The Myth of Splitting the Vote And Why I Chose to Stand Up

The Myth of Splitting the Vote And Why I Chose to Stand Up By Councillor Lisa Robinson We’ve all heard it before: “Don’t split the vote.” It's the line the political establishment uses to scare good people into supporting bad candidates. But let’s be honest—this is nothing more than a tactic to keep you locked into a broken system, one that no longer serves the people it was meant to represent. The truth is, there’s no such thing as splitting the vote when your vote never truly belonged to a party in the first place. Your vote is yours. It belongs to your conscience, your values, and your future—not to strategists in Ottawa or party insiders trying to control the outcome. The past few years under Liberal leadership have been nothing short of disastrous. Taxes are up. Food prices have skyrocketed. Gas is unaffordable. Our small businesses have suffered. Families are stretched thin, seniors are being left behind, and young people are losing hope. This government has bled us dry while smiling for the cameras—and they have the nerve to ask for four more years? And now, in Pickering–Brooklin, they’ve parachuted in a Liberal candidate who doesn’t even live here—she lives in Markham. Let that sink in. She doesn’t share your streets, your schools, or your struggles. But she wants to represent you? On the other side, we have the so-called Conservative candidate—also not from Pickering. Not even from Durham. Dropped in from elsewhere, with no skin in the game, no history with our people, and no understanding of what we’ve been through. And worst of all? This same individual pushed vaccine mandates on innocent people—including marginalized communities—forcing people to choose between feeding their families or complying with a political agenda. How could anyone support that over someone who has been in the trenches with you—fighting, sacrificing, and standing firm when it mattered most? That’s why I chose to run for the People’s Party of Canada. Because I know what it means to stand up—when it’s hard, when it’s costly, and when you’re standing alone. If I didn’t step forward now, I would never be able to look myself in the mirror. I’d be betraying everything I believe in—and everyone who put their trust in me. This isn’t about ego. It’s about principle. It’s about truth. It’s about doing everything in my power to give you a real voice in a system that has tried again and again to silence people like us. I’ve faced council censorship. I’ve gone without pay for nearly a year. I’ve been smeared and attacked because I dared to expose corruption, speak honestly, and refuse to be bought or bullied. And I’m still here—because I refuse to quit on you. They’ll say I’m splitting the vote. I say I’m offering the only real choice. Because when your options are a Liberal who doesn’t live here, has ruined our economy, made life unaffordable and a so called conservative who pushed mandates on your children, the question isn’t “Why vote for me?” The real question is: Why on earth would you vote for them? Your vote is your voice. And it’s time to use it not out of fear—but with boldness. With courage. With the conviction that we, the people, still hold the power in this country. They can try to divide us. They can parachute in strangers. But they can’t stop the truth. And they can’t stop a people who are finally ready to rise. I am Councillor Lisa Robinson, The People’s Councillor, A True Conservative MP Candidate for the People’s Party of Canada

Do we need municipal government?

do we need municipal government?

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 You always hear... Democracy is failing society... Democracy is under siege. When in reality Democracy is the vehicle that allows the people to elect someone to office. Traditionally, the electorate selected candidates based on credentials and stature in the community. People they could trust to work in their best interest. This worked well for hundreds of years as long as it was a communal mentality. In today's modern society it still works fine as a vehicle for selecting representatives. The problem is the quality of representative is what has become questionable as most of those elected do not have life experience, the academic qualification and or intellect to be able to make the decisions that they are faced once in office. So what do we have. Wasted tax payers money. Little or no representation. Think about this. When was the last time you ran into your local or regional council member? Do you even know who they are? Then how is it they are representing you? Do you know the issues? Do you know what is happening in your community? If you answered ‘NO’, to any of the above. Then you proven my point. Modern day municipal government is a waste of money. We have no representation. Unfortunately, those elected may not even have the answers. As they depend on staff recommendations and peer opinion. Not on hard sound decision making based on common sense and rational thinking. Look at Oshawa. They spend millions of taxpayers dollars to erect a park next to a park. The ED BROADBENT park next to Lakeview. Is that sound, rational planning? Or wise expenditure on behalf of the taxpayers. This is one example. Now you can’t blame those elected? As they have clearly proven they have no clue what they are doing. It has become so bad... that most of the municipalities across Durham have shut down public access to the municipal offices. The public is so fed up that out of desperation they see municipal government as the enemy. Oshawa, a municipal fortress with three levels of security. Civic, police and a 2 million dollar para-military security firm that primarily protects the mayor and council members from taxpayers. Is this what we pay our taxes for? Don’t think so. But let’s not blame the incompetent we elected in office as they do not have the life experience and or intellect to deal with the general public. Once elected they employ a hit and miss approach towards matters. What we need is to vote based on credentials. Life experience. Imagine how much we the taxpayers would save with just a regional government. We need to get government back to the people and out of the hands of incompetents.

Job Seekers: Consider How You Are Interpreted

Job Seekers: Consider How You Are Interpreted By Nick Kossovan People—hiring managers, recruiters, receptionists, your network, human resources—are what carbonates the job search experience. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that how you're interpreted (read: perceived) is the deciding factor in whether your networking efforts bear fruit, whether you're referred, whether you move along in the hiring process, and whether you're ultimately hired. This truism echoes the cautionary words of American rapper and actor Jaden Smith: "Be careful with how you make the world perceive you because they'll perceive you like that for the rest of your life." Undeniably, image is everything. Yet, many job seekers fail to manage their image effectively and wonder why they're stuck in a lengthy job search. Basically, interpreting someone involves attributing meaning to information, which could be visual (how the person is dressed, physical mannerisms, the car they drive, what they're eating, how they keep their work area) or auditory (accent, use of slang, lexicons, profanity, pronunciation). We do this constantly while communicating, which is why communication is messy. For an employer to whittle down a stack of applications to the one they'll hire, they must interpret what they know and see, making judgments that sometimes lead to accusations of bias or "ism." According to philosopher Hannah Arendt, identity is formed through public actions; we become who we are based on how others see us. Thus, "people treat you as they see you." Be mindful of the impression you make on others, remember: · Image is everything! · How you make someone feel is everything! Since your image and how you make your interviewer(s) feel significantly influence your job search success, knowing what isn't a 'good look'—what turns off employers—is essential. Based on my observations, most job seekers either don't know what isn't a 'good look' or don't care about how they're perceived by employers. What isn't a 'good look' Publicly Bashing Employers: It's common knowledge that employers scrutinize a candidate's online activities to determine whether they're interview-worthy, which is why it amazes me how many job seekers bash employers. Do they believe employers will read their "frustrations" and say, "He's right! Let's change everything we've been doing"? Publicly bashing employers is like biting the hands you want to feed you. Why go on a platform like LinkedIn to malign those who could potentially help you? Publicly bashing employers shows poor judgment and a lack of emotional control. Sloppy Self-Presentation Apicius, a 1st-century Roman gourmet, famously said, "We eat with our eyes first." This principle applies when meeting someone for the first time. It's human nature to assume a person's outward appearance reflects their inner qualities. If there's ever a time to look your best, it's during a job search. Also, presenting yourself well extends beyond your appearance; your resume, LinkedIn profile, and social media activities contribute to the overall impression of who you are. Typos, vague results, poor grammar, and inappropriate social media posts turn employers off. Aggressive Communication Many job seekers often confuse assertiveness with aggression, possibly due to a prevalent sense of entitlement. Assertive communication expresses needs and opinions directly and respectfully, while aggressive communication prioritizes personal needs at the expense of others. I view assertiveness as a two-way dialogue, whereas aggression feels like a one-way proclamation. Aggressive communication leads to the aforementioned employer bashing and having a standoffish attitude with interviewers as if they're the enemy. In contrast, assertiveness means being clear about what you want while considering the employer's needs. The easiest way to expedite your job search is to focus on how you can solve an employer's problems and align your communication accordingly. Job seekers should aim to communicate from a "What can I do for you?" perspective rather than a "What's in it for me?" stance. Lack of Manners and Social Skills Although manners and social skills have declined, they are still crucial for career success. Lacking these skills makes you less likeable (read: affects how others feel about you). I've yet to meet a hiring manager who hires someone they don't like. Good manners facilitate relationships, which are vital to career success. Ignoring social cues or failing to read a room can lead to misunderstandings and hinder relationship-building. How people receive your message, what they remember about you, and how they feel afterward matters. At some point, everyone feels that how they're being interpreted is holding them back. When that happens, it's in your best interest to figure it out. If you feel unappreciated or misunderstood, look in the mirror instead of blaming "the world." You control your destiny through how you present yourself and how you communicate. Nobody is owed acceptance. While it’s contrary to the popular advice to "be yourself," that assumes 'yourself' is someone people actually like—a dangerous assumption—because your physical appearance and actions are what others use to interpret you, perception management is crucial to job search success; therefore, care as much, if not more, about how others perceive you than how you perceive yourself. The phrase "perception is reality," attributed to American political strategist Lee Atwater, echoes throughout an employer's hiring process; therefore, what employers see about you is your responsibility. ___________________________________________________________________ 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

A NEW FORM OF ‘REPRESENTATION’ WITHOUT ELECTION? APPOINTING INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TO MUNICIPAL COUNCILS

A NEW FORM OF ‘REPRESENTATION’ WITHOUT ELECTION? APPOINTING INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TO MUNICIPAL COUNCILS By Dean Hickey THE FRAMEWORK FOR OUR CANADIAN STYLE OF GOVERNANCE from our federal parliament to our local and regional councils is based on democracy, not only in principle but in all its consequences. Canadians elect their representatives directly, and for the most part at regular intervals to ensure accountability. In this regard, you and I are the ultimate authority, and our collective interests remain a perpetual influence throughout our communities as we find ourselves surrounded by the incessant drumbeat of political propaganda. This decade has so far seen several attempts made to water down that democratic process among local municipal councils, and in particular, Toronto City Hall. Some among that august body of decision makers have recently formed the opinion that the affairs of their community may be better served by adding an unelected member of city council. At a recent meeting of their Executive Committee - which is chaired by Mayor Olivia Chow - a motion was brought forward by the Mayor that would see Toronto’s City Manager look into opportunities to ‘deepen meaningful representation of the Indigenous community in City decision-making… including through advisory bodies and other mechanisms.’ Those ‘other mechanisms’ are seen by many Toronto councillors as an attempt to add one or more members of council who would be appointed based on their ancestry, without having been given a mandate by the electors. It will be convenient at this stage to consider a little more clearly the nature of this proposal and how it might ultimately affect other councils within the province, including that of the city of Oshawa. Let us suppose such a change is eventually approved by the provincial government, under whose authority this issue rests. Our attention must first be directed to the degree to which land use and planning may be affected. The Reconciliation Action Plan created and approved by Toronto City Council strives to establish what they see as ‘collaborative decision making within many divisions whose work impacts Indigenous Peoples, land and water.’ There’s the first challenge, and one that will undoubtedly give rise to conflicts over what constitutes Indigenous lands, whether subject to Treaty disputes or not. Consider; every Oshawa council or committee meeting begins with a rather lengthy Land Acknowledgement statement, which among other things, seeks to recognize ‘our role in addressing the negative impacts that colonization continues to have.’ Those are strong words, and it is not unreasonable to suggest major decisions on residential and commercial developments could be challenged by appointed members whose mandate, some would say understandably, may include a focus on leveraging their ability to halt certain projects. The Association of Municipalities of Ontario makes reference to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as a foundation for building relationship agreements. There’s the second challenge, being the potential for appointed councillors to bring the specter of international law to bear on local decisions. Municipalities do not have full access to information on Crown-Indigenous relations, nor do they have the financial resources or the capacity to assume any responsibility in that regard. Enhancing Indigenous civic engagement is certainly a positive step, however the prospect of bringing the debate directly into a city council chamber is unwise and unfair to all concerned. Consider this; Oshawa’s Safety & Facilities Services committee recently recommended to Council that the Open Air Burning Bylaw be amended to allow for ‘Sacred Fires’ which is a reference to a typical ceremonial fire of deep spiritual and cultural significance to many Indigenous Peoples. The staff report includes a reference to, among other things, the United Nations when recommending that such open air burning be exempt from the City’s Fire Permit process. Further consultations were made with the City’s Diversity, Equity and Reconciliation Division, specifically the Indigenous Relations Advisor. The City of Toronto already recognizes Sacred Fires, however they still require appropriate documentation to be submitted to their Fire Services to initiate a site safety review, as these fires are known to sometimes burn for days on end. Residents have a right to be concerned as to what appears to be the complete absence of due diligence on the part of the City of Oshawa to include the necessary safety provision requirements over Sacred Fires. The proposed exclusion from the Fire Permit process may reasonably be seen as over-zealousness on the part of the Diversity gang whose staffing level was in fact increased by Mayor Dan Carter in his latest budget. It is that kind of pressure that results in bad policy decisions, and the prospect of appointing one or more unelected members to any city council to potentially further advance such ideas is wrong. Circling back to the City of Toronto, a spokesman for the Ford government had this to say when asked about the ongoing efforts by Mayor Chow and her closest colleagues to appoint unelected members to council: “People have the right to elect their representatives. We will always support that right.” Daniel Tate, from the watchdog group IntegrityTO had this to say: “It’s really concerning that a taxpayer-funded committee thinks it’s appropriate to invent unelected council positions based on identity.” As to the final results of this debate, time alone will tell, however now that the issue is being studied, debated, and reported on by the media, you can rest assured this affront to democracy will someday be approved, and as with so many changes at the municipal level, city councils across Ontario will rush to step in line to enact similar policy changes in their own municipalities. Last year, Hamilton councillors voted down a similar proposal that would have seen their city become the first to have unelected members of council. At the time, councillor Tom Jackson offered up these words, which one can only hope will resonate with others, including Oshawa councillors, “I will not support the exploration of adding a non-elected seat. Imagine the supreme, ultimate honour of an Indigenous person… running for elected office… and winning” That is exactly how it works in a democracy.

What Happened to the Sesame Street We All Know and Love?

What Happened to the Sesame Street We All Know and Love? By Dale Jodoin For over 50 years, Sesame Street has been a staple of children’s television, teaching generations of kids their ABCs and 123s. From Big Bird to Elmo, the show became more than just entertainment—it was an educational tool that shaped childhoods around the world. But something is happening to Sesame Street, and it has left many wondering: can we ever get back the version we all loved? The Big Change at Max The biggest shock came in December 2024, when Warner Bros. Discovery announced it would no longer produce new Sesame Street episodes for its streaming service, Max (formerly HBO Max). The decision came as part of a shift in focus—Max wants to cater more to adult and family content, moving away from children’s programming. This means that after Season 55, which premieres in January 2025, the show will need a new home. While older episodes will still be available on Max until at least 2027, the future of new seasons is uncertain. The producers of Sesame Street are now searching for another platform willing to take on the beloved show. But even if it finds a new home, will it still be the same show? A Different Sesame Street for a Different Time Fans have noticed that Sesame Street has changed over the years. The original show, created in 1969, was built around short, engaging segments with colorful puppets, music, and real-life lessons. It featured diverse characters, catchy songs, and a sense of community that felt natural. Parents and kids could watch together, and both enjoyed the humor and lessons. In recent years, however, the show has shifted. Some say it has become more about pushing messages than simple, fun education. The storytelling has changed, and some beloved characters have been altered or even disappeared. Season 56 is expected to move further away from the traditional magazine-style segments and adopt a more narrative-driven format—which could mean fewer classic skits and more scripted episodes. The question many are asking is: why fix something that wasn’t broken? Is Sesame Street Going Woke? Critics argue that Sesame Street has become more focused on political and social agendas than just teaching kids the basics. The show now includes discussions about complex topics that many parents feel aren’t appropriate for young children. Some believe the show is trying too hard to cater to small groups instead of sticking to the broad, welcoming appeal that made it great. The show has always promoted kindness, diversity, and understanding, but today’s version feels more like a lesson in activism than in learning how to share cookies like Cookie Monster. Parents who grew up watching Bert and Ernie’s silly antics or Oscar the Grouch’s grumpy but loveable personality now feel that the show has lost its charm. This shift raises concerns: is there still room for the classic fun that made Sesame Street a success, or is it now just another platform for “modern” messaging? Where Will Sesame Street Go Next? With Max cutting ties, the big question remains—who will pick up Sesame Street? The show could move to another streaming service like Netflix, Disney+, or Amazon Prime. But those companies might demand even more changes, further shifting Sesame Street away from its original feel. The public broadcasting model that made Sesame Street famous has also faded. Once upon a time, PBS aired the show for free, reaching millions of kids across North America. But with its shift to paid platforms like HBO, access to Sesame Street has been harder for many families. If the show moves again, will it become even more exclusive? Some are hopeful that a new network will bring back the old charm. Others worry that no matter where it lands, the show will never be the same again. Can We Bring Back the Old Sesame Street? Many long-time fans would love to see Sesame Street return to its roots—where lessons were simple, fun, and relatable for all kids. But in today’s world, entertainment is no longer just about entertaining. Many shows, including Sesame Street, are trying to meet modern expectations instead of keeping things light and fun for everyone. Is there still a place for classic Sesame Street, where Big Bird and Grover go on silly adventures, and Oscar complains about everything but still has a heart of gold? Can Sesame Street go back to focusing on numbers, letters, and life lessons instead of deeper political themes? Some believe that if enough people speak up, Sesame Street could find a way to balance the old with the new. Others fear that those days are gone forever. A Future Full of Questions No matter what happens, Sesame Street has left an undeniable mark on pop culture and education. The question is: will it continue to be the beloved show for all, or just another program that only appeals to a select few? For now, all we can do is wait and see where Elmo, Cookie Monster, and the gang end up next. But one thing is certain—Sesame Street will never be forgotten, even if it doesn’t look the way we remember.

THE GOLDEN SODA

THE GOLDEN SODA By Joe Ingino B.A. Psychology Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Articles Published Columns in Canada and The United States Ah, who has not been victim of a good Coca Cola, Pepsi Cola soda on a cold summer day. The two soda cartels that control the flow of soda across the world. A monopoly made from a 100 year long brand battle. Today, Coca Cola and Pepsi Cola control most of the canned soda. Most brands and most flavors. The two entities have become corporate giants employing millions of people. My question at large. How is it that a 2 litre bottle of Coke or Pepsi retails for more than 2 litres of gasoline? Are we to assume that producing soda from tap water is more expensive then refining crude? Are we to assume that there is that much demand for soda over oil that the cost for a soda is in some cases double. Gas prices today. $1.40/litre. Soda prices $1.50/litre. Why are we paying such premium prices for soda. This is an example of corporate greed. The root of why food prices are what they are. Being a life long business person. I see what they are doing. In business we always look for opportunity. In the case of soda. No one regulates the cost. The final price. These corporations can charge what they want as they are not affected by economies as other corporation may be. But, don’t let that fool you. You will soon see that these corporations come out public. Belly aching on how ‘tariffs’ are affecting the cost of cans they use and they will pass yet another increase to a litre of soda. We live in a run away economy. Regulations are set only to benefit corporation and in part give them opportunity to increases prices. Look at the relation between transportation, manufacturing or producing any particular item and the fluctuation of it’s final price. Gas goes up. Our products go up. Gas goes down. The prices for that same product stay the same. I like to call it the sling shot affect. There always has to be a justification for increasing rates... but no real reason for lowering them. Look at gas. One day it is $1.70. In the morning it is $1.40. Next day $1.80. The following morning $1.45. Companies slowly increase rates without the consumer really realizing it. I just came back from the United States. Within the same City. One gas station had $2.49/gallon. Another down the street $3.59. There is no justification. Same gas station. Soda gouging is out of control. We can’t boycott as for some soda is like gasoline for a car. We are nothing but blinded modern day slaves. Subjected to the will and punishment of corporations.

Canadian Politics on the Ropes

Canadian Politics on the Ropes by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East A turmoil is washing across North America. The Trump administration has embarked on a tariff war that is causing grave concern in Canada. The resignation of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in early January ignited a Liberal leadership contest won by Mark Carney in early March. Mr. Carney is a former Governor of the Bank of Canada and of the Bank of England. With no political experience, he is now the Prime Minister of Canada in a very sensitive political and economic situation, especially with regard to relations with the United States. In the meantime, his becoming leader of the Federal Liberal Party and consequently the Prime Minister of Canada seems to have produced a real tsunami in the polls; reversing the fortunes of the Liberal Party. In December 2024 the Conservative party led by Pierre Poilievre had a commanding advantage of 20 points over the Liberal Party and what looked like an almost certain chance to form the next government. However, this advantage in the polls has suddenly evaporated, as there is a new game in play to determine who will form the next government of Canada. A new National Post-Leger poll shows that 42 per cent of Canadians now say they plan to cast a ballot for Mark Carney’s Liberals, while 39 per cent say they intend to vote for Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives. It is a stunning recovery in the polls for Carney’s Liberals. Support for the party, which has governed since 2015, had plummeted over the last year. The Conservatives held a significant lead, suggesting an election would lead to Liberal decimation in the House of Commons and a Poilievre-led supermajority. The Conservative Party now faces a Liberal Party Leader with substantial credentials and work experience both in public service and private business. A Prime Minister who has not held an elected position previously, is also unprecedented in Canadian history. Not since 1984 has a Prime Minister been elected who wasn’t an MP. While John Turner was not a sitting MP when he became prime minister, he had previously served as an MP. He became Liberal Party leader and prime minister in June 1984 but did not win a seat in Parliament until the September 1984 election. There do not appear to be any recent precedents for such a situation in Australia, New Zealand, or the United Kingdom. The Canadian public seems to have reacted to these dynamic and rapid succession of events, and the results are astonishing. With an election call expected within days, before the prorogation of the Parliament expires on the 24th of March, a new national poll shows the Liberals leading the Conservatives by three points. Certainly, the Conservative party will have a difficult time in the weeks leading up to the next federal election. To win, they need to change gears and adapt to this new reality. However, considering the advisers and the inner circle of the leader, they are unlikely to have either the imagination or the tools to make the necessary dynamic and useful changes. I base this opinion on the fact that Mr. Pollievre is surrounded by the same people who lost the 2015 election for Stephen Harper, and subsequently for Andrew Sheer and Erin O’Toole as well. After years of promising to axe the carbon tax, Conservatives watched in obvious horror as Prime Minister Mark Carney did it for them on his first day in office. They could have chosen to take a victory lap here. They could have celebrated the elimination of a policy they had attacked with enormous amounts of political time and resources, and moved on to the far more pressing matters at hand. Instead, they threw a collective temper tantrum. Maybe Mark Carney is not as inexperienced on the political scene as some people have assumed. Mr. Carney’s decision to zero-out the consumer carbon tax with the stroke of his prime ministerial pen is starting to look like a well-laid trap his opponents jumped into, headlong. Melissa Lantsman, the deputy leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, a former staffer, has suggested that “he’s pausing it for the election so he can trick you into believing it’s gone.” Former CPC leader Andrew Scheer, also lacking in all but political experience, described this move as “a con,” apparently all part of his “Carbon Tax Scam.” Finally, Pierre Poilievre got into the act, putting the cherry on top, with the accusation that, “After 9 years of battling for a carbon tax, do you really trust the Liberals not to bring it back? Dream on.” The trauma of watching their signature campaign pledge enacted by their new opponent reverberated throughout the Conservative universe. Really, the Conservative Party needs to change its approach, like yesterday. Changing their approach is the only way they can possibly secure victory. We will soon see if they are capable of the changes needed to focus on the real issues generated by the adversarial relations developing with Canada’s Southern neighbour. Pierre Poilievre needs to realize that the biggest political danger for him might be on the Canada-U.S. file, which has taken on an understandably existential dimension over the last few months. In an election that will be fought over who can best protect Canada’s economy from President Trump, Pierre Poilievre needs to find reliable ideas to put to Canadians, in order to win. Here is the question: will he be able to do so in the short period of time available? Otherwise, he will go down in history as a Don Quixote,”tilting at windmills” Let us hope for the best.

PRESERVING OSHAWA’S PAST THE FIGHT TO SAVE THE CITY’S CULTURAL HERITAGE

PRESERVING OSHAWA’S PAST THE FIGHT TO SAVE THE CITY’S CULTURAL HERITAGE By Dean Hickey MANY OSHAWA RESIDENTS WERE SADDENED to see the demolition of Cowan House, one of the city’s oldest surviving examples of early Georgian architecture, in the summer of 2022. The property, across the street from city hall, has now been cleared and construction is set to begin on a 16-storey, 172 unit condominium. Heritage Oshawa is a municipal advisory committee that was formed for the purpose of advising City Council on all matters relating to preserving the city’s cultural heritage, including buildings and structures. Prior to the sale and demolition of Cowan House (circa 1858), the committee recommended that it be designated under the Ontario Heritage Act. The Anglican Church which owned the building opposed such a designation, and was ultimately supported by a majority of city councillors. A similar loss of one of Oshawa’s last remaining pre-confederation homes occurred at a property on Thornton Rd. N. where no less than seven new dwellings have been built in place of what was a gothic-style residence built in 1840, and once the home of Edward French, an early Oshawa merchant, as well as Joseph Gould who, for many years was a Justice of the Peace and a Commissioner of the High Court of Justice. Such history within the community is worth preserving, not only in archival documents and photographs, but in the form of houses and other buildings that provide a visual guide as to our collective past. Presently, there are two properties that have been the subject of debate over whether re-development or what is now known as ‘adaptive re-use’ should take precedence over heritage preservation. City councillors decided early last year to designate the century-old former Harmony Public School and to pursue the matter all the way to the Ontario Land Tribunal if necessary, despite objections from the property owners who want to tear it down for a proposed development. A similar appeal process is currently under way for Robert McLaughlin House, located on Simcoe St. N. not far from the city’s downtown. This property fell victim to arson and a gaping hole has been visible in the roof for a number of years as the battle between city hall and the property owner drags on. Among my examples, we have two properties lost, one that may very well be saved from the wrecking ball, and one that will likely not survive the appeal process in its current state of disrepair. Mixed results to be sure, however the struggle to preserve future at-risk properties continues. I had occasion to chat with well-known Oshawa resident Robert Bell, who is also a member of the Heritage Oshawa committee, and we discussed all manner of ongoing preservation efforts within the city. His interest began many years ago when he represented his church as they were seeking to have their property designated under the Ontario Heritage Act. That was in 2012, and since that time he has been an active participant in a process which at times has been rewarding, and at others certainly less so as demolitions occur in spite of the committee’s efforts. When asked about the highs and lows of trying to save Oshawa’s history, my friend was sanguine in his reply, “I’m an eternal optimist, always trying to see something good in everything, and I never take things personally.” He went on to add, “I give advice only, and it’s important to remember that I am not an ultimate decision maker when it comes to the fate of historic properties.” All the while telling me he wasn’t in a position to speak on behalf of Heritage Oshawa, Robert was able to identify one preservation effort that he felt illustrated both positive and negative elements; that being the renovations to the 1929 Genosha Hotel building located at 70 King St. E. “The building had long since been designated, and proposals to do something with the property came and went over the years, with many people in the community simply looking forward to the day such an ‘eyesore’ would be pulled down” he said. “I felt lucky to be on the Heritage Committee when the building was finally gutted and its exterior fully restored, as we were permitted access that enabled us to see the transformation close up.” My friend described this project as a perfect example of what he says should be done, meaning a successful adaptive re-use. However, along with the obvious enthusiasm at urban renewal, there are always detractors, which Robert says is unhelpful. “During the process, as I saw the interior of the Genosha taken down to its structural elements only, there were some who felt the need to comment on social media that the place was nothing more than a ‘fire trap’ and of little value to anyone” he said. We shared a laugh as to what could possibly burn in a structure that by that time had been reduced to brick and steel. Of course, the building is now an architecturally significant condominium with a major food court at street level, but that doesn’t take away the memories my friend has when it comes to the naysayers. “It was troubling, because comments were circulating on Facebook that effectively hurt the entire community, with some saying - there’s Oshawa spending money on a fire-trap, a piece of garbage - and that is such a negative outlook in the face of those who were trying to do some good.” Circling back to the issue of Cowan House and its unfortunate demise, we discussed what I suggested was a missed opportunity to create a sort of ‘heritage district’ by preserving the entire block bounded by Simcoe, Athol, Centre, and Bagot Sts. within the very heart of the city. As it happens, Oshawa has only one such designation, that being the collection of wartime buildings at the airport. My further concern was the loss of most buildings that stood prior to the year 1900, however my friend was quick to say “You must remember that 19th century Oshawa was not a big place, and most of that is in our downtown.” As to the city’s future and all that might be done to save its built heritage only time will tell, but as long as there are dedicated volunteers ready to do what is necessary, Oshawa residents can look forward to seeing much of their built history remain for generations to come.

Sudden Surge of Fake Patriotism in Pickering

Sudden Surge of Fake Patriotism in Pickering By Lisa Robinson For over six months, I have been advocating for a simple but meaningful change—playing the national anthem before council meetings. I have also pushed for a motion that government buildings should only fly government flags, ensuring that we stand united as Canadians under one national flag, rather than dividing ourselves with symbols that cater to personal ideologies. Yet, despite my efforts, these proposals have been met with resistance from the very people who now drape themselves in the flag, claiming to be the champions of “Team Canada.” What changed? Donald Trump and tariffs. Suddenly, my council—who previously scoffed at these ideas of national unity—has discovered a newfound love for Canada. Councillors who once dismissed patriotism as outdated or exclusionary are now grandstanding about Canadian values, not because they believe in them, but because they see political advantage in aligning themselves with anti-Trump sentiment. And let’s talk about the Mayor's childish behavior here. Mayor Ashe himself told me directly that the reason he refused to move forward with my motion to play the national anthem was “not because of the message, but because of the messenger.” That’s right—he admitted that it wasn’t about whether the idea was good or meaningful—it was about who suggested it. That kind of petty, ego-driven decision-making is not just unprofessional—it’s undemocratic. Now, suddenly, the Mayor is reversing course. Why? Because it fits the new “Team Canada” narrative. He’s not doing this because it’s the right thing to do—he’s doing it because it’s politically convenient. And it’s not just Pickering. The Region of Durham is now also rushing through a procedural bylaw change to play the national anthem before meetings. This isn’t about patriotism—it’s about optics. It’s about riding the wave of anti-Trump sentiment and capitalizing on the idea of national unity for political gain. Let’s be clear—real patriotism is not performative. It’s not about reacting to a news cycle or using Canada’s name as a prop in political theater. It’s about consistent dedication to our country, its principles, and its people. That’s why I proudly brought the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Bill of Rights into our offices. That’s why I have pictures outside my office showcasing my favorite places in Pickering—because I genuinely love this city and this country. That’s why I continue to push for policies that reflect unity, not division. Meanwhile, some councillors continue to treat their offices like personal billboards, displaying flags that do not represent the people of Pickering as a whole, but rather their own political agendas. These same individuals resisted my efforts to establish true symbols of unity—yet now they want to pose as defenders of Canadian interests. The hypocrisy is glaring. Patriotism isn’t a costume you put on when it’s politically convenient. It’s not a temporary reaction to trade disputes. It’s a steadfast commitment to the values that make Canada strong—freedom, unity, and national pride. And no amount of performative flag-waving from my council colleagues will change the fact that their sudden enthusiasm for “Team Canada” is nothing more than a hollow, self-serving act. And if Mayor Ashe and the rest of council truly believe chairing meetings and listening to the public is such a burden, I’ll gladly take that off their hands. I’d happily chair every meeting myself if it means giving the people of Pickering the respect and voice they deserve. That’s real leadership. That’s real service. That’s real patriotism. It’s time we stop pretending this is about unity and start calling it what it is: political theatre. The people of Pickering deserve leaders who stand up for Canada because they believe in it—not because it’s suddenly popular. I am Councillor Lisa Robinson, The People’s Councillor

The Home Business

The Home Business By Theresa Grant Real Estate Columnist For the last few weeks, I have been writing about the redecorating and updating underway in my eighty-year-old house. At the moment, we are waiting on materials to be able to carry on, so I decided to take a break from that and talk about a question that was posed to me by an acquaintance a few weeks ago regarding running her small business from her home. My friend, Marsha, was hoping to open a home-based bakery type of business in Oshawa. She wondered if it would matter what type of home she lived in and if she could operate her home business form any area of the city. Although I am a realtor, I focus on residential real estate therefore my knowledge of commercial real estate is limited. I did have some experience of a personal nature though. The experience as it turned out was completely irrelevant in her case because it was too old. I recalled back in the early 80’s when I was living in Scarborough, I had just had my daughter, and I was home everyday with her while my husband was at work. I had always loved to bake, so I had thought to myself that I might like to operate a small baked goods business where I would make things throughout the day, and they could be picked up or delivered in the evenings. The first order of business was to call the health board to get a home inspection. The fellow came about a week after I made the appointment to have a look around. Although the house was impeccable, I was told that I could not get a license to operate because the was no separation from the rest of the house as far as the kitchen went. The business at that time had to be in a commercial space, a residential space was not permissible. Fast forward forty years. Now with the Dine Safe program and relaxed licensing criteria, many people are safely operating wonderful home-based bakeries. There definitely are rules and regulations to be followed. Licenses must be obtained, and premises are monitored and inspected on a regular basis to keep your green operating status. It seems much of how we operate today has changed to suit the need as is always the case. So, If you’re thinking about opening a home-based business of any kind, I would suggest calling the city. There are several different types of licenses you can apply for. The inspectors still come out to deem your space appropriate or not for whatever you intend to do. There are applications to fill out and fees to pay but for many, it’s a wonderful opportunity to work for themselves, and make a great contribution to the community by providing a service that many may want. If you have any questions that you would like answered please drop me a line here at the paper and I’ll be happy to address them.

Dominoes

Dominoes By Wayne & Tamara I am the father of two children and a husband for 12 years. I love my son and daughter dearly, but my relationship with my wife has been suffering for years. In fact, it has evolved into more of a business relationship than a marriage. There is no passion between us. Sex is rare and mutually sans emotion. I wouldn’t call it miserable, but we argue every day and don’t treat each other with the love we each deserve. I’ve been a committed and faithful husband even though my marriage has left many emotional needs unmet. We are best friends with another couple who also have two young kids. Since the day I met her, I’ve suppressed an attraction which grew stronger as I got to know her wonderful personality. After years of secretly fighting off the mutual passion and frequent flirting right in front of our spouses, we both gave in. She would describe her marriage exactly the same as I do. My relationship with my wife was rocky even before we got married, but I thought I loved her and figured we'd grow closer together as we aged and had kids. Now I know what love really feels like. We agreed one day we'd probably end our marriages, if not for the kids. Knowing our vision may be clouded by the excitement of this long anticipated romance, we've agreed not to talk about taking action for one year. We can't stand to be apart. We’ve spent several nights and days together in hotels. In fact, we've had more sex together in three months than in our own marriages over 10 years! The lying and deceit is hard to think about. We don't feel we’re “that kind of people," but we’ll do almost anything to be together. Strangely, neither of us feels much guilt about the cheating. In fact, we both avoid sex with our spouses due to reversed guilt feelings. We engage in risky behavior and talk about the I-don't-care-if-we-get-caught feelings trickling through our minds. We know what could happen if we get caught. If this relationship continues to grow and we take action, we want it to be on the right terms and at the right time. You hear from many people involved in affairs. When you read my words, what are your thoughts, opinions, and observations? Evan Evan, we often hear stories like yours. They start with a snare. Before you were born the snare was set by people who claim there is a fix for every relationship. You thought a rocky relationship could be fixed with a wedding, and a rocky marriage could be fixed with a couple of kids. Somehow that seemed logical to you at the time, though it’s a little like trying to fix indebtedness by taking on more debt. But that echo in your head—every relationship can be fixed—allowed you to irrationally go forward. So if the fix to bad dating is marriage, and the fix to a bad marriage is children, then the fix to spare your children divorce is adultery. Children are little animals who can sniff out anything. That is meant in the most positive way. They are masses of energy and life. They move on absolute base instinct. They aren’t tricking themselves or performing skullduggery on themselves. They are like the doe in the woods. I smell humans. I smell unhappiness. We are fooling ourselves if we think we are fooling our kids. You said yourself you are engaging in risky behavior which may be found out. If the children don’t learn the details, the minimum they will learn is marriage is conflict. And if they learn the details, who knows what they will learn. And how will that affect their future? It’s just going farther down the rabbit hole, because there isn’t a fix for a marriage which should not have occurred. 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.

Ban Foods Causing Fatty Livers in Young Children

Ban Foods Causing Fatty Livers in Young Children By W. Gifford-Jones MD and Diana Gifford How many parents know this shocking fact? The American Liver Foundation reports that 10 percent of young children have fatty degeneration of the liver. It’s due to horrid food consumption practices, too much sugar and fat, leading to childhood obesity before the age of 10! Once fatty liver disease takes hold, there is no medication to cure it. Only immediate lifestyle changes can slow its progression. Among the culprits are large cereal corporations that persuade children to eat sugary cereals. This at a time when obesity and type 2 diabetes have reached pandemic proportions. An economic report shows treating obesity costs North Americans $147 billion dollars and diabetes $412 billion yearly! So, why are medical professionals and politicians totally inept at ending this catastrophic medical disaster in children? Studies show obese children become obese adults. Just look around. We are all witnesses to the phenomenon. Everyone must ask, what has happened to our society? For instance, surgeons are used to seeing large amounts of fat when operating on adults with diseased organs. Patients need to know that this excessive fat increases the risks for surgery complications due to the length of the operation, requiring increased time for anesthesia, greater chance of a surgical error, and increased risk of post operative infection and pain. But when young children are the innocent victims of excess weight gain from poor lifestyle, it is to the great shame of our society. Instead of complacency, this injustice should get the adrenaline flowing! How many times must it be made clear? Heart disease is not the number one killer. Rather it’s obesity. Don’t forget that viral diseases like COVID-19 killed millions but lasted just three years! Obesity kills year after year! And it’s associated with serious and costly medical complications. One would think that this would make media headlines flash in red. For a start, health authorities should ask some piercing questions to the executives of food corporations. They should know that a major contributor to obesity in children is the excess sugar in cereals marketed heavily to them. These same cereals lack fiber, an ingredient that would provide dietary bulk, signalling to the stomach a sense of lasting fullness and supporting healthy digestion. The government should then ask why food companies add honey and other additional sweeteners. The executives will respond that kids like sugary calories, and if they don’t add sugar, they will lose business to their competitors. Regulators should put an end to it. One, limit how much is allowed. Two, educate the public about the consequences of eating junk. The government should devise other ways to reduce the unhealthy poundage of North American society. New synthetic drugs to treat obesity and Type 2 diabetes are already causing complications in adults and should not be used in children. Better nutrition and proper exercise do not kill, involve lessons of responsibility, and should always be the preferred path to a long, healthy life. When people continue to make bad choices for societal wellbeing, the government needs to take action. Rampant obesity and diabetes are blaring the call. Remember, type 2 diabetes is a leading cause of blindness, kidney failure, heart attack, and leg amputation. Sad prospects for obese children. Food companies must face legislation to stop children form suffering later problems. Family need step bathroom scales and use calorie counters to avoid the huge calories in some foods. Everyone should use their legs more often. Don’t hold your breath to see the name Gifford-Jones appointed Common Sense Health Czar. But were it to happen, there would be no obese children. Legislation would be passed. Sign-up at www.docgiff.com to receive our weekly e-newsletter. For comments, contact-us@docgiff.com. Follow us Instagram @docgiff and @diana_gifford_jones

An Effective Nuisance Bylaw

An Effective Nuisance Bylaw By Maurice Brenner Regional Councillor Ward 1 Pickering While the majority of residents in Pickering and thoughtful and respectful when disposing of litter, unfortunately there are those who do not, and their disrespect for our communities has resulted in bags of garbage thrown on public and private properties. Not only is it unsightly but potentially causes damage to the environment. On a regular basis , I receive numerous calls, as well as seeing numerous posts on Social media from frustrated residents demanding the Municipality do something to stop this practise and clean up the garbage. The solution however can not be just solved by Municipal Government, it takes a collective approach and partnership with residents. Many will ask, what’s the point?, even if we report what we see there is no enforcement and no consequences. I believe that the City of Pickering’s recent anti-littering campaign is a step in the right direction. By establishing a marketing campaign that will engage with residents and stakeholders in an effort to create greater awareness of the negative impacts of littering and a call for the majority to be the eyes on the street to report the minority who litter is a good start. Coupled with a new and effective nuisance bylaw, reporting can and will have consequences for those who litter. But what’s the use you may be thinking, no one is ever charged. In the short period that the nuisance bylaw has been implemented, City staff have already inspected over 115 bags of garbage, looking for anything that can identify the source that has littered the City. Currently 15 cases are before the Courts with charges having been laid and others in the works. While together we can and will step up to clean up public streets, there will always continue to be those who are not deterred by the risk of consequences, our message to those who continue to disrespect our City is clean up your act or face the consequences. YOU WILL GET CAUGHT. Watch for my next column as we tackle speeding on our Roads

What if I Told You Ageism Doesn't Exist?

What if I Told You Ageism Doesn't Exist? By Nick Kossovan When you read the title of this column, where did your focus and mental energy immediately go? What if, when job searching, instead of obsessing about all the things you can't control—biases, economic factors, the job market, employer’s hiring process—you focused on what you can control, such as creating and maintaining a professional network, tailoring your resume and cover letter for each application, managing your digital footprint, and cultivating a positive mindset. Wouldn’t this be a more effective approach to your job search? Every job seeker I encounter seems fixated on what they can't control. LinkedIn has become an echo chamber of pity, dominated by posts vilifying employers, giving unsolicited advice to employers who'll never read it, and venting about ageism, being overqualified, or ghosting. Participating in these discussions doesn't reflect well on you when employers check your profile to evaluate whether you're interview-worthy. You're likely familiar with the quote attributed to theologian Reinhold Niebuhr: "Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference." This emphasizes the importance of accepting situations you can’t change and directing your energy towards what you can influence. As a job seeker, you can't control: Someone's Biases: Do yourself a favour; stop trying to control the beliefs and behaviours of other people. Whether it's age, ethnicity, or any other characteristic, you can't change how someone perceives (read: interprets) you. Biases are a fact of life, and dwelling on them only drains energy. Speaking of biases: Why do people fail to recognize their own biases but see them in others? The Economy and the Job Market: Yes, economic downturns, market fluctuations, industry trends, government policies, and global events contribute to the job market landscape, but you have no influence over them. My advice is to say to yourself, "It is what it is," and turn your attention elsewhere. The Hiring Process: Employers own their hiring process. You can't control how an employer structures their hiring process, accesses candidates, or how long they take to make a decision. Since no two employers hire the same way, job searching is unpredictable, leading to frustration if you let it dominate your mindset. I often see the unpredictability of hiring; what one employer views as a positive might be seen as a negative by another. For example, hiring manager A might determine, based on the level of your previous job and/or your age, that you're overqualified and, therefore, will soon become bored and leave. Conversely, hiring manager B might perceive you as a potential role model for younger employees, in addition to bringing a wealth of knowledge and experience. Subjective perception, the basis for creating bias, plays a crucial role in hiring decisions. Company Culture: You're either a fit or you're not. Trying to contort yourself in hopes of appearing to be someone who'll "fit in" is pointless. If you get the job but can't be yourself, you won't be happy. Hiring managers know their company's culture much better than you, especially its nuances; hence, trust them if they determine you won't be a good fit. Past Experiences: What's done is done. If there's anything to learn from a mistake, do so and move on. Dwelling in the past only creates unnecessary anxiety. As a job seeker, you can control: Creating and Maintaining a Professional Network: Your professional network is your lifeline in terms of job search and career advancement; thus, it's the most influential factor in your job search. Given that the correlation between networking and job search success is common knowledge, you undoubtedly know the primary benefit of networking; access to unadvertised opportunities. I highly recommend reading Never Eat Alone by Keith Ferrazzi. Tailoring Your Resume and Cover Letter: Each job application should feel personalized, highlighting your skills and experiences that directly relate to the position you're pursuing. "I applied to over 700 jobs in three months" isn't a flex. As far as job searching is concerned, submitting two quality applications daily is significantly better than the 'spray and pray' method that most job seekers resort to. Your Digital Footprint: Be mindful of your online presence. Your social media activity reflects your professionalism. A messy digital footprint is a red flag to employers, just as not having one makes you appear out of touch. Practicing Interview Skills: The best hack I know for honing your interview skills is to have more conversations with family, friends, acquaintances, and strangers and ask more open-ended questions ("How did you spend this past weekend?" "What made you decide to become an accountant?" "What's your go-to restaurant?"). The more comfortable you become having conversations, the better you'll perform in interviews, which are essentially a conversation. Maintaining a Positive Mindset: Your attitude impacts your job search. Control your mindset by practicing mindfulness and gratitude. Focus on what you can achieve, not on what you believe is holding you back. Another book recommendation: Rewire Your Mindset: Own Your Thinking, Control Your Actions, Change Your Life! by Brian Keane. As in life, what you focus on determines where your energy goes; therefore, choose your focus wisely. ___________________________________________________________________ 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

My Old House - Part Five

My Old House - Part Five By Theresa Grant Real Estate Columnist What a difference a door makes! So, last week we left off with the living room having been painted with six coats of soft yellow paint, and a new door being installed in the kitchen. I cannot tell you what a difference the door has made. I never realized just how much light is blocked by the steel or wood make up of a door until now. The model I chose is a single full glass door going out to the backyard. It has a roller shade built in between the glass panes. The amount of light streaming through this door is quite impressive. I have a lot of plants in the kitchen so needless to say they are loving this. It’s one of those things where I think to myself, I wish I had done this earlier but of course we don’t know until we know. With the door installed in the kitchen, that room is now complete. The coastal theme though, is proving to be a little harder to pull off than I had originally thought. The entry hall is the beautiful seafoam green; the living room was going to be green to match but at the last minute I went with the yellow of the kitchen to match that side of the room. That may have been a mistake. A mistake that will unfortunately cost me a few hundred dollars to correct. I need to get this right. I was afraid to go with three separate colours for the hall, the living room and the kitchen which are all open onto each other. I thought it would be too much and not look good. I am thinking differently now though. I absolutely love corals, and I am now thinking that I want to put coral in the living room. A big part of the problem when it comes to the living room is the window in the middle of the room. The window itself is only 22 inches wide. It’s tiny and looks ridiculous in the living room so to offset the look, I went out and purchased a longer curtain rod and extended the rod and have the curtains full and extended to about 4 to 5 feet. Trying to find curtains that go with a coastal look is not easy. Most coastal looks incorporate sheers for that flowy, breezy look which I, by the way love. I cannot do that here though because you would then see the wall on either side of the 22-inch window and it would look ridiculous. Right now, I have blue drapes with white sheers in the middle to go nicely with the yellow walls. That said, the look is a classic look not a coastal look. So, now I have 2 different themes going on in the living room and it is clear that I am in a bit of a pickle. I’m really not sure what my next move will be to try to get the look I am going for. Hopefully the weekend will bring inspiration.

A LOT HAS HAPPENED WITH MUCH MORE STILL TO COME

***MY CITY HALL COLUMN RETURNS TO THE CENTRAL*** A LOT HAS HAPPENED WITH MUCH MORE STILL TO COME By Dean Hickey THERE IS NOTHING IS SO IRRESISTABLE as a commanding position working in the name of the people, because, while it exercises a certain moral influence which belongs to the decision of the majority, it acts at the same time with the promptitude and tenacity of a single man. That man is me, and this my column. To suggest my time reporting on municipal politics last autumn was rewarding is a serious understatement. Thirty days had scarcely elapsed since I offered up my somewhat premature retirement, when my attention was once again struck by local events. Certainly, 2025 is shaping up to be a busy year at city halls across this region, and locally, residents have borne witness to the mundane, tolerated the unusual, and scoffed at what they could only describe as some of the more bizarre aspects of political theatre. January began with Oshawa Mayor Dan Carter waving his arms about and literally walking out of a committee meeting in a huff following repeated exchanges with the chair. Nevertheless, a degree of sympathy can be had for the Mayor, as this was a clear example of what happens when the chair of a Committee, in this case Ward 4 city councillor Derek Giberson, loses the ability to keep the discussion within the rules that govern proper procedure. It’s well known that the Mayor has been councillor Giberson’s political benefactor on more than one occasion, and to see them at odds was heart-wrenching to say the least. Meanwhile in Pickering, the New Year kicked off with the publication of a YouTube video, dedicated to exposing what Mayor Kevin Ashe described as “…a growing infiltration of alt-right individuals, ideologies, and influences” within his municipal arena. The video, aimed at Ward 1 City councillor Lisa Robinson, was created in the style of a television docudrama, complete with background music and a narration by staff. Subsequent events have resulted in all Pickering council meetings being held virtually, with city staff noticeably absent as tensions continue to rise. Expect big news on this in the weeks and months ahead, and perhaps a sort of “High Noon” moment where the opponents have their final showdown. Over at Regional headquarters, Durham councillors voted in favour of investigating the construction of a $1Billion gondola transit system along Oshawa’s Simcoe Street corridor, extending from Lakeview Park right up to Durham College. “We understand the public is going to be skeptical and council is going to be skeptical. It’s a new technology,” said Durham Region’s David Dunn, who gave the update on the Transit Study. “A large part of our plan moving forward will be in educating people so they can make informed decisions and they don’t just see this as a novel approach.” Well, that sounds like a tall order Dave, particularly for the residents of Oshawa, however there did appear to be one convert who could be heard offering up considerable praise for the idea. Mayor Dan Carter told his fellow councillors, "I find the conversation fascinating. I’ve been fascinated by the whole thing all the way through. I like that we’re forward thinking. I like that we’re trying to look at things a little bit differently." He went on to tell his colleagues, "I mean, we’re a ‘higher learning’ community, so to be able to get post-secondary education involved would be important. Mr. Chairman, I’m excited about this project and I’m excited about continuing on with the discovery, and I look forward to the final report." That sound pretty positive, right? Wrong. As often happens in politics, the mayor had second thoughts within minutes, and decided to vote against the idea. Another developing story in Oshawa continues to be the transformation of the downtown and surrounding area, which includes large scale developments like the multi-residential project that will soon take the place of most of the old Oshawa Clinic buildings. The City Centre highrise across from city hall also appears poised to begin in earnest, as does the renovations to the PHI Building at Centre and King St’s. As it happens, there are too many new projects to mention here, but readers can rest assured there will be multiple construction cranes visible very soon, on McMillan Dr, Athol St, Bond St, and possibly on the old Fittings property, although that remains to be seen. Oh, and look to see a revitalization of the old Bond Street bus terminal as well. Unfortunately, Oshawa residents continue to put up with ongoing acts of vandalism to some of the businesses located in the city’s downtown, and while staff and councillors condemn this illegal behaviour, one can only hope that the upcoming summer months will be nothing like last year when scenes of violence became an almost regular occurrence. This, too, will be a developing story in the weeks and months ahead. The process of drawing important information out of city hall is one to which I have become fully accustomed, and there is so much still to be reported on and discussed. The very essence of a democratic and transparent government consists in the sometimes more contentious aspects of investigative journalism. An aggressive yet honest approach by one in my position is not only fair, but also beneficial to the readers of The Central. Should anyone label this newspaper as either too bold or unforgiving, I would suggest it is nothing of the kind, because holding elected officials and others to account is, on behalf of the public, the special duty of writers and editors attached to the public press. The blood of certain members of council has been known to run high with righteous indignation against The Central as they sought to disparage the more pertinent aspects of an honest profession. The founder and publisher of this newspaper, Joe Ingino, has more than once shared a jaunty laugh, reassuring himself he is safe against any wound which could be inflicted by his antagonists. Let it be said the thin blade of reason continues to penetrate every page of this publication. Finally, it is worth noting that one Oshawa councillor recently suggested to his constituents and to others on social media that to go against his ideals and beliefs was, as he put it, “the antithesis to friendship.” Rest assured, this newspaper and this column will continue to support and promote the right of individuals to think independently. It’s nice to be home again.

Pickering’s Democracy Is Under Siege

Pickering’s Democracy Is Under Siege By Lisa Robinson Pickering’s Democracy Is Under Siege—and I’m the Last Line of Defense By Councillor Lisa Robinson Pickering, Ontario, is no longer a democracy. Let’s stop pretending it is. Under Mayor Kevin Ashe’s iron grip, our city has slid into full-blown authoritarian rule, and I’ve been fighting tooth and nail to stop it. For nine months, I’ve stood alone against a 6-to-1 council majority hell-bent on silencing dissent, punishing the truth, and dismantling the very principles that hold a free society together. They’re trying to destroy my name, my livelihood, and my resolve—but I’m not backing down. This isn’t about me. It’s about you, the people of Pickering, and the democracy they’re stealing from us. What’s happening here isn’t just political mismanagement, it’s a calculated, communist-style power grab. Mayor Ashe isn’t acting like a leader; he’s acting like a dictator. He’s seized control of city government, sidelined the public, and turned City Hall into his personal kingdom. His latest move? Under Strong Mayor Power’s declared himself Chair of the Executive Committee—the most powerful decision-making body in the city. That gives him absolute control over which issues are discussed, how they’re framed, and how decisions are made. Translation? He controls everything. If by chance Ashe can’t be present, the powers to be have been assigned to Councillor Brenner as Vice Chair. He didn’t stop there. Ashe has appointed his loyal Deputy Mayor to chair the Planning Committee, and assigned Vice Chair to Councillor Butt, which means all major development decisions will now be rubber-stamped without meaningful debate or oversight. Statutory public meetings—your chance to be heard—have been shoved to separate evenings where only the Chair is required to show up. The rest of council can skip it, leaving your concerns ignored and your voice silenced. Don’t buy the “efficiency” or “burden” excuse – because I was never asked if I felt like chairing or attending meetings was ever a burden. In fact, I think the opposite, I would chair every meeting if I could and give every Pickering resident the chance to participate and have their voices heard. This is about cutting you out of the process. Fewer eyes, less pushback. That’s control, plain and simple. It gets worse. Ashe has also moved council meetings online—supposedly for “public safety”—yet Ashe’s wife, kids, and even his 8-year-old grandkids were allowed to attend in person. If it’s not safe for you, why is it safe for them? This isn’t about safety; it’s about silencing you. It’s easier to manipulate the narrative when you’re not in the room. Meanwhile, City Hall’s council chambers are being remodeled into a courtroom, with Ashe, the CAO, and the City Clerk front and center—while your elected Councillors are pushed to the sidelines. When you speak, you’ll face a wall of power, not the people you voted for. That’s not democracy—it’s intimidation. The public’s voice is being choked out. Delegation times have been slashed from 10 minutes to 5. No direct questions allowed. No recording meetings without a two-thirds council vote—good luck getting that. Residents can’t even discuss Integrity Commissioner reports meant to hold officials accountable. The CAO picks the media outlets for city ads, turning transparency into propaganda. Questions? Ask them behind closed doors—or not at all. This is a systematic shutdown of scrutiny, and it’s happening right in front of us. But Ashe’s authoritarian reach doesn’t stop at City Hall. He and his allies on council have also lobbied the provincial government to amend the Municipal Act—giving them the power to remove elected officials from office and ban them from running in future elections. Let’s be very clear: That’s not democracy. In a democracy, the voters decide who stays and who goes at the ballot box—not a handful of politicians behind closed doors. If Ashe and his council get their way, this would be nothing short of election interference. It would mean politicians—not the people—deciding who gets to participate in the democratic process. Challenge the establishment, and you’re gone—not by the will of the people, but by the whim of a political majority. That’s how authoritarian regimes operate—not democracies. This isn’t just about local control—it’s about fundamentally altering how democracy works in this province. Politicians are supposed to be accountable to the voters, not each other. If an elected official crosses the line, the voters decide their fate at the next election—that’s the foundation of democracy. But Ashe wants to rewrite that rulebook, giving politicians the power to remove their opponents and eliminate competition. That’s not democracy—that’s tyranny. I’ve been on the front lines of this fight since day one, exposing corruption and demanding transparency. How did Ashe respond? By hitting me where it hurts. For nine months, I haven’t received a single paycheck—not one cent—because I refused to stay quiet about the backroom deals and abuses of power I’ve witnessed. They’ve frozen my council budget, blocking me from holding town halls or keeping you informed. They’ve weaponized city resources to cut me out of key decisions. This isn’t just retaliation—it’s a desperate attempt to break me. But here’s the thing: I didn’t run for office for a paycheck. I ran to fight for you. And I’m not going anywhere. Then there’s Ashe’s wife. This isn’t just about him—it’s about a political dynasty. Her influence has turned city decisions into a family affair, protecting their inner circle at Pickering’s expense. This isn’t government; it’s a business—and we’re not the customers. Decisions are no longer being made for the good of Pickering—they’re being made to protect and benefit the Ashe political family and their friends. They want you to think this is over. They want you to believe Ashe will get away with it. But I’m still here, the lone voice against a stacked council, taking the hits so you don’t have to. They’ve tried to destroy my name, calling me a troublemaker, a radical—anything to discredit the truth. But I wear their attacks as a badge of honour. Every unpaid month, every blocked town hall, every 6-to-1 vote against me proves I’m striking a nerve. I’m fighting for free speech, for your right to be heard, for a Pickering where power answers to the people—not the other way around. This is our last stand. If Ashe gets his way, democracy in Pickering—and maybe beyond—dies. But I believe in us. I believe in the grit of this community. They can’t silence me, and they won’t silence you. It’s time to rise up, demand accountability, and take back our city. Because if we don’t stop this now, there may be no turning back. Here’s a list of the authoritarian measures Ashe, council, and the CAO have implemented to silence the public — though this may not be exhaustive: · Delegation times slashed — Reduced from 10 minutes to 5 minutes, making it almost impossible for residents to present their case. · No more Q&A — The public is no longer allowed to ask direct questions to council during meetings. · Recording meetings forbidden — The public can no longer record meetings · Media forbidden from recording meetings— Unless two-thirds of council votes in favour. · Restricted agenda control — Residents can’t speak about anything not already on the agenda unless two-thirds of council approves of topic. · Propaganda control — Council can now only advertise in media outlets hand-picked by the CAO. · Closed-door dealings — All questions must be asked behind closed doors, out of public view or they will cut off your mic. · Integrity Commissioner reports off-limits — Residents are forbidden from speaking about these reports at council meetings. · Banning public speakers — Residents from outside Pickering are banned from speaking at council meetings, unless approved by Mayor or City Clerk. · Virtual meetings — Moved under the guise of public safety. · Council chambers remodeled into a courtroom — You’ll now face Ashe, the CAO, and the City Clerk directly while councillors (Elected Officials) sit off to the side, stripping them of their authority. · Threatening political punishment — I’ve been denied my paycheck for nine months as retaliation for speaking up for constituents. · Weaponizing the budget — My council budget has been frozen, preventing me from holding town halls on City property. “Thoughtcrime” · Threats of loss of office — “Thoughtcrime” If I record any videos from my office — They don’t approve of the content or truth. · Notices of Motions — All notices of motions “shall” go through staff first before being presented · CAO Authority – I can no longer speak directly to Directors or Staff – all correspondence must go through the CAO · Staff Attendance – For the month of March, staff will not attend meetings in order to send a “strong message” because I called a staff member out for lying, and want to bring a notice of motion for strict penalties up to and including termination if employees are caught lying to public or council. · Trespass Orders — For speaking the truth, voicing your opinions, whether in person or over social media that the City feels threatening. They’re systematically silencing you. They’ve tried to crush me for exposing the truth. But I’m still here — and I’m not backing down. Pickering belongs to the people — and it’s time we take it back. I am Councillor Lisa Robinson “The People’s Councillor”

SOCIAL MEDIA IS DEAD

SOCIAL MEDIA IS DEAD By Joe Ingino B.A. Psychology Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Articles Published Columns in Canada and The United States I can tell you with great authority that social media as a way to keep the population at large informed is dead. The Central as the first online publication back in 1993 and subsequently the first online radio station in 1995. We are the local experts in online communications and publishing. I remember the days of approaching the different municipalities with the idea of going digital. All were not set up to even entertain such technology. Others outright refused out of sheer fear of the initial expense. Bottom line. Municipalities were ignorant of what was about to come. If they had made the adaptation then. They would not have had to spend 10 times more for the upgrades that they were forced to do. In a nut shell most municipalities do not work on economic common sense. Instead they operate under the guise of popular thought. Today, most municipalities have opted to use online media systems. In an attempt to keep the population at large informed. We, approached all municipalities and warned them that it would be a failure. Once again they did not listen and you the tax payers are paying for it. No one knows what is going on. No one is getting vital information. All municipalities know that online is a huge failure. Look at the numbers on their social post. Minimal at best. They post there because it is cheap. Look at what is happening online. Reputable entities are being infiltrated by all kinds of commercialized crooks to the point that no one is trusting browsers. Just this week. Clarington released the following: We’re listening, Clarington! Help us measure our communications efforts—how can we do better? It’s time for a pulse check, Clarington! Two years ago, you told us how we could improve our communications efforts—and we listened! Now, we’re checking in again. Have we improved? What’s working well? Where can we do better? I have a public message. 1st. Listen to the experts in the community. 2nd. Don’t put out these type of messages in an attempt to give the idea that you care about what people have to say. As most people are openly opposing your elaborate phone systems. The fact that you are forcing people to go online during a very hard economic time. People can’t afford food on the table and you expect them to have internet and or a computer. Clarington, you want to do better. Go back to what worked for the past 1000 years. Post all municipal matter on a public media like your local newspaper. Support your local small businesses like your local Canadian newspaper. Stop the pretentious, arrogant attempt to falsely make believe that you care when you clearly don’t. Take these comments to heart and prove that you are listening.

The Death of the North American Free Trade Agreement

The Death of the North American Free Trade Agreement by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East After a series of threats, delays and plenty of territorial trolling thrown in for good measure, President Donald Trump made good on his promised tariffs targeting Canada and Mexico. It is a historic moment that should be understood as the end of NAFTA or now CUSMA, if not yet in law, certainly in practice. As the tariff war heats up, Canada seems quite unprepared to deal with it. Coordination is needed at the national level, but is yet to be seen. Following their recent victory in the Ontario provincial election, the incumbent Conservatives, are hell bent on escalating the tariff war rather than calming things down through negotiations. Acting with feisty bravado, Premier Ford vows to retaliate against the United States issued tariffs with a smile on his face, as he said recently. Certainly, he will need more than a smile to deal with this serious tariffs trade war, which is only just beginning. On the Federal side, we have a care taking Prime Minister who is about to resign in days, making way for an incoming Prime Minister, yet to be sworn in. The House of Commons is prorogued until 24th of March and in the current situation in Canada, a federal election is imminent. With all these events in place, Canada is in a weak position to take action on the seemingly daily tariff threats bombarding us from the United States. Canada’s economy is not in good enough shape to deal with a trade war efficiently. So we need to have strong, effective leadership in place sooner rather than later, to deal with this very serious situation. Considering Canada’s trade relations with other major economic partners that might be of help during these difficult times with the United States, we realize that we are in a very challenging position. Canada’s relations with China are tense. China has brought down another hammer on many Canadian farm and seafood exports, hitting them with a “double trade war” that industry leaders say will slam Canadian producers. Last year, Canada matched U.S. tariffs against Chinese imports, imposing 100 per cent tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, and 25 per cent tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum imports. When the tariffs on China were announced at a cabinet retreat, the Trudeau government made clear it was moving in lockstep with the Americans against Chinese “overcapacity.” Beijing responded several months later, announcing recently that it will levy a 100 per cent tariff on more than $1 billion worth of Canadian canola oil, meal and pea imports, and a 25 per cent duty on $1.6 billion worth of Canadian aquatic products and pork. The escalation in the tariff war with China is not a good idea, especially since the tariffs imposed on China were an attempt to curry a favour with the United States. And how did that work out for us? The United States and President Trump has been completely indifferent to Canada’s policy towards China, and in fact, he does not seem to have any intention of treating Canada better than China. In fact, President Trump is coming after Canada far more aggressively than he is going against China. Looking at our relations with another economic partner, India, Canada is not in an enviable position there, either. As to the rest of the world, Canadian relations with the European Union are good, but that is hardly helpful. The European Union is also in a difficult economic situation due to the turmoil in Europe and lack of access to cheap energy to prop up their industry. Considering all these factors, we must see that Canada is not in a very good situation. Only a strong and dedicated leadership will be able to take the country out of this mess. With the increased pressure from the South of the border, we are seeing an interesting trend towards unity in Canada and more of a need to recognize Canadian identity and nationalism. In addition, the ivory tower in Ottawa is starting to crumble in the face of this new reality, and the need to look for somebody who is able to challenge the trade salvos from the United States is abundantly clear. The recent Liberal party leadership contest results seem to put Mark Carney forward. He seems to have the qualifications, tools and preparation for such a task if used properly. Despite the disaster created by the previous leader of the Liberal party, Prime Minister Trudeau, the fortunes of the party seem to be on the rise. By now they are basically tied in the polls with the Conservative Party of Canada, the loyal opposition. In order to succeed in the next election, the Conservative Party of Canada, which had a commanding lead just a couple of weeks ago, must come up with new ideas. It will soon become evident whether the Conservative Party, under the leadership of Pierre Poilievre and his advisors, will be able to adjust to this new dynamic reality. Let us hope that they will regroup, and come up with new ideas to strengthen the nation and bring new hope for a Canada strong and free. It is high time they abandoned the worn and beaten to death old slogan of “carbon tax” from the Harper era. These issues are rapidly evolving, and the coming days will be interesting to watch. The dynamic changes are astounding. A new era is about to begin. Time to get excited and get involved, don’t you think?