A NEW COLUMN TO DISCUSS ISSUES OF MENTAL HEALTH

A NEW COLUMN TO DISCUSS ISSUES OF MENTAL HEALTH MY NAME IS KATHY CUMMING and you may have read my letters-to-the-editor in previous editions of The Central where I described some of the challenges faced by those struggling with mental health issues. In this occasional column, I will attempt to share stories centered on people of my acquaintance who have been forced to cope with the many hardships associated with concerns over their mental health. I’d like to tell these stories in a unique way, with a focus on how they managed life, both at home and within their communities, and what they needed most in terms of care and support. I want to help by sharing their stories and describing, where I can, some of the alternatives to pharmaceuticals that may benefit others. Some of the topics within the field of mental health that are rarely discussed include the question as to who assesses the available programs, should it not be the families that actually use them. I will also seek answers as to who is best to determine outcomes and how we can move beyond simply asking families to “please fill out this survey”. The needs among those struggling are great, and include factors such as group home environments, dietary needs, assisted housing, employment, transportation, access to proper medical care, and even counselling in matters of faith and education. How can we help build that? DURING A CONFERENCE ON FUNDRAISING for Mental Health charities and non-profits, a gentleman walked up to our group and stated, "everyone has mental health concerns, and in reality it just depends on the severity" I had thought long about family members and others I knew growing up, and the complex names given to their various conditions. Friends I knew who had some form of simple anxiety could also be numbered among the people suffering from, as the fellow at the conference said, some type of mental health concern. I have spent considerable time visiting unique communities within North America looking for clues that would enable the creation of the perfect environment in which everyone with mental health issues may find peace. Such a place remains a mystery to me. I value your input as we move forward in our discussion. Let’s learn from each other.

Ottawa Pro-Life March: A Rallying Cry for Courage, Compassion, and the Defense of Life

Ottawa Pro-Life March: A Rallying Cry for Courage, Compassion, and the Defense of Life By Councillor Lisa Robinson As a proud elected councillor for the City of Pickering, I have attended many events - but none have stirred my heart and renewed my sense of purpose like the recent Pro-Life March in Ottawa, hosted by the remarkable March for Life Coalition. This was more than just a march; it was a nationwide stand. Thousands of Canadians, young people, parents, grandparents, faith leaders, medical professionals, and advocates, gathered with one powerful message: to defend the dignity of human life, from the moment of conception to natural death. In a world where the push for Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) has crept deeper into our healthcare system — even targeting the vulnerable, the elderly, the disabled, and sometimes even the mentally ill - this march was a critical statement. We are saying loud and clear: Canada must be a country that protects life, not disposes of it. Life is precious at every stage, and we must push back against policies that treat death as a solution to suffering, poverty, or mental health struggles. What stood out most was the courage and resolve in the faces of those marching. Despite the challenges, the media pushback, the political resistance, and the social pressures, these Canadians showed up - peaceful, determined, and driven by love. We weren’t there to judge; we were there because we care deeply about the voiceless, the vulnerable, the unborn, the sick, and the future of our country. The March for Life Coalition and their event crew deserve enormous praise. Their flawless coordination - managing logistics, amplifying diverse voices, and ensuring everyone felt safe and respected - transformed this gathering into a monumental moment. I felt proud, not just to attend, but to stand shoulder to shoulder with national leaders and ordinary citizens alike, all united in one moral cause: to affirm that every life matters. I left Ottawa with a renewed determination to bring this message home - because defending life is not just a federal issue or a national conversation; it’s something that touches every local community. We need to have the courage to speak up at every level, even when it’s politically inconvenient or socially unpopular. To those who marched, organized, volunteered, and sacrificed to make the Pro-Life March a success: thank you. You are proof that conscience, conviction, and compassion still thrive in this country. This is a movement that will not be silenced, and I, for one, am honored to be part of it. Together, we stand for a Canada that cherishes life, from the first heartbeat to the final breath - not by force, but by the natural dignity every person deserves.

MAYOR CARTER YOU ARE HYPOCRITE

MAYOR CARTER YOU ARE HYPOCRITE B.A. Psychology Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States This week off the news wire it read: ‘Carter promises job support to impacted GM plant workers Oshawa Mayor Dan Carter has promised support to workers impacted by the decision to return the General Motors’ Oshawa Assembly to a two-shift operation instead of the current three. "On behalf of the City of Oshawa and City Council, I extend our compassion and support for those workers and their families who will be impacted.’ Being a hypocrite means acting in a way that contradicts what one claims to believe or feel. It's about saying one thing and doing another, often with the intention of appearing more virtuous or moral than one truly is. By Webster definition: hypocrite - noun Synonyms of hypocrite 1. a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion 2. a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings. If by my definition I am wrong. Please accept my apology. But if not then the Mayor has to be the biggest incompetent on the planet when it comes to managing Oshawa. For him to make such statements over GM. When his downtown is emptying out faster than he can drive through it. Does he not drive through downtown Oshawa? Does he not care? Or does he only care about 700 GM jobs that were on the chopping block any way. Now with the ‘Tariff’, bull. Companies like GM have an excuse. Oshawa lost 30,000 GM jobs and what did our mayor do for those families.... same thing he will do for the 700, increase their taxes next year by 8%. Yet, Carter is quoted, “‘Carter promises job support to impacted GM plant workers.” Honest concern, or just being a hypocrite. Or option two. He is such an incompetent administrator/leader that he has failed to support downtown merchants going out of business. Affecting 1000 of jobs.... Carter claims to “SUPPORT”. Yet, he fails to ‘SUPPORT’, his City Newspaper situated right in the heart of downtown Oshawa. Does he not care? Or is he a Hypocrite? Then again, this newspaper would not be the first local business that is passed over due to political interests. Carter has the only in print newspaper in his downtown and he has failed to support it. We are the heartbeat of the City and the region. Where is the municipal support? Incompetent or Hypocrite? Maybe I am the one with the intellectual handicap and expect for our beloved Mayor to be true to his word. He, will not support the 700 loosing their jobs any more than he is supporting his City Newspaper and or all the downtown local Canadian small businesses closing almost on a monthly basis. Incompetent or Hypocrite. You tell me... please.

When Looking for a Job, Imagine Yourself as a Renter

When Looking for a Job, Imagine Yourself as a Renter By Nick Kossovan You don't own your job; your employer does, making the phrase "my job" an oxymoron. Layoffs illustrate that jobs belong to employers, not employees. In 2025, as layoffs remain prevalent and the economy becomes more unpredictable, job seekers, as if in denial, continue to equate finding a job with finding a permanent home. This mindset leads to prolonged job searches. Employees are renters; they rent their jobs until they no longer want them or until their employer no longer requires their services. Layoffs demonstrate that employers are the landlords of jobs. Essentially, being laid off is akin to being evicted. By adopting a renter's mindset, job seekers can shorten their job search and stop seeking what doesn't exist—a permanent employment situation. When renting, the primary goal is to have a roof over your head. Since renting isn't permanent, we tend to accept 'less-than-ideal' circumstances (neighbourhood, kitchen layout, bathroom size). Similarly, in job searching, 'less than ideal' circumstances could be a lower salary, working onsite, or a less prestigious company. On the other hand, homeownership, in which understandably ideal circumstances are sought, is a long-term commitment involving a significant financial outlay and is far more challenging than renting. When looking for a job, consider it as searching for a rental situation that meets your immediate needs rather than pursuing your ideal work situation, which you can always continue to seek. However, keep in mind that whether your job is merely to pay your bills or it's your supposed "dream job," you're renting your job. For the last 20 years, the gig economy has been a topic of discussion, emphasizing that employees rent their jobs. Now that the gig economy is here, and people lament the broken hiring system. NEWSFLASH: Since no two employers assess candidates in the same way, there is no universal hiring system; therefore, there is no "broken hiring system." Those who take their careers seriously are strategic. They don't waste time or energy complaining about the imbalance in the employer-employee relationship, especially regarding hiring. When a job posting attracts 1,000 applicants for a single opening, the 999 candidates not selected often blame everyone and everything except themselves, particularly those with a sense of entitlement. Today's job market, as AI eliminates white-collar and creative jobs, illustrates the interplay between supply and demand. The rapid progress of AI and automation is swiftly eroding job security. In 2025, whether we like it or not, all employees are, to some degree, part of the gig economy. The Myth of Permanence Renters understand that their lease will eventually end. Employees must realize that their job, or the one they're pursuing, will also end. Companies evolve, industries change, and geopolitical interests shift, as is happening now with tariffs. Economies fluctuate, and consumers are fickle in their tastes and demands, which means any job can disappear overnight. Approaching your job search with a renter's mentality helps you remain flexible and adaptable without succumbing to the pressure of expecting your next job to last until retirement. Truism: Nothing lasts forever. Short-Term Mindset, Long-Term Benefits When you view your job search through the lens of a renter, you prioritize short-term experiences over long-term commitments. Ask yourself: What skills do I need to develop and show a track record of having used to further my career? What experiences will enhance my resume? By focusing on these questions, you can identify roles that meet your immediate needs rather than getting bogged down in trying to find the "perfect" job. Truism: You can always change jobs. The Importance of Flexibility Renters typically have a more flexible mindset. They understand that their landlord may change their living situation and are prepared to adapt. This flexibility is crucial in today's job market. Instead of fixating on a single role or company, broaden your search. Consider contract, part-time, or freelance positions that can provide valuable experience and networking opportunities, often leading to full-time employment. Truism: Flexibility isn't just a trait; it's a survival skill. Setting Realistic Expectations Most renters understand that compromise is necessary; the same applies to job searching. It's okay not to land your dream job, which will likely be a temporary situation anyway. Have realistic expectations and recognize that obtaining your desired job may take time and require extra effort—such as networking, being active on LinkedIn, and attending relevant industry events—and your journey will likely include detours. Truism: Patience is a virtue. Embracing the Journey Renters understand they don't own their home; hence, it's not theirs and, therefore, not permanent. This understanding requires embracing the journey of discovering new neighbourhoods or interacting with evolving neighbours. Even though job searching can be stressful, when approached with curiosity and an open mind, it transforms into an opportunity to explore new possibilities and connect with new people. Every experience, whether positive or negative, contributes to your growth. Truism: Job searching, as in life, is about the journey, not just the destination. Adopting a renter's mindset acknowledges that all jobs are temporary and that employees are now part of the gig economy, encouraging a pragmatic job search strategy. You're not seeking permanence; you're actively looking for opportunities that align with your aspirations. Moreover, you recognize that you don't control employers; you only control your mindset ___________________________________________________________________ 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

Tax Increases and Wasteful Spending: Time for Accountability in Pickering

Tax Increases and Wasteful Spending: Time for Accountability in Pickering By Councillor Lisa Robinson As a city councillor and, more importantly, a concerned citizen, I find myself deeply troubled by the ongoing trend of excessive tax increases and wasteful spending that continues to burden the residents of Pickering. In 2025, our community faces a 3.75% municipal property tax increase, while Durham Region is imposing a staggering 5.8% hike in the regional levy. These increases are three times the current inflation rate, which hovers around 2%, placing an undue financial burden on taxpayers. But here’s the kicker: while residents are struggling with these higher taxes, our local government continues to pour taxpayer money into initiatives that lack measurable outcomes. Take, for example, the Hannover Messe 2025, an international trade fair in Germany where the Mayor and City staff traveled to represent Pickering at a significant cost to taxpayers. Thousands of dollars were spent on booths, travel, and accommodations, all in the name of “economic development.” But where are the results for Pickering residents? There’s little tangible evidence that these expensive ventures lead to real, local jobs, business growth, or direct benefits for our city. It’s frustrating to see so much public money spent with little to no return for those who are paying the bill. Unfortunately, the issue doesn’t stop there. Over the years, we have seen a troubling pattern of wasteful spending on consultants. In many cases, these consultants deliver work that is incomplete, poorly executed, or outright ineffective, only to see the city hire the same firms again, leading to costly rework and delays. This is money that could be better spent on improving our roads, supporting local businesses, or addressing the serious infrastructure needs in our community. If consultants are consistently failing to deliver quality work, then why are we paying them over and over? Why should taxpayers foot the bill for these failures? This pattern of mismanagement is compounded by a broader trend of poor project execution. We’ve seen initiatives that were started, only to be scrapped or redone because the original planning and execution were flawed. It’s not only wasteful but also demoralizing for taxpayers who are left footing the bill for government failures. As a city councillor, I believe it’s my responsibility to hold our local government accountable to the people. But, as a citizen, I share the growing frustration that many residents feel. It’s time for transparency, accountability, and responsible stewardship of taxpayer money. We cannot continue down this path of wasteful spending while residents are being asked to pay more, year after year, without seeing any tangible benefits in return. We need to refocus our priorities on what truly matters to the people of Pickering — better services, stronger infrastructure, and a more transparent and accountable local government. This needs to stop. Enough is Enough It’s time to hold our elected officials accountable for their spending, their decisions, and the impact those decisions have on all of us. If we don’t demand change, then we risk continuing this cycle of mismanagement that will ultimately harm our city in the long run. I am Councillor Lisa Robinson, “The People’s Councillor” Watch for my column each week in The Central..

We Need to Have a Good Talk About Healthcare

We Need to Have a Good Talk About Healthcare By Dale Jodoin As we head toward another election season, people are once again talking about housing, jobs, taxes—and yes, healthcare. But here’s the truth: we’re not really talking about it the way we should. We toss around slogans, blame politicians, and get into arguments online. But when it comes to actually fixing Canada’s broken healthcare system, everyone seems too scared to have a real, grown-up conversation. It’s time we sat down, took a deep breath, and had that talk. Because if we don’t? Things are only going to get worse. Canada Comes Second Last in Health Ranking A new report came out from a group called the Commonwealth Fund. They looked at 11 wealthy countries—like Germany, Australia, and the U.K.—and rated their healthcare systems. Canada came second last. That means 10 out of 11 countries are doing better than us. The only country ranked worse was the United States. Let that sink in. For a country that says we “take care of everyone,” we’re not doing a great job. People are waiting hours in emergency rooms, months to see a specialist, and even longer for surgery. Some folks are just giving up and paying out of pocket—if they can afford it. What’s Going Wrong? Let’s look at the facts. Here are some real numbers: Over 1.3 million Canadians left emergency rooms last year without being seen. Why? Because they waited too long and gave up. More than half of Canadians who needed to see a specialist had to wait over four weeks. Around 18% of people needing surgery waited more than four months. Canada has fewer doctors per person than most other developed countries. We also don’t have enough MRI or CT scanners, so even getting diagnosed takes longer. This isn’t just frustrating—it’s dangerous. Delays in care can mean worse outcomes, more stress, and even death. It’s Not the Nurses’ or Doctors’ Fault Let’s be clear: most of the people working in healthcare are doing their best. Nurses, doctors, paramedics, cleaners—many of them are burnt out, underpaid, and trying to help in a system that’s falling apart. So where’s the problem? The truth is, our healthcare system is run by too many layers of management, unions that won’t budge, and governments afraid to make changes. We have too many meetings and not enough action. Too much talk, not enough care. And no—this isn’t about “getting rid of unions.” But it is about putting adults in the room who can talk about hard truths. We need to be honest. We need to admit the system is broken and ask the tough questions: Should provinces have more freedom to try new solutions? Should private clinics be allowed for faster service, while still keeping basic care public? Should we let pharmacists and nurse practitioners do more? Should we open new training schools for nurses and doctors? Emergency Rooms Shouldn’t Be the Only Option Right now, if you get sick after 5 PM or on a weekend, your best hope is the emergency room. Why? Because walk-in clinics are closed, and many family doctors don’t offer after-hours care. That means ERs are packed with people who don’t need emergency care—they just have nowhere else to go. This slows everything down. People with real emergencies—like heart attacks or broken bones—get stuck behind people with ear infections and sore throats. We need to rethink this. More after-hours care. More mobile clinics. More home visits. Let’s take the pressure off hospitals. We Can’t Just Throw Money at It Some people say, “Just spend more!” But that’s not the answer either. Canada already spends more than most countries on healthcare. Yet we get less for it. Other countries—like Australia and the Netherlands—spend similar amounts but get better results. Their people wait less. Their systems are faster and more efficient. So maybe it’s not just about the money. Maybe it’s about how we’re spending it. We need to follow the money. How much goes to middle managers? How much paperwork? How much to consultants who never see a patient? If we’re going to fix things, we have to make sure every dollar is going where it counts—directly to patient care. Time to Get Real Here’s what I’m asking: Let’s stop pretending everything’s fine. Let’s stop blaming one political party or another. Let’s stop hiding behind slogans like “universal care” when the care isn’t really there. Let’s have that real talk—across kitchen tables, on radio shows, in town halls. Let’s talk about hard changes. Let’s talk about what’s working in other countries and what we can learn. Let’s listen to doctors and patients, not just union reps and bureaucrats. And let’s not wait for the next crisis. A System Worth Saving Despite all this, I still believe in public healthcare. I believe we should take care of each other. I believe no one should go bankrupt because they got sick. But believing in something doesn’t mean pretending it’s perfect. It means fighting to make it better. So let’s roll up our sleeves. Let’s act like grown-ups. Let’s fix this thing before it’s too late. We don’t need another election promise. We need a plan. Because our health—and the health of our country—depends on it.

The Legacy of Pope Francis

The Legacy of Pope Francis by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East Reflecting on the peaceful Easter celebrations of millions of catholic, protestant and orthodox Christians, the sad news of the passing of Pope Francis into eternity came as a crushing blow. Here in Canada we are currently focused on the crucial federal elections soon coming to an end. Our national focus is evidenced by the more than 7.3 million Canadians who have already voted during the Easter holiday advance polls. However, we cannot ignore the death of Pope Francis. He was one of the most humane and dedicated persons to the wellbeing of humanity. Pope Francis died on Monday the 21st of April, the day after Easter, at the age of 88. As the leader of the Roman Catholic Church, he left behind a legacy of service, unity, and compassion. Jorge Mario Bergoglio was born in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and was the son of Italian immigrants. He was named a Cardinal by Pope John Paul II in 2001 and was elected pope on March 13, 2013. Pope Francis was the first non-European pope in more than a millennium and the first Latin American pontiff. He preached peace and acceptance and reflected those values through his actions. He was the first pope to address a joint meeting of Congress in the United States and the first pope to visit the Arabian Peninsula, known as the birthplace of Islam, a historic moment for interfaith dialogue. Pope Francis (born Jorge Mario Bergoglio) 17 December 1936 – 21 April 2025) was the head of the Catholic Church and sovereign of the Vatican City State from 2013 until his death in 2025. He was the first pope from the Society of Jesus (the Jesuit Order), the first Latin American, the first from the Americas, the first from the Southern Hemisphere, and the first born or raised outside of Europe since the Syrian pope Gregory III in the 8th century. Bergoglio was inspired to join the Jesuits in 1958 after recovering from severe illness. He was ordained a Catholic priest in 1969, and from 1973 to 1979 he was the Jesuit provincial superior in Argentina. He became the archbishop of Buenos Aires in 1998 and was made a cardinal in 2001 by Pope John Paul II. Following the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI on the 28th of February 2013, a papal conclave elected Bergoglio as his successor on the 13th of March. He chose Francis as his papal name in honour of Saint Francis of Assisi. Throughout his public life, Francis was noted for his humility, emphasis on God's mercy, international visibility as pope, concern for the poor, and commitment to interreligious dialogue. On the night of his election, he took a bus back to his hotel with the cardinals rather than being driven in the papal car. The next day, he visited Cardinal Jorge María Mejía in the hospital and chatted with patients and staff. In addition to his native Spanish, he spoke fluent Italian (the official language of Vatican City and the "everyday language" of the Holy See) and German. He was also conversant in Latin (the official language of the Holy See), French, Portuguese, and English; he also understood Piedmontese and some Genoese Ligurian. He was known for having a less formal approach to the papacy than his predecessors. For instance, he chose to reside in the Domus Sanctae Marthae (House of St. Martha) guest house rather than in the papal apartments of the Apostolic Palace used by previous popes. In addition, due to both his Jesuit and Ignatian aesthetic, he was known for favoring simpler vestments devoid of ornamentation, including refusing the traditional papal mozzetta cape upon his election, choosing silver instead of gold for his piscatory ring, and keeping the same pectoral cross he had as a cardinal. Francis made women full members of dicasteries in the Roman Curia. Pope Francis was a critic of trickle-down economics, consumerism, and overdevelopment. He viewed the death penalty as inadmissible in all cases, and committed the Catholic Church to its worldwide abolition. In international diplomacy, he helped to restore full diplomatic relations between the United States and Cuba, negotiated a deal with the People's Republic of China to define Communist Party influence in appointing Chinese bishops, and supported the cause of refugees. He encouraged peace between Israel and Palestinians, called protection of migrants a "duty of civilisation" and criticised anti-immigration politics world-wide. In 2022, he apologized for the Church's role in the cultural genocide of Canadian Indigenous peoples in residential schools. Pope Francis convened the Synod on Synodality, which was described as the culmination of his papacy and the most important event in the Catholic Church since the Second Vatican Council. He made his last public appearance on Easter Sunday, the day before he died. With his passing we lost a true champion of humanity. Many world leaders will pay ultimate tribute to Pope Francis, protector of the poor and disadvantaged and champion for world peace. May he rest in peace!

Municipal Failure Supreme Last One Out, Turn Off The Lights

Municipal Failure Supreme Last One Out, Turn Off The Lights 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 On April 16, 1971, real-estate agents Bob McDonald and Jim Youngren put the words, "Will the last person leaving SEATTLE -- Turn out the lights" on a billboard at S 167th Street and Pacific Highway S near Sea-Tac International Airport. The two realtors, who work for Henry Broderick, Inc., put up the billboard as a humorous response to pessimism generated by the national aerospace industry's nosedive, known locally as the Boeing Bust. A Sign of the Times The recession came as The Boeing Company, the region's largest employer, went from a peak of 100,800 employees in 1967 to a low of 38,690 in April 1971. McDonald said their out-of-town clients "were amazed that Seattle wasn’t a ghost town with weeds growing in the streets. Sadly the comparison to Oshawa. We also have weed growing on our streets in the form of cannabis shops.... Everything else is closing or has closed. Have you been downtown Oshawa lately? Well, take a drive and see the similarities to the above... God forbid take a walk. Oshawa was once the jewel on the regions crown. We had power. We had standards. We had an exceptional quailty of life. Ever since Nancy Diamond, took out the fountain at Memorial Park. Life has slowly deteriorated to a notch above a war zone. I have been warning the City of GM move to pull out. No one listened. Scared, city officials failed to stop GM from slowly taking jobs other places and leaving us with an enviromental mess. Much like The Boeing model above. Oshawa has turned in to a zombie wonderland. Made up the homeless, drug addicts, drug dealers and some of the worlds uglies prostitutes. I blame the Mayor for doing nothing but waste your tax dollars to the tune of 2 million dollars on a private para-military security company that gets him a personal bodyguard. Your Money. He likes to fill his mouth that Oshawa is resilent... The only resilient thing about him is his neglect for Oshwa and to work with people. The two downtown councillors. Complete disgrace. In the two terms they served 10yrs. Oshawa downtown has become a war zone. Yet, they push for a new downtown mini park. In my opinion. Rick Kerr and Derek Giberson should do the honorable thing and resign. Convenience stores are closing, restaurants... It appears that the only shops opening are vaping shops and cannabis. The mayor talks about supporting local small businesees. He does not. But in their defense. Kerr, has no real business experience. Giberson a third rate wonna be musician never really had a solid job other than that of being elected. We can’t expect more. But we can expect for them to resign... before the last one of us has to turn off the lights on Oshawa, due to municipal incompetence.

Is Canada Still the Country We Thought It Was?

Is Canada Still the Country We Thought It Was? By Dale Jodoin Over the past two decades, many Canadians have noticed something changing. The country feels less united, less fair, and more dangerous. Across schools, courtrooms, and political offices, a growing number of people are asking: Is this still the Canada we were promised? From weak school systems to unequal justice and a rising wave of climate extremism, some say Canada is heading down a troubling path. Across the country, teachers are struggling to keep control in classrooms. Over the years, school systems have shifted their focus—from discipline and structure to emotional comfort. Some students now feel free to yell, act out, or even threaten others without facing serious consequences. "Respect is gone in many classrooms," says one retired educator. "Students are told they’re always the victim, so they don’t take responsibility for bad behavior." As a result, many young people are growing up without learning how to follow rules, listen to others, or work through problems peacefully. This has led to more conflict—not only in schools, but also later in life. Canada’s legal system was built on the idea that everyone is equal under the law. But more people are beginning to feel that justice isn’t being served fairly. In some cases, the punishment depends more on who you are than what you did. Certain groups seem to get lighter sentences, while others face harsher ones. Scam artists, repeat criminals, and violent offenders are often released back into the community with little punishment. This has caused many Canadians to lose faith in the justice system. When people don’t trust the courts, they may feel they need to solve problems on their own. Canada’s political leaders once focused on building roads, creating jobs, and protecting families. Today, many seem more focused on headlines and global image. Regular people say they feel left behind—especially those in rural areas or working-class neighborhoods. While taxes rise and living costs grow, Canadians see billions spent on programs that often don’t help them. Many believe politicians care more about big business, foreign interests, or social media trends than about the average citizen. One small business owner shared: “It feels like the people in charge don’t even live in the same country we do.” Caring for the planet is a good thing. Most Canadians agree we need to reduce pollution and protect nature. But a growing number of people have turned climate action into something more dangerous. Radical groups have started vandalizing businesses, attacking pipelines, and even threatening people with different opinions. These acts aren’t peaceful protests—they’re attacks. Yet many politicians and media outlets avoid calling them out. “When you can’t question something without being silenced or punished, it becomes like a religion,” one analyst said. “And when people act on it with violence, that’s extremism.” Canada is not prepared for this new kind of domestic threat. Law enforcement often backs off. Politicians avoid speaking up. But the damage is real—jobs lost, property destroyed, and public fear on the rise. There is growing concern that young Canadians who still believe in fairness, law, and order will eventually give up on the system. They may stop voting. They may stop speaking out. Some may even feel forced to take action into their own hands when no one else will. That is when a country becomes unstable. “When good people stop believing the rules work, things fall apart fast,” said one retired police officer. “And that’s where we’re headed if we don’t fix this.” Can Canada Still Be Saved? Yes—but change needs to happen now. Schools must return to discipline, structure, and respect. Justice must be equal and fair for all—no matter your background. Leaders must listen to regular Canadians, not just activists or corporations. And Canada must be brave enough to deal with violent climate extremists the same way it handles any other threat. Canada is not just a flag or a place on a map. It’s an idea—one built on fairness, safety, and opportunity. But if we lose those values, we lose the country. There is still time to make things right. But it will take strong voices, open eyes, and a public that refuses to stay silent.

They lied to you. Repeatedly. Boldly. Without shame.

They lied to you. Repeatedly. Boldly. Without shame. By Councillor Lisa Robinson

Remember The Ice Cream Truck

remember the ice cream truck... 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 Remember simpler times.... as a kid waiting for the ice man to come riding that old insulated wagon pulled by good old Charlie. Charlie always appreciating that apple or bucket of water awaiting for him during every visit. Or the times waiting on the milk man. Bringing the order of fresh milk, butter and other goodies. There I would stand holding written order in pencil... Or the knife sharpener... the mailman... The shoe repair man... Oh those were the times. Sun gently caressing my skin.... And who can forget the ICE cream trunk later in the 60’s. That bell that could be heard blocks away. Soon as you would hear it... You run to your mom and hit her up for some cash. Soon as you seen it coming.... You run to the curb awaiting the latest flavor or at the least you favor... as many times they would run out and or sub in a different one. As I sit here looking out my office window. My memories race, to the uncertainties. To the innocence of being a child. My parents sheltering me from all of the world’s ills. Look at today. All those memories enriching my character.... Today instead of the ice cream truck. We await the political truck to roll by. At the local level, many people do not even know who is running until they pull up to your front door and introduce themselves. As voters we are at the will of the National names. Some vote on traditional misconceptions. Others on the color of the party. And yet others don’t even bother voting. Democracy is a word pretty much like love. A mix of interpretations and uses. Everyone has their own take. Depending on the context at the moment. Much like that ice cream truck. We the voters have little memory of what we had. A clear dislike for what we are having, ‘NOTHING’. And hope that this time around the truck will bring us something good and something sweet. Much like children, all we want is to be happy. To feel loved and to love those around you. Our political flavor stems from many ideas, misconceptions and presumption, assumptions that normally are not rooted. We the people can’t be expected to see the bigger picture. We only see the wrapper of the different flavors. Then it is up to us to try them. But like they say. Those that like Vanilla over Strawberry will always go for Vanilla. That sweet taste is why we live in a neapolitan world full of confusion guided by ice cream trucks driven by agenda, propaganda and general self fulfilling interests. Vote - No Vote - Hell it is all ice cream that melt after the election.

Election Fever Has Taken Over in Canada

Election Fever Has Taken Over in Canada by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East We are approaching the halfway point of a strange federal election campaign. Polls are heating up, the journalists and the pundits are getting more and more exited, predictions of the winner are abounding, but the economic situation is getting worse for the ordinary Canadian. The tariff war is being fueled by our neighbor to the South and the geopolitical situation is deteriorating by the day. The unpredictable nature of this tariff war is seriously worrisome and President Trump is playing a dangerously provocative game. Dare we call it bull-negotiations? In a situation like this, one hopes that the world might one day be a better place to live. On our political front, the time has come for parties to release their platforms, and we are being bombarded by promises from all sides. As usual, the politicians are promising everything to get the vote. Once the election is over, many of these promises will be forgotten. So diving into this midterm campaign, we see that the competing parties are not only campaigning, but they are constantly asking for money. The advertising is heating up, with negative advertising becoming the trending signature of the Conservative Party. Rallies with the leaders are being held regularly all over the country, with each party trying to convince the electorate to vote for them. However, the economic outlook in Canada is not so good for the near future. Canadian economic growth is expected to run below trend in 2025 and 2026, before finding greater balance in 2027. Slowing population growth and the impact of tariffs on business and consumer sentiment are the drivers of lower growth. Consumer spending had been improving with lower interest rates, but we expect this to act as a drag on growth as higher prices cut into spending power. This has the unemployment rate moving above its long-run level until 2027. Businesses and households see the economic climate as unpredictable. The scope and magnitude of planned US tariffs, along with the timing of their implementation, continue to change. This uncertainty is making it difficult for businesses to make investment and hiring decisions and to set prices. Trade tensions have led households to worry more about their job security and financial health, and they now intend to spend less. Concern about job security is particularly evident among people working in sectors that are highly dependent on trade. Businesses have revised down their sales outlooks. Indicators of future sales—such as order books and sales enquiries—have declined. This decline is particularly prominent in manufacturing. In addition, sectors that depend on households’ discretionary spending continue to report weak demand. Most businesses say they are continuing with existing investment projects, particularly projects aimed at maintaining capacity and improving productivity. In the oil and gas sector, many businesses expect only a modest impact on their near-term investment and production decisions. However, a tariff would make projects less attractive to investors over the medium term. Certainly, households and businesses expect trade tensions to lead to higher prices. This is reflected in a recent rise in their short-term inflation expectations. This is the tense situation in which the federal election campaign is being conducted. Undoubtedly, we can expect to see more interesting days, with more surprises to come. One interesting development has been the involvement of former Prime Minister Stephen Harper in the Conservative Party campaign. He was not very committed in previous campaigns, but this time he came out forcefully in favor of the leader of the Conservative Party, Pierre Poilievre. Let us hope that once the election campaign is over, Canadians will have a more predictable and a strong government to deal with the very serious issues we face both at home and abroad. Hope for the best and let your voice be heard. Get out and VOTE.

Is a renter always a tenant?

Is a renter always a tenant? By Theresa Grant Real estate columnist Renting in the province of Ontario doesn’t always mean you’re considered a tenant. As such, not everyone is protected under the RTA, The residential Tenancies Act. Whether or not you are covered under the Residential Tenancies Act depends on the type of accommodation you are renting. If you are renting an apartment in a large building with multiple units for instance, you would be considered a tenant. As such, you would be covered under the Residential Tenancies act. If you are renting a room in a house where your landlord or the owner of the house also lives, you would be considered a boarder or a lodger. If you are renting a self-contained basement apartment with a separate entrance, and the owner of the house, the landlord or landlady lives upstairs, you would be considered a tenant. It can get confusing. Renting rooms in a house where the owner or landlord does not reside, is different yet again. If that is the case, you would be considered a tenant. Rooming houses were a way of life many years ago especially in populated cities like Toronto. That may have been a person’s first home away from home as they migrated to the city for work or school. Over the years, their popularity dwindled and, in some cases, became neglected run-down fire traps. There are very strict fire regulations on the registered rooming houses that remain. There are a few registered rooming houses here in Oshawa. They are inspected by the fire department on a regular basis. The official inspection pass is usually located just inside the front door along with the occupancy maximum. They are run like a business because that is what they are considered. As rents surged over the last few years, rooming houses seem to have regained some popularity. If you are living in a four-bedroom house and the owner and or the owner’s family also reside in the house, you are a boarder or a lodger. You are not covered under the Residential Tenancies Act. One helpful notation to all of this confusion seems to be that if you are renting a space within the home of the landlord or landlady, and you do not have a kitchen or bath, you are then considered a lodger as opposed to a tenant. It is always recommended to know your rights and responsibilities when it comes to renting and always know whether you are considered a tenant or a boarder.

A TALE OF TWO MAYORS AND A D.E.I CULTURE GONE MAD THE ISSUES AND DEBATES THAT HAVE SHAPED THE WEEK

A TALE OF TWO MAYORS AND A D.E.I CULTURE GONE MAD THE ISSUES AND DEBATES THAT HAVE SHAPED THE WEEK By Dean Hickey THIS WEEK WE DIRECT OUR ATTENTION toward events which, by themselves, have displayed a range of unhealthy moral and philosophical principles, all of which account for much of what is lacking in the way we are governed. It is impossible at times, notwithstanding the most strenuous exertions, to raise the acuity of some among the elected officials who now occupy certain city council chambers. Readers of this column may surely grasp this reality as we consider recent social media posts that are generating plenty of controversy. PICKERING’S MAYOR ASHE TAKES TO SOCIAL MEDIA To even the most casual observer, the tensions that have plagued Pickering City Council so far this term are nothing less than troubling to residents within the community as well as some among the municipality’s staff. The source of this conflict continues to be a matter for debate, however, over the course of six days last month, Mayor Kevin Ashe took to Facebook in an attempt to offer up a series of provocative comments aimed at his well-known adversary, Ward 1 City councillor Lisa Robinson. The unfortunate narrative began with a post on March 22 in which the Mayor described councillor Robinson as a ‘hypocrite” suggesting she was “The only Councillor who has been found to breach our gifts policy…” This, as one might expect, gave rise to a public debate between the Mayor and his outspoken colleague. Their exchanges included the following remarks as each sought to outdo the other in what could only be described as an online sparring match: Ashe: “You can’t follow the rules. Why don’t you start there?” Robinson: “”Why don’t you start following the current rules?” Ashe: “I follow the rules…” Robinson: “Stop deflecting, Mr. Mayor. Why won’t you second the motion to ban gifts and benefits?” If that public display of animosity and schoolyard banter wasn’t enough, Mayor Ashe posted yet again on March 26, suggesting councillor Robinson take a leave of absence due to her having recently been selected as a federal candidate in a neighbouring riding. That post appears to have been removed, however, another was added in its place a mere 24 hours later. This time, the debate has been considerable, with one participant suggesting to the Mayor, “It’s actually embarrassing watching you whine about her” and another saying, “This bickering back and forth between Ashe and Robinson is unprofessional.” Perhaps the most memorable comment was offered by councillor Robinson herself when she told the Mayor, “Looks like I’ve taken up permanent residence in your thoughts…” The situation continues to unfold for all the world to see, and whether one agrees with Mayor Ashe or his opponent in the debate, this little exhibition of ‘catch me if you can’ does nothing but diminish the Office of the Mayor, and that is something everyone over at Pickering city hall needs to understand. OSHAWA’S MAYOR CARTER BUILDS A BUREAUCRATIC EMPIRE “At this particular time, I have embraced the Strong Mayor Powers, and I just want to remind everyone of that.” Those comments were made by Oshawa Mayor Dan Carter as some councillors attempted to debate a few key components of his tax-and-spend agenda. It began during a debate over public engagement opportunities for future budget deliberations, namely that a special meeting of council be held on a pre-scheduled weeknight this coming autumn to listen to residents’ concerns. Ward 5 Regional councillor Brian Nicholson was unequivocal in his comments to the Mayor as to how such a meeting may be perceived. “It leaves the impression that Council has some kind of authority or power in this process.” He went on to add, “When we say to the public that Council is going to listen and… control the budget process, we are misleading the public.” It is known that councillors attempted to bring forward amendments to last year’s budget, only to be vetoed by Mayor Carter as part of his overwhelming embrace of the supreme powers bestowed upon him by the Provincial government. Local taxpayers were subsequently faced with an increase in spending and staffing levels, to be paid for by a whopping 7.87% tax increase, far above that of the previous year, which amounted to less than 4%. The proposal for greater public input on the budgetary process was ultimately voted down, not only by the Mayor, but also councillors Bob Chapman, John Gray, John Neal, and Rick Kerr. Undeterred, councillor Nicholson went on to move a motion that “Council recommends a budget increase target of not more than 4% in 2026.” This proposal was ultimately successful, but without the support of the Mayor and certain councillors apparently unwilling to rule out another major tax increase, including Derek Giberson, Jim Lee, and Rick Kerr. OSHAWA DEI CHAMPIONS AWARDS PROGRAM Last week I told readers of this column about efforts within some municipalities, particularly the City of Toronto, to create an unelected council seat for a representative of the Indigenous community, part of a broad-reaching mandate by that city’s in-house Diversity Equity and Inclusion (D.E.I.) bureaucracy. Last week, Oshawa councillors approved an initiative by their own staff to establish a ‘Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Champions Awards Program’ with an inaugural awards presentation scheduled for Spring 2026. For those who believe solely in the inherent fairness associated with a merit-based approach towards hiring and other selection processes, the staff report considered by Council is nothing more than an affirmative action and racial preferences mandate. The intent of the report is to see a government-initiated extension of D.E.I. initiatives toward individuals, schools, businesses, charities, and non-profit organizations, all under the guise of a so-called rewards program. The ideology behind this type of approach has rightly become a target of criticism, as the focus is inevitably on ‘identity’ over merit, leading to quotas and forced representation rather than on skills and qualifications. Certain among the anti-racism policies and other such programs which seek to foster a welcoming environment, fairness in the application of our laws, and the protection of individual rights are all positive steps. The mandate associated with overall D.E.I. ideology, however, may be seen as less valuable, and certainly less trustworthy. A COLLECTIVE DISPLAY OF RECKLESS IDEAS The unfortunate aspects of our political culture highlighted in this week’s column display, in a special manner, the truth of what this newspaper has heretofore identified as weaknesses within the democratic process. We see it as a waste of votes when citizens elect officials who start making decisions based on self-interest rather than those of the community which put them into office in the first place. Embarrassing debates on social media, a reckless disregard for over-burdened taxpayers, and the approval of policies that will only seek to divide rather than unify, are all part of a pattern bordering on ineptitude. Meanwhile, the threat of significant global economic challenges looms overhead, and will require a renewed focus among municipal councils on what really matters, being the economy and the creation of jobs. Let us hope common sense prevails.

OPINION: The Conservative & Liberal Parties Don’t Own Your Vote --- You Do ---

OPINION: The Conservative & Liberal Parties Don’t Own Your Vote --- You Do --- By Councillor Lisa Robinson Let’s talk about democracy. Not the kind politicians love to plaster on lawn signs — I mean real democracy. The kind where you choose your candidate, not some backroom party boss. Because what’s happening right now in Canada — and right here in Pickering–Brooklin — is a betrayal of everything democracy is supposed to stand for. The Conservative Party has handpicked candidates in approximately 90 ridings across the country, including ours. That means grassroots candidates who spent over a year knocking on doors, meeting residents, building relationships, and pouring their own time and money into earning a nomination were pushed aside at the last second. Why? Because they weren’t part of the inner circle. That’s not democracy. That’s elitism. And it gets worse. Our Liberal candidate isn’t even from Pickering–Brooklin — they’re being parachuted in from Markham. Meanwhile, the Conservative candidate doesn’t live here either, and she’s already proven she doesn’t share the values of real conservatives. This is someone who pushed vaccines on children and tried to bribe marginalized communities with dance parties and gift cards to get the jab. Is that conservative? That’s government overreach, coercion, and the exact opposite of bodily autonomy. And let’s not forget — she wasn’t voted in by the people. She was handpicked by Doug Ford, the very Premier who rammed through vaccine passports, locked down small businesses, and divided communities. If that’s not a follower looking for a paycheck, I don’t know what is. And if we ever face another medical or social crisis again, do you really believe this person will protect your job, your family, or your bodily autonomy? Because I don’t. And neither should you. If the party can’t even respect the basic right of members to choose their own nominee, what makes you think their candidate will respect you as a constituent? They weren’t chosen by you. They were chosen for you — and that’s the problem. And while they’ve been silent, collecting their endorsements and avoiding tough conversations, I’ve been the only elected official in this riding willing to stand up — and pay the price for it. I’ve been unpaid for nine months because I spoke the truth and refused to back down. Not one of these candidates said a word in support. Why? Because they don’t want to upset the system. They don’t rock the boat — they row it. So no — voting for what you believe in is not splitting the vote. That’s just a lie designed to control you. It’s how they keep you in fear, voting for the “lesser of two evils.” But ask yourself: what has that gotten you? More of the same. More mandates. More lockdowns. More broken promises. The Conservatives don’t own your vote. The Liberals don’t own your vote. You own your vote. And you deserve to give it to someone who will fight for you — not someone who’s just waiting to cash a paycheque and follow orders. This is your moment. If we want real change, we have to vote like it. Don’t vote out of fear. Vote with courage. Vote with conviction. Vote for someone who has already shown they’ll stand up — even when it costs them everything. Because the ballot belongs to the people. Let’s start acting like it. I am Councillor Lisa Robinson, The People’s Councillor

TrumpedChumpedand left for Stupid…

trumped chumped and left for stupid... 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 Sometimes I feel like I am the only one awake. Does no one else see the business move Trump is pulling on the world and everyone is falling for it? Trump comes from the corporate world. A place where you have to win all the time. Open challenge normally is met with total annihilation. Or in what we all have got to know as ‘YOUR FIRED’. Challenging Trump on the Tariffs is economic suicide. Look at what is taking place in Canada. Before tariffs were even sanctioned. Companies laid off. Companies threaten economic downfall. Suppliers, threatened price increases.... What Trump has done is expose the vultures in our economy. The vultures that look for any opportunity to slim the work force and increase prices. Much like this crap about ‘BUY CANADIAN’. The question is why have we not been buying Canadian all along? Why because traditionally Canadian made products cost more. So people obviously went with China and the U.S. Look at the local municipalities for example. They are all quick for the photo opportunity, extending opinion and resolve on an issue they have no clue what they are saying other than parrot what the main media spews. FEAR MONGERING. This is ridiculous. Personally, I think what Trump has done should be a wake up call to all average hard working taxpayers. We are getting ripped off. Our tax dollars are being wasted. Back to Trump. What do we do. NOTHING. Let him put tariffs on us. Let him think he has won. Then, when he comes around wanting something. Here is where we negotiate for a Canada win. Us imposing tariffs on U.S. goods does nothing for our economy and puts us on a weak spot in future negotiations. As every attempt to negotiate will lead to the same resolve. We as Canadians have to be smarter. Trump worries about borders. Ok, we as a sovereign nation. Will open all our borders across Canada. No security. Let the Americans build another wall to the north. As for the pipeline. Sure let’s build it. But we would claim special building funds for the next 100 years for crossing our land. A lease of sort. As for U.S. goods coming to Canada. No Tariff. Let’s pull what China has for years. Use American goods and services to strength our country. Charge double on their needs without mentioning tariff. Remember it not personal it’s good sound business.

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.

A Canadian Federal Election to Remember

A Canadian Federal Election to Remember by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East As expected, Canada's 45th general election got underway Sunday March 23rd, with the party leaders vying to become Canada's next Prime Minister, each positioning himself as the best candidate to strengthen Canada's economy and stand up to United States President Donald Trump. Canadians will vote and the campaign will close on April 28th, making it one of the shortest campaigns (37 days) allowed by legislation. Liberal Leader Mark Carney triggered the campaign by visiting Governor General Mary Simon and asking her to dissolve Parliament. Speaking outside Rideau Hall following that meeting, he said he is offering solutions instead of anger and division. "It's easy to be negative about everything when you've never built anything; when you've never had to make a payroll," he said. "Negativity won't win a trade war." Right out of the gate Carney promised a one-point cut to the middle class tax rate and said an election is necessary to show a strong response to American economic threats. The Liberal leader, who has yet to serve as an MP, will seek election in the Ottawa riding of Nepean. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre launched his campaign an hour before Carney addressed media, saying he plans to restore the promise of Canada and tackle affordability issues that he blames on elites. "Our nation is more divided than ever before, because the Liberal, radical, post-national, borderless and globalist ideology has weakened our nation," Poilievre said in Gatineau, Que., overlooking Parliament Hill. "Now, desperate for a fourth term, Liberals have replaced Justin Trudeau with his economic advisor and handpicked successor, Mark Carney." Poilievre said he will bring down the cost of living and fix the immigration system while supporting a strong military. Recent polls have suggested the Liberals and Conservatives are in a neck-and-neck race and the comfortable polling lead the Conservatives enjoyed for more than a year has all but evaporated. The NDP, which was tied with the Liberals a few months ago according to many surveys, has watched its support plummet. President Trump has threatened to economically coerce Canada into becoming a U.S. state, implementing some debilitating tariffs and promising others in response for a shifting set of policy changes ranging from fentanyl flows to dairy quotas. The new tariffs proposed by the United States are to hit Canada in just a few days, on April 2nd. It will be an exiting election with many unknowns and dynamics. Both leaders of the main parties willing to govern are untested in previous elections. Mark Carney the Liberal party leader has never had an elected position. On the other hand, Pierre Poilievre, the leader of the Conservative party, is a politician by trade with a long record of political involvement, but other experience. We will have to see how the campaign evolves, because it is an important election in a tormented world. Canadians need to leave woke issues and need to be united to face an uncertain future. Canadian identity must be preserved and we must be proud to be Canadians as never before. At this point Canada as a nation needs to be patriotic and proud of its past and its history, in order to face the black clouds of political menace from our previously trusted friend and neighbour. But let us go a little back in time. In ways no one could have understood at the time, the summer of 2015, has turned out to be a momentous one for Canada and Canadian politics, and the reverberations are only being fully felt now, nearly a decade later. I remember the election of 2015 very well. It was an election to be lost by the Conservative party lead by Prime Minister Stephen Harper. They approached it in a very unusual way and failed to identify the real threat, which was the Liberal party, reduced to third party status at the time. Unfortunately, many of the staff running the 2015 election campaign are still involved in senior positions in Pierre Poilivre’s campaign, and prone to commit the same fatal mistakes that lead to the loss of the 2015 election. In the summer of 2015, one of the significant events might have seemed to be an announcement made by the leader of the Liberal Party in downtown Ottawa. Still four months away from becoming prime minister, Justin Trudeau stood before television cameras at the Château Laurier and presented a platform for sweeping political reform, including a categorical commitment to change Canada's existing electoral system. In reality, at about the same time, a more seismic event occurred. On Fifth Avenue in midtown Manhattan, dismissed by many politicos as insignificant at the time, a former reality TV star announced that he was running to be president of the United States. He said "drugs" and "rapists" were streaming across the American border with Mexico. He promised to build a wall. He said the United States was being "ripped off" by the rest of the world and that it didn't have "victories" anymore. He vowed to "make America great again." It was Donald Trump. In the years that followed, the United States had multiple opportunities to decisively reject Donald Trump’s ideas. But last fall the majority of Americans chose him to be their president for a second time. For Canada, the first four years of a Trump presidency were a time-consuming challenge. The scramble to maintain an open economic relationship with Canada's largest trading partner necessarily became the Trudeau government's top priority. At the time it was still possible to believe that those four years were a strange anomaly and that America would, after four years of Trump, snap back to normal. Joe Biden's victory in 2020 seemed to confirm that. However, the four years of Biden's presidency now seem like the last gasp of a world that no longer exists. Well, two months into the second four years of Trump, the threat to Canada now seems existential. The first time around, Trump talked about tearing up the North American Free Trade Agreement. Now, he threatens to erase the border an "artificially drawn line," in his words between our two countries. Whoever is prime minister after April 28th will have to contend with this unsettled and unsettling new reality. He will have to fight a continental trade war. He will have to negotiate with an American president who openly pines for annexation. He may soon face a national or global recession brought on by a global trade war. He will have to make urgent decisions about domestic economic policy, resource development, national defence and international engagement. Being aware of the challenges the next Prime Minister must face, it is up to you to decide which contender is best qualified to be Prime Minister. So never before has it been so important for you to get involved. Canada’s future is at stake!

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.