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

"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.

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

Trudeau finally cracked

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 What is wrong with our Prime Minister? He has managed to declare and undeclared war on Nations that are pointing and laughing at Trudeau’s leadership. First he went after the Chinese.... He blamed them for espionage and Canada infrastructure tampering. Then he turns around and allows the Chinese army to practically invade a Province in Canada in the name of ‘joint military’ exercises. The Chinese must be laughing at us as most of the world. Not to long after that, he declared a silent war on India. India according to Trudeau has been involved in all kinds of criminal activities. Including the tampering of the democratic process. Has he gone mad. On either, case if a war was called.... we are already invaded by either Nations people through his immigration policies. Are we to turn to Trump to come in and liberate us? Just recently the wire news communique read - ‘Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says Canada will abide by all rulings of the International Criminal Court, after the war crimes tribunal in The Hague issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his former defense minister and a Hamas military chief.’ Really. This poor excuse for a Prime Minister is going to side with a people that took innocent civilians as hostages and ran down city street shooting at anyone in sight. Where is his call for the arrest of all the leaders of Hamas? How is it that he is not outlawing any pro Palestine demonstrations as an act of terrorism against the people of the world. The Palestinian people demand. On grounds that are beyond shaky. Palestinians where not attacked upon. They are not being held hostage almost a year after the conflict they started. Now Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is exercising his right to retrieve hostages at all cost and he is the criminal. Think about it for a moment. All people of Israel are his responsibility. If you had your children, mother, father or any family member taken beaten, tortured for no reason other than your ethnicity. Would you not use every tool available to go after those responsible? The Palestinians want the war to end. Release the hostages and apologize for killing innocent un-expected civilians. The Americans back the Israeli. As Canada did for while. Are we to assume that Justin call for the arrest of a foreign leader is a call to war? Are we going to battle with Israel. The U.S. any supporters of the same? Pure, insanity. It’s their war. Let them fight it out. Sure the death of innocent lives on both side is horrific... but it should lie on the shoulders of Hamas. No reason for savagery. No reason to attack innocent citizen. I think that Justin is wrong in getting Canada involved in foreign conflict. Hope Trump soon comes to the rescue of Canadians.

Royal Canadian Legion Branch 606 Revokes My Invitation to Veterans’ Dinner

By Lisa Robinson Royal Canadian Legion Branch 606 Revokes My Invitation to Veterans’ Dinner—All Because of Rumors Spread by Fellow Council Members! Despite being the only one fighting for freedom and the rights of Pickering residents, I’m being shut out. Is this what our veterans sacrificed for? I am profoundly disappointed by the Royal Canadian Legion Branch 606’s President’s decision to revoke my invitation to the Veterans Dinner—an event that should transcend politics, standing as a tribute to those who sacrificed everything to secure the freedoms we cherish. As someone who has consistently fought for these very freedoms, as my family did, this decision feels like a betrayal, not only to me but to the principles our veterans gave their lives for. Meanwhile, council members who impose authoritarian, communistic controls within Pickering’s council chambers will be attending this event, claiming to honor the same veterans whose values they are systematically dismantling. Under their rule, our community has witnessed an erosion of democracy so severe that it borders on oppression. These council members have stripped residents of their fundamental right to freely voice concerns, requiring a council vote even to speak on certain topics. They have forbidden the public from recording meetings, demanded two-thirds approval for media presence, and reduced our chambers to a stage for their own agenda, silencing all who dare question or hold them accountable with trespass orders. This is only to name a few. Now, in a disturbingly authoritarian move, they are pushing for the right to remove elected officials who don’t align with their views stripping the public of their power to choose their representatives. Not only that, demanding that Councillor not have the right to run in the following election. This is not just an affront to democracy; its election tampering, its tyranny, echoing oppressive regimes that suppress dissent to maintain control. And yet, my Council are the ones still invited to celebrate the freedom our veterans fought for, while I—the only vocal defender of those freedoms—am turned away. I proudly display the Canadian flag in my office, on my lapel, my parking space, on my door as a reminder of the unity and patriotism our veterans stood for. In contrast, some council members promote divisive special interests, choosing ideological symbols like the pride flag over the flag that represents us all and were disgusted when I said the Canadian flag is my pride flag. I fight for every resident of Pickering, without bias or favor, advocating for the basic rights and protections they deserve. My fellow council members have launched baseless attacks, spreading vile rumors to undermine my character and silence my efforts to hold them accountable for the corruption and cronyism I see seeping into City Hall. To the thousands, millions, who have supported me across Pickering, Ontario, Canada, and beyond, I thank you. Your encouragement strengthens my resolve to expose the truth, defend our freedoms, and fight for a government that serves the people, not its own interests. While I am disheartened to be denied the chance to honor our veterans in person, at the dinner, I remain steadfast in my commitment to uphold their legacy. I will not be intimidated by those who wield power to stifle dissent and distort democracy to their own ends. This is not just about one invitation; this is about the fundamental values that our veterans fought and died to protect. I will continue to stand firm, honoring their sacrifice by defending the freedoms they secured and speaking out against those who seek to strip them away. For our veterans, for our community, and for the future of our democracy, I will not be silenced, and I will never give up. See you all on Remembrance Day. Since posting the above on social media…. One of the Legion bartenders Linda Cook who happens to be a City Councillor in Ward 2 has decided to take to social media to spread many more lies about me, so lets delve in. First, she claims that the Legion does not receive government funding. It’s funny though however councillor Cook assisted in obtaining funds for the Legion’s D-Day BBQ approximately $2,000.00 which is the new allocated amount that anyone can be given without having to go to council and be voted on, and the Legion has also been given money for other projects as well. So the truth is, The City of Pickering has provided financial support to the Legion, even though the organization asserts that it operates mainly through membership fees without "government operating grants." This is a matter of semantics, as these funds are indeed public, even if they don’t fit the technical definition of a “grant.” This same Councillor has spread lies, claiming that I waited until two days before Remembrance Day to share my thoughts in an effort to shame the Legion and their decision. For clarity, the Legion’s letter was delivered to my office on October 22 which Councillor Cook claimed, and my Executive Assistant stamped received on it Oct 23rd. Yet this Councillor, who I can’t stress enough that works at the Legion, somehow knew and commented on the timing of my receipt and response, suggesting coordination, collusion, within the Legion. The rumor she’s spreading suggests I saw the letter on October 22, a claim made to paint my intentions as disrespectful. In reality, I waited to speak directly with the President after his vacation, which occurred on November 8, before sharing the letter. This blatant lie joins others from this Councillor, claiming that I’ve taken issue with various other community groups, simply because I’m outspoken in defense of freedom and truth. Spreading lies about attacking DARS, SNIP, the Police, The Black Community and the list goes on, in an attempt to distract how the People of Pickering hard earned tax dollars are being recklessly spent. These ongoing attempts to misrepresent my character only further underline my commitment to giving the people of Pickering and beyond full transparency and genuine service for what’s really happening in our City Hall. For instance, in September I gave a Notice of Motion to play the national anthem before council meetings—a simple act of unity – which has still gone unsupported by fellow council members, this goes along with only flying governmental flags on all governmental buildings with the exclusion of The Poppy Flag and new Veterans Flag. The reluctance to second this motion should be a red flag to residents on Councils lack of patriotism for our National flag and anthem. Nonetheless, as we approach Remembrance Day, I believe our government should be supporting our school age children in honoring our veterans by excusing them from school and paying for their transportation to attend municipal ceremonies. This small gesture is one I would also like to push as it would allow students to learn directly about the sacrifices made for our freedoms. My late uncle, Andrew Irwin (Andy), and I share a profound bond in our dedication to protecting freedom. He fought in WWII aboard the Algonquin at Normandy, earning the Russian Medal of Ushakov and the French Legion of Honour before passing at age 92 on June 1, 2017. His legacy of service inspires me daily to uphold the values he defended, and I will never stop fighting as both a civilian and a politician to uphold your Freedoms. To all veterans and their families: Lest We Forget. Thank you for your service, and may your sacrifices continue to be honored in all we do. I truly Love you all

Canada’s Submarine Project and the Arctic

by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East As the geopolitical situation in the world grows worse, Canada will be forced, sooner or later, to upgrade its armed forces for the defence of the country. Canada’s Arctic is extremely vulnerable, as several successive governments since WWII have neglected it, hoping that the United States will defend it for us. With the development of new weapons and new foes on the horizon, the situation has changed dramatically. Climate change has opened up the waters of the Canadian Arctic, increasing the region’s strategic importance and presenting new security challenges from powers such as China and Russia. Canada’s vast and vulnerable Arctic territory, waters and coastline necessitate a rethinking of our armed forces deployment and submarine fleet. We need a fleet capable of prolonged and stealthy under-ice operations to deter potential adversaries. When I served on the House of Commons Defence Committee, I raised the need for defence of the Arctic several times, particularly the need for capable submarines. These are formidable weapons we may need in future conflagrations. At that time, my warnings were generally ignored. Currently, I see that interest in the defence of the Artic is once again becoming a recognized item to be dealt with. A little too late, but better than nothing. It has become clear that addressing threats that originate in the Canadian Arctic, transit through the region, or directly involve the Arctic, such as potential incursions by foreign land and naval forces or unauthorized resource exploitation, can no longer be ignored. A prime focus should be the building of a strong fleet of submarines. Here again, we see the failure of our public service in purchasing used Victoria-class submarines, from the U.K. government in the 1990s, which have proven inadequate for Arctic operations, frequently spending more time in dry dock than on missions. The cold depths of the Arctic Ocean have long been a stage for geopolitical manoeuvring, where submarines play a crucial role in national defence strategies, including intelligence gathering, deterrence, and protecting maritime territory. For Canada, modernizing the fleet is essential for addressing both current and future defence challenges and maintaining a strategic edge in these increasingly contested waters. In early 2024, the Liberal Government finally unveiled “Our North, Strong and Free,” a comprehensive defense policy update (DPU) that emphasizes modernizing the Royal Canadian Navy’s underwater capabilities as part of a broader strategy to strengthen national security and address evolving challenges. As part of the DPU, Canada announced plans to invest C$60 billion to replace its aging submarines with up to 12 advanced, conventionally powered vessels designed for Arctic conditions, with the first replacement submarine to be delivered no later than 2035, more than 10 years from now. This is not a good sign. Spending taxpayers’ money on conventional rather than nuclear submarines means we are not getting the most advanced ones. Even though conversations about the potential acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines have resurfaced, these discussions, unfortunately, remain in the exploratory phase, with no formal commitment thus far from either the government or the military. Historically, Canada’s interest in nuclear submarines dates back to 1987 — and in fact even as far back as the late 1950s — when Canada announced plans to transition from German-style diesel submarines to a fleet of 10-12 nuclear submarines, surprising non-proliferation advocates. That announcement nearly led to supply contracts with the U.K. and France. However, under pressure from the United States, which feared the market-driven expansion of nuclear technology, Canada subserviently abandoned these plans. (shades of Avro Arrow, anyone?) We really face a continued lack of leadership in securing our country’s defence. Today, opinions within Canada on acquiring nuclear submarines remain sharply divided. Proponents highlight the strategic advantages of nuclear powered submarines, such as their long-range capabilities and ability to engage in extended Arctic operations. These attributes would enhance Canada’s role within NATO and strengthen its defense posture alongside key allies like the United States. Critics, argue against nuclear submarines citing high costs, logistical challenges, complex maintenance, potential safety and environmental risks, and the challenge of training crews to operate them. We seem to have learned nothing from the fiasco of acquiring F 35’s ten years later at a higher cost to taxpayers. Let us hope the F-35 story will not be repeated with the submarines and Canada will decide to acquire nuclear submarines rather than conventionally powered ones. I retain this hope despite the short-sightedness focus of defence officials and the public service on the potential acquisition of conventional submarines . Canada’s immediate focus on conventional submarines reflects last century warfare mentality. The immediate goal should look to the future and build the advanced skills and capabilities needed to adopt more sophisticated submarine technologies, including the nuclear-powered submarines. This approach would better position Canada to address evolving security challenges in the Arctic and beyond. Strengthening security co-operation with like-minded countries and jointly pursuing advanced submarine technologies, including nuclear options, should be considered a primary goal. Furthermore, our current politicians should take a page from the playbook of WWII Prime Minister W.L.M. King and Minister C.D. Howe in skillful negotiating with the United States in much difficult times. They might find it easier today to navigate diplomatic challenges in lifting the United States. opposition to Canada’s procurement of nuclear submarines. Are our leaders up to it? In short, the procurement process should aim to achieve the objective of acquiring the most advanced nuclear submarines. The adoption of advanced submarines also should be pursued alongside the accumulation of comprehensive operational capabilities, technological proficiency, and diplomatic leverage so that the opportunity can be seized immediately when it arises. What do you think?

Stop Asking Your Interviewer Cliché Questions

By Nick Kossovan Most job search advice is cookie-cutter. The advice you're following is almost certainly the same advice other job seekers follow, making you just another candidate following the same script. In today's hyper-competitive job market, standing out is critical, a challenge most job seekers struggle with. Instead of relying on generic questions recommended by self-proclaimed career coaches, which often lead to a forgettable interview, ask unique, thought-provoking questions that'll spark engaging conversations and leave a lasting impression. English philosopher Francis Bacon once said, "A prudent question is one half of wisdom." The questions you ask convey the following: · Your level of interest in the company and the role. · Contributing to your employer's success is essential. · You desire a cultural fit. Here are the top four questions experts recommend candidates ask; hence, they've become cliché questions you should avoid asking: · "What are the key responsibilities of this position?" Most likely, the job description answers this question. Therefore, asking this question indicates you didn't read the job description. If you require clarification, ask, "How many outbound calls will I be required to make daily?" "What will be my monthly revenue target?" · "What does a typical day look like?" Although it's important to understand day-to-day expectations, this question tends to elicit vague responses and rarely leads to a deeper conversation. Don't focus on what your day will look like; instead, focus on being clear on the results you need to deliver. Nobody I know has ever been fired for not following a "typical day." However, I know several people who were fired for failing to meet expectations. Before accepting a job offer, ensure you're capable of meeting the employer's expectations. · "How would you describe the company culture?" Asking this question screams, "I read somewhere to ask this question." There are much better ways to research a company's culture, such as speaking to current and former employees, reading online reviews and news articles. Furthermore, since your interviewer works for the company, they're presumably comfortable with the culture. Do you expect your interviewer to give you the brutal truth? "Be careful of Craig; get on his bad side, and he'll make your life miserable." "Bob is close to retirement. I give him lots of slack, which the rest of the team needs to pick up." Truism: No matter how much due diligence you do, only when you start working for the employer will you experience and, therefore, know their culture firsthand. · "What opportunities are there for professional development?" When asked this question, I immediately think the candidate cares more about gaining than contributing, a showstopper. Managing your career is your responsibility, not your employer's. Cliché questions don't impress hiring managers, nor will they differentiate you from your competition. To transform your interaction with your interviewer from a Q&A session into a dynamic discussion, ask unique, insightful questions. Here are my four go-to questions—I have many more—to accomplish this: · "Describe your management style. How will you manage me?" This question gives your interviewer the opportunity to talk about themselves, which we all love doing. As well, being in sync with my boss is extremely important to me. The management style of who'll be my boss is a determining factor in whether or not I'll accept the job. · "What is the one thing I should never do that'll piss you off and possibly damage our working relationship beyond repair?" This question also allows me to determine whether I and my to-be boss would be in sync. Sometimes I ask, "What are your pet peeves?" · "When I join the team, what would be the most important contribution you'd want to see from me in the first six months?" Setting myself up for failure is the last thing I want. As I mentioned, focus on the results you need to produce and timelines. How realistic are the expectations? It's never about the question; it's about what you want to know. It's important to know whether you'll be able to meet or even exceed your new boss's expectations. · "If I wanted to sell you on an idea or suggestion, what do you need to know?" Years ago, a candidate asked me this question. I was impressed he wasn't looking just to put in time; he was looking for how he could be a contributing employee. Every time I ask this question, it leads to an in-depth discussion. Other questions I've asked: · "What keeps you up at night?" · "If you were to leave this company, who would follow?" · "How do you handle an employee making a mistake?" · "If you were to give a Ted Talk, what topic would you talk about?" · "What are three highly valued skills at [company] that I should master to advance?" · "What are the informal expectations of the role?" · "What is one misconception people have about you [or the company]?" Your questions reveal a great deal about your motivations, drive to make a meaningful impact on the business, and a chance to morph the questioning into a conversation. Cliché questions don't lead to meaningful discussions, whereas unique, thought-provoking questions do and, in turn, make you memorable. _____________________________________________________________________ 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

The Right Choice

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 It is about time that the people win one. It is no secret that North American style politics is in severe need of repair. No matter where you look. Corruption, collusion prevail. Not to mention wealth. This past week we witness the pushing of a reset button by the people through what we deem to be a democratic process. Democracy much like the many other political systems are in danger of extinction and or severe change. With the recent win by Donald Trump. The world is watching to see him clean out the old and bring in the new. A new system that will punish those that take part in the rat race and reward those that are intellectually capable to work truly in the best interest of those that elected them to office. Kamala, was a poster child for all that is wrong in politics. A person that would tell you anything you wanted to hear. She would promise the world and deliver excuses. The question that will linger in her mind for years to come. ‘I SHOULD HAVE TOLD THEM MY PLAN’. Something that until today no one knows what it was.... all we know is that she wanted to be elected to the highest office on a promise of turning some fictional page. She promised to do what she failed to for the past four years. She vowed to make changes after she got in and failed to do anything while she was in office. Well, the people have spoken and they have turned a page in the right direction. What are we to expect. As promised by Trump. World peace will be re-instated. No more Middle East conflicts. No more Ukraine war. Finally, peace will come to reign in all foreign conflict. Including the mess along the South Pacific rim. A silent cancer that has been beaten back time and time... Alone they are harmless. In unity they may pose a serious threat. The U.S. will soon boom economically. As always Canada will follow. Our Canadian dollar will once again start climbing up. Gas prices will start coming down. Food prices will come down and immigration put under control. No more open taps on immigration. No more wasting taxpayers dollars to subsidize refugees. Canada will soon go through similar political transformation. It is the natural law of Canadian politics. We go red for a while. Then blue and eventually back to red.... What North America needs is a new political system. Hopefully, Trump this time around will rise with the system to implement for generations to come. It is like that saying goes. Time will tell. Let’s hope Trump does not waste this golden opportunity for positive change.