should they want to attend. For example this April 22, 2024 council meeting had approximately 10 residents or less, in attendance. March 25, 2024, The Mayor upon opening the meeting, quickly changed the agenda to bring item 12.2 to be the first debated and voted on. This item/topic was in reference to removing the “Open Question Period”. To explain, June 2023 council meeting passed allowing an Open Question Period in the city council meetings, allowing those in attendance to ask questions regarding the items on the agenda, good idea. Apparently it wasn’t being used. Hmmm … I wonder Why? It seems that the city failed to tell the residents they could speak during the Open Question Period to any item on the agenda, without a delegation, instead residents were told if they wanted to speak to the agenda, remember it comes out Friday, they would have to make a delegation prior to noon on Monday. The motion to remove the Open Question Period Passed with a 6-to-1 Vote. Residents are wondering what’s happening in Council Meetings these past several months. Residents rarely attended meeting and only hear gossip, or hear negatives on social media. Remember the agenda comes out Friday prior to the Monday council meeting, which follows two other meetings that Councillors have to attend. Residents see the agenda but not the mounds of paper involved regarding the items on the agenda. Councillors have the weekend, less any personal or city commitments, to review and be informed on the topics for discussion. People wonder Why, why do so many of the items pass with a 6-to-1 vote. Could it be that one Councillor Lisa Robinson, actually takes her duty to the Pickering residents seriously and reviews everything, thereby having many questions and doesn’t just rubber stamp things based on staff recommendations? Councillor Lisa Robinson stands strong for the residents in spite of how the Mayor and fellow Councillors treat her, ousting her, name calling, bullying, pay docking etc. NOTE - Pickles urgent motion; Council didn’t want Robinson or Residents to know Pickering Residents it’s time you support Councillor Lisa Robinson who Fights for YOUR RIGHTS, BEFORE YOU HAVE NONE

Canada’s recent immigration policy and the unforeseen effects

by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East In its well-meaning effort to encourage immigration, the Trudeau government showed bad timing by increasing the immigration numbers at a time when Canada is confronted with an unprecedented housing crisis, issues in the health care system and a downturn in the economy. The Liberals have nearly doubled the number of permanent residents being admitted to this country, from 260,400 in 2014, to a projected 500,000 next year. Canada is now bringing in more immigrants than at any other time in its history. Last year, a record-breaking 431,645 permanent residents entered Canada, an influx almost exactly equivalent to the entire metro population of Halifax. This level of immigration is even higher than seen in the brief period before the First World War when Canada was frantically hustling in steamships full of Eastern European immigrants to settle the prairies. Today, however, there does not seem to be any plan on the part of the government or plan from the opposition to create new settlements in order to develop Canada’s resources. These totals are also well beyond the totals of another country historically big on immigration, the United States. On a per capita basis, Canada is now bringing in four times more immigrants than the Americans. And, Ottawa is looking to push it higher still. By 2025, Canada is set to receive up to 500,000 newcomers per year. In just the next three years, Canada is planning to bring in enough new Canadians (1.45 million) to equal the entire population of Manitoba. While Canadians have not abandoned their national love of immigration, there are clear signs that people are nervous about the tempo, amid crunches in the health system, housing and other infrastructure. As a result, broad public support for immigration, the cornerstone of multicultural Canada, is eroding. At the core of the problem we also have badly thought-out migration of international students to Canada. The flood of international students – there are now more than a million – who have been coming into Canada in recent years has created a huge problem, especially in housing. Many of these students get a sound education, land good jobs, and eventually become valued Canadian citizens. However, others show up at so-called puppy mills: pop-up private colleges noticeably lacking in academic rigour, without much in the way of classrooms or teachers. This clearly illustrates poor coordination between the Federal government responsible for immigration and the Provincial governments responsible for education. Both of them are putting political gains before the interests of Canadians. The Federal government ostensibly demonstrates its openness and responsiveness in taking measures to compensate for an aging work force by increasing the number of immigrants. However, their lack of vision and planning in pursuing this policy, demonstrates that they are only looking to increase their political base, not to build this country. At the same time, Provincial governments are relaxing education standards, claiming that they are showing openness and inclusivity for immigration. No immigrant comes to Canada to have their children get a watered down education, so this too, is a ploy for increasing political base rather than working for the good of the electorate. In fact, it does not matter which party is in power either federally or provincially. Immigration is seen primarily as a tool for political advantage, rather than a way to benefit the nation. Here we are then, with a major problem on our hands, as millions of newcomers compete with those already here, for a place to call home. The result is that Canada has the worst housing crisis in the G7. Government politicians are fighting with their respective opposition members, but apparently neither of them have real solutions for the problems they have created. The quick integration of newcomers into the Canadian way of life has many obstacles, which both the Federal and the Provincial governments have totally neglected to deal with. One of the main obstacles is the provincial system of regulating the professions through self-regulatory bodies. Unfortunately, these entities are out of touch with the times in which we live. They are primarily self-serving with no government over say in their activity. Legislatively they could have crucial input, but they prefer not to exercise it most of the time. These obstacles create a brake on the productivity of the country with most immigrants finding that their qualifications are not accepted, so they cannot work in their field of expertise. This is not good for either the immigrants or the country, especially now, when Canada is seeing a collapse in its productivity. One solution would be for the Federal government, which has jurisdiction to enter into international agreements, to work with the provinces to negotiate mutual recognition of degrees from foreign countries, and then eliminate this obstacle to accessing professions. The provinces should also have better input and overview on professional designations and practice, as they have a role in the professions acts and regulations, which they rarely exercise. I personally hope that Canada will continue to be a welcoming country for immigrants, but there is a dire need for politicians to work with Canadians in order to work out the right policy for immigration. What do you think?

The immigration colander

By Joe Ingino Editor/Publisher ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States “I live a dream in a nightmare world” Always Remember That The cosmic blueprint of your life was written in code across the sky at the moment you were born. Decode Your Life By Living It Without Regret or Sorrow. - ONE DAY AT A TIME - Allow me to disclose that I am an immigrant to this country. When, I came to this great country. I had standards to meet and I had a certain level of civility in order to qualify for a visa. I had to speak English, have and education, be clear of any medical infections or illnesses. I had to have a sponsor and the desire to integrate. Those were the days Canada had standards. Through my years, I strived to contribute. To educate myself to the point were I could offer other Canadians the same opportunities I worked so hard to earn. Today, it appears that Canadian Immigration policy has no standards. Canada has gone from a proud nation of it’s languages and heritages to stepping stone for foreign civil wars. A place that Canadians are forced to accept foreign culture, traditions and political interests. Canada has become a country of forced compliance. Foreign cultures demanding rights and priviledges that have not been earned but demanded as a human right. It appears that Canada has gone from air tight high standard immigration policy to a Tutti-Fruti Colander scooping from world civil wars, politically unstable regimes and just about anyone that cries refugee status gets in. What is that giving Canada? An Immigration policy that is being polutted with people with no education. Not even interested in learning our languages. In some cases ill and infectious. Criminals and political agetators. Political agitators with the only interest is to continue the cause back home from Canada. I say this is wrong. Then there is the visa for those that can pay. In some provinces if you can afford to run a business for two years. You are granted a visa. Many of these shell business opened never generate a dime or hire a soul. As long as they can register it and claim to be open for two years. Bingo. Or for the ultra rich. With a substantial investment they get to go ahead of the line. In most cases these are just as dangerous as the political/militant agitators that come under the guise of political refugees and ony interst is to use the resources of this country to continue the unrest back home. The wealthy visa seekers. Are buying land and property and then turning around and renting them out to only people from that nationlity for extortion rent rates. Is this our country. Let’s stop all Immigration. Let’s shut the door to refugees. Let’s tax heavy foreign investment and let’s cap the purchase of land for non-birth-Canadian. The Colander model is not working. It is hurting our country. It is changing all that was good in order to accommodate other cultures and tradition that have a proven fail record. Otherwise why are they in Canada?

STUGOTS $1.80

STUGOTS $1.80 By Rosaldo Russo Allow me to begin this column by thanking the Oshawa/Central newspaper for allowing me the opportunity and access to the press. Not to many if any allow an average person like me to tell the world what I see and think. In my opinion. The Editor/Publisher is a real upstanding type of guy. He shoots from the hip and hold traditional core values. My name is Rosaldo Russo. I came to this great country to make a better life for myself and my family. I thank Canada for everything it has allowed me to do and earn. I worked construction all my life. I know the value of hard work and honesty. I remember as a boy my father always telling me to work hard and buy land. So I did. I remember days when I did not have enough to eat. I go to work... but I did not wait for hand outs. I rounded up my pride my skill and my determination to succeed and went to work. In those days the only benefits we received was the fact we were employed. Before retiring I was the owner and operator of local material supply company that allowed me to retired without worry. Now that I have time to enjoy life. I look around me and have some concern for future generations. I see that the world is finished. Before anyone gets offended. Let me explain what Stugots means.... Stugots is Italian mob slang lingo - Italian term that refers to the male genetalia. It is used to describe an idiot or a jerk. Now, I think that later is more descriptive of how our government treat us. The first more like those we elect to office. I read a report on Monday warning me that by the end of the week the gas could go up as much as fourteen cents. Managia, fourteen cents... Che Fai, then they tell us on Wednesday that lucky us we may see gas prices drop as much as four cents. Now am I blind, stupid or plain retarded? They raise 14 on Friday, the following Monday they drop four cents... They still stuck it to us for ten cents... But this is not the worst. This mathematical conundrum is an open license for grocery stores to jump their prices in the name of high fuel costs. I say, Bull dingy. This is an outright rip off. Not only is it bad that people can’t pay for the inflated food prices. Now they will not be able to afford gas to go to work and make the little they make to pay for groceries. Come on people. Where is the Canadian red blood? Is it not time for Canadians to grow some grapes and call the government out. We can send millions if not billions to fight loosing foreign wars. We can’t take care of young families wanting to start a new life but can’t due to the outrageous house prices. Now they can’t even afford to drive to work. They surely will not be able to pay for food. $14.00/lb for beef at some stores. Hamburger almost $10/lb. Are you kidding me. But wait. We the apologetic people of Canada may go hungry and homeless before we figure it out. WE ARE GETTING SCREWED AND FORCED TO LIKE IT. Let’s send a clear messages that those Stugots we elected will not treat us the hard working tax paying Stugots like a bunch of Stugots. Oh Canada... Our home and native Stugots.

Safe streets act

Safe streets act By Dale Jodoin In a significant legal development, the Ontario courts have partially overturned the Safe Streets Act, specifically targeting provisions that have long been a cornerstone in regulating public solicitation. The court struck down sections related to "aggressive solicitation" and location-based restrictions, such as near ATMs, public toilets, and transit stops, deeming them unconstitutional. These sections were criticized for violating the freedom of expression and the presumption of innocence. The ruling has not completely dismantled the Safe Streets Act. Certain elements, like the ban on stepping onto roadways to solicit funds from drivers and engaging in solicitation aggressively, still stand, highlighting a compromise between public safety and individual rights. However, this decision stirs a complex debate about the impact of panhandling on local businesses and public safety, particularly in downtown areas. Before this ruling, it was rare to enforce the now-overturned restrictions rigorously, yet they offered a sense of security to businesses and pedestrians. The presence of panhandlers around sensitive areas like banks and businesses historically created a tense atmosphere, with incidents of aggression when panhandlers were refused money. This, understandably, sparked fear and discomfort, contributing to a perception of insecurity that could drive businesses out of downtown cores. Critics argue that the relaxed restrictions may lead to a "free-for-all" situation, where increased panhandling could negatively affect local commerce. Business owners, who contribute significantly to municipal taxes, feel particularly aggrieved. They argue that their taxes help fund social services that assist the homeless and other vulnerable populations, yet their businesses suffer from the very issues they help address. Furthermore, the economic strain on everyday citizens is palpable. With taxes rising to accommodate social programs and the cost of living increasing, the public’s capacity to give charitably is stretched thin. The frustration is evident as people feel pressured into giving directly on the streets, while also contributing through taxes. This scenario creates a double-edged sword: there is a desire to help those in need, but resentment builds as personal financial burdens grow. The court’s decision h

as opened a can of worms regarding the balance between individual rights and community welfare. The question arises: were the judges and policymakers out of touch with the daily realities of downtown businesses and safety? The original intent of the Safe Streets Act was to protect both the public and the vulnerable, yet its partial repeal raises concerns about whether true balance can be achieved. As Ontario grapples with these changes, the future of downtown safety and economic stability hangs in the balance. It remains to be seen how this decision will affect the dynamics of charity, business, and public welfare in the long term. For many, this ruling is not just about constitutional rights but also about maintaining a quality of life that keeps downtown areas thriving and safe for everyone.

Side Hustle Culture: Extending Our Working Hours to Keep Up Appearances

By Nick Kossovan I'm sure you're aware of all the side hustle evangelists online touting that everyone should have a side hustle, peddling their "side hustle formula" and "get-rich-quick" schemes. They portray having a side hustle as a glamorous pursuit of ambition, masking the fundamental motivator: additional income to keep up appearances. Having said this, I can't make this assertion without acknowledging that the workplace has become an existential nightmare. AI, automation, and robotics eliminating jobs, social media's emergence and CEOs creating headline-making layoffs every time the economy sneezes are partially fueling the side hustle culture; however, these aren't the primary reasons for the trend. The reason is the implied social contract—never promised—of working 40 hours per week in exchange for enough money to live on defaulted long ago. Nine-to-five has become an existential nightmare. Many millennials and Gen Zs, enough for employers to make sweeping generalizations about their work ethics, have come to feel that nine-to-five offers little in return for all the demands they feel it places on them. Putting in an eight-hour workday, plus commute time, is unappealing—downright distasteful—when carrying the sense of entitlement narrative "I'm better than this." What is appealing is the "Image is everything" lifestyle social media influencers and marketing propaganda promote. Having a second, sometimes third, job to supplement one's income to pay the bills and make ends meet has always been common. However, our consumerism—bills—have dramatically changed since the advent of the Internet and social media. Today, our consumerism revolves around looking rich and impressing. What ends—what bills—are those with a side hustle trying to meet? Based on my observations, I'd say that most people who claim they have difficulty making ends meet prioritize having the latest iPhone, wearing designer clothes, and living in a house larger than they need over being prudent with their money. Most North Americans could downsize their lifestyle by half and live far more comfortably than most worldwide. Contrary to our first-world lifestyle, characterized by financial waste and its multitude of negative environmental impacts, according to the World Bank Group, half of the global population lives on less than $6.85US a day. Westerners live a lifestyle most of the world's population doesn't come close to living. Easy access to credit makes it possible to make $60K a year and appear, by your spending, to make $120K a year. However, credit requires interest-bearing repayment. Instead of cutting back on using credit (read: downsizing your lifestyle), many start a side hustle—Grind! Grind! Grind!—to keep their facade of prosperity visible. Thanks to constantly evolving psychologically penetrating marketing techniques and social media, a godsend to marketers, keeping up with the Jones has never been more prevalent. Apart from lottery winners and those who received an inheritance, rich people are rich because they've adopted the habit of prioritizing saving and investing BEFORE spending. (Paying yourself first, while not sexy, is stoic money management advice that, when followed, significantly benefits your financial health.) Your only glimpse of the rich is how they spend money on things you wish you had. Unseen: Most of their income goes towards savings and investments. They only spend a portion of their income. Many people have a hard time managing their money because they copy the spending style of those with money rather than how they earn and manage their money. Many will cite that the side hustle culture offers an opportunity to "pursue one's passion." What does this even mean? Is making money from one's passion a requirement? A person who says they're passionate about ceramics certainly doesn't mean they're passionate about spending several hours a week researching social media trends, handling paperwork, and marketing their hand-made pottery business. Turning your hobby into a side hustle is turning your hobby into work. Furthermore, if the money generated from that work is to help finance keeping up appearances, is it still a work of passion? We need three things to survive: food, water, and protection from the elements (shelter and clothing). Everything else exists for comfort; hence, most things only exist for us to buy and for someone to make money. The side hustle culture trend didn't arise out of survival necessity, to make financial stability (read: savings, investing) fashionable or because people have become more ambitious. It emerged because someone saw, and many others followed, they could profit from our fear of how others will judge our lifestyle. Ultimately, the side hustle culture reflects a broader societal problem: our obsession with appearances and materialism. Our pursuit of material wealth comes at the cost of being trapped in a cycle of consumerism, constantly chasing the latest trends and accruing debt. Our respective finances and the environment would greatly benefit from starting and embracing a new trend that celebrates contentment and financial prudence over keeping up appearances. Let's call it aligning your lifestyle with your income. _____________________________________________________________________ Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job. You can send him your questions at artoffindingwork@gmail.com

Go Generals Go

By Joe Ingino Editor/Publisher ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States “I live a dream in a nightmare world” Always Remember That The cosmic blueprint of your life was written in code across the sky at the moment you were born. Decode Your Life By Living It Without Regret or Sorrow. - ONE DAY AT A TIME - What great news. The Oshawa Generals hockey team is on a roll. They are having an awesome season. One would think that with the Oshawa 100th anniversary that the City would be on fire in celebration. Or at the least the Region celebrating it’s 50th anniversary. The City and or the Region would be capitalizing on the great achievements of the Oshawa Generals and use this opportunity to bring tourism to the region. No, instead we get the same old same old. Instead of painting the City of Oshawa red white and blue in support of the Generals. What do we have. A bunch of street banners promoting a college. Come on people, who is doing the thinking at City hall? No wonder the City of Oshawa is in such condition. Nothing, but hookers, drug addicts and the homeless. To ad insult to injury. The City does not promote any of it’s events. No notices are being published. Road closures, construction, community events, important notices, facility closures, 100th celebration events. Nothing. When was the last time you seen a notice or event published in your community newspaper. The Durham Region is having changes to garbage collection. Have you seen it published? The Region is having a battery recycling event, road closures, and many important events that you should know about.... have you seen it published any place? I know that if I had been elected to office. I would have used this 100th opportunity to unite our community. To host events every week that catered to family interests. We have 2 million dollars to waste on a quasi militia security firm... for whose benefit? We have bylaw and the police. Why do we need 2 million wasted on a private firm. I would use that money to host events. To create programs for the homeless so they do not have to sleep on our streets. Give them opportunity. I would promote the Generals efforts by encouraging local business to give discounts to people coming in to their stores wearing Generals wear. I would use the momentum to raise money that would go to children programs and to feed those in need. We have a great opportunity on our front doors and the door of opportunity is being shut. So, sad to see such opportunities come and go. Well, In my opinion we should all be behind the accomplishments of the Oshawa General and wish them the best of luck in their next series. The road to success is a long one. GO GENERAL GO.

Canadian Federal Government Announces New Rules on Capital Gains Tax

By Daryl Ching, CFA | Managing Partner Vistance Capital Advisory The recently announced changes by the federal government to the capital gains tax rules are terrible news for SMEs in Canada who are ultimately looking to sell their businesses. In accordance with the 2024 federal budget unveiled yesterday, the taxable portion of capital gains increases from 50% to 67% for capital gains in excess of $250,000, and tax is subject to personal income tax levels, which we all know are one of the highest in the world. Most small businesses that I work with certainly expect to sell their businesses for much more than that. By comparison, the long-term capital gains tax rate in the US for assets held for more than a year is 15-20%. Assuming you hit the top income tax bracket, Canadians will effectively pay 33.5% on capital gain upon selling an asset, which may potentially be more than double what a US citizen would pay. The capital gains tax impacts a number of parties: · Business owners selling their businesses · Individuals or corporations that make investments in stocks · Real estate investors · Individual employees that opt for stock options when they take a position in a startup firm When you consider the recent triple whammy from the federal government, this puts considerable strain on SMEs that are still struggling to survive in the post-COVID world: · $40K CEBA repayments in January · Shut down of CDAP - grants for digital adoption · Increase in capital gains tax rate The ripple effect from this announcement can be massive. Investors who put their capital into private businesses looking for a return will be deterred from continuing to support SMEs in Canada. For those business owners that were thinking about moving their business to another jurisdiction, this announcement is yet another push in that direction. If they decide to pack up and move their headquarters elsewhere, we will see job losses and a loss in economic activity. Canada already provides a challenging environment for a startup company with insufficient sources of capital at an early stage. This will be yet another deterrent for that entrepreneur looking to take a substantial personal risk to start a business. For those who believe this is simply taxing the rich to redistribute wealth to those more in need, I believe that opinion is oversimplified. I would support that argument if the federal government implemented an inheritance tax or a wealth tax, which taxes the net worth of wealthy individuals, a concept that has been floated around by politicians like Elizabeth Warren in the US. However, the effective capital gains tax rate was intentionally set up to be lower due to the recognition that activities that generate capital gains involve capital expenditures where individuals or businesses take on risk that may at some point in the future yield a large return. These individuals are not necessarily wealthy today and theoretically should be rewarded for taking that risk. Individuals taking risks lead to greater innovation, better products and services for consumers, more jobs for Canadians, and higher overall productivity in the country. This is a sad day for Canadian SMEs.

Looking for Loopholes

 Direct Answers
from Wayne & Tamara

Looking for Loopholes
Q My boyfriend and I had a great start to our relationship. We were medical students then. We trusted each other and were both clear that cheating is a dealbreaker for us.
     When we moved to different cities to start our specialty training, we saw each other less. Things got busier but we tried working things out, always thinking about the light at the end of the tunnel. Nonetheless, we felt really happy once we met.
     Two years ago, someone anonymously messaged me on a networking site saying my boyfriend was seeing someone else. There was no evidence, but I immediately called him and he denied it.
     One day, I went into paranoid mode and checked his phone while he was asleep. I saw flirty messages. The next morning I confronted him and asked who she was. He said they were coworkers and friends, and he was just helping her review. That was our first big argument.  Of course, I believed him. We even got engaged last year!
     Fast forward to three months before our wedding. Another person messaged me, this time with proof! Turns out, their relationship became physical both before and after he proposed to me.
     Bit by bit, he told me the truth. He admitted they were friends, part of a group who went out together and reviewed in his apartment, until the two of them were left alone. But he never once mentioned this group of friends to me. He said he was afraid I wouldn’t give my permission to hang out with them.
     He said the girl made a move and kissed him first, and his lust took over. After that, they had sex for a few more meetings until he realized what they were doing was wrong. He claims he ended it with the other woman three months ago and was going to tell me.
     My life crumbled. The person I thought I knew best and trusted most, suddenly became a stranger. We broke up and our wedding was canceled.
     A month and a half after D-day, we still communicate. He’s remorseful and readily answers my calls, even though he knows I just want answers.
     I will be flying to another country for 18 months of further training, while he’ll be staying in our home country for his training. He says he’ll fly to see me once he’s done and court me again. He says I’m the person he wants to live with in this lifetime.
     Can a person really change? Will I be able to get past this feeling of betrayal?
Heidi

A Heidi, a loophole is defined as an exemption that can be used to avoid the effect of a law. You and your boyfriend are both looking for a loophole.
     In this case, the law you want to avoid is a law of human nature.
     Your boyfriend’s first line of defense was to lie. His second line of defense was to blame you. (You wouldn’t approve of his group.) His third line of defense was to blame the other woman. (She started it.)
     If you stay with him, his final defense will be, “It couldn’t have been all that bad because Heidi stayed.”
     Of course it isn’t all that bad to him. He’s not the one betrayed. Proceeding as before is what a cheater wants because they are not the injured party. But if you had cheated on him, would he be so lenient on you? Of course not.
     His excuses are the archetypal responses of a cheater who is caught. It’s the classic pattern, but because you haven’t been through this before, you don’t recognize the pattern. Still, your gut told you to cancel the wedding.
     When he blamed the other woman, he admitted he can “fall prey” to any other woman. In trying to wriggle off the hook, he set the hook. He admitted, “I cannot control myself and you cannot trust me.”
     You were not paranoid when you checked his phone. You smelled gas and looked for the leak. That’s realism, not paranoia.
     Perhaps you’ve had to explain to a patient that they have a terminal disease. Now you’re on the other side of that. You must face that your relationship with this man is terminal.
    Reactions to cheating—the disgust, the outrage at the unfairness, the suspicion, the traumatic response—are not something a skillful counselor can talk you out of. They are part of your human nature.
     Counseling can be helpful in many areas, but it cannot overcome the basic needs built into us for trust, for justice, and for love.
     In a marriage, there can be no loopholes. Why? Because with people who belong together, none are needed.
 Wayne & Tamara  

write:  Directanswers@WayneAndTamara.com

Pickering Council In a 6 to 1 vote On Board For a Way To Expel Members

By Lisa Robinson - Pickering City Councillor Lately, there has been considerable talk surrounding municipal governments endorsing recommendations of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), to call on the Provincial Government to amend the Municipal Act to have the power to remove a sitting elected official from Municipal office, prioritizing the interests of municipal elites over those of ordinary citizens. This is a blatant disregard for democratic principles and the rights of elected officials to represent the diverse views and interests of their constituents. This proposal by way of a motion has been circulating from municipality to municipality with the hope of granting Integrity Commissioners and City Councillors the power to remove a fellow sitting council member based on their subjected interpretations of their conduct, rather than objective criteria. This development should raise serious concerns not only among municipal elected officials who resist conforming to the status quo or willing to engage in political posturing, but also among the electorate who voted for them. It presents a worrisome scenario wherein council members could potentially abuse their power and manipulate the system to target colleagues with differing views or whom they perceive as threats. Granting municipalities the authority to apply to a member of the judiciary to remove a sitting member, based on the recommendation of a “CITY PAID Integrity Commissioner”, lacks transparency and accountability. It also 100 percent creates a system where the removal of elected officials could be influenced by political motivations by either municipal staff, council, or a biased Integrity commissioner rather than genuine concerns about misconduct. If that wasn’t enough, the proposal also includes a clause to prohibit a member if removed from office, from sitting for election in the subsequent term which further raises a huge red flag for me, making me suspicious of ulterior motives. By effectively disqualifying individuals from seeking re-election, this provision could be used as a tool to silence dissenting voices and maintain the status quo within municipal councils. This is a direct threat to the democratic principles of fair competition and equal opportunity in elections. This loophole opens a whole new breading ground to enable incumbents to wield their positions of power to safeguard their own political interests, thereby distorting the democratic playing field and diminishing the rights of potential challengers to participate in the electoral process. AMO’s recommendation cannot persistently define and establish clear and objective criteria for determining what constitutes misconduct or disrespectful behavior warranting removal from office. Without such criteria, there is a risk that the process may be manipulated to target councillors who hold opposing views or challenge the status quo. If the AMO and all those supporting these recommendations genuinely prioritized the well-being and accountability of its municipal members, would it not also encompass provisions for the removal of councillors and/or mayors in cases of dishonesty, or lying? In my opinion, this too raises concerns about the consistency and fairness of the proposed measures. Lying or dishonesty by elected officials can be equally be damaging to public trust and the integrity of municipal governance as other forms of misconduct, if not more so, and failing to address this as a form of misconduct creates a selective approach to enforcement that may serve to protect certain council members while targeting others. Furthermore, this lack of seriousness in addressing these types of unethical behavior, sends a strong message that certain forms of misconduct may be tolerated or overlooked. By neglecting to address lying or dishonesty as a form of misconduct, the motion misses an opportunity to strengthen public confidence in municipal governance and ensure that elected officials are held to the highest ethical standards. There is also a lack of consultation with the electorate, which further undermines the legitimacy of the proposed legislative changes. It suggests a top-down approach to governance that prioritizes centralized control by a few and undermines the role of the electorate by diminishing their voice in the democratic process. This would erode the trust and confidence of voters who elected the representative to advocate for their interests, only to see that representative removed without their consent. By providing municipalities with these expanded powers to remove elected officials based on subjective interpretations of their conduct, the motion risks undermining the fundamental rights to free speech and expression enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This would have a chilling effect on elected officials' willingness to express dissenting opinions or challenge the status quo, for fear of facing punitive action or removal from office. Overall, this recommendation appears to be driven by political obedience rather than genuine concern for workplace safety and respectful discourse. It raises serious questions about the motives behind the proposed changes and the potential consequences for democracy and accountability within Ontario's municipal governments. In my humble opinion, any municipal members of councils who vote in favour of sending such a motion to be heard by the Provincial Government hold a blatant disregard for the democratic process, confirming the undeniable truth that the voices of the electorates do not matter. We are currently witnessing a worrisome demonstration of potential abuse of power through this authoritarian attempt at governance. This is not a democracy. "Strength Does Not Lie In The Absence Of Fear, But In The Courage To Face It Head-On And Rise Above It"

Canadian Federal Budget 2024

by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East As expected after the big spending Ontario 2024 budget with its 9 billion deficit, the Liberal’s big-government budget ups spending. It raises taxes, promising Canadians the world by spending their hard-earned money, to the tune of a 40 billion dollar deficit. The federal budget confirms the Trudeau government’s ongoing fiscal trajectory of higher program spending, more deficits and debt. It also sets out significant new tax increases, including a higher capital gains tax rate, intended to raise revenues to match the government’s higher levels of spending. Years ago, when the Trudeau government first took office in 2015, federal spending was roughly $250 billion (about 12.5 percent of GDP) per year. Although the incoming government intended to increase spending on the margins based on “modest,” short-term deficits, its overarching fiscal policy message was generally in continuity with its predecessor. Once in office, the Liberals’ first budget increased program spending by 6 percent and it never looked back. Program spending was up by 36 percent over just five years even before the pandemic hit. This trend of higher spending, systematic use of deficit financing that balloons the deficit, has continued in the post-pandemic years and is strongly reaffirmed in the new budget. This year’s projected spending is nearly double what it was in the Harper government’s final year in office. It’s projected to hit $534.6 billion for 2023-24 and set to increase every year thereafter. Spending as a share of GDP is now roughly three percentage points higher than it was when the Trudeau government was first elected, and the highest in 30 years. The budget’s tax increases start with the rich and end with the poor, in order to finance politically motivated projects. Using deficit financing this government has driven up government spending so high that it now needs to raise taxes to pay for its public expenditures. Rising borrowing costs and the government’s own spending habits will force taxes to increase more broadly to sustain the Trudeau government’s inexorable spending ambitions. Let’s look in detail at some of the major provisions in the 416 page recently tabled budget. Overall, the 2024 federal budget includes $52.9 billion in new spending plans, some of which is loan-based and reliant on provincial buy-in as well as an estimated $20 billion in new tax revenue, including tobacco and vaping taxes. Aiming to give Canadian millennials and Generation Z "a fair chance at a middle class life”, the budget outlines the Liberals’ plan to allocate $39.2 billion in net-new spending, while upholding the intended fiscal guardrails. Promising to build 3.9 million homes by 2031, the housing strategy includes a bevy of measures. Much of this spending is spread over the years ahead. Among the biggest ticket housing commitments are a $15-billion top-up to the Apartment Construction Loan Program; $6 billion for a Canada Housing Infrastructure Fund; as well as $1 billion in loans and $470 million in contributions for a new rental protection fund. The budget also includes $400 million to top up the Housing Accelerator Fund, plus $600 million for a series of new homebuilding innovation efforts aimed at scaling up modular and prefabricated homes. There are a series of chapters in the 2024 federal budget focused on various efforts to expand elements of Canada's social safety net. This includes $1.5 billion over five years to launch the new national universal pharmacare plan. The first phase, as pre-announced, will help cover diabetes and contraception medications starting this fiscal year. It includes funding for the Canada Disability Benefit: $6.1 billion over six years and $1.4 billion ongoing, with the first payments issued in July 2025. The budget includes more than a dozen new initiatives connected to the Liberals' longstanding commitment to Indigenous reconciliation. Among them: a promise to spend $927 million over five years on new on-reserve income assistance; $1.8 billion to help Indigenous people exercise their jurisdiction; $5 billion in loan guarantees related to energy projects. Further, the budget includes $1 billion over five years to fund a new national school food program intended to provide meals to 400,000 more kids. It earmarks $500 million for a new youth mental health fund; $1 billion in loans and $60 million in grants to build or renovate child-care centres; and $48 million to extend student loan forgiveness for early childhood educators. As part of a new small business-focused package, the budget earmarks $200 million over two years, starting in 2026-27, to increase access to venture capital for "equity-deserving entrepreneurs," and those outside of major hubs. Further, the Liberal budget promises a new "Canada Carbon Rebate for Small Businesses" that vows to rapidly return the proceeds from the federal pollution price from 2019-20 to 2023-24 to 600,000 businesses with fewer than 500 employees through a new refundable tax credit, estimated to cost $2.5 billion. A further, $3.5 billion is promised for strategic research infrastructure, investments in modernized facilities, including $2.4 billion for core research grants and to foster homegrown talent through improved scholarships and fellowships. The budget also includes $2.4 billion to build capacity in artificial intelligence, largely for computing capabilities and technical infrastructure. Lastly, the federal budget includes the promised billions in defence spending over the long-term. However, defence spending does not reach the NATO goal of 2% of GDP. On the safety front, the government notes it plans to move ahead with "additional penalties under the Criminal Code for those who commit an auto-theft related offence" and is earmarking $30.4 million for the buyback of assault-style firearms. Further, the budget includes $273.6 million for Canada’s Action Plan on Combatting Hate, and $16 million to help "create a safer and more welcoming sport environment" for all athletes. Related to the yet-to-be-passed online harms legislation, the federal government proposes to provide $52 million over five years, starting this year, to Canadian Heritage and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to fulfill their obligations regarding protecting children, ensuring major online platforms are abiding by the coming new regulations, and to set up the promised Digital Safety Commission. An additional $7.5 million will be going to the Public Health Agency of Canada to support the Kids Help Phone over the next three years, while Public Safety Canada is getting $2.5 million to support the Canadian Centre for Child Protection. There are other provisions in the budget to finance foreign aid for up to 3 billion dollars. However, there is no projected budget balance and forecast deficits get bigger than previously projected, each year. The budget titled "Fairness for Every Generation" notes that federal public debt charges are on track to balloon to $64.3 billion in 2028-29. Canada’s total debt will reach more than $1.2 trillion this year. When Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took power in 2015, the total debt was $616 billion. So the debt has doubled during his tenure. It is time to better administer taxpayers’ money! Don’t you think?

Remembering the Battle of Vimy Ridge 107 years later

by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East As the world continues to be ravaged by the conflicts in Europe and the Middle East with the prospect of new uncertain times to come, Canadians are encouraged to remember the efforts of Canadian soldiers in World War I during those four bloody days in France, between April 9 and 12, 1917. It is important to remember that more than a century ago this nation was essentially created by the efforts of all Canadians demonstrating patriotism and a high level of civic responsibility. Today we need to demonstrate the same patriotism and civic responsibility to keep Canada the best country in the world to raise a family. We need to strengthen our nation’s defences as never before, due to the worsening of threats posed by evolving complex international factors. A couple of months after the critical battle at Vimy, another enemy, the Spanish flu, decimated the world, also taking a devastating toll of Canadian lives. Just having survived the Covid-19 pandemic, which tested world resiliency, the world is once again facing uncertain times, brought on by the escalation of the conflicts in Europe and Middle East. The current situation requires that all Canadians unite to care of each other like never before. We must rely on our own civic responsibility and sense of duty to overcome the black clouds that are enveloping the modern world. Let us now look back in history to the days of Easter 1917, which defined the birth of a proud and compassionate nation. We just celebrated Easter ourselves, but let’s not forget our compatriots who gave their lives to ensure better lives for us. As dawn broke on that morning at Vimy, close to a hundred thousand Canadians poured from trenches, dugouts and tunnels, surged up a slope and conquered an enemy position considered impregnable by its German defenders and, frankly, by Canada’s allies. This was the first time all four divisions of the Canadian Forces fought as a unified force. They planned and rehearsed, planned again, and they stockpiled vast amounts of ammunition. On Easter Monday (April 9), they launched the battle, and because they were so well prepared, the artillery barrage was said to be so enormous that you could hear the distant thunder of it as far away as London, England, a distance of more than 250 kilometers. It was a costly victory. 3,600 Canadians making the ultimate sacrifice, and approximately 7,000 being wounded on the 9th: the worst day’s losses for Canada in the war. Many historians and writers consider the Canadian victory at Vimy a defining moment for Canada, when the country emerged from under the shadow of Britain and felt capable of greatness. Canadians had done a remarkable thing and, they had done it with French, English, First Nations and recent immigrants fighting together. Vimy was followed by other Canadian victories, some of them even greater feats of arms. Sir Arthur Currie, Canadian Corps commander after Sir Julian Byng, the victor at Vimy, was promoted, boasted that he had won an even better victory at Lens when he persuaded his British commander-in-chief to let the Canadians capture Hill 70, forcing the Germans to counter-attack at enormous cost in German soldiers’ lives. Currie’s arguments for smarter tactics carried weight chiefly because of Canadian success at Vimy. The Vimy experience provided a pattern for future successes. The Canadians had rehearsed tirelessly before the battle. They dug trenches and tunnels and piled up tons of ammunition for the heavy guns that pulverized German trenches and wiped out most of the German artillery hidden behind Vimy Ridge. The motto for Canadian success was “thorough”. Nothing that could help soldiers succeed would be ignored. Digging trenches and tunnels and lugging artillery shells through miles of wet, muddy trenches was brutally exhausting work. The Vimy victory shaped a Canadian way of making war. Other nations might celebrate flamboyant valour or dogged sacrifice; Canadians built on the conviction that only thorough preparation could spell success. At Hill 70, at Amiens, in crossing the Canal du Nord and even by capturing Passchendaele in October 1917, Canadians could take pride in their “ever-victorious” Canadian Corps. The victory at Vimy Ridge was greeted with enthusiasm in Canada, and after the war the battle became a symbol of an awakening Canadian nationalism. One of the prime reasons is that soldiers from every region of Canada — fighting together for the first time as a single assaulting force in the Canadian Corps — had taken the ridge together. As Brigadier-General Alexander Ross would famously say: “in those few minutes I witnessed the birth of a nation.” Therefore, it is time for reflection, time to learn from our own history and act in accordance with what we have learned, in facing these challenging modern times. Let’s not forget! Are our leaders listening or hiding? Lest we forget

Empowering Workers and Navigating Legal Changes

Empowering Workers and Navigating Legal Changes Tahir Khorasanee, LL.M. Senior Associate, Steinbergs LLP Empowering Workers and Navigating Legal Changes: What Ontario Employers Need to Know In the ever-evolving landscape of employment law, Ontario businesses find themselves at a crossroads. The recent passage of the Working for Workers Four Act, 2023 signals a seismic shift in workplace regulations around recruitment and selection strategies. Employers, buckle up – it’s time to adapt or face the consequences. The Key Changes AI Transparency: Employers must now disclose the use of artificial intelligence (AI) during hiring processes. No more hidden algorithms – candidates deserve transparency. Salary Ranges: Job postings must include expected salary or wage ranges. It’s a small step toward pay equity, but a giant leap for workplace fairness. Canadian Experience Myth: Ontario becomes the first province to ban Canadian work experie

nce requirements in job postings. Let qualifications speak louder than passports. No More Unpaid Trials: Service and restaurant workers rejoice! Unpaid trial shifts are history. If you test skills, you pay for them. NDAs Under Scrutiny: Consultations loom on restricting non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) in workplace sexual harassment cases. Employers, tread carefully. What Lies Ahead These changes aren’t isolated incidents; they’re harbingers of a new era. Here’s why: AI Accountability: AI bias is real. Employers must now grapple with transparency and liability. Discrimination? Prepare to answer. Pay Equity: Public salary ranges hint at a fairer future. Compensation secrets are out – skeletons, meet daylight. Takeaways for Employers Embrace Transparency: Be forthright about AI use and salary expectations. Trust builds stronger teams. Update Policies: Review your practices. Banish unpaid trials and understand NDAs’ risks. Stay Informed: The legal landscape shifts – stay ahead. Seek counsel when needed. Employers, the winds of change blow fiercely. Adapt wisely, and your workforce will thrive. Ignore them, and you’ll find yourself in a legal storm. The choice is yours.

In nothing we find everything and in everything we find nothi

In nothing we find everything and in everything we find nothing By Joe Ingino Editor/Publisher Much like the truth is out there. In nothing we can find everything and in everything we find nothing. Truth is the absolete understanding of nothing through interpretation and understanding of everything. Something that is not achievable by the human mind as the constant struggle between nothing and something rage on through one’s existence. This confusing the mind in a web of moral entanglement based on environmental divide. Look at the human animal. From nothing we evolve to something, that constantly changes to everything around us. From our molecular structure to our interactions. Evolution in it’s ongoing expansion and disclosure of everything clouds our minds in a romantic coccon of confusion. The more we evolve the more we see nothing. Our confusion mounts to such levels that compromises logic and common sense. It challenges natural laws and impedes natural growth of the mind and body. Love and hate become one, entangles in something that gives meaning to people’s everything. This passion translates to the understanding of nothing in claim of everything. The human mind is limited to know nothing, yet profess to know everything. An impossible feat as one can’t exist with the other. We look around the world and bring to question. How is it that the people of a Nation can turn on each other. How can such acts of horror be committed towards another? The answer lies in confused minds that profess to know everything when in reality they know nothing. Some may claim that nothing is in part pure innocence. Others may deem it as pure ignorance. But everything could not exist without nothing. If this stands true then, we as humans may never achieve full knowledge of everything as we fail to understand nothing. Now, what is nothing. Nothing is existence and the need for the human mind to evolve. To create a reality that is governed by everything around us and rooted in nothing or as stated, ignorance and innocence. Look in a dark room. What do you see. Do you seen nothing or do you see everything. The darkness in the room is just a measure of our perception of nothing.

Equal Rights under the Law

By Lisa Robinson - Pickering City Councillor As I've said 100 times before we should not be segregating or discriminating against any member of the public because of the color of their skin, their religious beliefs, or their sexual preferences. This is a crucial statement that should also apply when dealing with offenders who have broken the law. Instead, it has become evident that in many cases, the law has demonstrated leniency and has been influenced by such factors when dealing with certain individuals. Numerous special interest groups raise concerns and claim unfair targeting when a member of their group is charged with a crime, or it simply goes unnoticed by the authorities. While I do agree that such situations do occur occasionally, it is important to note that they are more of an exception rather than the rule. This disparity in treatment has resulted in a lack of equality under the law for certain individuals even though Section 15 in The Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canada specifically addresses equality rights. It states: “Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age, or mental or physical disability.” In my humble opinion, to ensure this principle of equality under section 15 is effectively upheld, all police officers and individuals within the judicial system must be committed to its reinforcement. A crime is a crime regardless of one's racial ethnic background or sexuality and I believe it is crucial to treat all individuals equally under the law. As politicians representing all levels of government, Municipal, Provincial, and Federal, it is our primary responsibility as community leaders to ensure the safety and well-being of the people. It is imperative that Municipalities in partnership with the police establish a comprehensive data collection system that captures relevant information about criminal behaviour, including demographics, recurring patterns, and modus operandi (method of operation – M.O). and make it accessible to the public so they are aware of what is happening in their neighbourhood’s. This can better prepare citizens by increasing their awareness and understanding of how they can be more vigilant and proactive, able to recognize the warning signs in reporting suspicious activities to the authorities. Pickering is becoming a cesspool for crime, and I believe it's time that we as leaders in the community initiate a formal review examining potential patterns and implement targeted strategies to protect our community from the devastating impacts due to crimes. Pickering has seen an influx not only in white collar crimes (non-violent offenses), but in juvenile crimes, organized crimes, drug crimes, property crimes, and violent crimes. We have homicides, shootings, attempted murders, violent gun crimes, car thefts, break and enters, robbery, gangs, drug trafficking, and human trafficking and it's time that we develop an action plan and awareness plan that will put an end to this. Now is also a good time to ask our governments to review our current bail reform and mandatory sentences, so we can restore faith in our justice system as this “catch and release” so to speak program is clearly not working. It is essential to implement or reinstate stricter laws that not only will act as a deterrent to potential offenders, but it will also help ensure that those who have committed multiple offenses face appropriate consequences for their actions. Our current program allows many offenders to be released back into the community the same day they were arrested, without adequate consequences. Without consequences, some of the individuals who are released continue to engage in criminal behaviour, including an escalation to more serious and violent crimes. This process potentially undermines the principles of justice and fails to provide any kind of deterrent for many, leaving our communities vulnerable to further violence that could have easily been avoided. I humbly ask elected officials at all levels of government, to join in demanding that offenders be treated equally under the law regardless of their skin colour, religious beliefs or sexual preferences. To review the current bail reforms and mandatory sentences, and that all Municipalities in partnership with the police establish a user-friendly comprehensive data collection system that captures relevant information about criminal behaviour, including demographics, recurring patterns, and modus operandi. And lastly, to make this information accessible to the public every month so that not only the people of Pickering are aware of what's happening in their neighbourhoods, but people throughout Durham and the GTA as well. I truly believe that better communication and awareness between law enforcement, municipalities, and the public, will lead to faster response times, increased apprehension of offenders, and ultimately, create safer communities for everyone. "Strength Does Not Lie In The Absence Of Fear, But In The Courage To Face It Head-On And Rise Above It"