My Christmas Wish List

By Lisa Robinson To The Honourable Doug Ford Premier of Ontario Room 281, Legislative Building, Queen’s Park Toronto, ON M7A 1A1 Premier@ontario.ca Subject: Protecting Democracy and Safeguarding the Voice of the People File: A1400 - 001 Dear Premier Ford, I am writing to you with deep concern regarding the most recent announcement to amend the Municipal Act. This proposal poses a serious threat to the democratic principles that underpin our nation and erodes the fundamental rights of Canadians to choose the elected officials who represent their voices. The introduction of such sweeping changes must be reconsidered, as it leaves the door wide open for abuse of power, corruption, and collusion among key municipal actors. Allowing council members, mayors, and city-paid Integrity Commissioners to collectively wield the power to remove an elected official sets a dangerous precedent. This approach is ripe for manipulation, retaliation, and political weaponization. It creates an environment where those in positions of influence can conspire to silence dissenting voices, punish political opponents, and skew future election outcomes—in essence, a form of election tampering. The power to elect and remove officials must remain firmly in the hands of the people, not in the hands of those who stand to benefit from their removal. The existing framework already includes mechanisms to address legitimate concerns like harassment, discrimination, or misconduct under workplace and human rights legislation. There is no justifiable reason to grant city councils and Integrity Commissioners the power to overrule the people's choice, especially when existing legal pathways are sufficient to address these issues. The City of Pickering is a stark example of how this system is already being exploited. Council has repeatedly targeted me, Councillor Lisa Robinson, by suspending my pay on three separate occasions—not for misconduct, but for exercising my right to freedom of expression and standing up for the beliefs and priorities of my constituents. My advocacy for transparent governance, my support for the principle that only governmental flags should fly on government buildings, and my call for fair and inclusive access to public restrooms are rooted in the will of the people I represent. Most recently, I face yet another attempt to strip me of three months' pay—my only source of income as a single mother. My so-called "offense" was stating, “If I were to become mayor, I would use strong mayor powers to remove the CAO, city solicitor, and a few directors because corruption starts at the top. I would tear down city hall, build it back up, and give it back to the people.” This is not misconduct—this is political expression. Every elected official should have the right to propose changes, share their vision, and advocate for what they believe is in the best interest of their constituents. Punishing this kind of expression is a gross misuse of power. Meanwhile, there have been far more serious transgressions by other council members that have gone unpunished. One council member has made violent threats towards me, stating they would "stick a knife in [my] back, twist it slowly, and [I] would never know until he was ready to pull it out." The same individual stated they would "sharpen their sword and decapitate the motherf---er" in reference to the mayor. (There is a recording of this comment). I have also endured sexual harassment and psychological harassment. Shockingly, there was no suspension or accountability for these threats or harassment. They were all swept under the carpet. Why? Because of the individual’s status as a senior councillor with close ties to the mayor, CAO, and city Integrity Commissioner. This clear double standard highlights how the proposed changes to the Municipal Act would be weaponized for political gain. The power to remove an elected official should never rest in the hands of council, the mayor, or the bureaucrats employed by the city. It should remain with the people. When municipal actors are permitted to play judge, jury, and executioner, democracy itself is at risk. Why even bother holding elections if those in power can remove their opponents on a whim? This new legislative change would serve as a backdoor to undermine political opposition and ensure only the "preferred" voices remain. I urge every Member of Parliament (MP) and Member of Provincial Parliament (MPP) to take a hard look at the implications of this bill. It is not merely an amendment—it is a fundamental attack on the democratic process. When those in power can remove their opposition, they no longer serve the people—they serve only themselves. Minister Calandra, I implore you to reconsider this dangerous course of action. The people's right to choose their representatives is sacred, and any attempt to strip that right away must be met with fierce resistance. We must protect our democracy from corruption, collusion, and authoritarian overreach. If the Municipal Act is to be amended, it should be done to prevent such abuses of power—not to facilitate them. Protecting Democracy and Safeguarding the Voice of the People December 13, 2024 Sincerely, Lisa Robinson City Councillor, Ward 1

Being Angry at Employers for Looking out for Their Interests Won’t Land

By Nick Kossovan The current job market is a stark reminder of a fundamental truth: The employee-employer relationship is inherently asymmetrical. This asymmetry is the default of the employer taking on the risk of investing capital while employees only invest their time. Employers have the upper hand, and the right to work ultimately depends on their decisions, as evidenced by layoffs. Employees don't own their jobs; their employers do. In the face of rejection after rejection, job seekers become frustrated and angry, blaming employers for being unreasonable, greedy, or only looking out for their interests, as if employers are in the business of hiring people. This mindset is counterproductive and will only hinder your ability to land a job. I don't think job seekers are angry with employers. I think they're angry because they were in demand, and now they're not. Recently, the tech industry has had more than its share of layoffs. Most likely, until now, those laid off had only experienced being highly sought after. A shift of this kind requires humility, which is lacking amid all the anger directed at employers. When making a hiring decision, the employer rightfully prioritizes its interests over those of the job seeker. Employers seek candidates who can deliver value and contribute to their organization's success. In contrast, job seekers look for roles that fit their skills, experience, and career goals. Employers looking after their interests aren’t wrong or nefarious; it's simply smart business. Employers' self-interests are not your enemies. Instead, use them to your advantage by identifying them and positioning yourself as the solution. Demonstrating how you'll support the employer's interests will turn you from a generic candidate into an asset. Three strategies can be used to align your self-interests—presumably landing a job—with those of an employer (Envision, "You scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours.”): Understand the employer's priorities, the obvious being to generate profit. Job seekers tend to focus solely on the job description and the required qualifications and overlook the company's overall goal(s). Knowing (read: researching) the company's goals will enable you to explain how your skills and experience can support their goals. Suppose you're applying for a marketing coordinator role at a rapidly growing tech startup. The job posting lists key responsibilities, including managing the company's social media accounts, creating content, and planning events. However, after studying the company holistically, you find, like most companies, it prioritizes gaining new customers. With this knowledge, you can position yourself as a candidate who can help drive that growth by emphasizing, using quantifying numbers (e.g., In eight months, increased Instagram followers from 1,200 to 32,000.) in your resume, LinkedIn profile, cover letter and during your interview, your experience developing high-performing social media campaigns attracting new leads for previous employers. You could mention your innovative ideas for using user-generated content to raise brand awareness or partnering with industry influencers. The key is to show that you possess the required functional skills and understand the company's overall goals and how you can help achieve them. Explain how you'll make your 'to-be' boss's life easier. Your 'to-be' boss is juggling a million competing priorities, budget constraints, and pressure from their boss to optimize their team's productivity. Position yourself as the candidate who'll simplify your 'to-be' boss's life, and you'll differentiate yourself from other candidates. During the interview, make it a point to understand the specific pain points and challenges your 'to-be' boss is facing—I outright ask, "What keeps you up at night?"—and then present yourself as a solution. Perhaps the department has a retention problem. You could tell a STAR (Situation, Task, Action, Result) story, demonstrating your ability to build strong cross-functional relationships and create a positive work culture that boosts employee engagement and loyalty. Educating your prospective boss that by hiring you, they'll have one less headache is a hard-to-ignore value proposition. Show how their success is equal to yours. Hiring boils down to finding candidates who can drive measurable business results. Don't rely solely on your skills and experience. Outline how you can deliver tangible benefits to the employer. Quantify the value you've brought to previous employers. If you're applying for a sales role, share data on the year-over-year revenue growth, client retention rates, and customer satisfaction scores you achieved in your previous positions. Quantify the value you brought to the organization, then explain how you can replicate or exceed that level of performance in the new role. Say you're interviewing for an IT support position. In addition to highlighting your technical expertise, again using a STAR story, highlight your expertise in streamlining processes, reducing downtime, and providing exceptional customer service. Tie those accomplishments back to the employer's need to maximize productivity and minimize disruptions. The key is to make a compelling case that the employer also succeeds when you succeed. It's understandable to feel frustrated by rejection, but the most successful candidates recognize that employers have legitimate business priorities. Identifying an employer's interests and showing how you can support them will improve your chances of landing a job. Stop expecting an employer to save you. Save an employer. _____________________________________________________________________ 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

Is the Government Ignoring Canadian Economic Realty?

by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East Let’s face the crude reality. It is not just that people do not feel good about the economy; the economic wellbeing of Canadians has been declining for years. Although it is true that the overall economy is growing slowly and inflation has been brought back down to the Bank of Canada’s 2 per cent target, these struggling positive indicators do not necessarily mean that Canadians are better off. From the middle of 2019 to the end of 2023, Canada experienced one of the worst declines in inflation-adjusted GDP per person in the last 40 years. According to new data from Statistics Canada, this decline in living standards has continued for most of 2024, and as of September 2024, GDP per person ($58,601) was 2.2 per cent lower than it had been in June 2019 ($59,905). Simply put, Canadians have suffered a marked decline in living standards over the last five years. Moreover, Canada’s private-sector employment has stagnated. From 2019 to 2023 (the latest year of available data), employment in the private sector (including self-employment) grew by 3.6 per cent compared to 13.0 per cent in the government sector. This is a major problem that seems to be ignored by both the government and the opposition. The private sector pays for the government sector, primarily through taxes. While a growing private sector helps drive wealth-creation in the economy, a growing government sector extracts that wealth and redistributes it elsewhere or even inhibits that wealth-creation in the first place. Despite data showing that private-sector employment and living standards have stagnated and/or declined for years, the Trudeau government insists that everything is fine and Canadians just “feel” worse off. On top of this discouraging news, we have the saga of the recently released fall economic statement. In it, the federal government broke its key fiscal guardrail and posted a deficit of $61.9 billion for the 2023-2024 fiscal year, blowing past the $40.1 billion level at which it promised to keep the deficit. The Liberal government is further projected to go beyond the $40.1-billion guardrail for the next two fiscal years, with a deficit projection of $48.3 billion in 2024-2025 and $42.2 billion in 2025-2026. Not only is this higher than what was forecast in the budget last spring, but based on past performance, would it surprise anyone if they continue to exceed their projections in the future? Department of Finance officials claim that the deficit was $21.8 billion higher than expected for 2023-2024 due to exceptional factors. Those included future payments to compensate First Nations children and families who faced discrimination under the First Nations Child and Family Services program and under Jordan’s principle. The government previously set aside nearly $23.3 billion for compensation. The second factor is money that has not been recovered under the Covid-19 pandemic support programs. The higher-than-anticipated provision for these two categories accounted for $21.1 billion in accounting charges. Why is nobody talking about the more than 12 billion dollars forked out by the government on foreign projects with no accountability? Even the loyal opposition is totally silent on this issue. Why, instead, are they continuing to harp on the obsolete “gas tax”, like a dog barking in the desert? The statement projects that the economy will grow by 1.3 per cent in 2024 and 1.7 per cent in 2025. Tax revenues for 2023-2024 are expected to be $5.5 billion below the spring budget’s projection, due to lower tax revenue consistent with a softening economy. The most significant investments introduced in the fall economic statement include renewing the Accelerated Investment Incentive, to make Canada’s corporate tax system more competitive. First introduced by former finance minister Bill Morneau in 2018, the incentive was intended to address competitiveness concerns after Donald Trump was first elected U.S. president. The revival of these incentives will cost the federal government an estimated $17.4 billion over the next six years. They will slowly be phased out starting in 2030 to 2033. The government has also announced $1.1 billion in new spending to boost the Scientific Research and Experimental Development tax incentive program. An additional $1.6 billion was allocated for the government’s GST holiday, which gives a break from the goods and services tax on a number of goods between Dec. 14 and Feb. 15. The government has also committed $1.3 billion over six years for strengthening the border, a contentious issue with the incoming Trump administration that the federal government hopes to solve. On top of this evident government crisis, the sudden resignation of Crystia Freeland as Finance Minister just hours before the fall economic statement was to be tabled in Parliament, is also noted. The government house leader Karina Gould tabled the statement in her absence. In a letter addressed to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Crystia Freeland said she had been at odds with the Prime minister for weeks over “the best path forward for Canada.” So, on top of an economic crisis we are inching towards a political one too? Clearly, this government is out of touch with Canadians.

"The Tariff Tug-of-War: Why a 25% US Tariff Could Reshape Canada’s Trade Future"

By Dale Jodoin Canadians are fuming over the news of a 25% tariff being imposed on Canadian goods by the United States. The move, announced by the US President, is being interpreted by many as an attack on Canada. But is this really about destroying Canada’s economy, or is there a bigger picture to consider? Let’s break it down in simple terms to understand what’s happening and why it matters. The current US President approaches politics like he approaches business. For him, it’s all about fairness and ensuring that no side has an undue advantage. From his perspective, tariffs like this aren’t meant to punish Canada—they’re meant to equalize the playing field. Here’s the issue: Canada’s dollar is weaker than the US dollar, which means Canadian manufacturers can sell goods to Americans at a cheaper price than US manufacturers. This isn’t just about competition—it’s about fairness for American workers who feel they’re being undercut by cheaper imports from Canada and Mexico. Canada’s lower dollar has been a deliberate strategy by some policymakers. By keeping the dollar slightly devalued, Canada gains a competitive edge over both the US and other trading partners like China and Mexico. This allows Canadian goods to be priced more attractively in foreign markets. However, this strategy creates a significant trade imbalance. The US has a massive trade deficit with Canada, meaning Americans are buying far more from Canada than Canadians are buying from the US. In the eyes of the US President, this is unsustainable and unfair to American workers. Many Canadians are asking, “Doesn’t free trade mean equal prices for manufactured goods?” The answer is more complex. Free trade is supposed to create open markets, but if one country’s currency is devalued, it can tilt the scales in favor of that country. The US President sees this imbalance and is trying to correct it. His tariffs are aimed at encouraging Canada to rethink its policies and create a fairer system where both Canadian and American workers can thrive. The tariffs are not just about trade; they’re also tied to larger issues like the fentanyl crisis and border security. The US has accused Canada of not doing enough to stop the flow of fentanyl into the US. This deadly drug has devastated communities across America, and the President wants Canada to take stronger action. Additionally, the US has long criticized Canada’s lax border policies, especially under the current Liberal government. While Canada prides itself on being open and welcoming, this has created security concerns for its southern neighbor. The US President sees these issues as interconnected and wants Canada to step up. Instead of being angry at the US, Canadians might want to take a closer look at their own policies. Are we truly playing fair when it comes to trade? Could we compete on an equal dollar with the US? Many believe that Canadian manufacturers produce some of the best goods in the world. If that’s true, then why not level the playing field and prove it? Rather than pointing fingers, Canada and the US need to work together to create a more balanced trade relationship. This could involve: Adjusting Currency Policies: Finding a middle ground where the Canadian dollar isn’t deliberately devalued to gain a competitive edge. Strengthening Border Security: Addressing US concerns about fentanyl and border issues could improve trust and cooperation. Promoting Mutual Growth: Encouraging policies that benefit workers in both countries rather than pitting them against each other. It’s easy to get upset when policies like tariffs seem to target Canada, but it’s important to look at the bigger picture. The US President isn’t out to destroy Canada—he’s trying to ensure fairness for American workers. Instead of focusing on the negatives, Canada should seize this opportunity to prove that it can compete on a level playing field. With strong manufacturing, skilled workers, and innovative industries, Canada has what it takes to succeed. By addressing the underlying issues and working with the US, both countries can build a stronger, more balanced trade relationship that benefits everyone. So, instead of anger, let’s focus on solutions. How can we make trade between Canada and the US fairer and more beneficial for both sides? That’s the question we should be asking.

The Times They Are a Changing

The Times They Are a Changing By Theresa Grant - Real Estate Columnist The Real Estate market is a dynamic entity, continuously shifting between favouring buyers and sellers. Durham Region has been in a balanced market for quite some time now. In fact some would say that the market in Durham Region has been soft, quiet, weak. Any way you want to put it, houses have been sitting on the market in many cases, for months before selling or terminating with a thought to try listing again in a stronger market. Houses that are priced properly right out of the gate tend to sell quickly and still do. The would-be buyers have certainly sent a message to the sellers that they are not willing to pay more than the actual value of the home. Unfortunately, some home sellers are still stuck in the Covid craziness days and think that people are going to pay well more than what the house is worth. Another thing that potential home buyers have sent a strong message to the home sellers on is the idea of holding offers. Having a presentation date is not really effective when the buyers aren’t buying to begin with. Numerous houses have had their presentation date come and go with either no offers or low offers, but not high enough to seal a deal. The whole idea of an offer presentation date is to garner as much interest in the property as possible, bring in as many offers at one time as you can, as this benefits the seller client. We are seeing more and more listings saying, “offers anytime”, just like it used to be prior to Covid. I don’t think the offer presentation is going anywhere; I think that it is only effective in a seller’s market and that people will eventually understand that. With the Bank of Canada continuing to cut rates, Many will stay firmly planted on the sidelines, where they’ve been for a couple of years now. They will patiently wait for the news that the rates have hit rock bottom and then plan their jump into the market. The only problem with that is that when the rates finally hit rock bottom, the house prices will have risen considerably. Most analysts expect the Bank of Canada to cut through 2025. There is a sweet spot in the market right now and many buyers are taking advantage of this window of opportunity. Houses that have been sitting on the market for four, five, and even six months are now being snapped up. Buyers that thought they had time to look at a house, think about it and view it again before making a decision are finding that they don’t have that luxury at all in a lot of cases. I know a young couple looking for their first home and they are having their viewings cancelled because the house they were going to look at, that has been on the market for four months has just sold. This has happened to them in a few times. This indicates that the market is starting to tighten up. Inventory is really starting to move. It will be very interesting to see what 2025 holds in store for the Durham Region market. Questions? Column ideas? You can email me at newspaper@ocentral.com

Recruitment and Retention Crisis

Canadian Armed Forces Recruitment and Retention Crisis by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East During this period of daily decay in global security, not strengthening our armed forces adequately has serious implications for our nation’s security, wellbeing and integrity. The Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) are in the midst of a recruitment and retention crisis, one that threatens not just Canada’s own security, but its standing with allies like the United States. With approximately 12,000 unfilled positions, which represent 16% of its target strength of 71,500 regular members, the military is struggling to maintain basic operational capacity. This shortfall, compounded by outdated equipment, rising attrition, and a lack of political urgency, reveals deep structural flaws. The stakes are high, and the question is not just what should be done, but whether Canada’s political leaders are willing and able to do it. You may have noted that at this time Canada is spending a lot of defence-targeted money, in the order of billions of dollars, for military support in foreign countries instead of strengthening our own military. The importance of recruiting is paramount for a healthy military, but to assure success a sincere and committed political involvement is needed. Realistically, I do not see any serious actions from either the Liberal government or the Conservative opposition in support of the military. The question of who can fix the CAF’s recruitment and retention crisis is as important as the solutions themselves. Canada’s two major governing political parties, the Liberals and Conservatives, offer differing visions for defense policy, but neither has a flawless record of accomplishment. The Liberal Party, under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, has been criticized for its lack of urgency on defense. While the government introduced a defense policy update in 2023 that included $15 billion in new spending commitments, much of this funding remains unallocated or delayed. The Liberals have also struggled with procurement delays, such as the eternal saga of replacing Canada’s aging CF-18 fighter jets, which has dragged on for over a decade. Efforts to promote diversity within the military are commendable but the Liberals’ approach has been too slow to address the scale of the crisis. The Conservatives position themselves as the party of defense, emphasizing the importance of meeting NATO commitments and strengthening Canada’s military capabilities. Their "Canada First Defence Strategy" includes promises to increase defense spending and streamline procurement, aligning with the urgency of the CAF’s challenges. However, past Conservative governments have also struggled with procurement delays and personnel shortages, raising questions about whether they can deliver on their promises. The CAF’s recruitment and retention issues are a systemic problem, not a passing phase. Recruitment processes are outdated and cumbersome, with timelines that stretch over six to nine months, an eternity for applicants in today’s competitive job market. The quality of military recruiters also leaves a lot to be desired. The quality of recruiters is crucial in the recruiting process, a systemic problem senior military officials continues to ignore. These inefficiencies discourage potential recruits, many of whom turn to private-sector opportunities that offer quicker hiring processes, better pay, and clearer career paths. In 2023, the CAF recruited only 2,800 new members, far short of its annual target of 5,900. The recruitment crisis is compounded by a lack of serious outreach to underrepresented groups. Women, Indigenous communities, and ethnic minorities remain underrepresented in the military, despite Canada’s diverse population. Efforts to improve diversity have been sporadic and insufficiently integrated into broader recruitment strategies. Retention poses an equally significant challenge. The CAF’s attrition rate climbed to nearly 8% in 2022, with over 5,000 personnel voluntarily leaving the military. Job dissatisfaction is a major factor, driven by limited career progression and long deployments. Many service members cite frustration with outdated equipment and inadequate infrastructure as contributing to their decision to leave. For instance, the CAF’s barracks and training facilities are widely seen as substandard, and the delays in procuring modern equipment, such as new fighting and engineering military vehicles, fighter jets and naval vessels, have eroded confidence in the military’s ability to meet operational demands. Morale is further undermined by a perception that successive federal governments have not prioritized defense. They have allocated resources only when forced to do so by external pressures or crises. This lack of consistent political support has left service members feeling undervalued, exacerbating retention problems and creating a cycle of dissatisfaction that the CAF has struggled to break. In addition, senior military personnel are more preoccupied with their own promotions than dedicating attention to this endemic problem, which is consuming the military. Beyond being an internal CAF issue, the recruitment and retention crisis has profound implications for Canada’s ability to respond to domestic and international security challenges. Domestically, the shortfall in personnel undermines the CAF’s capacity to respond to emergencies such as natural disasters or threats to Arctic sovereignty. The Arctic, in particular, is an area of growing concern I mentioned several times during my time in Ottawa, but my concerns fell on deaf ears. With the opening of new shipping routes in the Arctic and increasing competition for resources, Canada’s ability to assert its sovereignty in the region is critical. Neglecting the Artic leaves a gap that adversaries like Russia and China could well exploit. When I noted in the House ten years ago that Russia is a potential threat because it was refurbishing its arctic military bases at a phenomenal rate, I was assured that ‘Russia is not a threat at this time’. Internationally, the crisis weakens Canada’s contributions to NATO and its defense partnership with the United States. Canada has consistently failed to meet NATO’s target of spending 2% of GDP on defense, a shortfall that has not gone unnoticed by its allies. At present, Canada spends only 1.37% of GDP on defense, placing it near the bottom of NATO member states. This chronic underfunding has strained Canada’s relationships within the alliance as well as the United States, where incoming President Donald Trump has already indicated that he will take some painful actions against Canada unless we ‘ante up’. In fact, the U.S.-Canada defense relationship, exemplified by joint operations in the Arctic and the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), is also at risk. With Russia increasing its Arctic presence and China seeking greater influence in the region, the United States needs a strong partner to help secure North American interests. Canada’s inability to maintain a fully operational military not only jeopardizes its own security but places additional strain on U.S. resources and planning. In conclusion, the CAF’s recruitment and retention crisis is a test of Canada’s political will and its ability to meet the demands of a changing security environment. The right solutions must be found quickly and implementing them requires sustained effort, adequate funding, and a commitment to making defense a national priority. Canada’s security and its reputation as a reliable ally depend on decisive action. This is not just about filling vacancies; it is about reaffirming Canada’s role as a credible partner in NATO and a trusted ally of the United States. The time for half-measures is over. Canada must act decisively to fix its military, or risk becoming a nation that cannot defend itself or its allies.

New Relations on the Horizon for Canada and the United States

New Relations on the Horizon for Canada and the United States by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East There are just a few weeks left before President elect Donald Trump takes office on the 20th of January 2025. In the meantime, there are preparations for the new presidential administration, and the incoming President is putting new ideas forward in order to strengthen his mandate for making “America Great Again”. He is looking to implement a series of his ideas for strengthening the border both North and South of the United States. He is also looking to eliminate waste in government spending and keeping manufacturing jobs in the country. For instance, he has made a promise to impose a 25% tariffs on goods imported from Mexico and Canada, until these countries make the required efforts to secure their borders with the States to curtail illegal immigration and lower the trade deficit. Not surprisingly, Donald Trump’s declaration that, as one of his first acts upon taking office on January 20th, he will impose a sweeping 25% tariff on all Canadian and Mexican goods entering the United States has sent politicians, policymakers, and business leaders across the continent into a frenzy. The question is how seriously we should take this threat. Secondly, what can Canada do to prevent the North American free trade agreement from becoming a relic of the past? Based on our knowledge of the incoming President, it seems that the threat is very real and should not be taken in an easy and dismissive way. I see commotion in the Canadian Government, which was taken by surprise by the re-election of Donald Trump, and had not taken any steps to cultivate the appropriate relations that would avoid any surprises in bilateral relations. This commotion resulted in a sudden desperate trip of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to have dinner with the incoming President and try to resolve the issue. It should be noted however, that based on previous actions the two men are not on the best of terms, personally .Diplomatically, incoming President Trump affirmed that the meeting with Prime Minister Trudeau was productive. However, if we make deductions from what is publicly known about the meeting, as Canadians, we might well be concerned. According to people at the table who heard the discussion, Trump, while cordial and welcoming, was very direct when it came to what he wants from his counterpart to the North. Paraphrasing the discussion, Trump told Trudeau that Canada has failed the U.S. by allowing large amounts of drugs and people across the border, including illegal immigrants from over 70 different countries. Moreover, Trump became more animated when it came to the U.S. trade deficit with Canada, which he estimated to be more than $100 billion. The President-elect told the Prime Minister that if Canada cannot fix the border issues and trade deficit, he would levy a 25% tariff on all Canadian goods on day one when he returns to office. The reaction from Prime Minister Trudeau was that the President should not levy the tariff because it would kill the Canadian economy completely. Trump replied by asking, “so your country can't survive unless it's ripping off the U.S. to the tune of $100 billion?” Trump then suggested to Trudeau that Canada become the 51st state, which caused the Prime Minister and others to laugh nervously. Someone at the table chimed in and advised Trump that Canada would be a very liberal state, which received even more laughter. Trump then suggested that Canada could possibly become two states: a conservative and a liberal one. He told Trudeau that if he cannot handle his list of demands without ripping the United States off in trade, maybe Canada should really become a state or two and Trudeau could become a governor. While sources at the table say the exchange got many laughs, Trump delivered the message that he expected change by January 20. Talking seriously, the impact of a 25% tariff on imported goods from Canada will have a devastating result on the Canadian economy, especially in English Canada. In Ontario, for example, two-way trade makes up 41 percent of the province’s economy, and in Alberta, a major energy supplier to the U.S., it is 42 percent. As a result, a 25% tariff would be highly disruptive, potentially affecting millions of jobs. The threat of a 25% tariffs should not be taken lightly and Canadians need to be prepared for this alternative rather than dismissing it. Our politicians, both governing and in opposition, will need to be prepared for alternatives. We will soon see if they will be capable of doing so. Let me be clear, the incoming Trump administration sees restoring manufacturing production in the United States as a socio-economic imperative. It is at the centre of their vision for being responsive to the voters who elected them and restoring the social equilibrium of deindustrialized America. Through this lens, Trump’s tariffs targeting Canada and Mexico take on a different meaning. He has picked his North American partners first because the supply chains here are the shortest and producers in the two countries will face lower transaction costs for shifting production back into the United States than companies in Europe or elsewhere. The Trump-Vance policy bet is that a 25% tariff to access the U.S. market will represent such a high economic cost that companies will be prepared to absorb the short-term disruption of moving product mandates, production lines, and even entire facilities from Canada and Mexico back to the United States. Considering the disastrous fiscal position the United States finds itself in, a position that has deteriorated markedly not only because of the pandemic but also because of continued government deficit spending at levels normally seen during wartime, new innovative measures need to be taken. At this time, tariffs are considered to be a key part of a larger fiscal agenda for generating hundreds of billions in revenues to fund trillions in tax cuts without pushing up borrowing costs. They are no longer just a bargaining tool. In conclusion, comparing tariff threats in 2025 versus those in 2016, we must understand that the current threats are a fiscal necessity hardwired into Trump’s demand-side theory of stimulating economic growth through large-scale permanent tax expenditures. In view of this and in stark terms, the incoming Trump administration, nervous about a debt-to-GDP ratio of 124 percent, may not have very much choice when it comes to levying large tariffs. If Canadians continue to think that this President, his billionaire donors, and the current GOP are going to forgo tax cuts to forgo tariffs, they suffer from a level of national delusion that even Dracula cannot sort out. Are the politico in Ottawa prepared in their ivory towers? We will soon see

THROUGH THOSE EYES…

THROUGH THOSE EYES... By Joe Ingino B.A. Psychology Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States Nothing brings my heart greater sorrow than to drive down my city downtown and witness the suffering and despair of fellow citizens living on our streets. Thanksgiving comes, remembrance day passes and now Christmas. Times to celebrate with an open heart and generous spirit. A time to rejoice on spirit, faith and appreciation for all that makes Canada. CANADA. My mind happy, proud of our Canada. Yet, so full of sorrow and confusion as how can we celebrate knowing the truths that lurk before us. The realities of those fellow Canadians suffering. As I stop at a light. I look over at a soul staring right through me. Sitting on a cold sidewalk along with all his belongings. Shivering and suffering as the tempest weather pounds him. Surrendered to the realities of his life. He sits there in despair as a scene from some poor third world nation. This is not our Canada. This can’t be our Canada. How can we celebrate anything with the suffering right before us. As I look into his eyes, I can see down deep in his suffering soul. I can feel his pain. Through those eyes, I see me. You, any one of us. His pain becomes mine. As good as we may have it today. Life is a constant evolving change. A loss of job. Illness, death in the family. The realities of life can give great comforts, as it can take. Through those eyes I can feel that he does not want to be on the street. Any more than I would. Any more than any of our family members or friends would. Through those eyes I can see myself at any given time. Without money, food or shelter. No place to call home. Many discard the homeless as being addicts, mental health cases. In reality, they are one of us... with negative life circumstances. By-product of a broken social, political and cultural system. Systems that at one time focused on standards, quality of life and the preservation of culture, customs and Canadian traditions. Today’s we are quick to label people with struggles as suffering from an array of mental health issues. We have failed to be compassionate and understantive. Mental health has many faces and the social stigma in order to justify lack of standards and care is what is crippling our society. Through those eyes - I see the need for our country to go back to what worked. It may not have been pretty. But it worked. Many argue we have had this problem for ever. That due to increase population the problem is more noticeable. I say not. The poor have always been. They had their culture based on their own standards. Always maintaining the integrity of duty to Country. Today those eyes scream out for help. For guidance. We need solid change.

Community Newspapers: Connecting and Supporting Local Communities

Community Newspapers: Connecting and Supporting Local Communities By Dale Jodoin Community newspapers are a vital part of neighborhoods and towns, delivering local news to millions of Canadians every week. They serve more than just an informational role; they are key in connecting people, supporting local groups, and fostering collaboration. Across Canada, nearly 14 million copies of community newspapers are distributed weekly, often free of charge, making them an essential resource for many. Community newspapers provide straightforward news, helping readers stay informed about events and issues in their area. They act as a watchdog for local governance, holding politicians accountable by ensuring transparency in reporting. This role is critical to maintaining trust and credibility, as unbiased reporting empowers communities and encourages informed decision-making. However, concerns about political influence over some media outlets have sparked discussions about the importance of journalistic independence. Readers expect community newspapers to provide accurate, impartial news rather than being swayed by political agendas. Independence ensures newspapers can continue their role as a reliable source of truth and a platform for public accountability. Beyond reporting, community newspapers play an essential role in supporting local nonprofit organizations and community groups. These groups often rely on newspapers to raise awareness about their work, promote events, and recruit volunteers. Local food banks, for example, use newspapers to inform the public about distribution times and how to donate. Environmental groups share sustainability tips and event details, while other organizations highlight community resources, such as free educational programs or mental health services. Affordable advertising and feature stories in community newspapers allow nonprofits to reach a wide audience without straining their budgets. Public service announcements and advocacy pieces also provide these groups with a platform to communicate their mission and needs effectively. Community newspapers are a hub for building connections between local groups, businesses, and individuals. They encourage collaboration by sharing success stories of partnerships that benefit the community. For instance, a story about a local grocery store teaming up with a food bank to provide meals for families not only informs the public but also inspires similar initiatives. Additionally, newspapers help bridge gaps between local authorities and residents by sharing essential guidelines and updates. They educate readers about rules, such as food bank eligibility criteria, recycling practices, and safety protocols for community events. This information simplifies processes and ensures that people know how to access the help and resources they need. Community newspapers often serve as a platform for highlighting important local issues. Coverage of topics such as homelessness, public safety, or environmental challenges brings these issues to the forefront, encouraging community involvement. By reporting on these matters, newspapers motivate individuals and groups to take action and seek solutions. For example, stories about cleanup efforts in parks or volunteer recruitment for local shelters show the impact of collective action. These stories also provide recognition to those working tirelessly to improve their communities. Community newspapers are more than just a source of news. They act as a cornerstone for local engagement, bringing people together and supporting those in need. Their commitment to unbiased reporting, community support, and advocacy ensures they remain a valuable resource for towns and neighborhoods across Canada. By connecting people and sharing stories of positive change, community newspapers continue to strengthen the fabric of society, ensuring local voices are heard and local challenges are addressed.

The Baby Boomer Generation: Facing Loss and Finding Meaning Life and Loss: Navigating Grief and Finding Purpose

The Baby Boomer Generation: Facing Loss and Finding Meaning Life and Loss: Navigating Grief and Finding Purpose By Dale Jodoin As the Baby Boomer generation enters its later years, loss has become an inescapable part of life. The passing of parents, siblings, spouses, and friends forces us to face the fragility of life. These losses don’t just mark the end of relationships—they prompt deep reflection on our own mortality and the impact we’ve had on those around us. Loss is universal, yet it feels deeply personal when it happens to us. For Baby Boomers, saying goodbye to aging parents is often a poignant milestone. It’s a moment that shifts the family dynamic, leaving many to step into the role of the eldest generation. This shift often comes with a profound sense of vulnerability, as the people who once protected and guided us are no longer there. But losing a sibling or close friend carries a different kind of weight. These are the people who shared our lives, our secrets, and our memories. Their absence reminds us that time is fleeting and that even the strongest bonds can be broken by death. The loss of a spouse, however, is perhaps the most life-altering experience. A partner represents a shared life, a co-writer of your story. When they’re gone, the world feels quieter, emptier. Tasks that once seemed mundane, like preparing meals or watching TV, now highlight the void left behind. As death approaches, many people find themselves turning inward. For some, this means reaching out to faith or spirituality. Even those who’ve spent decades away from religion often find themselves praying or seeking forgiveness at the end of life. The prospect of leaving unfinished business—whether with loved ones or a higher power—can weigh heavily on the mind. Forgiveness becomes a recurring theme in these moments. Old grudges, once seen as insurmountable, suddenly seem trivial in the face of mortality. Yet, the desire for reconciliation often comes late, leaving little time to rebuild the connections that were lost. It’s a reminder to settle disputes and mend relationships while there’s still time. Whether through heartfelt conversations or simple gestures, letting go of resentment can bring peace not only to the dying but also to those left behind. For parents, the loss of a child is a grief that defies explanation. It goes against the natural order of life and leaves a wound that never fully heals. The sense of helplessness is overwhelming, as there’s no way to shield a child from the inevitability of death. This type of loss carries a ripple effect through families. It’s a grief that unites, yet isolates. Support from others who’ve experienced similar pain can be invaluable, as only they can truly understand the depth of this heartbreak. As death touches those around us, it also forces us to examine our own lives. What legacy are we leaving behind? How will we be remembered? These are questions many Baby Boomers are asking as they approach their later years. For some, the answers lie in revisiting faith or seeking a deeper connection with the world around them. A quiet moment in nature, a visit to a place of worship, or simply spending time with loved ones can provide clarity. Others focus on practical matters, like organizing their finances or writing a will. These steps, though sometimes uncomfortable, can ease the burden on those left behind. They’re acts of love that show consideration for the future. Grieving is a deeply personal process, and no two people experience it the same way. For some, the pain is overwhelming, making it difficult to move forward. In these moments, reaching out for help is essential. Support groups, whether in person or online, offer a safe space to share stories and emotions. They remind us that grief is a shared experience and that there’s strength in leaning on others. Friends and family can also provide comfort, even if it’s just through their presence. It’s important to remember that grief doesn’t have a timeline. Healing is not about forgetting—it’s about learning to live with the loss and finding ways to honor the memory of those who’ve passed. Despite the inevitability of death, life remains a gift to be cherished. Each day offers an opportunity to create new memories, strengthen relationships, and find joy in the small moments. Whether it’s laughing with grandchildren, exploring a new hobby, or simply enjoying a sunrise, these moments remind us of the beauty that still exists. At the same time, it’s crucial to address the practical aspects of life’s end. Writing down wishes, resolving conflicts, and communicating openly with loved ones can provide a sense of closure. It ensures that when the time comes, you can leave with fewer regrets and a clearer conscience. Grief is a reflection of love. The pain we feel when someone dies is a testament to the bond we shared with them. While the loss is devastating, it’s also a reminder of the impact they had on our lives. As we navigate this journey, it’s important to remember that we’re not alone. Others have walked this path before us and will walk it after us. Together, we can find strength in our shared humanity, creating a legacy of love and compassion for those who will carry on after us. Live fully. Love deeply. And when the end comes, face it with grace and gratitude for the life you’ve lived.

Ward 2 oshawa the forgotten people…

ward 2 oshawa the forgotten people... By Joe Ingino B.A. Psychology Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States For those that read my column on a regular basis. will know that I am a believer in the democratic process when it comes to electing government officials. In the same breath. You, also know where I stand with the quality of the candidates that we elect in office. The quality of living in the City of Oshawa keeps getting worst. Taxes keep going up. One would have thought that at the 2022 municipal election the electorate would have voted for change. Almost a reset button on Oshawa’s quality of life. NO - instead the electorate kept all the councillor and the incumbent Mayor and only changed one. I still can’t believe the results and the outcome. To vote back in a Mayor that has turned downtown Oshawa into Durham’s capital for the homeless, drug use, drug trade and prostitution. I am beyond words. Only to strengthen my position on how the electorate votes. Take for example the only change in the municipal roster. Ward 2, City Councillor, Jim Lee. At first I was excited. I thought finally someone with some credentials and a some what proven work history. I had hope for the ward with an under used airport. With a ward that has no representation. At the region, Regional and City councillor Tito-Dante Marimpietri has had numerous terms as the ward 2 rep. How has the ward benefitted? Anyone’s guess. As for Lee. He has shown respect and visited my office once since elected. I appreciated that.... as Tito in his God knows how many terms... maybe visited his local city newspaper once or twice out of the many years he has been elected. Lee, in my opinion. Has become institutionalized. The do nothing and say even less, gets you elected time and time again appears. Lee instead of taking this golden opportunity to make a name for himself. He has opted to cushion his pension and play by the municipal coalitions rules. Say nothing, support what the coalition supports and support corporate prejudice and political vindication against anyone that challenges the status quo at the City of Oshawa offices. If I am wrong. I will be the first to apologize. One question. What has Lee done for ward 2 in his half term. The City position on doing business with the 30 serving newspaper is ignored due to political vendetta. They claim they support local small businesses. We are living proof of their bias, prejudice and lack of support for local small businesses. This is in part why there are so many vacancies in our core. NO SUPPORT. The City of Oshawa is not inclusive but selective.

NEW DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT ON ITS WAY -MERCHANTS CONCERNED OVER LOSS OF PARKING-

NEW DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT ON ITS WAY -MERCHANTS CONCERNED OVER LOSS OF PARKING- By Dean Hickey THE PRINCIPLES WHICH GUIDE the approval of any new development within the city’s downtown core will, by necessity, demand a parallel review of the existing parking capacity upon which so many businesses and residents rely. With the future of Lot 4 now being debated by council, many among the various property owners, merchants, and those who frequent the area will doubtless be concerned as to the potential reduction in the number of available spots. The Economic and Development Services committee decided in early November to declare the surface parking lot at the north side of Athol Street, between Simcoe and Centre Streets, as ‘surplus’ in an effort to engage with those seeking to develop the property into something far beyond its current use. Due to the nature of the process which surrounds such negotiations and decision making, most of what has so-far been discussed has taken place in closed session, and the details have yet to be disclosed. It is known, however, that staff did recommend the approval of a specific proposal having been brought forward as a result of a targeted RFP (Request for Proposals) process, whereby consideration was given to a few select proponents. Committee members took a publicly recorded vote on the matter and, oddly enough, those who were opposed to the staff recommendation were Ward 4 councillors Rick Kerr and Derek Giberson. Both men represent the area that encompasses the downtown, and they are known as having competing visions for the city. Those differences will undoubtedly play a role in their responses to a recent petition that has been submitted to city hall on the issue of parking and the losses that may occur. A group of downtown merchants have signed the petition that reads as follows: “We hereby write, sign, and validate this document as a request…with regards to the acceptance of such project wherein consideration is given to the development of a Parking Lot in the area of Lot 4 in downtown Oshawa. The shortage of parking is NEGATIVELY affecting businesses and is resulting in loss of customers and loss of business revenue. Countless customers have expressed their frustration with the lack of parking, and after circling the downtown area and wasting over fifteen minutes, they give up and go somewhere else. If you want to see businesses grow and thrive in downtown Oshawa, you MUST provide parking. We NEED this parking lot to be built to accommodate customers driving from outside of the area and to generate more productivity in the neighbourhood and provide the potential of expansion for future projects. This is a basic necessity.” One property owner I spoke with, on condition of anonymity for the sake of his tenants, said “Anyone can see we have parking issues downtown. The City doesn’t have the money to do anything about it, so they’re relying on developers.” He went on to add, “Factor in the massive residential developments that are coming downtown and we are severely affected.” He expressed a high level of frustration over the City’s consultation process, telling me it’s quite simply insufficient. “They need better communications people, because we have a manager at city hall who is responsible for downtown business development, and nobody seems to know who she is or what she does.” That’s unfortunate, because the effects of an ever-shrinking supply of parking are being felt directly by those who are trying to make a living in the city’s core, and they need proper representation at the staff level. Supporting a blanket conversion of Lot 4 into other uses may be a recipe for advanced economic decline, if one also takes into account the proposal from the Provincial government for dedicated rapid bus lanes that will consume no less than 125 parking spaces when complete. If that wasn’t bad enough, consider the effect the widening of sidewalks along the north side of King Street has had on the number of spaces available, and the losses continue to mount. This is where the difference in vision between the two Ward 4 councillors may be considered. I was advised by one downtown merchant of a recent survey undertaken by councillor Kerr in an apparent effort to gauge just how troubling the whole parking issue has become. “Rick Kerr is all over this parking thing, and it’s like he’s on a mission” she told me as we discussed her most pressing concerns. Numerous factors have come together in recent years, causing a negative effect on her business. They include open drug use among the homeless, an increase in crime, and of course the slow but steady erosion of accessible parking for customers she says are uncomfortable walking any great distance, particularly as the daylight hours diminish at this time of year. I reached out to councillor Kerr for comment, and he suggested that “Our downtown businesses are stifled now by a lack of parking, for both customers and employees, and I can give you at least three examples. The first is the CIBC building, which has lots of available opportunities for future tenants, however they require reliable, available parking in order to successfully market their office space. Another example is the number of empty store-fronts where businesses have closed or relocated to other areas they see as more accessible. The third component is the lack of development potential for small-footprint buildings that cannot be converted or redeveloped due to their lack of anticipated parking requirements.” While I did not reach out directly to councillor Giberson, his public comments on the issue of mobility within cities, and downtowns in general, has been outwardly focused on the promotion of alternate forms of transportation. In one of his social media posts he offers the following, “It's great to see what Ottawa has been doing in substantially increasing their bike lanes, and they are proof that with time (decade+) and focused will (political, planning & engineering depts, community organizing, financial commitment), you can build up that network and make active transportation and public transportation…a viable alternative to car-centric mobility…” For many elected officials and urban planners, it has become fashionable to cast retailers and others who decry the absence of parking as being somehow biased in their perceptions and without proper appreciation for aspects such as bike lanes, which have certainly been in the news recently. Meanwhile, in the shops and offices downtown, those at ground zero can see for themselves exactly what the absence of a meaningful strategic parking initiative has cost them, and they’re tired of excuses from a bureaucratic and political establishment that lacks the necessary vision.

Canada –an independent nation

Canada –an independent nation by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East With the world in turmoil, Canada embroiled in political fights between the two parties which have traditionally ruled it, and our southern neighbor considering the imposition of a 25% tax on products from Canada under the new Trump administration, it is time to remember a little of our history and learn from our past leaders. Largely unknown and unrecognised by the vast majority of Canadians, the Statute of Westminster Day, celebrated on December 11th is nonetheless an extremelyimportant day in Canada’s history as a nation. The self-governing colonies of the British Empire, which included Canada, were known as the Dominions. Despite their right for self-government, the British parliament had considerable legislative authority over the Dominions. The situation was changed by the Statute of Westminster in 1931, which increased the sovereignty of the Dominions, giving them legal autonomy and making them essentially sovereign nations in their own right. However, at Canada’s request, the British parliament retained the power to amend the constitution of Canada for five more decades after the enactment of the Statute. The anniversary of the Statute of Westminster is celebrated in Canada every year, but it is not a public holiday, which means that government offices, educational establishments, banks, and businesses remain open unless December 11 falls on a weekend. To celebrate the day, the national flag of Canada and the Royal Union Flag, commonly referred to as the Union Jack, are flown side by side on federal buildings and establishments from sunrise to sunset. Please observe that this is the case in your community. In remembering the steps involved in the formation of the Canada of today, July 1, 1867, the day the Confederation of Canada came into being is generally considered the founding date of the country. However, at that rime the country still wasn’t an entirely “autonomous” nation. That came decades later, on December 11, 1931 with the passing of the Statute of Westminster. The British law clarified that Canada and other Commonwealth countries have full legal freedom except in areas where those nations chose to remain subordinate to Britain. That Statute included the Dominion of Canada, the colony of Newfoundland (which would join Canada in 1949), the Commonwealth of Australia, the Dominion of New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, and the Irish Free State. Having garnered great respect internationally and a strong sense of Canada’s unique nationality as a result of the First World War, Canada signed the Treaty of Versailles ending that war as a separate nation from Britain, though this was not quite the case. During the following years, the government of Canadian Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie-King sought the full rights of a sovereign country in creation of laws and foreign policy. The process had begun in the 1920’s when Canada signed a fishing treaty with the U.S without British participation, established an embassy in Washington, and decided not to assist a British occupation force in Turkey without the approval of Canada’s Parliament. However, the seeds for autonomy were sown in 1926 at the Imperial Conference when Britain’s foreign minister, Lord Balfour proposed that the Dominions be granted legislative autonomy. In 1929, Canada’s head of the Department of External Affairs, O.D. Skelton, attended the Conference on the Operation of Dominion Legislation in London. Here the various resolutions proposed in 1926 were firmed up. In 1930 the various governments submitted terms of the future Statute to their Parliaments. Then on the date of December 11, 1931, the Statute was passed into law. While the Dominions accepted all resolutions, only Canada couldn’t determine a process to amend the Constitution. Thus, power to amend Canada’s Constitution remained under British authority until 1982 with the passing of Canada’s Constitution Act. In conclusion, the anniversary of the Statute of Westminster is a key date that celebrates Canada’s legal independence from Britain. This day is important because it marks Canada’s legislative autonomy, allowing it to make its own laws without British approval. The Statute of Westminster was a pivotal step in Canada’s journey towards becoming a fully sovereign nation. Celebrations on this day highlight Canada’s identity and achievements. The statute is celebrated because it acknowledges the hard work and determination of Canadian leaders who fought for the country’s independence. It also serves as a reminder of Canada’s evolution into a nation that stands on its own while still being part of the Commonwealth. Our current leaders need to remember the work of their forefathers who guided Canada’s evolution to becoming an independent nation, They need to learn from our history, and possibly be inspired by the achievements of their predecessors. Instead of bickering in their ivory towers in Ottawa, our leaders should concentrate on developing new and inspiring objectives for Canada as a nation, working to evolve Canada into a leading nation of the world. What do you think?

Resume Trickery Never Works

Resume Trickery Never Works By Nick Kossovan There was a time when "white fonting," using white text to hide keywords in your resume, was suggested to circumvent an employer's ATS. Many still use this resume trickery, which is considered unethical by many, even though ATS systems can detect white-font text and disregard it, and recruiters can check for. The latest resume trickery self-professed career coaches are advising job seekers who feel their age is an obstacle to leaving dates off their resume. It's worth noting that it's in a career coach's best interest to have you believe ageism is widespread since this narrative helps them sell their "services." Does ageism exist? Of course, it does, irrespective of age, along with countless other biases, albeit not to the extent promoted by career coaches and the media, whose self-interest is best served by keeping us anxious and addicted to the news. Career coach's business model: Create a false narrative about a supposed job seeker's "obstacle" and offer a solution. Leaving dates off your resume or LinkedIn profile is lying by omission—intentionally leaving out critical information to create a misleading impression—constitutes an unethical attempt to influence the reader by misrepresenting yourself. Furthermore, since dates of employment and graduation are standard on a resume, omitting dates raises a glaring red flag that you're hiding something. Hiring managers and recruiters read the same job search advice you do. When they read a resume without dates, they know why the candidate hasn't included them. Putting aside the ethical question, assuming leaving off dates does get you an interview, once face-to-face, your age will be apparent; what then? If the hiring manager is an ageist, once seated, your age takes centre stage. They'll look for ways to confirm any biases they have of the age group and generation you belong to, such as: · you won't be a cultural fit · you'll soon retire · you have age-related health issues · you'll be entitled and easily offended and, therefore, hard to manage (especially younger candidates) · you'll be more likely to engage in activism · lack of experience · too much experience (overqualified, will be expensive) The range of assumptions, the foundation on which biases are formed, covers all ages, genders, races, ethnicities, etc. Hiring is a human judgement activity—maybe AI will change this one day—therefore, biases are inherent in the hiring process. You have biases; I have biases. Social norms and legislation cover up but don't eradicate biases, turning them into "subtle undertones." Presuming skills, competencies, and experience are relatively equal, which candidate would you lean toward: Candidate A: As you're engaging in small talk, which they initiated, they mentioned they're Seattle Kraken fans; you also happen to be a fan. Candidate B: Doesn't initiate small talk, and when you ask if they watched last night's Seattle Kraken vs. New York Islanders game, they say they don't like sports. Candidate A: Attended MacEwan University (Class of 2002), as did you (Class of 1997). Candidate B: Attended Boatwright University (Class of 1993). Generally, our biases aren't malicious. I'm of the opinion that, for the most part, "bias" is merely choosing whether an employee, friend, spouse, mechanic, doctor, or financial advisor is someone you feel comfortable with, and commonalities go a long way in making this decision. Your interviewer, especially if they're the person you'll be reporting to, is asking themselves: · Can I work with this person? · Will the team accept this person? Another reason lying by omission is futile is the Internet, which experts conveniently fail to mention. The Internet has made hiding your age and other details about yourself a futile endeavour. It's a given that your LinkedIn profile will be read, and you'll be Googled to determine if you're interview-worthy. If a hiring manager wants to know your age or anything else about you, they can use Google and find: · the years you graduated · the years you played minor league hockey · the picture your daughter, who tagged you, posted on Facebook in August 2004 of you dropping her off at university · the whitepaper, Advancing European Markets Are Undermining Globalization, you wrote back in 1998 for the brokerage firm you were working at · your tweet announcing your 25th wedding anniversary The point I'm making is it's better to be transparent about your age or [whatever]. At some point in the hiring process, especially since employers usually conduct four to six interviews, the employer will find out what you're trying to hide. Therefore, if the hiring manager is an ageist, you'll be eliminated when they Google you and determine your age, and off-chance should you get an interview, it'll be awkward. It's better to beeliminated upfront than to spend time preparing for and conducting an interview only to be rejected because of an "ism." I believe ageism or any other "ism" can be overcome by self-empowerment (read: respecting yourself) that comes from being proud of who you are and all you've accomplished rather than contorting yourself trying to be accepted. Look for an employer who values the experience of a 'seasoned' candidate—they do exist. Self-respect begets respect. I don't know a hiring manager who hires candidates they don't respect. _____________________________________________________________________ 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

NAVIGATING THE NARRATIVE WAR

NAVIGATING THE NARRATIVE WAR By Carla Grace Skinner The Information Age, also called the Digital Age or the New Media Age, can be difficult to navigate. Establishment Media is quickly becoming irrelevant. The simplicity of turning on our television and tuning into the news to stay informed is a thing of the past. Ratings are in decline due to lack of public trust and as a result, competing platforms have emerged. How we source information has evolved and the demand for journalistic integrity has increased. With so many information sources including mainstream media (“MSN”), government funded media, digital media, print media, social media etc., how do we know who to trust and how do we know what is factually true? Prior to the pandemic, I paid very little attention to news or politics. Tuning into cable news to stay up to date on the spread of the virus was a real eye opener for me. Because I had no preformed biases or political affiliations, I was consuming the news from all MSN Outlets, without prejudice. I realized very quickly that there were two completely different narratives being reported to the public. I began to see highly credentialed experts being censored; that some narratives were 100% fabricated as well as MSN warnings of misinformation, disinformation and warnings to stay away from social media. It was clear to me that this was a tactic used to attempt to control the narrative. I began to see citizen journalists being silenced for reporting evidence-based information; breaking stories with zero mainstream coverage; fellow citizens labeled and shamed for having a differing opinion; a divide forming within the collective psyche. As a result, I became fully committed to learning how to navigate this evolving media landscape in the search for accurate information. I committed to listening to content creators from both mainstream and independent media sources focusing on which side gave the most supporting evidence. Despite whether I agreed and aligned with every belief of the content creator, I concerned myself only with the quality of information being provided and their knowledge of the topic. Navigating the Narrative requires us to understand all sides and to carefully analyze the facts and supporting evidence, whether the sources are mainstream or independent. Seeking out the stories that MSN fails to report on can provide a wealth of information. Listen to what several experts have to say about an issue, especially those being censored and shadow banned. Social Media is home to many quality content creators and should therefore be judged based on their content rather than the platform they use to deliver their message. Always do your own fact checking and seek understanding vs confirming whatever supports your current beliefs. We believe what we believe based on what we’re told. Remember, history is written by the victors, therefore, questioning your sources makes good common sense!

How Crime Affect Home Values Theresa Grant

How Crime Affect Home Values Theresa Grant By Theresa Grant - Real Estate Columnist We all want to live in a beautiful neighbourhood where the streets are lined with mature trees, the neighbours all know each other, and the sounds of children playing echo through the air. Often, through the years, I have heard people say that when they grew up, they never had to lock their doors. In fact, I remember myself, growing up in Toronto. We lived on a side street in the Yonge and Eglinton area. It was a very nice area. Very quiet at the time. There were two schools in the area so you either went to the Catholic school or the Public school. Although the kids attended the different schools, there were all neighbours and so we played together every day and on weekends. Our summers were spent together, exploring our neighbourhood. For the most part, the parents knew each other, at least to say hello. I know that our front door was rarely locked. That was the 70’s mind you. Things have changed quite a bit since then. I remember driving with my family to visit my Aunt and Uncle who lived in Oshawa. The lived-on St. Lawrence St. around Mill and Simcoe. There was a Kentucky Fried Chicken on the corner of Mill and Simcoe, and as soon as we would pull off of the 401, we could see the giant bucket turning atop its pole. It was so exciting for us kids. We always had Kentucky Fried Chicken for dinner when we visited our Oshawa relatives. Many times I would here one of my cousins announce that they were heading uptown. I always wondered why they called it uptown, In Toronto, we would always say downtown. All of the neighbours on St. Lawrence knew each other and they knew us as well. Very friendly people, they were. We never heard any talk of crime or violence to any degree. We played freely without a care in the world. Today things are very different, and our society has changed so drastically. Once lovely neighbourhoods have fallen into disrepair. Drugs, violence, and homelessness have taken root in some of the oldest and most well-established areas of our city. While local Council scrambles to keep up with the growing issues that plague our city, homeowners have to do what they can to protect themselves and their property. As well as protecting their property, their property values are actually affected by crime rates. If you live in a high crime area, the value of your home will be less than the same home in a low crime area of the city. People want to feel safe, especially at home. Some areas of the city tend to see more crime than others. Unfortunately, an area that has experienced a high crime rate will often be painted with a stigma long after things have started to get better in the neighbourhood. Whether purchasing or renting, it’s always a good idea to thoroughly research the area that you are planning to move into and call home. Questions? Column ideas? You can email me at newspaper@ocentral.com

I'll Be Home For Christmas

I'll Be Home For Christmas from Wayne & Tamara I have been married 25 years. We come from completely different backgrounds. I grew up in a large family in a small town, and we were poor. My husband is an only child, privileged, and he was given everything by his parents. This continued throughout all our married life. The house we moved into, against my wishes, is theirs. It was "given" to us when they retired and built a home in a warmer climate. However, the deed remained in his parents' name, and they came back every summer for a visit. For me it was a nightmare. I work full-time but arranged time off to get everything in immaculate order for Abigail, my mother-in-law. It was never good enough. It was always a white glove inspection with her rubbing her hands across my kitchen counter and glancing at her fingertips. She even poked her head up inside the fireplace. She would say, "Oh, honey, you need to clean your mirrors," or "I rewaxed your floors because I didn't think they were clean enough." When she asked how I liked my house, I would say I didn't really think it was mine. She would smile at me and say, "No, it's not, is it?" One year after they arrived and we were having dinner, I made a grammatical error. I said "me and Linda" instead of "Linda and I." Abigail rapped her spoon on the tabletop screeching, "Honey, Honey, Honey! It is not me and Linda! It is Linda and I! Linda and I! Linda and I!" I was so stunned and embarrassed I excused myself from the table. My husband and my father-in-law just dropped their heads. As usual, what Abigail did was "for my own good." The following year she brought me a grammar book. I adored my father-in-law. He made me feel special. He would put his arms around me and tell me how much he appreciated me putting up with them. My husband would say, "That's just my mom." So I quit trying to fight her for the sake of my father-in-law and husband and to keep the peace. Three years ago when my father-in-law died, something happened inside me. I felt so much anger at Abigail I wanted to stay away from her. Last Christmas I didn't want to go see her. Abigail went berserk saying, "How will this look to my friends?" So I went. Within 24 hours she started in on me, as always, after my husband left the room. This time I called my husband back. It shocked my husband to see his sweet mom screaming, but when she saw she wasn't going to get away with it, she switched like a light bulb. She hugged me and told me how much she loved me. The rest of our visit she was as nice as pie. It is Christmas again, and we are scheduled to return to her house. I've asked my husband to go alone, which he thinks is a horrible idea. I am on antidepressants and scheduled for therapy after the first of the year. Am I being selfish? Melanie Melanie, the Greek playwright Aristophanes said, "The wise learn many things from their foes." Last Christmas you learned two things from Abigail. You learned she would be embarrassed if you refuse to visit, and you learned she will not confront you in front of her son. If you can stay home without doing serious damage to your marriage, that is one possible course of action. But there is another answer. Can you distance yourself from the situation? Can you decide in a perfectly calm, cool manner that you will go, but if your mother-in-law is not nice as pie, you will confront her in front of her son? Abigail has shown you that you can alter her behavior by standing up to her. The power has shifted. 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.

Selling in the Fall

Canada’s ever challenged parliamentary democracy

by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East It is becoming increasingly clear that the political system in Canada has degenerated in a worrisome way. More and more power is concentrated in the Prime Minister Office and the Office of the Loyal Opposition, where the staff set the rules, blessed by their respective leaders. I would say without remorse that this is an affront to the spirit of democracy, and borders on being a parallel structure. The role of the elected Members of Parliament is drastically reduced and their freedom of speech in expressing their opinions is limited to the point of being muzzled, all in the name of maintaining party discipline. This does not serve the nation, which is then led by the staff of the elected people for all intents and purposes. It is very sad indeed, that we have arrived at this stage. Staff of the members are literarily spying on them and reporting any moves to the staff in the leader’s office, which in turn can reward them or punish them. Moreover, the quality of the staff and their life experience is questionable and we have often seen -former staff running for elected office. It seems to me that we are reenacting the medieval dark ages, when the inner intrigues for gaining power were the basis for decisions and rules, not the interest of the people. The United States, at least at the presidential level, seems to be changing this trend. The re-elected President does not come from the political establishment, but has a lifetime of business experience to draw on. We will see how this works out, but it is certainly a novelty. Perhaps it is time for us in Canada to have a leader with a broader view and experience, one who is not limited to a political science or law background, without any real life experience. Certainly, this new type of leader might have some interesting and out of the box ideas on how to rule in the people’s interest. Returning to how things are run in Canada today; party staffers monitor caucus for signs of message indiscipline and fraternization with other MPs. MPs say, and I can confirm from my own experience in the House of Commons, that there is less and less freedom of action with an increasingly tight control from the leader’s office. MPs are watched by party staffers both inside and outside Parliament. Elected representatives are publicly called to order for deviating from the so-called party line. Words and actions are closely scrutinized by the leader's office. Partisanship is encouraged. Fraternizing with elected officials from other parties is a no-no. Those who follow blindly without deviating from the sometimes very narrow party lines are rewarded. Those who don't follow blindly and might have some good ideas which might benefit the party, often have to suffer consequences. There are always multiple people in the penalty box; there is always someone in trouble for having a slightly better idea than the party line, but not understood by the controlling staff who reports them to the leader. Some elected officials feel they come to caucus to be told what to do and what to think. Unfortunately, this is very true. The caucus meeting is not a constructive way to listen to members’ ideas. One minute for making your point is not enough, mostly when the leader is not listening while you speak. Often, his mind is already made up, and you find yourself conducting a one-way conversation. If the leader invents a new slogan, it is understood that the respective MPs will have to use it. Catchphrases deployed by leaders (axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget, stop the crime) and terms of derision like "wacko," "radical," are often picked up and repeated by MPs. The Question Period becomes a circus with questions going unanswered, as empty wording is tossed about. It is sad to watch. MPs who repeat the slogans are usually rewarded and celebrated in front of the entire caucus for being a good cheerleader. Such MPs get more speaking time in the House and during question period. Those MPs who refuse to parrot the lines lose their speaking time, in direct proportion to their ‘offense’. Lately it has been reported that a press secretary for the leader of the Conservative opposition has been seen on multiple occasions, signalling MPs not to stop in front of the cameras. Like a policeman directing traffic, he seemed to be beckoning them to enter the room without responding to reporters. This is nothing new. It was thus when the Conservatives were in power; I experienced it personally. More recently, it seems that press secretaries from the Conservative leader’s office have been supervising the entrances to Parliament and monitoring journalists' scrums with MPs, with the goal of recording the exchanges. The Conservative Party seems to be the only federal party that currently does this, so old habits are not dying. This is not surprising, considering that the majority of the current senior staff come from the Harper era and seem frozen in time, without any new ideas. Therefore, we have arrived in a situation where everybody is being watched. What the MPs say, what they do, who they talk to. The MPs are told not to fraternize with MPs from the other parties. This isolationist attitude is far from normal and it certainly does not help to resolve the country’s problems. In my humble opinion, to be a good MP, it is important to build relationships with colleagues from other parties. That is how Parliament is supposed to work best for Canadians. The leader's office is against this because it wants to control everything. Staffers, especially Conservative staffers, have developed and perfected a culture of monitoring MPs' interactions not only in the Commons chamber but also in the corridors of Parliament and at social events. As this evidence shows, political employees who were not elected by the people act as if they were. This is a deplorable situation, and if I were a Member of Parliament again, I'd go to the leader to denounce the situation and say I'm not going to stand for this. In conclusion, party discipline is needed, but Orwellian exaggerations have no place in it. The question remains: when will the political establishment abandon theatrics and start to work for the people who elected them? What are your thoughts?