DOES THIS MAKE SENSE?

DOES THIS MAKES SENSE? By Joe Ingino BA. Psychology Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States This week a headline read: Ontario Investing $16.5 Million to Protect Tariff-Impacted Workers and Businesses Projects will support $120 million in total investments while protecting and creating 1,500 jobs across Ontario November 17, 2025 Ministry of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade VAUGHAN —The Ontario government is supporting companies and workers impacted by U.S. tariffs by investing $16.5 million through the Ontario Together Trade Fund (OTTF) to help them increase resilience, build capacity and re-shore critical supply chains to Ontario. The announcement marks the first round of funding under the OTTF program, with the eight recipient companies’ projects amounting to over $120 million in investments that will create over 300 new, good-paying jobs and protect nearly 1,200 more across the province. I am no economist, no banker nor a financial scholar. Do the math on the investment vs the return. Does it make sense to plunge 120 million to create 1,500 jobs. The math tells you it is $80,000/job. On the surface one may say. Great. In reality, one has to wonder who will the 120 million be really going to. I know the old thinking. Something is better than nothing... the government is famous for putting out cash and ending up in someone bank account that had nothing to do with the initial intent. I believe that our society is falling and about to fall even harder. We elect officials that do not have the business understanding to make the decisions that they make. So what do they do... they bunch up. Spend millions on expensive consultant to give them a series of choices. From these choices they engage in all kinds of paths. Good or bad. It does not matter. As it is not their money. They make a bad decision. They truly do not care as they are not accountable to no one. Think about it... the article read: The Ontario government is supporting companies and workers impacted by U.S. tariffs by investing $16.5 million through the Ontario Together Trade Fund (OTTF) to help them increase resilience, build capacity and re-shore critical supply chains to Ontario. The question I have for the government.... do they really have an understanding on how tariffs work and or how it will impact industry. I ask this question because tariffs in my opinion should only cause a shift in consumer buying... At the manufacturing level it should produce a shift to newer suppliers. If this stand to be true then where are all these millions going? Who are they politically paying off? Will the average worker really benefit... and if so for how long...

Speed Dating

Speed Dating By Wayne and Tamara I am a 19-year-old college freshman who has never been married. I am actually dating my first boyfriend, but that is by choice, because I never wanted to be a part of the high school drama scene. I wanted a mature relationship that transcended all that. However, I seem to have gotten myself far too deeply into something I am not ready for. I have been dating my boyfriend for almost three months. He’s 21, and we get along wonderfully. I am not his first girlfriend, but the first girlfriend he ”really wanted.” Just a few days into our relationship, he told me he loved me, and kept saying it, though I never responded in kind. After four weeks, I did finally tell him I loved him. I thought I meant this. However, since then, he’s come to mention quite often plans for the future. Plans such as marriage after we both finish college, children, names for those children, and more. I am not ready for this. I cannot definitely say I want to spend the rest of my life with him, though he is completely enamored with me. I’m also worried, because I have not known how to respond, and in saying nothing, I believe he has read my assent. I am truly scared I’ve led him on. This is not something I can accept of myself, since I honestly do care for him. I don’t want to hurt him, but I will continue to lead him on if I don’t say anything. Bobbi Bobbi, ancient artists drawing on cave walls didn’t sign their work. They couldn’t because they didn’t have a written language. Instead they put their hand against the cave wall, took color in their mouth, and blew. The outline of their hand is the mark they left for us. Lovers also leave a mark—on each other. When your boyfriend said “I love you,” he put his mark on you. When you said it back to him, you put your mark on him, even though you had your doubts. The problem with marks is, if love isn’t there on both sides, then the relationship has missed the mark. In sociology there is a term called the “norm of social reciprocity.” That simply means we feel obligated to give back to others what they give to us. It’s called a norm because if we violate it, if we don’t give back, we feel we have done something wrong. When social reciprocity involves sharing or being polite, there is nothing wrong with it. But it has a dark side. It can be used to take advantage of us. When your boyfriend kept saying “I love you,” it created the expectation that you had to say it back to him. Eventually you succumbed. “I love you” is also an implied promise. It says I will behave in certain ways toward you, now and in the future. Since people are supposed to stick to promises, you feel bad about pulling back now. But if you don’t, you will grow weaker as a person, and farther from your true feelings. You went to college to learn things, and one of the most valuable things you can learn is how to say no. You have a chance, through your education, to secure your future. That is an opportunity many young women don’t have. So grab that brass ring and put it in your pocket, knowing that economic freedom gives a woman the power to make wise decisions all of her life. One of the marks of maturity is the ability to do the right thing, even though it is a hard thing. We totally understand not wanting to trifle with another, but if your boyfriend has moved too far forward, that’s on him. The norm of social reciprocity is no substitute for the mark of genuine love. Wayne & Tamara

The Strange Power of Fake Pills

The Strange Power of Fake Pills By Diana Gifford I have been sorting through unpublished Gifford-Jones columns. Among them, I found a dusty clipping from a Reader’s Digest article by Robert A. Siegel and a rough draft of this week’s column. In it, we find a glimpse into a lecture hall at Harvard Medical School 75 years ago, and the teachings of Dr. Henry Beecher, the Harvard anesthetist who challenged the medical establishment’s views about truth and healing. Beecher had stunned his class of medical students when he asked, “Is it ethical for doctors to prescribe a dummy pill – a pill that does no harm, never causes addiction, and yet often cures the patient?” He was speaking of a placebo. The lecture shocked his students who’d been taught that honesty was an unshakeable tenet of medical ethics. And yet Beecher showed that sometimes, deception can be powerful medicine. Siegel’s Reader’s Digest story echoed this point. He described meeting Dr. John Kelley, a psychology professor at Endicott College who studies the placebo effect at Harvard. Curious, Siegel asked whether a “phony pill” might help him overcome his chronic writer’s block, insomnia, and panic attacks. Kelley obliged with a prescription: 100 gold capsules – Siegel’s favourite colour – costing $405. Each one contained nothing but cellulose. And yet, Siegel found that the more expensive they seemed, the better they worked. The gold capsules helped him focus and stay calm. Even when drowsy, another capsule kept him writing. Beecher published his groundbreaking paper “The Powerful Placebo” in 1955. He argued that all new drugs should be tested in double-blind trials so neither doctor nor patient knows who receives the real drug. The results were unsettling. Hundreds of supposedly effective drugs were found to be little more than expensive illusions. Many were pulled from the market. Placebo therapy itself is ancient. And there’s proof that belief predates biochemistry. In the medical lore, we’re told doctors once prescribed crocodile dung or powdered donkey hoof, and sometimes they worked! Later, physicians injected sterile water to relieve pain, and to their surprise, many patients improved. One study in 1959 found that when surgeons tied off an artery to increase blood supply as a treatment for angina, some patients reported relief. But when surgeons merely made a skin incision and did nothing else, the results were just as good. Ethics boards today would never allow such sham surgeries, yet they taught medicine an unforgettable lesson. The mind can profoundly influence the body. Even more astonishing was later research at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario. Placebo pills improved urinary flow in men with enlarged prostates. Some of these same men also developed side effects so real that they had to stop taking the dummy pills altogether. There is a popular account of a 26-year-old man who swallowed many capsules thinking they were antidepressants. But he was actually in the placebo arm of a trial. His blood pressure plummeted, his heart rate soared, but he stabilized when told the pills were placebos. How do placebos work? The colour of the capsule, the cost, the trust in the physician, all play a role. Our expectations can spark real physiological change, from heart rate to pain relief. Beecher’s lecture appalled some medical trainees. Others were intrigued. But all got the lesson. The placebo didn’t deceive patients; it revealed the self-deception of medicine itself. Of course, no placebo will mend a ruptured appendix or stop internal bleeding. But in an era when so many unnecessary prescriptions are written, perhaps it’s time to remember the wisdom of Voltaire, who wrote, “The art of medicine consists of amusing the patient while nature cures the disease.” —————————————————————————————————————— This column offers opinions on health and wellness, not personal medical advice. Visit www.docgiff.com to learn more. For comments, diana@docgiff.com. Follow on Instagram @diana_gifford_jones

When Retirement Savings Meet Healthcare Realities

When Retirement Savings Meet Healthcare Realities By Bruno M. Scanga Ted and Martha had always planned well for retirement—about $600,000 in their RRIFs, which gave them nearly $4,000 a month before taxes. Everything seemed secure—until Ted began experiencing cognitive impairment. For a year or so, Martha managed to care for Ted at home. But eventually she had to make a heart-breaking decision: move him into an extended care facility. Today, depending on your province and whether you’re using publicly subsidized or private care, costs can vary dramatically. For example: · In British Columbia, the maximum monthly rate for long-term care services (publicly subsidized) is $4,073.40 in 2025, while the minimum is about $1,466.20 · Across Canada, private long-term care can cost anywhere from $6,000 to $15,000 per month, depending on location and level of care. In Ted’s case, the facility charged $2,500 per month—a mid-range private rate. Martha knew she needed to boost their RRIF income to keep up: roughly $46,000 extra a year after tax. But even with a strong 7.5% average annual return, the savings evaporated in just eight years. We also face systemic challenges. As of 2025, Ontario has just over 76,000 available LTC spaces, and they’re at full capacity. Meanwhile, nearly 48,000 seniors are waiting for placement—more than the population of many mid-sized Ontario towns. And it’s not just facilities: Based on updated figures from the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, around 40% of people who reach age 65 will spend time in a retirement home at some point before they die, underscoring the real possibility that long-term care may be part of many seniors’ life trajectories. Many people prefer staying at home. But private home care isn’t cheap. Depending on the provider, rates for registered nurses run $33 to $41 per hour, medical aides $16 to $21, and personal support workers $22 or more. So, what’s a better way to prepare? Long-Term Care Insurance. Available for people aged 30 to 80, it pays benefits—usually $10 to $300 per day, depending on policy—when care is needed, starting after an elimination period (like 30, 60, or 90 days). Payouts kick in when a physician declares the insured unable to care for themselves due to cognitive impairment or needing help with two or more daily activities. It offers coverage on top of any government benefits. Final Thoughts Ted and Martha’s story is far too common. Retirement savings can disappear fast when unexpected care needs arise. With long-term care costs ranging from $1,466 to well over $6,000 per month in Canada, both planning and protective insurance can make a world of difference.

A Candid Conversation

A Candid Conversation By Theresa Grant Real Estate Columnist A Candid Conversation By Theresa Grant Real Estate We have always had three markets when it comes to real estate in Canada. The buyers’ market, the sellers’ market and a balanced market. Awhile back, I coined a new term for the market we seem to be in. The Trump market. What exactly is the Trump market you ask? Well, it’s a market where the interest rates have really come down nicely considering where they were a year ago, house prices are down 22% from their peek during Covid-19, in fact some absolutely stunning homes that would normally be on offer for well over a million dollars are now being offered well below a million dollars. It’s truly astonishing to see what some of the more palatial mansions of old Oshawa are going for in this market. Why is this the case? In a word, tariffs. Donald Trump’s Tariffs have cast a cloud of fear over Canadian workers to the point that those who were thinking about buying when the interest rates dropped, seem to have completely abandoned the idea. So, while we would have called this a buyers’ market a few years ago. There is definitely something that keeps the buyers from buying. That is the underlying fear of losing their jobs in this very uncertain time. I have heard many stories over the years of people who signed the mortgage papers one day and were laid off or let go the next. Nerve wracking times to be sure. Some real estate agents are reporting zero traffic through their open houses on weekends. That in and of itself screams volumes because even when you’re not necessarily looking to purchase immediately, it’s always been something that people who are intending to purchase at some point enjoy doing. They get out and look. The news is full of reports that housing starts have collapsed, prices are down, the volume of sales is down. Interest rates will continue their downward trend over the next year, but will that make any difference whatsoever? It will help the homeowner who is renewing their mortgage next year, but it will not do much to convince the would-be homeowner that the water is fine and to jump on in. I will admit I have never seen a market like the one we are currently experiencing. That being said, the observance of human nature never disappoints. I find it truly fascinating to see how people behave in different environments, and this is no exception. One thing that stays with me and has since I was a child is a saying that my uncle had. He always used to say, “this too shall pass”. I have brought that to mind many times over the years and firmly believe that it is something we can take comfort in when things are uncertain.

Four Words That Will Help You Get Hired: Features Tell, Benefits Sell

Four Words That Will Help You Get Hired: Features Tell, Benefits Sell By Nick Kossovan The selling principle features tell, benefits sell highlights that customers are driven by outcomes, not technical details. While a product's features describe what it is or does, its benefits explain why that matters to the customer. Successful salespeople focus on conveying the benefits of their products or services in a way that builds both practical and emotional connections. Most job seekers refuse to acknowledge that job searching is a sales activity, which explains their prolonged search. A job seeker has one goal: to sell their value (benefit) to employers. Applying the features tell, benefits sell selling principle to your job search will significantly shorten it. Getting hired depends less on what you can do and more on the value you can contribute to an employer's profitability. Start by identifying your features (skills, experience) and then explain how they offer a tangible benefit (value). Feature: 15 years of delivering $4 million+ projects under budget and on schedule. Benefit: Projects are finished on time and within budget, resulting in cost savings (enhancing profits) and client satisfaction (recurring revenue). Feature: Automated data collection and analysis processes, reducing reporting time from 7 hours to 1.5 hours. Benefit: Executives can make decisions more quickly. Feature: Delivered training to over 50 employees, raising performance metrics within three months by 15%. Benefit: Increasing employee productivity eliminates the need to increase headcount. LinkedIn Profile: Your 24/7/365 Online Presence Your LinkedIn profile is how recruiters and employers discover you and assess whether you're interview-worthy. For these reasons, you should consider your LinkedIn profile more important than your résumé. Your LinkedIn profile and activity will either enhance or hinder your job search. Employing the feature-benefit approach throughout your profile is a game-changer. "As a Sales Manager at Ziffcorp, I led a team of eight outside sales representatives for five years, consistently surpassing our annual sales target by at least 120%, resulting in a 15% year-over-year growth without additional marketing investment." This shows potential employers not just what you did, but also why it matters; what employer doesn't want growth without spending more on marketing? Applying the feature-benefit approach throughout your profile is how you get employers to see you as a solution provider worth having on their payroll. Why would an employer hire you if they don't see an ROI from hiring you? Résumé: Your Marketing Document Like your LinkedIn profile, résumé is an opportunity to leverage features tell, benefits sell. As you should be doing throughout your LinkedIn profile, craft narratives that highlight your accomplishments and their impact. Avoid duplicating your LinkedIn profile; redundancy wastes valuable space that could be used to expound the benefits of hiring you. "I oversaw Grubhub's marketing campaigns, which led to a 55% increase in lead generation from 2022 to 2024, eliminating the need to buy leads." Again, what employer doesn't want growth without incurring additional marketing expenses? Cover Letter: Reason to Read Your Résumé Not including a cover letter is lazy. I don't know a hiring manager who hires lazy. Using your cover letter to provide context around your features, the ones the employer is looking for (skills, years of experience) and explaining the benefits they offer, gives compelling reasons to read your résumé. Don't just say, "I have five years of customer service experience." Instead, say, "Having worked in customer service for five years, I have developed a skill that enables me to resolve conflicts quickly. This has led to a 95% customer satisfaction rate, which correlates directly with customer loyalty and retention." Name an employer that doesn't consider retention and loyalty essential for their business success. Interviewing: The Sales Pitch An interview is a sales meeting; therefore, a feature-benefit approach is a solid strategy. When asked about your experience, don't just recite your résumé. Use the opportunity to show how your features translate into tangible benefits. Imagine you're interviewing for an account management position; don't just say, "I managed a portfolio of over 500 accounts." Instead, use the features-benefit approach: "I oversaw 547 accounts. While meeting the wants and needs of purchasers was my priority, I also ensured invoices were paid in accordance with the agreed-upon terms. As I'm sure you can appreciate, Nifty Snacks, being a wholesaler, constantly monitored how much each retailer was purchasing in relation to their ability to pay on time. Compared to my predecessor, I reduced delinquency by 45%, resulting in fewer accounts being sent to collections agencies." Networking: Building Professional Connections When you meet someone, consider your features and benefits as talking points. Instead of saying, "I'm a project manager," reframe it: "I'm a project manager who has successfully led cross-functional teams to deliver projects on time and under budget, saving my last employer over $475,000." This not only creates a more engaging conversation but also leaves a lasting impression. Articulating your features and benefits makes you memorable. By focusing not just on "what you've done" (features) but on "how it matters" (benefits), you transform your job search into a solid explanation of how you add value to an employer, an explanation few job seekers offer because they fail to understand that employers aren't interested in their features, but rather in the benefits of hiring them. ___________________________________________________________________________ Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned corporate veteran, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. Send Nick your job search questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.

I can’t believe I’m writing this but here we go

I can’t believe I’m writing this but here we go By Councillor Lisa Robinson Next time you’re at the grocery store, ask yourself: is the meat and dairy you’re purchasing real… or is it cloned? Most Canadians have no idea that our federal government has quietly opened the door to cloned animals in our food supply. Health Canada has reclassified cloned beef and dairy so they are no longer considered “novel foods.” That single decision removed the requirement for pre-market safety reviews, public notification, and labeling — leaving the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), the very agency responsible for enforcing food safety and labeling, with almost no authority to intervene. The CFIA is the same agency that didn’t hesitate to kill healthy ostriches — no tests, no proof, no concern for whether the animals were sick or healthy. And now? With cloned meat, they don’t even need to approve whether it’s safe for humans to eat. Think about that. The very agency that treated living creatures like disposable objects is now deciding what we put on our plates — and they don’t have to show us a single shred of evidence that it’s safe. If they couldn’t care about birds, why should we trust them with people? If Health Canada doesn’t require labels, then the CFIA can’t enforce them. Let me be very clear: cloned beef and dairy products from cloned cattle — and their offspring — can now legally enter our grocery stores. There are no labels, no warnings, and no way for Canadians to know what they’re buying or eating. And the most disturbing part? We don’t even know if it’s already on our shelves. Health Canada has not told the public when the change officially took effect — and since there’s no labeling or tracking, there’s no way to verify what’s already in circulation. They say it’s “safe.” But this isn’t about safety anymore — it’s about transparency, ethics, and trust. Cloning is not natural. It’s a laboratory process that copies an animal’s DNA to create a genetic duplicate. Many cloned animals suffer from deformities, reproductive issues, and shortened lifespans. Even the surrogates that carry them face complications. So instead of increasing oversight, our government quietly removed it. Instead of warning Canadians, they decided we didn’t need to know. WTF Canada — time to start paying attention. Do you think this is transparency? I bet the majority of Canadians — maybe 60 to 70% — have no idea this is even happening. And a good chunk would probably call it a “conspiracy theory” while reading this post. Year a little research will prove it’s truth. This is deception, plain and simple Canadians deserve to know what we’re putting on our tables and feeding our families. Health Canada made the decision. The bullies, I mean the CFIA will enforce it. And the Canadian people are left completely in the dark. Time to open your eyes and start paying attention my friends, Because no government should ever decide that the truth belongs to them — and not to the people. Kind regards, Lisa Robinson “The People’s Councillor” City of Pickering“Strength Does Not Lie In The Absence Of Fear, But In The Courage To Face It Head On And Rise Above It” - Lisa Robinson 2023

THE REALITIES OF THE CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY AND IT’S EFFECT ON CANADIAN SOCIETY

THE REALITIES OF THE CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY AND IT’S EFFECT ON CANADIAN SOCIETY THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH WE LIVE are very often designed to favour particular outcomes, whether we realize it or not. Quite recently, I came across an online discussion about what is referred to as the Cloward-Piven Strategy, being a process for social and political manipulation – and a topic that has since led me to examine more thoroughly the degree to which this initiative may exist in Canadian society. In this week’s column, I will share with you some of what I've learned. The Cloward-Piven Strategy is a political and social blueprint that aims to create a crisis, both politically and within our welfare system. The aim is to force radical social change and an increasing dependency on government. In recent years, this has included the establishment of a guaranteed minimum income – a topic most Canadians have by now either read or heard about. The strategy was outlined in a 1966 article entitled "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty," published in the ‘The Nation’ magazine by two American sociologists and political activists, Richard Cloward and Frances Piven. The central idea of their thesis is to encourage mass enrollment into social welfare programs to the point of overloading the administrative and fiscal capacities that support them. What that basically points to is a calculated effort, over time, to mobilize the ‘poor’ and so-called ‘marginalized’ groups in our communities to apply for all the benefits to which they’re entitled. The resulting flood of claims would strain local bureaucracies and budgets, leading to a breakdown in their ability to function properly. In theory, this would compel governments at various levels to intervene with a much bolder solution, such as a guaranteed minimum income provided by the state. As we know, this would result in a massive redistribution of wealth in our country – and add a frightening new level of dependency. For decades, Canadians have witnessed an ongoing expansion in Provincial welfare rolls, however, the concept of a guaranteed minimum income has yet to be implemented – regardless of the efforts made by social activists. I would argue that such a program would, primarily, encourage many thousands of unemployed people across this country to simply rely on government handouts manifestly designed to promote a socialist agenda. Stay with me, because there’s much more behind the ideals that form the basis of such an economic and political theory – ideals that go well beyond a guaranteed minimum income. Some of the more worthwhile commentary I have read on social media suggests the Cloward-Piven Strategy is right now being implemented by our federal government in ways I hadn’t previously considered. It begins with programs put in place during the Covid pandemic, those that included massive government stimulus spending, including the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB), which gave more than eight million Canadians free money with no strings attached. Some say desperate times call for desperate measures, however, there’s an argument to be made that CERB was in fact part of a broader agenda, one that helped to create an additional dependency on programs that allowed the federal government to gain more control. Justin Trudeau and his cabinet appeared ready and eager to raise our national debt to the point of bankruptcy-by-design, even under the guise of keeping our national economy temporarily afloat. Another example to be considered is the Liberals’ radical climate agenda that began affecting Canadian energy producers as major banks stopped issuing loans to oil and gas firms unless they complied with net-zero targets. With fuel prices soaring, we faced historic inflation, and food banks across the country reported record demand as the cost of groceries increased roughly 30 per cent between 2020 and 2025. This, too, helps to create a dependency never before seen, as individuals from coast to coast still struggle to feed their families and are more often starting to look to government for assistance. On a larger scale, our now-Prime Minister Mark Carney spoke at the Vatican in 2019 in support of the Council for Inclusive Capitalism, a group designed to unite global corporations, financial institutions, and the Catholic Church under a single moral-economic framework. His message was clear: Loyalty must shift from traditional institutions to a centralized system where authority is dictated by economic compliance. At the same time, there appears to be a movement dedicated to the creation of an even greater permanent dependency on the State through what is known as ‘programmable money’. Our Prime Minister has been seen as one of the most vocal international advocates for Central Bank Digital Currencies. In a speech given at a gathering of the Bank for International Settlements, Mark Carney suggested the future of ‘money’ will be programmable and trackable, and that its purpose must include support for what international agencies see as ‘sustainable’ development. In October 2023, the Bank of Canada began pilot testing a central bank digital currency, and our Prime Minister helped to advise that effort. If implemented, this programmable currency would allow the government to freeze accounts, limit purchases, and control every financial transaction – in theory. What is not mere theory but rather factual evidence is the swiftness of action taken by the federal Liberals to freeze the bank accounts of protesters they simply didn’t agree with. Those “financial incapacitation” measures by which individuals seen at a protest were subjected to bank account freezes and auto insurance cancellation decrees - all without a court order or even notice and a chance to respond - were ultimately deemed by the courts to be unlawful. The actions taken by then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his cabinet remain as one of the most glaring examples of government overreach in Canadian history. Additionally, many Western leaders across the globe appear to have loyalties more connected to the World Economic Forum, the United Nations, and other unelected global institutions than to national sovereignty and the maintenance of individual freedoms. The future is full of doubt, particularly for Canada, as in recent days our federal government has brought forward a budget that forecasts a total debt of $1.347-trillion in 2025-26, while at the same time offering up additional spending in excess of $140-billion over five years. When taken as a whole, these and other government initiatives that tear down the rights and freedoms of the individual can only succeed when a community of citizens is itself corrupted into almost complete dependency. This is the Cloward-Piven strategy in full force.

CAMBALACHE

... By Joe Ingino BA. Psychology Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States "Cambalache" can refer to several things, most notably the 1934 Argentine tango song by Enrique Santos Discépolo, which is famous for its lyrics about corruption and chaos. These are the lyrics of such tango that if read carefully... They not only foretell today... but the future to come. Have a read: That the world was and always be filth, I already know… In the year five hundred and six and in the year two thousand too! There always have been thieves, traitors and victims of fraud, happy and bitter people, valuables and imitations. But, that the twentieth century is a display of insolent malice, nobody can deny it anymore. We lived sunk in a fuzz and in the same mud all well-worn… Today it happens it is the same to be decent or a traitor! To be an ignorant, a genius, a pickpocket, a generous person or a swindler! All is the same! Nothing is better! They are the same, an idiot ass and a great professor! There are no failing grades or merit valuations, the immoral have caught up with us. If one lives in a pose and another, in his ambition, steals, it’s the same if it’s a priest, a mattress maker, a king of clubs, a cad or a tramp. What a lack of respect, what a way to run over reason! Anybody is a gentleman! Anybody is a thief! Mixed with Stavisky, you have Don Bosco and La Mignon don Chicho and Napoleon, Carnera and San Martin. Like in the disrespectful window of the bazaars, life is mixed up, and wounded by a sword without rivets you can see a Bible crying next to a water heater. Twentieth century, bazaar problematic and feverish! If you don’t cry, you don’t get fed and if you don’t steal, you’re a stupid. Go ahead! Keep it up! That there, in hell we’re gonna reunite. Don’t think anymore, move out of the way. Nobody seems to care if you were born honest. That is the same the one who works, day and night like an ox, than the one who lives from the others, than the one that kills or heals or the one who lives outside the law. We are living in dangerous times... times that are about to transform civilization in a never to return what was. Canada is under seige in a Cambalache of misconception. As we celebrate ‘Remembrance’ We should all bow our heads in shame in letting our country fall and allow being forced to conform. Canada is tired... and it seeping at the seams. This past week a local news item read: Hateful comments stepped up by assault at McDonald’s A delivery driver was assaulted after a male suspect made hateful comments in Bowmanville, in the Municipality of Clarington. Police attempted to investigate as a hate crime... Now don’t get me wrong there is no room for prejudice or injustice. But in a social Cambalache...you have to give respect to the causation... as open social defiance is seen by Canadians as insulting to our National identity. People dressed in foreign attire even though their right to wear what they want. It is insulting to Canada. Tolerance has been pushed to the limit of oppressive laws to force compliance. This cambalache is not hate but frustration. We may be multicultural but very much one nation with one custom, tradition, language and history. This is why today we bow our heads in remembrance... under one flag, one people.

Why Flying Is Safer Than Surgery?

Why Flying Is Safer Than Surgery By Diana Gifford Many of us have the experience of boarding a plane with a prayer that the pilot has had enough sleep. With your surgeon, it’s a similar problem. Few people get to choose who will do their surgery. Even if you’ve gone to the trouble of arranging a referral to the best, how can you know the doctor hasn’t hit a rough patch? Maybe a crumbling marriage? Or a punishing work and travel schedule that simply has your surgeon fatigued? What can you do? As individual patients, not much. In fact, wait lines are often so long there’s a disincentive to jeopardize that precious surgery date. But as for airline pilots, health care systems have safeguards to ensure surgeons are in good working order. But they are a looser and more opaque. Working hours for pilots are strictly regulated by law. Residents in training often work 24-hour shifts despite known fatigue risks. Fully trained surgeons often have no legally mandated work-hour limits. Schedules are set by hospitals and departments. Is there a culture of bravado among doctors, that they tolerate this? When there’s a near miss in an airplane, the pilot faces the same consequences as passengers. When a surgeon makes an error, there no co-surgeon to prevent or correct it, and reporting of incidents is rare for fear of lawsuits. Physicians are trained to diagnose and to treat. They are not trained to admit vulnerability. Yet, the profession is showing serious strain. More than half of Canadian doctors report feeling burned out, with many contemplating early retirement. In the United States, the numbers are similar. Across Europe, countries have begun to notice alarming levels of depression, addiction, and even suicide among doctors. Why then does the public know so little about existing programs that support doctors and their families. Even healers need help when the going gets rough. We should be broadcasting the programs that care for doctors. And they do exist. The Ontario Medical Association offers a confidential Physician Health Program for doctors, residents, and medical students dealing with mental health challenges, addictions, or professional stress. Other provinces in Canada have comparable services. The U.S. has the Federation of State Physician Health Programs. In Europe, the NHS Practitioner Health service in England, the Practitioner Health Matters Programme in Ireland, and programs in the Netherlands, Norway, and France provide support. Spain offers a particularly sobering example. In the 1990s, several high-profile physician suicides shocked the medical community there. The profession realized that denial and silence were killing their own, and that patients, too, were at risk. In response, the medical colleges created the Programa de Atención Integral al Médico Enfermo, or “Comprehensive Care Program for the Sick Doctor.” It has become a model across Europe, combining confidentiality with structured monitoring to ensure doctors get well and return to practice. The model is strikingly consistent across jurisdictions, offering confidential support, separate from licensing bodies, to encourage doctors to step forward. Where risk to patients is clear, reporting obligations to regulators remain. But the central aim is prevention: address problems before they spiral into impairment, mistakes, or withdrawal from practice. Should the public know more about these programs? My answer is yes. Not to fuel distrust, but to build confidence. A doctor who seeks help is not a doctor to be feared; quite the opposite. Still, it is easy to see why some bristle. Shouldn’t the system be stricter, not gentler, with impaired physicians? Isn’t there a danger these programs “protect their own”? Such suspicion misreads the design. These programs are protective, for doctors and patients. Alas, medicine clings to its culture of invincibility, and that’s why flying is safer than surgery. —————————————————————————————————————— This column offers opinions on health and wellness, not personal medical advice. Visit www.docgiff.com to learn more. For comments, diana@docgiff.com. Follow on Instagram @diana_gifford_jones

As a Job Seeker, Are You Really Hungry?

As a Job Seeker, Are You Really Hungry? By Nick Kossovan Wanting "easy" is why most people underestimate the time and effort it takes to achieve success—whether that's shooting a round of golf under 85, running a marathon, starting a six-figure consulting business, making it in Hollywood, or finding a job that aligns with their career goals. As white-collar jobs decline and competition for the remaining positions rises, a job seeker's level of hunger becomes a crucial factor in their job search success. A determined job seeker leaves no stone unturned. They hyperfocus on one goal: securing employment. They don't point fingers or buy into the narrative that "the hiring system is broken." Worth noting: No two hiring managers assess candidates in the same way; therefore, a universal "hiring system" doesn't exist. Hungry job seekers keep their eyes on the prize and do whatever it takes to acquire it. As Henry David Thoreau said, "Success usually comes to those who are too busy to be looking for it." Whether intentionally or not, job seekers are associating the current hyper-competitive job market, paired with Millennials and Gen Zs beginning to take on gatekeeping roles in the workplace, bringing their own perspectives on work ethic professionalism, with a broken hiring system, which, as I mentioned, doesn't exist. Hiring processes aren't broken; employers are responding to the realities of supply and demand. Meanwhile, younger generations are modifying hiring processes to suit their preferred communication styles, and, like previous generations before, tend to lean towards candidates whom, for the most part, they can relate to. When interacting with recruiters and hiring managers, job seekers tend to lead with their skills and experience. While these are important, they're only the initial factors an employer considers. A candidate can possess all the qualifications but still lack the hunger for: · The company and its values · Their profession · The industry · Career progression It's a common misconception that hunger is hard to spot. Most hiring managers will tell you they recognize hunger when they see it; I certainly do. Signs that the candidate is hungry are important, as hunger fuels a person's drive to excel, whether it's for career growth, financial security, or to afford an annual European cruise. A candidate's chances of hearing "You're hired!" significantly increase when their interviewer perceives them as hungry and thus views them as the ideal employee, someone with intrinsic motivation. You're probably asking, "Nick, what are the signs that a candidate is hungry?" Actions speak louder than words. What a candidate does is far more important than what they say. Which candidate is hungrier? CANDIDATE A: Arrives 10 minutes early for the interview. CANDIDATE B: Arrives right on time or five minutes late. CANDIDATE A: Has grammatical errors throughout their resume and LinkedIn profile. CANDIDATE B: Has an error-free resume and LinkedIn profile. CANDIDATE A: Pushes back on doing a 45-minute assignment. CANDIDATE B: Welcomes the assignment to showcase their skills. CANDIDATE A: Doesn't send a thank-you note. CANDIDATE B: Sends a well-crafted thank-you note with additional insights about their impact on previous employers. Your actions, especially those visible to employers, reveal a great deal about your hunger and professionalism. No LinkedIn profile picture or banner? Not hungry. Only wanting a remote job? Not hungry. A hungry job seeker can be identified by: Their networking efforts. Hungry job seekers constantly reach out to everyone and anyone because they understand that job opportunities are all around them. The catch is they're attached to people; therefore, they know building relationships is how they uncover the jobs that are all around them. Including a cover letter. Not including a cover letter is lazy. Hungry job seekers leave nothing to chance; therefore, they include a cover letter that provides compelling reasons for employers to read their resume and visit their LinkedIn profile. Showing evidence of impact. Claiming "I'm a team player" or "I'm good at sales" is just an unsubstantiated opinion about yourself. Expecting employers to hire you based on your self-judgment shows you're unwilling to put in the effort to provide the information—numerical evidence of the impact you had on your previous employers—they need to assess your potential value. They've crafted an elevator speech. Writing and memorizing a 30-second elevator speech, a summary of who you are and what you offer, is an effort most job seekers won't bother with. When I hear a well-prepared elevator speech, I know I'm talking to someone who's hungry. The best elevator speech I received: "I sold Corvettes in Las Vegas." Not having a sense of entitlement. Nothing turns off an employer faster than a sense of entitlement. Hungry job seekers understand they must earn their way through an employer's hiring process. They don't expect special treatment, exceptions, or to be "given a chance." Due to the global economy and ever-changing consumer demands, companies are constantly striving to remain competitive and profitable by operating as lean as possible. The days of employers hand-holding their employees are long gone. Today, companies often have a "swim or sink" culture. Astute hiring managers know that candidates whose actions demonstrate a hunger for job search success are most likely to have the necessary motivation to succeed in a new job on their own. ___________________________________________________________________________ Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned corporate veteran, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. Send Nick your job search questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.

The True Rise of Evil

The True Rise of Evil By Dale Jodoin There is cancer spreading through the Western world. It doesn’t come with tanks or uniforms. It spreads quietly through words, through fear, and through the silence of people who should know better. At first it looks like anger. Then it grows into protest. But before long, it becomes hate. And hate, once it takes root, is almost impossible to remove. Right now, that cancer shows up as antisemitism. Jewish people in Canada, the United States, Britain, Australia, and across Europe are being blamed, harassed, and attacked for a war they didn’t start. Students are bullied in schools. Jewish athletes and artists are targeted online. Shopkeepers and families are threatened in their own communities. These aren’t soldiers or politicians, just people trying to live their lives. We promised “Never Again” after World War II. Those words were meant to stand for something permanent, something sacred. But promises mean nothing if they aren’t defended. What we’re seeing today feels like the early stages of what our grandparents fought to stop. Silence, excuses, and political cowardice are letting that same darkness grow again. In some cities, people march in the streets chanting for the destruction of Israel and even the death of Jewish people. They call it free speech. But there’s nothing free about it. It’s not a debate, it's poison. And the most shocking part is how many governments stand back and do nothing, afraid of being called names by the loudest voices. That poison has started to seep into our schools and institutions, the very places meant to teach fairness and respect. The National Education Association (NEA), the largest teachers’ union in the United States, recently made headlines after removing references to Jews from its Holocaust education materials and distancing itself from groups that train teachers to fight antisemitism. Jewish teachers and students spoke out, saying they felt erased and betrayed. When a national education union does something like that, it doesn’t just rewrite history, it opens the door for hate to return to classrooms under a new name. Once hate enters education, it spreads faster. It shapes how young people think. It tells them who is safe to hate next. And that’s what worries me. Today, the target is Jewish people. But you can already see who might be next. Christians are being mocked and excluded more often in the U.S., Britain, and parts of Europe. Italian Catholics are starting to see similar treatment. After them, it could be anyone, any group that refuses to go along with the mob or disagrees with the loudest crowd. That’s how hate works. It doesn’t stay contained. It grows and consumes everything in its path. We need to start calling things by their real names. The Muslim Brotherhood, banned in several Muslim countries for its violent activities, operates freely in Canada and the West. Antifa, a movement that claims to fight oppression, often spreads its own version of it. These groups don’t just protest; they intimidate, threaten, and sometimes call for destruction. When an ideology pushes violence or calls for death, it stops being political. It becomes terrorism. And terrorism should never be tolerated, no matter what mask it wears. Our governments need to wake up. If an arts group, festival, or publicly funded organization denies Jewish people participation because of their faith, it should lose every dollar of public money. Immediately. Public money is a public trust, and when that trust is broken, it must be cut off. Any teacher, professor, or administrator who bullies or excludes students based on religion should be fired and charged. Schools should be safe for learning, not breeding grounds for hate. And the public must do its part too. Every citizen has a responsibility to speak up. Hate doesn’t just happen “somewhere else.” It starts in small ways a joke, a post, a shrug and before long it’s something no one can control. If you think it won’t reach you, you’re wrong. History has shown again and again that once hate begins, everyone becomes a target eventually. We can’t pretend this is just about one conflict overseas. This is about the soul of our countries about whether we still believe in fairness, freedom, and equal protection under the law. When we turn away from one group being attacked, we give permission for others to be next. If our leaders lack the courage to act, then it’s up to regular people to remind them what this country stands for. Canada, and the Western world, were built on freedom and respect. Those values mean nothing if we only defend them for some. Either we protect all people equally, or we become the very thing we claim to fight against. Hate is lazy. It finds a reason to blame someone else instead of fixing what’s broken. It hides behind politics and faith to excuse cruelty. It grows slowly at first, then all at once. That’s why I keep calling it cancer because you can’t wait it out. You have to cut it out before it spreads. So let’s be clear: anyone calling for genocide, anyone denying others the right to live in peace, anyone using public money to divide people they are part of the problem. If we keep funding them, we are part of it too. This isn’t about left or right, Jewish or Muslim, believer or atheist. It’s about right and wrong. Humanity or hate. The choice is still ours, but not for long. If we don’t act now, if we don’t stand shoulder to shoulder against this rising darkness then one day soon, we’ll look back and wonder when it was that we stopped being the good guys. About the Author: Dale Jodoin is a Canadian journalist and columnist who writes about freedom, faith, and social change. His work focuses on the moral challenges facing modern society and the importance of protecting human rights in an age of growing division.

Scrolling Away the Days - How Social Media is Consuming the Life of Every Adolescent

Scrolling Away the Days - How Social Media is Consuming the Life of Every Adolescent By Camryn Bland Youth Columnist Social media has been incorporated into the routines of billions of people daily. It is used for entertainment, information, and creativity, all beneficial concepts at their core. The current issue isn’t with the idea of social media, but with the modern purposes of its usage and the degree it’s relied on. Not only is social media incorporated into the lives of so many individuals, but it is a time commitment that is much longer than one would believe. Short-form content, such as tiktok or instagram reels are often used as a time filler, something to watch in a spare moment. Every time I get on a bus, walk into a cafeteria, or wait for a class to begin, I witness countless people facing their phones. When adding all these simple moments in a day, a few minutes of screen time can easily turn into hours wasted. This wasted time is something which I cannot avoid in my daily life. I am a busy student who has very little free time, yet I always manage to spend more time online than I ever intended to. Any free time which I have should be rewarded by an activity which makes me feel good. I should spend my time reading, going outside, or baking, not watching others do these activities as if they’re a far off dream. In 2025, it has become easier to watch others enjoy their lives than to live our own, yet our dreams are calling from the other side of the device. My phone usage feels like an unbreakable cycle. The more overwhelmed I feel, the more I want to relax, which leads to doomscrolling on every social media app I have. This wasted time makes me feel much more anxious than I did when I began, and the cycle repeats. What was originally used to reduce my stress only continues to increase it, creating an addiction difficult to fight. When you read about social media, it seems almost silly how the lives of so many people revolve around something they could delete with the click of a button. The solution is right in front of me, yet I never choose to break the habit. I fear what I will miss out on, the jokes I will no longer understand. How will it affect my friendships if I am the only one offline? Will I be the last to hear the news if I remove my sources? How will I relax if I cannot scroll? Disconnection is the rational answer to fight a phone addiction, yet the hardest promise to commit to. The issue with this media doesn’t just come from the time commitment, but from the negative mood associated with it. When I finally disconnect, I feel worse than I did when I began scrolling. When I am online, I am fed a constant stream of comparison, upsetting news, and fake information. This outlet is no longer entertaining, informative, or creative, but a key source of anxiety and regret. One of the main influences of this regret is the comparison which stems from social media. Whether it be beauty, lifestyle, or success, influencers post the highlights of their lives, leaving out any inconvenience which may seem undesirable. Almost every post undergoes edits and tweaks before being seen by the vulnerable viewer, to make their posts, and their overall lives, appear perfect. This content causes feelings of shame and disappointment in my own life, despite the fact I know what I view is unrealistic. Social media is no longer about what is real and fake, it’s about what makes adolescents feel something, even if that's jealousy and dejection. These wasted hours are not solely the fault of the viewer; the addiction can be traced back to the algorithms which are keeping viewers hooked. Every social media platform, whether that be tiktok, instagram, youtube, or facebook are all designed to keep you coming back for more. It collects data from your interaction history, modelling itself to do whatever makes you interested. It is an effective strategy which keeps the media thriving and individuals struggling with an addiction to watching one more video. Every night, I promise myself I will reduce my screen time tomorrow. I understand the consequences of the manipulative system, yet the next day I scroll just as much as before. It is useless, as something created to inspire creativity and enjoyment leaves me more unmotivated than ever before. I could spend hours scrolling through the algorithm, yet not remember a single video which I watched. It’s a cycle which needs to be broken, a jail cell made of screen time which I must break free from. The key is right in front of me, the solution so simple; just delete the social media apps. Yet, it is something I may never be able to do, no matter how bad the consequences may be.

Lest We Forget — And Lest We Surrender What They Fought For

Lest We Forget — And Lest We Surrender What They Fought For By Councillor Lisa Robinson Every November, I make my way to Pickering’s cenotaph — my favourite place in this city. It’s quiet there. Sacred. A place where gratitude replaces politics and pride replaces excuses. We’ve built something special there — the Poppy Walkway, lined with vibrant red, and the Remembrance Sidewalk, guiding every step toward reflection. They’re more than beautification projects — they’re symbols of a Canada that once stood for courage, duty, and sacrifice. I have family who served. Their stories of honour and love of country shaped who I am. And maybe that’s why this day means so much to me — because I’ve spent my own life standing for the same freedom they fought to protect. But lately, I’ve watched those freedoms — of speech, conscience, and expression — being chipped away, piece by piece. Freedom doesn’t vanish overnight. It fades when good people stop defending it. And that’s what I fear most — that too many are afraid to stand anymore. The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. And right now, too many good men and women are doing nothing. We used to have Canadians who would run toward danger — even lie about their age — to defend their families and their freedom. Today, too many won’t even risk criticism. They’d rather fit in than stand up. Even here in Pickering, I’ve watched the change up close. Councillors proudly wearing lanyards and pins for special interest causes, but nothing of the Canadian flag — unless it’s Canada Day. Not on their jackets. Not in their offices. Not on their hearts. And some of these same councillors have even liked posts on social media that the Canadian flag is a “symbol of colonial violence.” Yet they still work part-time at our local Legion — the very place built to honour the men and women who fought under that flag. I can think of nothing more hypocritical, or more disgusting. And when I tried to bring back something as simple, as sacred, as our National Anthem before Council meetings, not one councillor would second my motion. Not one. For seven long months, I fought for something that should never have needed a fight — a simple act of respect for our country and for the veterans who died so that we could stand in that chamber and debate freely. And what did the Mayor do? Instead of allowing my motion to stand, he used his Strong Mayor powers to bury it inside a package of unrelated measures that stripped away even more of our local freedoms — measures I could never support in good conscience. He forced my hand — deliberately — so that I’d be made to look like I was voting against the very thing I had begged for for seven months. And make no mistake — the only reason that anthem finally returned wasn’t because of patriotism. It was because of political optics. The Mayor folded it into his “Elbows Up” movement — a show of defiance against President Trump, not a show of love for Canada. It had nothing to do with honouring our veterans, our flag, or our freedoms — and everything to do with opportunism. That’s the kind of leadership we’re dealing with. Even this week, when we raised the poppy flag at City Hall, I looked around the crowd and saw it plain as day: the Mayor and other members of Council stood in silence — I couldn’t hear a single voice singing. I couldn’t even see their lips moving. That silence broke my heart. Because silence is how freedom dies — not with violence, but with indifference. We have politicians who will bend our flag-raising policy to appease every special interest group under the sun — but won’t lift a finger to honour the men and women who died under the one flag that unites us all. We have veterans sleeping in tents while photo-op patriots boast about inclusivity. The same people who claim to “care” about justice can’t be bothered to care about those who gave everything for them to speak freely. This is not who we were meant to be. We used to be a proud, unapologetic, united country. Now, too many are afraid to even say the word Canadian. Well, I refuse to be one of them. I will not apologize for standing up for my country. I will not be silent to spare the feelings of those who’ve forgotten who they serve. Because remembrance isn’t a ceremony — it’s a duty. It’s not about wearing a poppy once a year. It’s about living the values that poppy represents: courage, integrity, and the will to stand when everyone else bows. This Remembrance Day, I’ll be at that cenotaph again, beneath the flag they fought for, surrounded by the spirits of heroes who never came home. And I’ll make the same promise I’ve always made: That I will stand for freedom. That I will speak the truth. And that I will never stop fighting for the Canada they believed in. Because I will never forget. And I will never surrender. Lest we forget — and lest we surrender. With gratitude, Councillor Lisa Robinson “The People’s Councillor” "Strength Does Not Lie In The Absence Of Fear, But In The Courage To Face It Head-On And Rise Above It"

ANOTHER LOOK AT THE NEED TO ELIMINATE INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL BOARDS ALTOGETHER

ANOTHER LOOK AT THE NEED TO ELIMINATE INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL BOARDS ALTOGETHER LAST WEEK IN THIS SPACE I said Ontario’s individual school boards are basically out of control and that it’s long-past time to eliminate them altogether. If I needed any reassurance that I was right about that, it came by way of a few social media responses to my column. One person I’ll refer to as Jenn had this to say, “Just like the Ministry of Education and its Minister, you have no idea what goes on in a public school or in the realm of public education. I welcome you to spend a week in my school.” Aside from the unlikely prospect of gaining entry to her classroom, I responded by saying the issues I highlighted are in fact, mere ‘drops in the bucket’ as to what's been going on in the current system of school administration. When I suggested that she offer up at least some form of defense as to the examples I chose – those I still believe to be the most indicative of a radical agenda – she doubled down on rhetoric without specifics, suggesting “The system is broken, and it starts with the Ministry.” I see. So, instead of sharing with me the potential benefits of local school boards focusing more on race and gender politics than on basic education like reading, writing, and arithmetic, her finger points directly to the very Education Ministry that is attempting to make some sense of it all. I get the fact that an educator with over two decades of experience will likely feel caught in a trap. If they try to defend what many see as entirely indefensible, they’ll be seen as radicals. At the same time, should they publicly oppose the mandate set by what I’ll call Marxist educators, their likely chance of promotion within a ‘broken system’ will be almost non-existent. Getting back to the social media responses, a fellow I’ll call Jeffery told me, in his infinite wisdom, that my position on the issue was “moronic”. Well, with that kind of diction, surely Jeffery possesses a unique member ID which he now uses to access all the benefits and resources of the Toastmasters Club. Way to go, little man. One person, who preferred to remain cowardly – that is to say ‘anonymous’ on Facebook, actually had the comical fortitude to suggest I was somehow in a homosexual relationship after having read my column. I hope that wasn’t a subtle invitation, whoever you are. I’m seriously not interested. As to being serious, I can tell my readers with certainty that my references in last week’s column undoubtedly form the basis of a collective attack on our local student population. The reasons for that are the controversial policies established by the Durham District School Board that have focused on so-called human rights issues related to gender identity, race, and the content of school libraries. All of which has ignited a fierce public debate as well as protests from concerned parents, and rightly so. What is happening in the debate over whether the classroom is the proper place for discussions about race and gender identification is that school boards are now tossing around references to the Canadian Human Rights Code as a means to do two things – justify teaching children about very sensitive issues that have noting whatever to do with a well-rounded education, and to basically get away with literally forcing a radical social agenda onto students without parental consent. Here’s just one example. In 2023, then-chair of the Durham District School Board, Donna Edwards, stopped a meeting twice during a question period that had quickly grown heated over concerns about gender identity, the appropriateness of school reading materials, and so-called discrimination issues. Her comments to concerned parents wishing to express their views were less than inspiring. “We do welcome and value diverse community perspectives and questions, we appreciate that these can help support our learning and shape different ways of thinking, however; questions, interactions and discussions within our classrooms, schools, workplace and boardroom must be respectful and free of discrimination. Questions or comments that erase or demean identities protected under the Canadian Human Rights Code or that perpetuate stereotypes, discrimination or assumptions are not acceptable.” Remarks such as those appear manifestly arranged to cast the shadow of a legal noose over the heads of anyone who dares to exercise their own rights of free speech – something too many Boards appear to have little time for, unless it be to support their own social and political agenda. At the same meeting, things again became heated when trustees were questioned on the appropriateness of school reading materials, specifically the graphic novel “Gender Queer” by Maia Kobabe, which includes a sexually explicit illustration. A question that was submitted for the purposes of discussion was ultimately censored by the Board to remove the term “pornographic illustrations.” In answer to the question, a senior administrator advised those concerned that the book had been reviewed by the board following a complaint from a parent during the previous school year – and that a review committee made up of educators, administration, superintendents and students found the novel aligned with the board’s “education policy”. There’s the rub. Is it acceptable School Board policy to potentially institutionalize a form of disrespect toward parental rights? How about the consequences of overstepping legal boundaries by acting in a manner more suited to a court of law when providing self-serving interpretations used to counter any opposition? It is widely observed and frequently reported in local media that there are low levels of public awareness and engagement regarding School Board elections and candidates. This is a recognized challenge, with several factors contributing to the issue. School Board elections are held concurrently with Municipal elections every four years, and historically, they tend to have significantly lower voter turnout compared to other levels of government. That shows a clear and dangerous lack of engagement. Voters often report difficulty finding information about individual candidates, their platforms, and the specific role and responsibilities of a school board trustee. One of the more intelligent social media comments I received came from someone named Jake, who had this to say: “…this proposal by the Ontario government is a bid to centralize power, so how would you feel if the (NDP) were removing trustees and appointing supervisors? Because the provincial Conservatives will not be in power forever, but this Bill will still be law whenever they're gone.” Good point, and my reply must focus on what I see as the need for consistency throughout the province. Regardless of which political party holds the reins of power, it would be a far better thing to have a single entity – not only responsible for setting policies, but to be accountable to the public. The days of individual domains controlled by radical School Boards must be brought to an end. Quickly.

STOP NEGOTIATING

STOP NEGOTIATING By Joe Ingino BA. Psychology Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States This week the International headlines read: Trump announces 10 per cent tariff increase on Canadian goods U.S. President Donald Trump says he is raising tariffs on Canadian goods by 10 per cent, after accusing Canada of airing what he called a “fraudulent” advertisement that misrepresented former president Ronald Reagan’s stance on tariffs. In a post published on Truth Social at 4:30 p.m. Saturday, Trump wrote, “I am increasing the Tariff on Canada by 10% over and above what they are paying now.” Trump’s post cited his frustration over an advertisement produced by the Ontario government that used clips of Reagan warning about the dangers of protectionism and praising free trade. “Canada was caught, red handed, putting up a fraudulent advertisement on Ronald Reagan’s Speech on Tariffs,” he wrote. People, people, people. Am I the only one that sees this? Our so called leaders are playing right in to Trumps strategy. If I was Prime Minister. I would not negotiate a thing. Let Trump have his Tariff. Let’s regroup Canada and not worry about the American power trip. As it stand our markets look good to Americans due to the currency exchange. The more we seem desperate to negotiate the harder he presses. Ford has no business getting in the middle of an International economic threat. Trump is way smarter than any of our so called leaders. He knows he can do anything he wants.... so he sets people up. Let’s take this scenario. Trump will impost Tariffs on Canada. Do we really benefit from the fight back? Has it been working so far? NO. It’s a fight you can’t win and eventually will put you at a bigger disadvantage. People are quick to blame job loss to tariffs. Bull. The problem with job losses is poor management and greedy corporate bulls in board rooms. COVID.... The Chinese, Russia, Trump. There is always an excuse for corporations to look for ways to shift corporate interest in the name of making billions. Look at GM. I have been calling it for your the past 20 years. No one believed me. Remember not to long ago. The automakers cried wolf that they would be pulling out and the billions they took in aid? As a nation we need to stop being so gullable and so ignorant of the writings on the wall when it comes to our economy. Remember not to far away... when car companies turned to the Canadian government for assistance in the fear of bankruptcy? The Canadian government once again negotiated with the car automakers and the Canadian taxpayer lost big time... as the money that was to go to Canada to keep jobs ended up paying for new plants all over the world. I say to our Prime Minister... Stop being a fool to Trump. Let him do his thing and you do yours. Canadians are suffering... on our streets. Focus on that first.

Tariffs and TV Ads Won’t Heal Our Hospitals: Ontario’s Misguided Priorities

Tariffs and TV Ads Won’t Heal Our Hospitals: Ontario’s Misguided Priorities by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC FEC, CET, P.Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East As Ontario devotes $75 million to a cross-border advertising campaign and faces punishing U.S. tariffs of 35 – 45 percent on Canadian exports, the fallout is being felt not just in factories but also in hospitals. The trade war threatens to drain over $1 billion annually from the province’s health-care system through lost revenues and higher costs for medical supplies. Instead of funding more nurses, beds, and diagnostics, Ontario’s leadership is spending on political optics while patients wait longer for care. Canada’s true deficit is not in trade—it is in health. Ontario’s paradox of priorities Ontario’s health-care budget now exceeds C$80 billion, roughly half of total provincial expenditures. Despite this enormous investment, hospitals remain overcrowded, rural clinics understaffed, and emergency rooms frequently forced to close because of personnel shortages. In 2025, the provincial government launched a C$75 million U.S. advertising campaign—complete with clips from Ronald Reagan’s 1987 radio address against tariffs—to defend Ontario’s manufacturing base and appeal to American public opinion. The gambit backfired. The Trump administration retaliated by imposing a 35 percent tariff on Canadian exports, which rise to 45 percent on certain goods not meeting “America First” domestic-content rules. Ontario, whose prosperity relies on cross-border trade in autos, steel, machinery, and pharmaceuticals, is hit hardest. The economic shock is now rippling into the very heart of public services. The indirect hit to health care Although the tariffs target export industries, their secondary effects—lost revenue, weakened growth, and supply-chain disruption—land squarely on the health-care system. 1. Revenue loss and slower growth: Ontario exports about C$200 billion a year to the United States. Even if only 10 percent of that total (C$20 billion) faces the 35–45 percent penalty, the province stands to lose C$7–9 billion in trade value annually. Lower profits mean smaller corporate and payroll-tax intakes, cutting provincial revenues by an estimated C$500–700 million each year—funds that otherwise would finance hospitals, long-term care, and medical infrastructure. 2. Rising costs for imported health goods: While the tariffs are levied on Canadian exports, the ensuing retaliation and logistical friction drive up import costs as well. Ontario’s hospitals depend heavily on medical technology, diagnostic equipment, and pharmaceuticals that originate in or pass through U.S. supply chains. Border delays, insurance surcharges, and counter-tariffs could inflate procurement costs by 8–10 percent. Given an annual operating budget near C$60 billion, even a modest 1 percent price increase translates to C$600 million in extra spending—money siphoned from patient care to cover higher bills for essential supplies. 3. Cumulative impact: Combining revenue losses and cost inflation yields a C$1.1–1.3 billion annual burden on Ontario’s health system. That sum could otherwise finance 1,200 to 2,400 new hospital or critical-care beds, pay yearly salaries for 7,000 registered nurses, purchase 150 MRI or CT scanners, or fund comprehensive home-care programs for 250,000 Ontarians. Instead, these resources are evaporating through a trade conflict that delivers neither economic stability nor better public health. Meanwhile, patients wait Across Canada, the median wait to see a specialist is 78 days, and one in four patients waits 175 days or longer. Ontario faces some of the worst backlogs for elective surgery among G7 countries. In northern communities, doctor shortages persist; in urban centres, ambulance off-load delays have become routine. It is difficult to justify multimillion-dollar ad buys in U.S. media markets while emergency rooms at home struggle to find enough nurses to stay open overnight. Political messaging has taken precedence over measurable service improvement. Eroding equity and the social contract Universal health care remains Canada’s proudest social covenant: access based on need, not wealth or geography. Yet that covenant is eroding under fiscal and logistical strain. When a government invests C$75 million in political advertising that provokes tariffs costing the treasury more than ten times that amount, while hospital budgets strain to maintain basic services, something fundamental has gone wrong. The result is a quiet inequity—urban hospitals absorbing shocks while smaller communities fall further behind. Every dollar spent on public relations warfare is a dollar not spent on the front lines of care. Why Ontario—and Canada—are falling behind • Fragmentation: Provinces administer health care independently, creating duplication, uneven standards, and limited data sharing. • Capacity constraints: Canada maintains fewer hospital beds and diagnostic units per capita than most OECD peers. • Under-investment in prevention: Only about 5 percent of total health spending goes to primary and community care, compared with 8 percent elsewhere. • Workforce exhaustion: Chronic shortages and overtime have driven thousands of nurses to the private or U.S. sectors. • Policy distraction: Trade wars and industrial headlines dominate the agenda, while systemic reform languishes. A road map for renewal 1. Re-centre priorities. Treat health care as national infrastructure, not a secondary political cost. 2. Set measurable national standards. Enforce maximum wait-time targets, minimum bed ratios, and rural-access guarantees. 3. Invest upstream. Strengthen family-health teams, community clinics, and preventive programs to reduce hospital demand. 4. Ensure transparency. Publish all government communication and trade-response expenditures beside health-care investments. 5. Coordinate federally and provincially. Align transfer payments and performance targets to ensure accountability for every public dollar. The lesson Ontario’s C$75 million advertising campaign and the ensuing U.S. tariff escalation to 45 percent reveal a profound misalignment of priorities. Political optics displaced policy substance—and patients are paying the price. If even a fraction of the money and lost revenue tied up in this trade confrontation were redirected to front-line care, Ontario could shorten surgical waits, expand capacity, and restore public confidence in universal health care. Canada’s hospitals do not need patriotic slogans broadcast across American airwaves. They need stable funding, long-term planning, and leadership focused on the well-being of Canadians. Canada does not need future aggravation by unnecessarily antagonizing an unpredictable president already primed for tariff battle. Ontario’s misguided ad, at great taxpayer expense, will put a serious spike in Canada’s future tariff negotiations and can be perceived as direct political interference in US domestic affairs. What do you think?

When Democracy Becomes Propaganda

When Democracy Becomes Propaganda By Councillor Lisa Robinson When a sitting provincial premier in Canada produces a 60-second commercial using disembodied clips of Ronald Reagan speaking about tariffs — with the clear intent to influence U.S. political opinion — we cross a line. That’s not diplomacy or persuasion. It’s propaganda. Ontario’s government, led by Doug Ford, has spent millions on a U.S. TV ad blitz that features Reagan’s 1987 radio address, edited to criticize tariffs. The ad warns Americans that protectionism will cause retaliation, job losses, and economic collapse — extracting excerpts of Reagan’s voice to serve a modern political purpose. On the surface, using an iconic conservative figure to broadcast a message to Republicans sounds clever. But if you dig deeper, the ad is not an honest “Reagan speaks” piece — it is cherry-picked, decontextualized, and weaponized. The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation has already stated that the Ontario ad misrepresents Reagan’s full speech and that the province did not secure permission to edit or repurpose it. By stripping away context, selectively choosing sentences, and presenting Reagan’s voice as an argument tailored to this moment, the ad turns Reagan himself into a tool — not a historical figure. That is propaganda, not persuasion. And it’s fair to ask whether this kind of political theatre should be paid for by Ontario taxpayers at all. What Doug Ford’s government did with Ronald Reagan’s words isn’t an isolated stunt — it’s part of a larger pattern. We’ve seen the same tactics right here in Pickering. Our own mayor used taxpayer dollars to produce a propaganda video — not to inform residents, but to attack and discredit an elected colleague who dared to challenge the status quo. The intent was the same as Ford’s Reagan ad: distort the narrative, confuse the public, and weaponize perception. Both rely on emotional manipulation instead of honesty. Both use the public purse to protect political power. And both demonstrate a dangerous trend: government officials using the machinery of public communication to silence dissent and reward loyalty. It’s no coincidence that Doug Ford and the Mayor of Pickering have become close political allies — buddies with mutual friends in the development world, often benefiting from the same cozy network of insiders who profit most when the public stops asking questions. When propaganda replaces truth, those friends get richer, while the people get poorer — in trust, in transparency, and in representation. In an age of AI, deepfakes, and micro-targeted messaging, citizens can no longer assume all “endorsements” are authentic. When governments use history’s icons — or public platforms — as political props, democracy suffers. Whether it’s a province meddling in U.S. politics or a mayor weaponizing City Hall communications, both cross ethical lines. The public should never have to fund propaganda against itself. Ford’s ad campaign and Pickering’s political videos both show how far officials will go to control the narrative. When governments use public money to attack the truth, the people must push back. Because once manipulation becomes normalized, it spreads. Today it’s Reagan’s voice; tomorrow it’s your tax dollars funding hit pieces on local opponents. The same playbook — just a different stage. History and truth belong to all of us. When leaders manipulate one and erase the other, they’re not governing — they’re performing. Doug Ford’s Reagan ad and Pickering’s propaganda videos are not about communication. They’re about control. And when politicians form alliances built on deception, backed by money and developers, the people lose their voice. The antidote is simple but powerful: call it out. Every time. Everywhere. Because once the truth is gone, democracy doesn’t stand a chance. "Strength Does Not Lie In The Absence Of Fear, But In The Courage To Face It Head-On And Rise Above It"

NOW IS THE TIME TO ELIMINATE INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL BOARDS ALTOGETHER

SCHOOL BOARDS IN ONTARIO ARE OUT OF CONTROL and it is long-past time to eliminate them altogether. In their latest round of orchestrated sanctimony, education workers are grandstanding in an effort to force the Ontario government to withdraw Bill 33, Ontario’s Supporting Children and Students Act. The bill would give the government the authority to remove School Board trustees and replace them with provincially-appointed supervisors if it is deemed to be in the public interest. This has been brought about due to wild spending sprees and other occurrences that have formed the basis – at least for some boards – of extreme radicalization of what should otherwise be the proper administration of our children’s education. David Mastin, president of the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario, was found to cry crocodile tears during a news conference at Queen’s Park recently when he had the audacity to suggest, “This is dangerously close to authoritarian control… We are seeing a dismantling of democracy in real time.” In spite of the big union boss and his useless rhetoric, many parents in Ontario would surely feel a sense of relief just knowing their children won’t be under the control of trustees who repeatedly engage in public displays of extremely bad judgment. Of course, it doesn’t end there. Educators are also stomping their feet and waving their hands over the potential placement of police resource officers within Ontario’s schools. This is nothing new, and is seen by many as a positive step toward improvements in safety. Joining her colleague on the soapbox of righteous indignation was NDP education critic Chandra Pasma, who called Bill 33 “a direct attack on the rights of students, parents, teachers and education workers to have a say in our local schools.” Citing what she suggests is a lack of resources for teachers, she went on to say, “We are seeing a rising violence problem… and a shortage of workers as good people are (being) driven out of the system every day due to the working conditions,” Perhaps she didn’t get the memo from the Teachers’ Federation who oppose police resource officers in schools. Talk about mixed messages. What wasn’t mixed in terms of the real agenda that exists among so many educators in Ontario was Ms Pasma’s admission that the need for authority among trustees far surpasses any other issue, as she went on to say, “Instead of fixing these problems, the government is focused on a partisan power grab.” Really? Not to be outdone on this theatrical stage, David Mastin chimed in by adding, “This is not just a bureaucratic shift, it’s a direct attack on democracy that will silence marginalized voices, harm students and strip the community of their right to shape public education.” Well, the only entity that would likely be stripped of the ability to “shape public education” are the radical Marxists who show more concern over race and gender politics than basic education like reading, writing, and arithmetic. Bill 33 provides a means of addressing financial mismanagement among school boards, which would include the ability to install provincial supervisors and setting out expense requirements. The bill would also impact post-secondary institutions by regulating fees mandating merit-based admission at post-secondary institutions, as well as children’s aid societies. “Parents deserve confidence that school boards are making decisions in the best interests of their children’s education,” said Education Minister Paul Calandra in a release announcing the bill earlier this spring. The bill is expected to pass this autumn, but as one might expect, Mastin and other critics say they want the bill withdrawn. “Our hope is that the bill will be withdrawn immediately,” Mastin explained. “There is no part of the bill we as teachers are comfortable with.” That’s a shame, Dave. Good luck with that narrative. There are so many examples of controversies among school boards in Ontario that it would take another three columns for me to discuss them all, but we’ll look at just a few. The most controversial policies established by the Durham District School Board (DDSB) in recent years have centered on human rights, equity, and inclusion, particularly related to gender identity, race, and the content of school libraries, igniting public debate and prompting protests from parents. DDSB policies regarding gender identity have consistently fueled controversy as well, notably concerning transgender students and gender-affirming practices. This includes concerns from some parents and community groups, such as the DDSB Concerned Parents, about gender education and practices like a student's ability to change their pronouns without explicit parental consent. The DDSB's broader human rights and equity policies have drawn criticism from some community members who argue they are ideologically driven. The 2022 Human Rights Policy proved contentious, with critics arguing that its definitions and framing were influenced by ‘critical race theory’ which fosters an ‘anti-white’ bias. The policy's description of so-called ‘white supremacy’ as a societal structure rather than being limited to extremist groups was particularly debated. A 2025 Juno News report highlighted concerns raised by the DDSB Concerned Parents regarding the board's equity spending. Critics questioned the effectiveness of equity programs, and the board refused to commission an independent audit to review the spending. Other controversial DDSB policies include the renaming of schools. Following a push from the Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario, the DDSB developed a policy for renaming schools that bear the names of historical figures with so-called "problematic" pasts. This included the decision to review schools named after figures like Canada's first Prime Minister, Sir John A. Macdonald. This was brought about by extremists in their attempt to bring the societal norms of the 19th Century into modern times - for judgement by those who appear to harbor a profound resentment of the very founding of Canada. Finally, a quick look at the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) shows an equal resentment based on race. In 2024, the TDSB temporarily pulled a teaching guide titled Facilitating Critical Conversations after criticism from the Ontario Ministry of Education. The document referred to Canada's education system as a "colonial structure that centres upon whiteness and Eurocentricity" and claimed it "must be actively decolonized". Seriously. Critics argued the guide was divisive, while the board maintained it was committed to what they now call “equity”. As I stated at the outset, school boards in Ontario are out of control, and it’s time to eliminate them altogether.