When Other People Start Weighing In

Dead and Gone…

By Gary Payne, MBA Founder of Funeral Cost Ontario There is a point where the circle around a family starts to widen. It doesn’t happen all at once, but over a day or two, word spreads, calls are made, messages go out, and people begin to reach in. Friends, extended family, neighbours, people who have been through something similar before. If I were gone, I would want my family to understand that this is a natural part of what follows. People care, and most are simply trying to be helpful in the only way they know how. But something else begins to happen at the same time. As more people enter the conversation, more opinions begin to surface. Suggestions are offered, sometimes gently, sometimes more directly. Someone shares what they did when they went through it. Another mentions what they think is expected. Someone else focuses on keeping things simple, while another leans toward something more traditional. None of this comes from a bad place, but when it all starts to arrive at once, it can be harder to sort through than people expect. I have seen families reach that point, even if they don’t say it out loud. The decisions are still theirs, but the space around those decisions starts to feel more crowded. It becomes less about choosing what feels right, and more about trying to reconcile everything that has been said. That can create a kind of pressure that doesn’t come from any one person, but from the accumulation of voices. It can leave people second-guessing themselves before they’ve even had a chance to think things through together. If I were gone, I would want my family to feel steady in that moment. Not closed off, not unwilling to listen, but grounded enough to recognize the difference between hearing someone out and feeling like they need to follow what’s being suggested. It’s reasonable to take in ideas. It’s reasonable to consider what others have experienced. But it’s also reasonable to step back and ask, quietly and honestly, what feels right for the people who are actually making the decisions. One of the things that makes this more complicated is that people tend to speak from their own experience. They remember what mattered to them, what felt meaningful at the time, what they wish they had done differently. Those reflections are real, and they often come from a good place, but they don’t always translate in the same way for another family. Every situation is different, and what brought comfort to one person may not carry the same meaning for someone else. I have spoken with families afterward who said this part surprised them. Not because they expected people to stay silent, but because they didn’t realize how much outside input could influence the way they were thinking. Some found themselves leaning in a direction that didn’t quite feel like their own, simply because it had been suggested more than once. It wasn’t intentional, but it was noticeable once they stepped back and reflected on it. If I were gone, I would want my family to trust themselves enough to come back to each other before making any decisions. To take a moment, even briefly, to ask what feels right between them, without the noise of other opinions layered on top. That doesn’t mean ignoring people or shutting anyone out. It simply means recognizing that the final decisions don’t belong to the wider circle. They belong to the people closest to the situation. In the end, what tends to stay with families isn’t what others thought they should do. It’s how they felt about what they chose. Whether it reflected the person they lost, and whether it felt honest to them in the moment. If I were gone, that’s what I would want for my family - not certainty, not perfection, just a sense that what they decided felt like their own. Next week, I will write about something that often becomes clearer once that space settles again: how to recognize which decisions truly matter, and which ones don’t need to carry as much weight.

Little Dance

Little Dance By Bruno Scanga Financial Columnist Have you ever stopped to think about the sneaky little dance happening in your wallet every single day? It’s a constant tango between inflation and its inseparable partner, purchasing power. The truth is you really can’t have one without the other! Most of us don’t spend our free time pondering economic concepts, but understanding purchasing power is crucial if you want to hit your long-term goals and achieve true financial independence. Think about what financial freedom really means to you: it’s having the exact standard of living you desire, paid for in inflation-adjusted, after-tax dollars, all without ever having to get out of bed and punch a clock again to keep it going. Sounds amazing, right? But here’s the catch. To reach that level of freedom—and hold onto it—you have to plan for how inflation will slowly chew away at the value of your money over the next ten or twenty years. If you don’t build a sturdy shield around your hard-earned lifestyle, you might end up in the incredibly tough position of heading back into the workforce long after your retirement party. Sadly, we’ve seen this become a harsh reality for retirees who had to find jobs again following the heavy economic shock and soaring living costs brought on by the 2020 pandemic. So, what exactly is purchasing power? It’s simply a measure of how far each of your dollars goes when buying the everyday goods and services you need to live. You’ve probably heard friends or family joke about trying to “stretch their dollars” or feeling like “there’s way more month than money.” That’s shrinking purchasing power in action. When you are living on a fixed income, even a modest annual price increase of 2% (the official target set by Canada’s Central Bank) means you will have to burn through your savings faster just to maintain your current lifestyle. If you ever doubt this, just ask someone who has been retired for a decade or two! Or simply think back to your own childhood. Remember when a chocolate bar cost just a dime instead of $1.50? Ask a senior, and they’ll gladly remind you that an average family car today costs about the same as what they paid for a nice house back in the 1960s. That’s exactly why inflation and purchasing power are two concepts you absolutely have to keep in mind when designing your wealth-building and wealth-preservation strategies. Keep in mind that inflation isn’t just about the rising price of groceries or wage bumps. It also shows up as a general surge in asset prices—think real estate and equity investments—and an increase in the total amount of money floating around the economy. So, the next time you hear a news report about a government go ahead with “monetary easing” policies, pay close attention. Often, these large-scale strategies are designed to fix massive public debt problems or solve sluggish economic growth. However, a major side effect is that these actions can stoke more inflation and deliberately reduce your future purchasing power. The great news is that you don’t have to be a victim of inflation. With the right financial strategy, you can use these economic forces to your advantage. Reach out to a financial professional to discuss how you can adapt your portfolio today to protect your financial health for tomorrow!

Meeting Them in Their Game

Meeting Them in

Common Sense Health – Diana Gifford-Jones Video games have a reputation – and not a good one, at least among parents. For years, I kept my distance. “Brain rot” some experts say. I’ve said it myself, often and with conviction. I’ve worried as my four children have grown up, eyes glued to screens. But over the recent holiday weekend, I caved. My now adult children – gamers, all of them – convinced me to join them. When I sensed their genuine excitement at the possibility that I might finally enter their world, how could I refuse? The game was Minecraft, where players explore, build, and survive in a blocky, pixelated universe. Think digital Lego meets wilderness survival, with a dash of engineering. Before I could begin, however, there was the small matter of getting set up. This, I discovered, was no small matter. Out came an assortment of computer equipment that had been gathering dust in closets. A screen, keyboard, and headset. I was instructed to wear ear pods underneath the headset so that I could simultaneously hear a voice chat on my phone and the game’s audio through the computer. There followed a symphony of muting and unmuting on the phone, on the computer, and on the headset. I was assured not to worry. “We’ve got this,” they said. I did not. But soon enough, there I was: seated, wired, and ready. My grown children, now giggling playmates, were scattered across three different cities, with one just down the hall. Yet we were all together in the game. I could literally see their characters running circles around me. Then the real test began. “Click here, Mom.” Easy enough. Except that was merely the beginning of what felt like a neurological stress test. First, I had to grasp perspective. With the click of a button, I could switch from seeing the world through my character’s eyes to viewing my character from the outside. Then came movement. To walk, I had to use the W, S, A, and D keys with my left hand while my thumb hovered over the space bar to make me jump. My right hand controlled the mouse, which required sliding, clicking left and right, and scrolling with the middle finger. This was no walk in the park. My brain and coordination were being tested. At one point, I was tasked with making an iron pickaxe. “Simple,” they said. Except it wasn’t. First, you need to get wood for a handle. Then you must craft a furnace. Next, the mining, for coal and iron ore. Then comes the crucial insight: coal goes in the bottom of the furnace, iron ore in the top. The game requires players to use reason, but I would have been helpless without my kids telling me how to survive. There was laughter. Lots of it. Belly-bursting laughter. There we were: a family spread across distances, connected by technology, having a blast. But I was thinking about the health benefits. Mental agility, hand-eye coordination, memory, and perhaps most importantly, social connection. Most researchers don’t focus on games like Minecraft; they use cognitive-training tests that miss the elements found in the family fun I’m talking about. So they report modest improvements in attention, reaction time, and memory. But my guess is that a little bit of Minecraft among people of my generation goes a long way in boosting cognitive flexibility, spatial reasoning, and the wholesome happiness factor. Will I play again? I’m counting on it. Much as I love a good book or a quiet walk in the woods, I’m intrigued by the potential for games like Minecraft to keep me sharp as I age.

Collateral Damage

Collateral Damage By Wayne and Tamara I am writing during a trying time in my life. I am a 35-year-old mother of three children and just recently lost my husband. My siblings and I have been dealing with an alcoholic mother since we were born. There were harsh and horrible memories, but I believe we have all forgiven her. My father who did not drink, but worked two full-time jobs, divorced her when the youngest of us kids was a teenager. My mother has gone through ups and downs ever since. Two years ago she was arrested again for drunk driving. After realizing she’d be facing prison time, she attempted suicide many times. The worst time my mother landed in intensive care for a week on a respirator, unconscious, while her children, sister and brother sat vigil by her bedside. We were told if paramedics arrived 10 minutes later she would have died. Each time she attempted to kill herself, she called one of us kids to let us know and say goodbye after taking all the pills. Well, she ended up doing the time assigned by the court and came out at first a calm and happy person, but she wasn’t given her old job back. She has a fear of working in public, so she won’t take a cashiering job close enough to walk to. As a result she is about to be evicted from her apartment. Since I lost my husband, who was also an alcoholic, I’ve found a cheaper apartment for myself and my children. It has an extra bedroom I’d like to use as a playroom. My uncle offered my mother a place to stay, but she says she doesn’t like his rules. She is demanding to move in with me. She still drinks and has mood swings that explode at the drop of a hat. I don’t believe it would be good for my children so I told her no. I told her to stay with her brother. She told me not to consider her my mother anymore. Her last words were, “I’ll never hate you, but I’ll never speak to you again.” I feel guilty, but I also know my children come first. They are still dealing with their father’s death, as it happened just four months ago. I feel hurt and angry my mother cannot understand what she is doing to me at such a painful point in my family’s life. Marti Marti, you cannot comprehend why a drunken woman doesn’t understand what she is doing to your family. For people not raised in an alcoholic household that is not even a question. They would be astonished if your mother didn’t attempt to destroy your family’s life. When you were young, your mother prepared a cocktail for you and your siblings. She mixed normal with what is normal only in alcoholic households. One result is you can say “I married an alcoholic” as casually as another woman might say, “I was raised Lutheran, so I married a Lutheran.” Every aspect of your life, and now it appears your children’s lives, has been affected by alcohol. You say your kids come first. That’s only believable if you eliminate alcoholism from their home life. That you feel guilty about not bringing your mother into your home suggests you haven’t grasped the full extent of her abuse. Legal and medical professionals who deal with people like your mother couldn’t help her. You can’t either. But you can get professional help to grow past the trauma you were raised in. The last thing you want to do is replicate the horror of your childhood for your children. Living under your uncle’s rules may be the last chance your mother gets to put her life in order. Her life suggests families need to move away from saving the drunkard to saving the six or 16 lives around the drunkard which are being mutilated. Wayne & Tamara

7 Expectations Job Seekers Need to Let Go Of

7 Expectations Job Seekers Need to Let Go Of By Nick Kossovan Expectations are resentments in the making. Many job seekers today enter the job market with an inflated sense of entitlement, expecting employers to prioritize their self-interests over their own. Instead, they're experiencing a fiercely competitive environment where emotions are decimated, and proving your value to an employer's profitability is your only currency for getting hired. The sooner you realize that the world owes you nothing—not a job, not a reply, and definitely not a career built around your "passions"—the sooner you'll start working strategically on your job search. Success doesn't come from expecting what you think you deserve, which, as I mentioned, is nothing; it's achieved by what you're willing to accept—akin to Rocky Balboa's "You gotta be willing to take the hits!"—by maintaining a more resilient mindset than the job seekers you're competing against, who, for the most part, are busy whining about employers' hiring practices. Job search success in today's job market requires a disciplined focus on what you can control and an indifference to what you can't. It's imperative to let go of the following expectations: Expectation of Communication Silence is communication. You submitted your résumé, had a second interview, and then silence. Ghosting is no longer a breach of etiquette; instead, it's become a social norm. Today, recruiters and hiring managers conservatively receive over 500 applications per role and therefore need to rely on technology that reduces candidates to data points. Silence isn't poor manners or unprofessional; it's the message. Socially or professionally, ghosting is regarded as an efficient way for someone to let you know they've moved on, and you should do the same. Expectation of Feedback In a litigious society like ours, expecting feedback is naive. An employer giving feedback to a candidate they didn't select risks liability issues. In an era of 'strip-mall lawyers' looking for a payday, a single wrong word about 'culture fit' can lead to a discrimination lawsuit. A prudent strategy to avoid giving candidates ammunition for a lawsuit is to refrain from providing feedback to rejected candidates. Expectation of a Fast Hiring Process Corporate bureaucracy is a slow, grinding machine, and the cost of a bad hire, both culturally and financially, is exorbitant. As bad actors flood the job market with AI-generated résumés and exaggerated qualifications, employers are conducting more due diligence than ever. "Hiring is not a democratic process; it is a risk-mitigation exercise. Companies would rather leave a seat empty for six months than fill it with a liability." — Lars Schmidt, Founder of Redefine Work. If you're frustrated by waiting, remember that the employer cares about protecting its culture and bottom line, not your bills. Expectation You Don't Have to Sell Yourself The belief that your "experience" speaks for itself is a form of laziness. Job searching is a sales activity; an interview is a sales meeting. Your résumé isn't a trophy case; it's a marketing brochure. It's not what you did that matters to employers; it's what you can do for them by the end of the next quarter. Unless you clearly explain in your résumé, LinkedIn profile, and especially during interviews, how you'll positively impact the employer's business to make it more profitable, you should expect a lengthy job search. Expectation of Human-Only Reviews Complaining about Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS) is like complaining about the weather; it's pointless and changes nothing. AI is a necessity for companies to sift through the thousands of mostly unqualified applications they receive. "AI isn't the enemy of the job seeker; it is the filter for the unprepared. If you can't speak the language of the machine, you'll never get the chance to speak to a human." — Jan Tegze. When the application process shifted from a handshake to an online portal, the "human touch" vanished. It's what it is. The Expectation of Guaranteed Networking Help No one is obligated to help you. Today, thanks to digital fatigue and heavy workloads, a stranger owes you nothing; someone you've neglected to stay in touch with owes you even less. When you haven't consistently added value to a relationship, don't expect to receive a favour when you need one. With a sense of entitlement widespread, most job seekers think pestering strangers and people they've lost contact with for "a job" counts as networking. Don't be that job seeker! Having expectations of others is more than just a recipe for chronic resentment and anger; it's a self-imposed hindrance that anchors you in a victim mentality. You can't change how a recruiter, hiring manager, or anyone else behaves, and quite frankly, it's not your responsibility to try. Your only job is to manage your own behaviour. The biggest obstacle between you and a paycheque isn't how employers choose to hire or being ghosted; it's your expectations. Conducting a job search with the expectation that employers will acknowledge your potential, without any effort on your part, to boost their profitability or hire you on your terms, is why many job seekers are frustrated and angry. The most effective job search strategy a job seeker can adopt is to lower their expectations of what's out of their control to nearly nothing and expect more from themselves.

Sticker Shock Nation. A City Grocery Store Won’t Fix It

Sticker Shock Nation. A City Grocery Store Won’t Fix It By Dale Jodoin Columnist Call it SSN. Sticker Shock Nation. That’s where we’re living now. You don’t walk into a grocery store anymore, you brace for it. You move slow, scan the tags, and hope you’re wrong. You’re not. The total climbs before you even hit the till. You cut items without thinking. Meat goes back. Extras disappear. You start choosing what to leave behind. This is the new habit, and it’s settled in. Across Canada, people are stretched thin. Rent is up. Gas is up. Food is up. It all piles on. Paychecks don’t move the way they used to. You can see it in the lines at Daily Bread Food Bank. More people show up every week. Not just people with no income. Working people. Seniors. Families with kids. Before we go further, clear this up. You’ll hear that city run grocery stores in the United States failed because of theft. That claim doesn’t hold. Most of the closures people point to were private stores, not government ones. In places like San Francisco, large retailers such as Target shut down locations after losses grew too high. Theft was part of it, along with high costs and lower traffic. The lesson is simple. When losses keep stacking up, even big, experienced companies can’t keep a store open. Now look at what’s being talked about here. In Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal, the idea is a city run grocery store. Sell food at lower prices. Give people relief. It sounds good. It feels like action. But it skips a hard truth. Running a grocery store is not simple. You need trucks, coolers, shelves, staff, and a steady flow of food. Prices change fast. Food goes bad. Profit is thin even when things go right. Chains like Loblaw Companies Limited, Sobeys, and Metro Inc. have size and experience. They buy in bulk. They run tight systems. And even they feel the pressure. So ask the simple question. If it’s hard for them, how will a city do it better? And if it doesn’t work, who pays? You do. When a public store loses money, that loss does not vanish. It comes from taxes. There is no quiet loss. It shows up on your bill. It may not come right away, but it comes over time, in small ways that add up. Now look at what’s happening inside stores. More items are locked up. Meat, cheese, baby formula. Things that used to sit on open shelves now sit behind glass. There’s a reason. Theft. It’s not the main driver of high prices, but it adds pressure. Stores lose goods every day. Rising prices mean some people steal food to turn into cash for resale. A pack of beef isn’t just dinner anymore. That changes how people act, and it changes how stores run. Staff see the same faces come in. Someone takes something, gets stopped, and then comes back days later. There are reasons. Small charges. Busy courts. Limits in the system. But on the store floor, it feels simple. Nothing sticks. When that feeling spreads, things shift. More cameras. More guards. More locked shelves. Less trust. And once trust goes, everything gets harder. Prices creep up to cover losses. Stores spend more on security. Good customers pay more and get treated like suspects. It wears people down. It changes how people shop, and it changes how they feel about the place they rely on. Now take that same problem and drop it into a city run store. Does it go away, or does it follow the same path? If private companies are already dealing with rising losses and tight margins, a public store will face the same pressure on day one. The difference is who carries the risk. In a public model, the losses don’t sit with a company. They land on taxpayers. That means the bill doesn’t stop at the checkout. It shows up in taxes, fees, and cuts somewhere else. This isn’t about blaming people who are struggling. Anyone can see how tight things are. People are trying to eat, keep a roof over their heads, and get through the week. But a system still has to work. Prices have to make sense. Rules have to be clear. And those rules have to mean something. Right now, they don’t feel like they do. Prices keep climbing. Trust keeps slipping. And the answer being offered is to build a new store and hope it fixes it. Hope isn’t a plan. That’s the risk. If the same problems stay in place, high costs, weak control, and uneven follow up, the result will be the same. Only the bill will change hands. From the store to the taxpayer. Once that shift happens, it’s hard to turn back. Cities will not close these stores easily. Losses will be covered year after year. What starts as help can turn into a long bill that never goes away. So before we build something new, fix what we already have. Push for fair prices people can trust. Make sure rules are clear and applied the same way every time. Support stores so they can stay open without locking half their shelves. That’s where the real work is. People don’t need a new sign on a building. They need to walk into a store, pick up what they need, and not feel that knot in their stomach when they check the price. Right now, too many do. And until that changes, no new store, public or private, is going to fix what people feel when they shop. They feel alone in it, and they’re tired of carrying it.

When Procedure Becomes a Weapon at Clarington Council

When Procedure Becomes a Weapon at Clarington Council In theory, municipal democracy runs on rules. In practice, it runs on whether those rules are applied consistently — or selectively. And lately, at the Municipality of Clarington Council, the line between the two is starting to blur. The Illusion of Order You’ll often hear references to Robert's Rules of Order — the gold standard of meeting procedure. It sounds reassuring. Structured. Fair. Democratic. But here’s the truth most residents don’t know: Clarington doesn’t actually run on Robert’s Rules. It runs on its own Procedural By-law, under the authority of the Municipal Act, 2001. Robert’s Rules are, at best, a guideline of last resort — not a free pass for improvisation. So when they’re invoked loosely, or selectively, something else is happening. The Referral Motion Loophole Let’s talk about referral motions — the procedural equivalent of “send it back for more work.” On paper, these motions are simple: - Where is the matter going? - When is it coming back? That’s it. They are not supposed to be: - A second debate on the issue - A political soapbox - A workaround to revisit arguments already made But at Clarington Council, something different is unfolding. When “Where and When” Becomes “Whatever You Want” Repeatedly, we’re seeing: - Members speaking at length on the substance of issues - Arguments being re-litigated during referral motions - The Chair allowing broad commentary far beyond procedural scope And here’s where it gets uncomfortable: That latitude is not always applied equally. Some are cut off. Others are given the floor. Same motion. Different rules. Why This Matters (More Than You Think) This isn’t about technicalities. It’s about control of the meeting. Because when procedural rules are bent: - Debate can be extended or suppressed at will - Outcomes can be influenced without formal votes - Certain voices can be amplified — others muted That’s not governance. That’s procedural engineering. The Real Rule Being Broken Let’s be clear — this isn’t about misquoting Robert’s Rules. It’s about something far more serious: Inconsistent application of the Procedural By-law And under Ontario law, that raises real questions: - Are decisions being made fairly? - Is the process transparent? - Is the Chair exercising discretion — or bias? Because once rules become flexible depending on who is speaking… They stop being rules at all. The Consequence No One Talks About Here’s the part they won’t say out loud: When procedure is applied inconsistently, it creates: - A record of procedural unfairness - Grounds for formal complaints - And in extreme cases, exposure to legal challenge That’s not political theatre. That’s administrative risk. So What Happens Next? There are only two paths forward: 1. Apply the rules consistently - Limit referral debate to process - Enforce scope equally 2. Continue down the current path - And accept that the legitimacy of decisions will be questioned Because once the public starts to see the pattern… They don’t unsee it. The Bottom Line Procedure is supposed to protect democracy. Not be used to shape it. And at Clarington Council, the question is no longer whether the rules exist. It’s whether they’re being used as a framework — or as a tool.

MOM - ‘WHEN I GROW UP I WANT TO BE A REFUGEE…’

MOM - ‘WHEN I GROW UP I WANT TO BE A REFUGEE...’ By Joe Ingino BA. Psychology Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800 ,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States I have seen firsthand the economic struggles many people are facing today—from those on the brink of eviction for unpaid rent, to families losing their homes to financial institutions unwilling to grant even a short extension. Across the country, the overall quality of life appears to be declining. Concerns about crime are rising, and the number of Canadians experiencing homelessness continues to grow at an alarming rate. This week, an announcement drew attention: Pickering to host an accommodation site for asylum seekers.According to Durham Region, a former hotel in Pickering is being converted into temporary housing for asylum seekers. The federal government has provided funding for the purchase of the property; however, neither the total investment nor the projected operating costs have been publicly disclosed. The site will serve as the Durham Reception Centre.Let me be clear—I have no issue with immigration. I am an immigrant myself. I came to this country with the same goal shared by many others: to build a better life, respect the laws of the land, and contribute meaningfully to Canadian society.I recall being asked as a child what I wanted to be when I grew up. My answer never changed. I was inspired by the uniform of the RCMP and the idea of serving a country that had given my family so much. To contribute to that legacy felt like both an honour and a responsibility. Today, however, I sometimes question whether that same sense of purpose is as widely shared. Canada has long been a nation built on diversity, but it has also relied on a shared commitment to integration, mutual respect, and civic responsibility. Increasingly, there are concerns about whether that balance is being maintained. At the same time, local governments are making significant financial commitments—such as the reported $7 million allocated toward a reception centre in Durham Region. This raises difficult but important questions: how do we balance support for newcomers with the urgent needs of Canadians who are struggling to afford basic necessities like food and housing? Behind these issues are real people—our neighbours, our families, our fellow citizens. These are conversations worth having, and perspectives worth sharing.

Parliament Is Not a Training Program

Parliament Is Not a Training Program by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC FEC, CET, P.Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East At a time when Canada faces mounting economic pressure, geopolitical instability, and a troubling erosion of public trust, we should be asking a fundamental question: Who is governing us—and on what basis? Being a Member of Parliament is not a learn-on-the-job position. It is not an internship, nor is it the natural next step after years spent as a political staffer. It is a national responsibility that demands demonstrated competence, tested judgment, and real-world experience—long before one ever rises in the House of Commons. Yet increasingly, we are normalizing a political pipeline that begins and ends within the same narrow ecosystem. Too many candidates today have spent their entire professional lives in politics—advising elected officials, crafting messaging, managing communications, and navigating internal party dynamics. They understand process, certainly. However, process is not governance. The distinction is not academic—it is consequential. Canada is not a theoretical exercise. Decisions taken in Parliament affect livelihoods, national security, infrastructure, and the long-term trajectory of the country. Those decisions require more than familiarity with procedures or party discipline. They require the kind of judgment that is shaped only through experience where outcomes carry real consequences. In engineering, failure is measurable and often unforgiving. In military operations, mistakes can carry immediate and irreversible costs. In business, poor decisions can mean lost jobs and shuttered enterprises. These environments cultivate a level of accountability and decisiveness that cannot be replicated through exposure to political process alone. Parliament needs more of that grounding. When legislators debate national defence, they should understand more than procurement terminology—they should grasp the realities of deployment, command, and risk. When they legislate on infrastructure, they should know how projects are built, financed, and maintained. When they shape economic policy, they should have firsthand experience with investment, payroll, and market uncertainty. This is not an argument for exclusivity. It is an argument for competence. A Parliament increasingly populated by career political operatives risks becoming insular, self-referential, and detached from the realities of the citizens it is meant to represent. It becomes a system that rewards message discipline over independent thinking, loyalty over leadership, and ambition over achievement. Political staffers play an important and often demanding role. Many are intelligent, dedicated, and deeply committed to public service. However, staffing is apprenticeship, not qualification. It is preparation—not proof of readiness to assume the full weight of elected office. Canada’s strength has always rested on the diversity of experience brought into public life. Farmers who understand land and food systems. Entrepreneurs who understand risk and growth. Engineers who understand infrastructure and systems. Members of the armed forces who understand strategy and sacrifice. Professionals who have lived with accountability beyond the political sphere. That diversity is not incidental—it is essential. When Parliament reflects a broad range of real-world experience, it is better equipped to legislate wisely, scrutinize effectively, and respond to the complex challenges of a modern nation. When it does not, it risks becoming disconnected from the very people it serves. Public trust in institutions cannot be rebuilt through messaging strategies or carefully crafted narratives. It is rebuilt when citizens recognize competence in those who govern them—when they see individuals who have demonstrated judgment under pressure, delivered results in demanding environments, and contributed meaningfully before seeking office. Being a Member of Parliament should be the culmination of a career of contribution—not its starting point. Canada does not need more individuals who know how Ottawa works. It needs individuals who understand how the country works—how decisions affect communities, industries, and families across the nation. That kind of understanding cannot be acquired solely within the confines of political life. It must be earned through experience, responsibility, and accountability outside it. If we are serious about renewing our institutions and strengthening our democracy, we must be equally serious about the standards we expect of those who seek to lead. If we continue to elect those who have only ever worked in politics, we should not be surprised when politics is all they know how to produce. What do you think?

Composting Magic

Composting Magic by Larraine Roulston ‘Protecting Our Ecosystem’ International Compost Awareness Week, celebrated the first week in May, provides compost councils on both sides of the border, to celebrate the event with outreach activities. Composting is one of the most important actions that one can do to fight climate change and support a thriving, sustainable future for all life on earth. Call compost a heap, a pile, or a mound— it’s a world full of busy worms, insects, and billions of organisms. Bacteria, fungi, and protozoa, which are all too small to see, start the decomposition process. Compost heaps should be covered with leaves or soil to avoid attracting animals. A layer of soil also introduces microbes. If compost has a nitrogen odour, it contains too many kitchen food ‘greens’. To solve this issue, aerate the pile and add more dry leaves ‘browns’. Compost soaks up great quantities of water and stores it as a film on tiny soil crumbs called aggregates that give soil its structure. During long rainless periods, plant roots seek out and absorb this moisture. This results in healthier plant growth. DIY composters can be made from any of: slatted wood pieces, pallet skids, chicken wire, or cinder blocks. Large barrels with holes around the sides for ventilation and on the bottom for drainage can also be used. Commercial composters have a sliding door at the base in order to allow a shovel to access the finished compost. Tumblers sit sideways on a triangular stand. Organics decompose quicker when spun. Do not add worms. Unfortunately, its sliding door freezes in cold weather. You can place a tray underneath to catch any liquid which can be used as compost tea. Black ‘digesters’ are set about 15 cm (6”) into the ground. As they are anaerobic, they accept bones and meat - more suitable for small yards. Utilizing compost results in healthier plant growth. For businesses, compost provides a revenue from organic resources that contributes to a circular economy. Presently, rising fertilizer prices demonstrate a farmer’s vulnerability in relying on synthetic and mineral fertilizers. Compost will improve the resiliency of our agricultural systems and mitigate the consequences of future crises such as the one currently facing us today. "Fossil-fuel-based synthetic fertilizers are like steroids providing a quick boost of nutrients directly to plants for fast growth but do nothing for soil health. In contrast, compost – which is a made-in-America product – provides a feast for the soil, adding organic matter and fostering beneficial microbial life. This leads to slow release, long-term fertility and so many other benefits from better soil structure to higher water-holding capacity, which can make the difference in whether a farmer’s crop survives drought conditions or not.” Brenda Platt, Director, Composting for Community Initiative, Institute for Local Self-Reliance. Compost for residents results in healthier plant growth. For businesses, compost provides a revenue from organic resources that contributes to a circular economy.