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"

A Candid Conversation

A Candid Conversation By Theresa Grant Real Estate Columnist Without question, it is a very different world today than the one I grew up in. I remember being a child living in what was then called uptown, it was actually the Yonge and Eglinton area of Toronto. It was a very modest upbringing. My parents worked hard to give their three daughters what they could. We all helped around the house, took turns doing the dishes and things to help our mom. We were respectful and obeyed the rules set out by our parents. We had one bathroom, one television and therefore had to agree on what to watch. Our parents set out most of the viewing schedule and I remember the whole family sitting around the living room watching Carol Burnett, The Waltons and many other entertaining programs. We as children didn’t use the phone much,we waited for someone to come knocking on the door to see if we wanted to play or we went door knocking ourselves. It was simple, stay close, come home as soon as the streetlights came on. At the time, we could not have imagined it being any different than it was. Progress to us (and to our delight), was returning to school in September to find a new piece of equipment added to the playground. For the many that grew up as I did in the sixties and seventies it is very hard to fathom what is going on with our youth today. Years ago, we thought that older people were looking to recruit the younger ones for their crimes and misdemeanors by telling them that they could not get into any serious trouble due to the young offender’s act.It would often be the case that a couple or a few named young adults would be arrested and we would see on the news that there was a young offender involved who could not be named. It seems that that is not even the case anymore. We see on the news on a regular basis, children as young as eleven and twelveare involved in horrific crimes and there are no older adults involved. Which begs the question, what the hell is going on with our youth?Where are the parents is one of the biggest questions that I hear posed when these stories hit the news. What is going on in homes across our region that would make these children think that it is okay to go out and commit the crimes they do? The most recent that comes to mind is the smash and grab at the Oshawa Centre involving a group of boys aged from 13-19. Then there are the 8 kids involved in the armed robbery of another youth on William Lott Dr. in North Oshawa. Here we had12-, 13-, and 15-year-old girls and boys. Back in the summer there was the swarming of a Pizza worker in south Oshawa that involved an 11-year-old boy and 3 girls aged 13,14, and 15. Most heinous of recent youth criminal acts is the elderly woman killed in frontof her home in Pickering by a 14-year-old boy in an absolutely unprovoked attack. Something needs to change. Now. People need to speak up.

Tax Efficient RRSP Withdrawal Strategies

Tax Efficient RRSP Withdrawal Strategies By Bruno M. Scanga Deposit Broker, Insurance & Investment Advisor Many Canadians diligently contribute to their Registered Retirement Savings Plans (RRSPs) throughout their working years, aiming for a comfortable retirement. However, when it comes to withdrawing these funds, the strategy isn’t always straightforward. For some, tapping into their RRSPs earlier than traditional retirement age can offer significant tax benefits and financial flexibility. Why Consider Early RRSP Withdrawals? The conventional wisdom suggests deferring RRSP withdrawals to delay taxes as long as possible. Yet, this approach might not be best for everyone. Withdrawing funds during years when you’re in a lower tax bracket can reduce your overall tax burden. This strategy, sometimes referred to as an “RRSP meltdown,” involves strategically drawing down your RRSP before mandatory withdrawals kick in at age 71. By accessing your RRSP funds between ages 60 and 70, you can decrease the account’s size before it’s converted into a Registered Retirement Income Fund (RRIF). This proactive approach can lead to smaller mandatory withdrawals later, potentially keeping you in a lower tax bracket and preserving more of your retirement income. Early RRSP withdrawals can also influence government benefits. For instance, the Old Age Security (OAS) pension has a claw back mechanism for higher-income retirees. By reducing your RRSP balance earlier, you might avoid or lessen this claw back. Additionally, for lower-income individuals, early withdrawals could help in qualifying for the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS), which provides added support to those who need it most. Another advantage of accessing RRSP funds early is the opportunity to transfer them into a Tax-Free Savings Account (TFSA). While you’ll pay taxes upon withdrawal from the RRSP, once the funds are in a TFSA, they can grow tax-free. This setup offers greater flexibility for future expenses, such as medical costs or helping family members financially. For couples, early RRSP withdrawals can be particularly beneficial. Imagine both partners have large RRSPs. If one partner passes away, the surviving spouse inherits the RRSP funds, potentially resulting in a significant tax liability due to higher mandatory withdrawals from a larger RRIF. By each partner drawing down their RRSPs earlier, they can manage and possibly reduce the combined tax impact in the future. While there are clear benefits to early RRSP withdrawals, it’s essential to approach this strategy thoughtfully. Withdrawing funds means paying taxes sooner and potentially missing out on the tax-deferred growth those funds would have enjoyed. Therefore, it’s crucial to assess your current financial situation, future income expectations, and retirement goals.

Canada’s Fall Budget 2025: Between Bold Promises and Fiscal Reckoning

Canada’s Fall Budget 2025: Between Bold Promises and Fiscal Reckoning by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC FEC, CET, P.Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East On November 4, Prime Minister Mark Carney will table his government’s first budget since assuming office. Canadians should be aware that this will not be a routine fiscal update. This budget will be nothing less than a test of credibility; a balancing act between urgent promises and the cold arithmetic of national finances. For years, Ottawa has grown accustomed to deficit financing as a political safety valve. Every government since the pandemic has justified red ink with appeals to crisis. However, the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) has found that the federal budget deficit will grow beyond previous projections. The total of just over $132 billion between 2025 and 2028 projected in Budget 2024 has escalated to the nearly $255 billion now projected for those years. Moreover, the debt-to-GDP ratio — the Liberals’ so-called “fiscal anchor” — is no longer guaranteed to decline. Much of this is driven by a considerable decline in federal tax revenues due to the personal income tax cut and other measures, as well as even larger increases in federal program spending. Total operating spending alone (excluding many federal transfers) is projected to be more than $10 billion per year higher than previously anticipated. Adding unannounced measures back into the PBO estimates will make cumulative deficits over the next four years exceed $360 billion—almost three times the amount last year’s budget anticipated. Even more concerning is the fact that federal debt is set to grow at a faster rate than the economy. In recent testimony to a parliamentary committee, the PBO noted that this was the first time in 30 years he had seen a projection where this key measure of fiscal sustainability continued to rise over time. Simply put, federal finances are at a precipice. This should trouble Canadians. Debt is not abstract. It is a mortgage on future taxpayers; a quiet siphon on every program we prize. The more Ottawa borrows, the more billions they sink into debt servicing, leaving less for housing, health care, or pensions. To govern as if fiscal gravity does not exist is reckless, and Prime Minister Carney knows it. Nowhere are expectations higher than in housing. For years, governments of all stripes have promised affordability but delivered little relief. Prime Minister Carney has already unveiled the Build Canada Homes initiative, a sprawling plan to accelerate construction. In this budget, the Liberals are expected to sweeten the pot with tax credits, subsidies, and incentives to coax builders and pension funds into action. However, here lies the contradiction: pouring billions into subsidies without tackling municipal bottlenecks, zoning gridlock, or labour shortages risks throwing money into a void. Canadians want roofs, not rhetoric. Unless Ottawa coordinates with provinces and cities to streamline approvals and mobilize labour, the housing crisis will remain a slow-burn national scandal. Also, beyond our borders, allies are losing patience. NATO’s 2 % of GDP target is no longer aspirational; it is a demand. The liberal government is poised to announce significant defence spending increases — new equipment, recruitment campaigns, and modernization of our aging forces. Canadians seems to be split on this. Many resent the idea of billions for tanks and jets while mortgages crush families. Yet the reality of a turbulent world — Russia’s ambitions, China’s assertiveness, American unpredictability — leaves Ottawa with little choice. Defence spending is not charity; it is insurance. Ignoring it only postpones and increases the bill. Whispers of a GST hike hang over this budget like a storm cloud. No government relishes raising taxes, but arithmetic is unforgiving. With deficits swelling, revenue must come from somewhere. Closing corporate loopholes, trimming boutique tax credits, and modestly raising consumption taxes are all on the table. Opponents will howl, but consider this: Canadians already pay the price of deficits, not in taxes today but in higher borrowing costs. A transparent, modest tax increase coupled with serious spending reform would be more honest than endless borrowing masked as generosity. Pre-budget consultations have revealed widespread anxiety about affordability. Groceries, rents, and energy bills are draining households. The government will likely respond with targeted relief measures — perhaps expanded child benefits or new credits for low-income families. These are politically irresistible, but they raise uncomfortable questions: how many more patchwork programs can Canada afford? And do such measures solve the underlying problems — productivity stagnation, weak wages, and supply shortages — or merely mute the symptoms for another year? For decades, Canada has lagged in productivity growth. Our economy too often relies on debt-fuelled consumption rather than investment. Prime Minister Carney, a former central banker with global gravitas, knows this better than anyone does. Yet productivity is the unsexy word missing from political stump speeches. If this budget does not deliver bold measures — from R&D incentives to trade diversification beyond the United States — then Canada will continue its slide toward mediocrity. Housing relief may win headlines; productivity reform would win the future. All of this unfolds under the shadow of minority politics. The Liberals must craft a budget palatable not only to their base but also to opposition parties whose votes are essential for passage. That means sprinkling in enough social supports to appease the New Democrats, while avoiding measures so fiscally reckless that Conservatives can paint the government as irresponsible. Budgets in minority Parliaments are less about economics than about survival. Yet survivalism cannot be Canada’s economic plan. Ultimately, the Fall Budget 2025 is a referendum on credibility. Can the Liberals admit that fiscal resources are finite? Can they deliver tangible progress on housing without throwing money into bureaucratic black holes? Can they prepare Canada for geopolitical storms while safeguarding households at home? Prime Minister Mark Carney’s reputation as a disciplined, globally respected technocrat will be on the line. If he bends to the temptation of pleasing everyone, the result will be a document that satisfies no one and deepens the deficit hole. If he seizes the moment with a clear, tough-minded plan — pairing targeted investments with genuine spending reform and honest revenue measures — he could reset Canada’s trajectory. This upcoming budget is not simply about numbers. It is about the social contract between Canadians and their government. Do we believe Ottawa can make hard choices, or only easy promises? Do we measure success by the billions spent, or by results delivered? Come November 4, Canadians will hear more than a speech. They will hear whether their government has the courage to level with them, or whether it will continue the comfortable illusion that Ottawa can spend without consequence. The country deserves better than illusions.

WARD 4 COUNCILLOR GIBERSON STAYS ON A PATH OF SELF-DESTRUCTION, BUT WHO PAYS THE PRICE?

WARD 4 COUNCILLOR GIBERSON STAYS ON A PATH OF SELF-DESTRUCTION, BUT WHO PAYS THE PRICE? IF A DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTION doesn’t somehow stop the progression of the human mind, it will certainly guide it in one direction over another. The effects of this were certainly laid bare at the September 29 meeting of Oshawa Council, and I encourage my readers to pause with me for a few moments as we consider some of what transpired. The title of this week’s column could have easily read, “Miracle on Centre Street” due to the rare occurrence whereby Ward 1 councillor Rosemary McConkey actually found favour among her colleagues – this time regarding a motion that seeks to address the problem of uninhibited drug use in our public spaces. The proposed initiative previously failed to gain support at the committee level, however Ward 3 councillor Bob Chapman came to the rescue by helping craft a new and more realistic version, one that was ultimately successful and supported by the Mayor and Council. To say the City needs to do something in an effort to encourage the Minister of Justice to take appropriate action on what has become a major breakdown in our society is a complete understatement. The motion makes reference to the open use of drugs in the community (A concern focused no doubt on the city’s downtown) and the effect this has had on young people as well as those who may be recovering from addictions. As noted in the motion, the possession of substances regulated under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act is a criminal offence, and the open use of such substances has become flagrant in parts of the city of Oshawa, reducing the quality of life for law-abiding residents. The open-air use and availability of those substances in areas providing supports to people attempting to recover from addictions undoubtedly impedes their recovery efforts. It also attracts drug dealers associated with greater crimes to areas frequented by users of those drugs. As written and presented, the motion was filled with all the right intentions, and perhaps a little too much diplomacy, given the ongoing crisis in mental health and addictions our country is facing. Nevertheless, at least one elected official took it upon himself to stand on the very margins of critical thought - in almost complete opposition to the initiative being proposed. That person was Ward 4 councillor Derek Giberson. This should come as no surprise to anyone in the community who has taken at least five minutes to listen to anything the councillor from downtown Oshawa has had to say during this term of Council. In an age where municipalities across Canada are starting to enact zero-tolerance policies on open-air drug use, including efforts to redirect offenders to court-ordered diversion programs and addiction support, it would seem unfathomable for a member of Oshawa Council – in a city severely burdened by the effects of so much drug use – to actively oppose the initiative. The tide is finally turning toward an approach that balances compassion with accountability, and it’s no stretch to suggest those who live and work downtown would welcome such a move on the part of councillors to seek a degree of sanity in the area of public safety standards. During the debate on this issue, councillor Giberson lamented the very idea of incarceration as a partial means of dealing with these problems. His comments bore all the hallmarks of the failed ‘soft-on-crime’ social experiment taken up by the courts over the last decade. Reasonable people understand that enforcement is not the only solution, and that the crisis over addictions we now face is primarily a healthcare issue. However, the public sphere is not the place for intravenous drug use. Expanding access to detox beds, treatment centres and recovery programs – coupled with limits on public consumption, is the best formula. One has to ask oneself, at what point will the Ward 4 councillor actually start agreeing to anything whatsoever to make downtown Oshawa a better place? We must first recall his failed attempt to erase much of the city’s artistic history by promoting the removal and partial replacement of the downtown murals. We can then look to his refusal to support the redevelopment of the Athol Street parking lot nearest to City Hall – an initiative that will soon see a multi-story parking and residential structure occupy what is now a sea of asphalt. We can further look to his oft-repeated stance against planning policies that favour more opportunities for additional parking spaces throughout the downtown, and his fixation on somehow mandating a made-in-Europe model for North American transportation needs. Finally, there was councillor Giberson’s failed attempt to sway councillor’s opinions in the matter of the By-law which now requires an 800 metre distance between existing and proposed social service locations. Remember, this is the same councillor who was found by the Integrity Commissioner to be in breach of the Code of Conduct that governs how members of Council are expected to behave, both at City Hall and within the public realm. Do you see a pattern of political self-destruction in all of this? Meantime, downtown businesses and those who live in the areas that surround social services agencies like the Back Door Mission are all too aware of the effect that open-air drug use has had on their community. They also see the results of so-called harm reduction and safe supply programs whereby discarded needles are now as plentiful as dandelions in springtime. It doesn’t take much imagination to foresee the effect that an actual crackdown on open drug use would have on the mandate of the Mission and its collective determination to carry on for as long as possible, seemingly without concern for area residents or those trying to run a business downtown. Ward 4 is in desperate need of change. When residents are forced to endure so much uncertainty at the hands of one or more ideologues whose self-interest appears to be all encompassing, they necessarily become victims who must stand and watch as their rights to security of property and personal safety are literally snatched from them. As soon as someone begins to treat public affairs as something removed from actual public service, they become a menace to society. In that regard, residents can certainly make their concerns known at the ballot box. The next municipal election is scheduled for October 26, 2026.

PULLING TEETH…

PULLING TEETH... By Wayne and Tamara I am employed by a dentist who is a specialist. He has a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde personality. For the most part the staff has learned to deal with this, but not accept it. The rest of the staff has been with him for years, as have I. Our boss is generous in many ways, but his behavior often leaves us wondering if it is all worth it. We are told to take an unpaid hour off for lunch, yet we are expected to pick up the phone and deal with his interruptions. The company he hired to do payroll handed us an office manual with the intended rules, yet it states they can change the rules at any time because he is an “at will” employer. I checked with a state agency and they agree. Everyone in the office is grateful to be employed, but at the same time we are frustrated by the lack of respect we receive from him and by the overall standards that apply to “at will” employees. When we try to talk to him on issues, we are reminded of our place in this office with a you-can-move-on-if-you-want reply. He knows that is not possible for most of us. What I’m looking for is guidance from someone at how to approach an unequal situation. Tabitha Tabitha, the great unspoken topic in psychology is dominance. People resist even bringing up the subject. What people are more than willing to talk about is communication skills. There the core idea is: I believe this, you believe that, and I can get you to change your actions through some words. It is all misdirection. If there were a simple way to make your boss agree with what you are saying, then you could, for example, make anyone come to your religion. All you would have to do is figure out the right words to say, and they would accept your way of thinking. Words don’t determine behavior, power does. In most situations, one person or group has power. What they say goes. People love to explain behavior in ethical, economic or social terms, but behavior most often comes down to a simple matter of power. The easiest representation of power is dollars. I have so many dollars, so I can send my kids to the best schools. You cannot. I can buy lobbyists and influence. You cannot. Rightly or wrongly, your boss has a sense of entitlement in the workplace. His people are telling him the legal minimum requirements he has to meet, and that is where he is drawing the line. Someone like you, in a subordinate position, can make inroads only by being creative. In a weak position, you must act like a martial artist. You can step to one side or use your opponent’s leverage against him, but a direct counterattack will not work. As a staff, find ways to minimize the lunch interruptions. On Monday one person might handle the phones; on Tuesday someone else. If one of you is disturbed at lunchtime, then find ways to lessen that day’s burden on her. Supporting and caring for one another will lessen the stress of the job. Since your boss has a generous side, try assaulting him with kindness. That often defuses people who are carrying an emotional load they cannot discharge. Even small actions, like bringing a plant to the office or voting for candidates who support your view of employee rights, will make you feel better. Some people reading your letter would count you lucky to be working in an educated, safe, clean environment. Many people work in dangerous environments for little pay. But what it comes down to is this. You know where your boss sits, you know where the law sits, now look for the parries and countermoves which work for you and the rest of the staff. Wayne & Tamara

A LOOK AT THE “ELECT RESPECT’ MOVEMENT BEING ADOPTED BY MUNICIPAL COUNCILS

A LOOK AT THE “ELECT RESPECT’ MOVEMENT BEING ADOPTED BY MUNICIPAL COUNCILS IN AN EFFORT TO END BAD BEHAVIOUR, Clarington Council recently voted in favour of a motion to hold its councillors to the tenets of the Elect Respect pledge, which calls for an end to abusive and potentially threatening conduct towards public officials. In doing so, Clarington councillors are encouraging colleagues and residents to put an end to ever-increasing abuse of elected officials. “The threats that are going on, it has caused a number of individuals to choose not to run for office because of threats,” said Clarington Mayor Adrian Foster, noting the aggression aimed at elected officials was a key topic of conversation at recent conferences, including the Association of Municipalities of Ontario and the Ontario Big City Mayors Association. So why exactly is the "Elect Respect" concept gaining so much traction among Canadian municipalities? First and foremost, it is seen as an effective and meaningful response to the growing toxicity, harassment, and abuse directed at public officials. It is a grassroots campaign that aims to address what many see as the deteriorating state of political discourse and the resulting harm to democracy, including discouraging qualified individuals from running for office. It’s no secret that the amount of harassment, personal attacks, and yes – threats – especially online via social media, has significantly increased in recent years. Municipal officials report experiencing constant abuse, intimidation, and even physical intimidation. The toxic political climate that is the result of all of this appears to disproportionately affect women and individuals from diverse backgrounds, discouraging them from seeking or remaining in public office. Clarington Councillor Lloyd Rang has called on residents in the community to join the movement. “I know there are more good people out there than those willing to cause dissent and division for no good reason,” he said, noting the behaviour is not only hurtful, it can be dangerous. “If this continues, if people continue to make racist comments, misogynistic comments, comments vilifying people on staff, whatever it is, somebody is going to get hurt,” he said. “Because when rage spreads, when anger spreads, people take matters into their own hands and that is dangerous. We have to nip this in the bud, Clarington – the good people of this community need to stand up and this is a good start.” There can be no doubt such an antagonistic atmosphere will ultimately push good people out of politics, and weaken the democratic representation we often take for granted at the municipal level. Civic engagement has been the bedrock for citizens of Durham Region over the many decades that I have followed municipal councils, and to see that slowly erode is, quite frankly, upsetting. Administrative staff also need to know they have a safe, inclusive, and respectful work environment, although there have been recent examples of what one may reasonably describe as a form of retaliation against a sitting councillor – meaning what goes around comes around, and no-one within the public realm is immune to aggression. The concept behind the Elect Respect approach originated with the Halton Elected Representatives (HER), a coalition of female leaders in Halton Region, Ontario, who shared stories of abuse. What started as a local initiative has grown into a movement gaining support across the Region and the entire country. Organizations like the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) are supporting and promoting the campaign. This institutional backing gives the concept more legitimacy and reach. Following the campaign's launch by Halton elected officials, the Halton Regional Council unanimously endorsed a resolution supporting the initiative. Municipalities like Clarington, St. Catharines, Thorold, and Niagara Regional Council have officially adopted the pledge through council resolutions. In addition to municipal associations, bodies like the Eastern Ontario Wardens' Caucus and the Western Ontario Wardens' Caucus have expressed their joint support for the pledge. Some municipalities are going further, by reviewing and strengthening their public codes of conduct to explicitly forbid verbal abuse during meetings and empower chairs to remove disruptive individuals. Pickering’s Ward 1 City Councillor Lisa Robinson, herself having been the subject of a harassment complaint initiated on behalf of the city's council by Mayor Kevin Ashe, recently appeared as a delegation before Durham Regional Council to speak in support of the Elect Respect initiative, which she says “…is not about silencing disagreement but about ensuring healthy debate.” The Pickering councillor also remarked on social media that “Disagreement is natural in politics, but personal attacks, threats, and abuse cross a line. This campaign calls for respectful engagement between residents, staff, and elected officials, no matter our differences.” Of course, this leads us to consider the impending provincial legislation known as Bill 9, the Municipal Accountability Act that some municipal leaders hope will empower councils to “act decisively” when governance is threatened. After a year marked by misinformation and Code of Conduct violations on Whitby Council, Mayor Elizabeth Roy said she welcomes the Ontario government’s reintroduction of legislation that would allow municipal council members to be removed from office for serious violations of the Code. Mayor Roy, in an op-ed offered to newspapers across Ontario, said municipal leaders are being tested, “…not just by the growing demands of our communities, but by toxic political behaviour that is becoming far too common around local council tables.” From stopping the spread of what the mayor considered “factually incorrect” information surrounding a summer recess, to ethics violations that required the Town’s Integrity Commissioner to get involved, Mayor Roy said she has experienced bad behaviour by councillors “first-hand”, calling it “some of the worst I’ve seen” in her 30 years in municipal politics. “Toxic behaviour and repeated ethics violations are threatening the function of local democracy, deterring new voices from seeking office and, in some cases, driving dedicated public servants out of government altogether.” Strong words, no doubt. Over in Halton Region, Burlington Mayor Marianne Meed Ward and other municipal leaders are supporting the Elect Respect campaign as well, with Milton Regional Councillor Sameera Ali saying there have been “many instances” where she felt unsafe, “to the point where I had to move,” while Meed Ward recounted having being told she should be “hung in Civic Square for treason.” As of the date of publication of this column, Ontario's Bill 9 – the Municipal Accountability Act – has passed its second reading and is in the committee stage, with the government aiming to pass it into law at some point this autumn. Back in the summer of 2025, public hearings on Bill 9 were held across the province by the Standing Committee on Heritage, Infrastructure and Cultural Policy. The government intends for the bill to be in place before the 2026 municipal elections.

The Gift of Rejection - How Failure Grows Into Success

The Gift of Rejection How Failure Grows into Success, Opportunities, and Life Lessons By Camryn Bland Youth Columnist Every individual has unique strengths, and with them, unique weaknesses. Perfection is a goal impossible to reach, a concept strengthened through every failure. However, it can be extremely difficult to accept our mistakes and appreciate the life lessons they are. Too often, we choose agitation, disappointment, or self doubt when faced with rejection, something which only intensifies the negative experience. Each mistake strengthens the fear of failure, paralyzing every goal. Like many others, I struggle with accepting rejection and failure. I have never let a busy schedule, difficult assignment, or personal stress stand in the way of my goals, which is why rejection feels so devastating. When I put in all my effort and fall short, I am left feeling incompetent. Although I have had many successes, I have also been weighed down by my share of rejection. One of my most prominent failures was during an eighth grade speech competition, when I did not place first, second, or even third out of the five contestants. As an anxious perfectionist, even at fourteen, the loss broke my heart. This competition was where my fear of failure originated, however, many other experiences have since grown it. Early in high school, I was rejected from student council, an extracurricular which I had my eye set on for years. In the past year, I was rejected from my school board's Presidents Council for two roles. I have auditioned for leads in drama productions, only to be given narrators or understudies instead. I have studied for hours on end, to sometimes end up with a mediocre grade or an underwhelming assignment. Each one of these failures left me feeling hollow and confused, and even now, these memories sting. Each experience made me feel unworthy of prior confidence, and uncertain about my future. In the wake of all my disappointments, I have also found many successes. Though I lost a speech competition, I was awarded Valedictorian a few months later. I wasoriginally rejected from student council, however I earned a spot the following year. I have been part of a first-place debate team, acted in multiple drama productions, and received many academic honors. Despite these victories, I felt incomplete. To me, every mistake was worth five victories, leaving me in a hopeless decline of confidence. Until recently, I have let simple errors overshadow every success. Each failure felt like a stab at my confidence, my abilities, and my goals. In reality, my issue with failure wasn’t simply what I was being denied, it was the self-doubt it sparked within me. For as long as I can remember, I have chased perfection in everything I do, which results in the highest highs and the lowest lows. Every success filled me with confidence and joy, which could easily be destroyed by one mistake. Every failure forced me to ask the question, am I not enough? After countless disappointments, I’ve begun to understand I am enough. My fear of failure stemmed from my own pride, which I have slowly begun to recover. It takes time to accept my failures, and understand they do not take away from my successes. My victories far outnumber my failures, proving that I am worth more than my worst moments. I am made of more than rejection, and this is something I have begun to learn in my day-to-day life. Rejection is an inevitable aspect of the human experience. It may sound cliche, but each failure is an opportunity to learn perseverance, humility, and self-awareness. I believe everything happens for a reason, and that what is meant to happen will happen; if an opportunity passes me by, it is not right for me. This belief helps me fight perfectionism and keeps me striving towards my passions. Failure will always be a part of life, whether that be in school, employment, or our personal lives. What matters is not the setback and disappointment, but how we respond to them. Regardless of the risks, it is crucial to pursue your passions. No matter what, it is worth it to shoot your shot; you will either reach your goals, or be granted the gift of rejection.

Calling Yourself 'Talent' Does Not Mean You Can Offer Value to Employers

Calling Yourself 'Talent' Does Not Mean You Can Offer Value to Employers By Nick Kossovan The job market is crowded with applicants claiming to be "talented." What's lacking are job seekers who provide concrete evidence of their skills and how their supposed "talent" has benefited their previous employers, rather than just making grandiose statements. Claiming you're talented is egotistical boasting, as if you’re a God-given prodigy. The word "talent" used to be reserved for artists. Today, many job seekers have adopted the feel-good trend of calling themselves "talent," conveniently ignoring the fact that employers don't hire based on self-proclaimed talent; they hire candidates with a proven track record of delivering results that positively impacted their previous employer's bottom line. Although believing, even imagining, that you're talented feels good, it can undermine your job search. · It's subjective: Calling yourself "talent" is engaging in an ego-boosting self-assessment that holds no real value for employers. Employers look for objective evidence of abilities, which few job seekers effectively showcase in their resumes, LinkedIn profiles, and interviews. · You sound conceited: Using pompous adjectives makes you seem arrogant and out of touch with what employers look for in a candidate. · There's no substance: Abstract labels don't convey the specific skills, experience, and dedication you bring to a role. When's the last time someone told you you're talented? In that moment, you felt good about yourself—maybe you're better than you thought. You've got something. Your ego eats it up. Believing you have talent is all about ego. An ego-driven, linear view of talent assumes that if I possess talent, then I'm "above you." Our assumptions about talent are often mistaken, and therefore, our assumptions about talent are frequently flawed, contributing to the disconnect between employers and job seekers occurring in the job market, which is counterproductive. In his 2020 book The Practice: Shipping Creative Work, Seth Godin writes, "It's insulting to call a professional talented. Skill is rarer than talent. Skill is earned." Acquiring skills requires effort and disciplined focus; hence, explaining the shortage of skilled individuals. Skills development involves repeatedly practising and failing. Unless you embrace this cycle until you master the skill and apply it (key) to produce results that employers need and want consistently, then no one, especially employers, will care about your "talent." Leon Uris, the author of Exodus (1958) and Trinity (1976), understood that calling yourself "talent" without working hard to develop that talent is just fooling yourself: "Talent isn't enough. You need motivation—and persistence, too: what Steinbeck called a blend of faith and arrogance. When you're young, plain old poverty can be enough, along with an insatiable hunger for recognition. You have to have that feeling of "I'll show them." If you don't have it, don't become a writer.” Talent alone is meaningless (read: of no value) without continuous effort to master it. I've met, as I'm sure you have, many people who claim to be talented, some even occasionally show their talent—like the numerous paintings I have hanging in my home from artistic friends—but they never find success. Why is that? Because they think that their "gift" is enough. Exhibit A: All the job seekers who say they are talented but can't convince employers how their talent would benefit their business. Achieving success, in any endeavour, including job searching, has never been, nor will it ever be, about talent. The key to success, for the most part, is strategic hustle and resilience to create what those who don't put in the work call "sheer luck." Was it Tiger Woods' supposed talent, gift, inclination, propensity, or aptitude for golf that created his extraordinary career, or his determination, which drove his intense practice habits, averaging more than 10 hours per day on the driving range? Wayne Gretzky, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Eddie Van Halen, Ernest Hemingway, Robin Williams, Philip Seymour Hoffman, a fully actualized actor-artist, and Serena Williams are just a few examples of people who transformed their innate abilities into huge success by working hard and making sacrifices most people aren't willing to make. If you've jumped on the "Let's call employees' talent' to boost their ego" bandwagon—talent still means employee, talent acquisition still means recruiting—ponder this humbling thought: no company has ever gone out of business because self-proclaimed talented employees left, thus why employers dismiss the veiled threat they'll lose "talent" over their return-to-office mandate or refusal to give in to specific demands. Employers also rightfully dismiss the unsubstantiated claim that their hiring process overlooks "talent." No job seeker, regardless of how talented or skilled they think they are, is an employer's 'must-have.' I'm a case in point; no employer has ever ceased to exist because they didn't hire me. The gap between job seekers and employers, that's causing much of the frustration and anger on both sides of the hiring desk, stems from job seekers believing they should be hired based on unsubstantiated talent. Your skills are your superpower! Demonstrating, through your resume, LinkedIn profile, and interviews, that you have the skills and experience to deliver the results employers need and want is how you speed up your job search. Leave the word "talent" to the artists. ___________________________________________________________________________ Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned corporate veteran, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. Send Nick your job search questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.

POLITICAL DISCOURSE AND THE MANIFESTO BEHIND D.E.I.

POLITICAL DISCOURSE AND THE MANIFESTO BEHIND D.E.I. NO GREAT DISTINCTION must be made between events here at home and those from faraway places that have the capacity to touch our lives. Some issues are so large as to create contradictory opinions on matters of morality, separating us into different factions within our communities, our families, and among those we trust the most. We live in an age where one must decide – willingly or not – where one stands in a society increasingly divided in all things. While it is reasonable to entertain different opinions upon subjects that affect entire countries alike, such as, for instance, the recent assassination of a social and political activist south of the border, it isn’t long before a feeling of moral oppression takes hold. There are unsupportable evils that become the foundation for cross debate, where individuals can exercise a degree of callousness that is all too often hard to reconcile. Locally, we can expect elected members of local councils to ultimately share their thoughts on the killing of Charlie Kirk, the activist to whom I refer, and what that means for the future of public debate within City Hall or on social media. Not unrelated to this is the recent drive towards the “Elect Respect” campaign, which sees our democracy as being under great pressure due to rising public distrust with seemingly unrelenting personal attacks in political spaces. Clarington Council voted recently in favour of a motion to hold their members to the tenets of the Elect Respect mandate, which includes rejecting and calling out harassment, abuse, and personal attacks while focusing their debates on policies rather than personalities. At issue is the need to build a supportive culture where people of all backgrounds feel safe to run for and hold elected office. Expect all municipalities to eventually jump on board in a similar fashion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Another potentially divisive issue has taken root within the corridors of power over at Regional Council, as seen in their recently released report entitled “Diversity Equity and Inclusion Strategy 2025 – 2029”. Before any of my readers come to an immediate conclusion on this topic, consider the following aspects of the report. The introductory statement tells us the Region’s DEI strategy offers “…a stronger, more unified path forward: one that not only connects the important work now underway, but also sets goals, a shared vision and a long-term commitment to meaningful change.” It goes on to say, “This document is more than a plan; it is a framework for transformative action…” There’s a great deal one could unpack from that text, however; my focus for now is directed towards the report’s “Glossary of Key Terms”. ALLYSHIP, which is basically the active support for the rights of a minority or marginalized group without being a member of it. Sounds reasonable – but a look at the description reveals the following: “An active and consistent practice in which a person in a position of privilege…seeks to operate in solidarity with a marginalized group”. EQUITY, a principle based on advocating ‘fairness’ for all individuals. The Glossary offers this interpretation: “Achieving equality does not necessarily mean treating individuals or groups in the same way, but may require the use of specific measures…” EQUITY DESERVING GROUPS, being those who are seen as having faced barriers to receiving equal opportunities. The Glossary offers a very aggressive interpretation of the term, “Communities that…actively seek social justice and reparations.” HATE ACTIVITY, which includes an assessment of the comments and actions by one individual towards another. Among the interpretations offered on this aspect, the report states, “Examples are: hate crime, hate propaganda, advocating genocide…” There are far too many aspects of the DEI report to analyze within this column, however, it is clear the Region’s views on the equitable treatment of individuals within the community go much further than employment policies and the delivery of social services. The report is nothing less than a political manifesto designed to cast aspersions on Canada and a particular demographic that has lived here for generations – as though they themselves had just disembarked from a sailing ship onto North American soil. This columnist has never been in a position of privilege, and my country is not a so-called colony, but rather a proud nation – Canada. The assertion by the report’s authors that it is somehow wrong to treat all citizens of this country in an equal manner is quite frankly, monstrous, and it demonstrates a repugnance towards what should be seen as true equity – based on universal freedoms, opportunities and merit. In addition, the word “genocide” has become a modern-day political weapon based on one of those unsupportable evils that are now used as the foundation for debate among the more radical in our society. Finally, it is not and never has been the mandate of staff or councillors at the Region of Durham to include references to social justice and most of all, reparations among groups or individuals. The massive bureaucracy that is Regional government bears the responsibility to provide efficient and equitable services to its residents, and only that. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . To close out this week’s column, I’d like to comment on the issue of automated speed cameras, which have been in the news lately. During an event in Toronto, Ontario Premier Doug Ford was asked about speed cameras in Toronto that have been repeatedly vandalized or cut down, and he responded by saying there are other ways to slow drivers down. "If you want to slow down traffic at a school, you put the big signs, big flashing lights at a crossing area, and people will slow down," he said. "I've driven by speed traps that aren't even close to school areas. It's nothing but a tax grab." The Premier is absolutely correct in his assertion, which comes at a time when many municipalities have become reliant on the cash windfall that has resulted in what many see as automated ATM installations on roads designed for a certain traffic flow. I wrote a previous column on the issue of speed cameras and the fact there is no data whatsoever to support their proliferation – and yet, there are those among us who still line up like sheep to advocate for more and increasingly invasive monitoring by Big Government. Among this week’s topics, that last aspect is probably the saddest.

No Mr. Darcy

No Mr. Darcy By Wayne and Tamara I will try to make this brief as I can. My husband and I separated over a lot of issues, the main one being I thought he was cheating. Well, I think he may have been, because we were not even apart a month when I found out he is seeing his mother’s chore worker. I was devastated. I loved him and wanted this marriage to work. I called near divorce time to tell him where to send the papers. We had nothing but angry words to one another before that call. He was sweet. I told him I was so sorry our marriage ended, but thought of him often and still loved him. I just wanted to cleanse old wounds. One hour later he called back asking to come to my home to clear the air. We both cried and talked about where we went wrong in the marriage. He asked me to give him time. He said this other woman did not want him; he barely ever saw her. But then he revealed her daughter and her daughter’s husband are living with him. Just give him time to clean up this mess, he said. When he told the other woman I called, she came running back into his life. He still leads me on and tells me he wants to try. I am getting played the fool, but I am having the worst time letting him go. I try but I can’t. He is the love of my life. He sees me wanting out, then he spews out words to hook me again. I feel like a fish getting thrown in and tossed back time and again. I know she is not living with him, but she sees him two or three times a week. Then he gets cool and distant toward me. But if she stays away, he leads me down this cruel path. I have prayed, remained faithful to him, and now I am at my wits’ end. How could anyone do this to another for a second time? Help me let him go, please. I have always been a strong woman, but this time I find no strength to be that woman. Beatrice Beatrice, how could he do this to you for the second time? The same way he could do it to you for the first time. This mess is a mess made by him. It was his mess to make, and it was his mess to clean up. But he has made another choice. He is not willing to do without a body in his bed. If she’s not there warming his bed, he wants you to be there warming his bed, with not a care about how either of you is affected by this. There is enough of the charmer, or the serpent, about this man that he can receive the benefit of having two of what he should only have one of, at a time. Someone you can spend your life with, share your bed with, share your deepest thoughts with—someone like that is someone not like this man. In Jane Austen’s novel “Pride and Prejudice” there is a clergyman named Mr. Collins. Mr. Collins is a bootlicker and dense as a board. But in the novel he says one wise thing. After Lizzy Bennet rejects his offer of marriage, Mr. Collins says, “I have often observed that resignation is never so perfect as when the blessing denied begins to lose somewhat of its value in our estimation.” This man is not the love of your life, though you want him to be. You wanted one wedding and one lifetime marriage. You cannot have that with him. You can never rest with an easy head or an easy heart. He won’t stand by you. To free yourself, he has to lose some of his value in your estimation. Wayne & Tamara

Creating or Consuming Why Creating Art is Necessary in Everyday Life

Creating or Consuming Why Creating Art is Necessary in Everyday Life By Camryn Bland Youth Columnist Creating art is a key component of humanity, something which our species has done for thousands of years. From parietal art to historical sculptures, we naturally gravitate toward creating throughout our lives. From a young age, we engage in arts and crafts, dancing, drawing, and storytelling. These activities are not just for entertainment purposes, but also to improve problem solving, communication, confidence, memory, and intelligence. Despite these benefits, we often disregard creativity in pursuit of simplicity and conventionality as we grow older. We instead spend our days consuming the content which has already been made, forgetting our individual crafts. This artistic oversight can be extremely harmful, as we begin to miss out on the countless benefits of creativity. When we think of art, we often consider professional, timeless pieces, such as Van Gogh's paintings or Shakespeare's plays. We envision perfection which has been passed down for generations, analyzed for deeper meanings and significance. Studying these impactful pieces can give us great insight into societies past and present, however it can also be the root of our issue. Our society has placed an unrealistic standard of perfection on art, which has caused most people to abandon the true point of creating; it’s not about fame or audience, but expression and connection. Not every piece needs to be worthy of greatness, they just need to be authentically yours. Until recently, I never considered myself a creative person. I have always disliked drawing, painting, and dancing. I am clueless regarding musical instruments, and I often give up on writing projects. I felt uninspired and talentless until last year, when I committed to theatre. Through my school's regional arts program, I have learnt to express myself through words, movement, and execution. I have directed, designed costumes, analyzed characters, managed backstage, interpreted soundtracks, and acted in multiple productions, with each task teaching me something different about both the arts and myself. Through these experiences, I have built a strong community of friends, developed critical thinking skills, and further evolved my sense of self. Since I discovered my passion for theatre, I have begun to understand creativity's role in everyday life through common tasks and hobbies. In my daily life, I am creative through baking, crafting, journaling, sewing, and taking photos. Day by day, we have the opportunity to learn, experiment and create, in whichever way works for us. You do not need to paint or act to be creative; you just need to experiment and express yourself. Art acts as an expressive outlet for our emotions and thoughts, which develops a thorough sense of self not otherwise possible. Emotions are rarely straightforward, making it difficult to understand what you’re feeling and why. Through paintings, film, theatre, dance, poetry, and music, many individuals are able to express and understand their emotions with a unique depth. Additionally, creativity has been tied to stress reduction, confidence in accomplishments, and brain stimulation. Engaging in the arts can serve as both a strategy to understand emotions and to redirect your energy, proving useful to every individual's mental health. In 2025, it is easy to get overwhelmed by the content which floods our lives, making it difficult to understand who you are and what you want. The art of creating can keep you grounded, connected, and understanding of yourself, rather than living through the eyes of others. It does not matter what you make and your purpose for making it, all that matters is that you continue despite the difficulties. It’s time to stop consuming the opinions and pressures of others; instead, it’s time to pick up a pen, a guitar, or a script. Instead, it’s time to create.

Glamorizing Sexuality in Schools is Harming Our Kids

Glamorizing Sexuality in Schools is Harming Our Kids By Councillor Lisa Robinson This year, it’s time to raise strong, confident children who know their value comes from being human — not from a label. As the 2025 - 2026 school year begins, parents, teachers, and students must ask: are we truly preparing children for life — or are we exposing them to confusing messages and adult agendas that could harm them? Schools should teach reading, writing, math, and character. Yet many classrooms have become social experiments, filled with identity labels, sexual themes, and divisive categories that pit students against each other. No child should ever be bullied or feel unsafe because of who they are. That is obvious. But the current approach is not protection — it’s confusion. It sends a message: some children deserve the spotlight, while others are invisible. Consider straight students who receive no recognition while other sexualities are celebrated. Every child wants to feel special, to be seen and recognized. When straight children are overlooked, some may go along with what is being presented — even if it doesn’t reflect who they are — just to feel acknowledged. That is not equality — that is favoritism. Glamorizing sexuality in front of children is not protection. It is adult content thrust on minds that are not ready. And then we wonder why anxiety, confusion, and even suicide rates among youth continue to rise. Parents need to be informed. Children should never be placed in situations where they are told to hide things or lie about what is happening in school. No safe, no good adult would ever instruct a child to deceive their parents — ever. Teachers, staff, and administrators must remember that respecting family boundaries is part of protecting children. If we truly care about children’s mental health, we must: Teach respect, kindness, courage, and resilience. Stop dividing students by labels and identities. Protect children from bullying without pushing ideology. Remind every child — straight, gay, religious, or non-religious — that their value comes from being human, not from a label. Remind children that it’s okay to be young. Childhood is not a rehearsal for adulthood — they do not need to rush into adult decisions or activities. Their childhood is valuable and deserves protection. Fantasy is not reality Every child deserves to be seen — not for a label, but for who they are. That is real equality. That is fairness. That is how we will actually reduce youth suicide — not by injecting identity politics into every classroom. Children need stability, not confusion. They need role models, not agendas. They need schools that build them up, not break them down. This school year can be different. It can be better. Let’s stop glamorizing sexuality. Let’s stop giving attention and praise based on who a child says they are attracted to. Let’s raise strong, grounded, confident young people who know they matter — not because of a label, but because they are human beings of infinite worth. Parents, teachers, and children: let’s put our children first this school year. Let’s make this a year of clarity, respect, and real support for every child. Let children be children “No label defines a child. No agenda owns their childhood.” - Lisa Robinson 2025 Then my name,”…… 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

2025 - Canada Under Fire

2025 - Canada Under Fire by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC FEC, CET, P.Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East As the summer plods along with challenging domestic and international problems, Canadians also face an unprecedented rash of forest fires with many communities affected from coast to coast to coast. It has really been a season and a year of extremes. Currently, Canada is in the grip of its second-worst wildfire season on record, with flames now stretching beyond the West into the Prairie and Atlantic provinces including Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Newfoundland and Labrador. The Canadian Interagency Forest Fire Centre says 7.5 million hectares have already burned in 2025, surpassing the 10-year average and reinforcing warnings that wildfire seasons are growing longer, more destructive and less predictable. Regions such as Alberta have been hit hard, with significant damages reported in popular areas like Jasper. Over the past weeks, raging, out-of-control wildfires have forced tens of thousands from their homes nationwide. In Manitoba alone, the Canadian Red Cross reports that it has helped more than 32,000 people evacuated from about 12,000 households. Recent years have been particularly challenging, with 2023 marking the worst wildfire season on record, where approximately 16 million hectares were scorched. The previous year also saw over five million hectares burned, highlighting a troubling trend in wildfire intensity and frequency across the country. In summary, the wildfire situation in Canada is critical with extensive areas affected, requiring ongoing efforts to manage and contain the fires. Drought is one example of root causes of wildfires. Canada is a big place and it is always dry somewhere, but not like this year. Agriculture Canada's map shows most of the country was abnormally dry. Large stretches of the Prairies were under at least moderate drought conditions, reaching extreme proportions in southern Alberta. In British Columbia, once the "wet coast," 28 of 34 river basins were at the province's top two drought levels. Ranchers were selling cattle that they could not grow enough hay to feed, and low stream flows threatened salmon runs. However, the effect of the prolonged heat was not restricted to the land. Waters off all three Canadian coasts have never been warmer. Hudson Bay is up to 30 C warmer. The Pacific coast is between 20 C and 40 C warmer. Both the Atlantic and Arctic coasts are 50 C above average. Then there were the fires that spread smoke across the continent and into Europe, where "Canadian wildfires" made headlines from the New York Times to Europe's nightly news. All 13 provinces and territories have been affected, often at the same time. Tens of thousands of people have been forced from their homes, hundreds of houses were destroyed and firefighters have been killed. If we look at the history of forest and vegetation fires in Canada in general, since the 1970s and 1980s, the total annual number of wildfires in Canada has decreased while the total area burned has increased, though there is variability from year to year. The number and size of large fires has increased since 1959, and the average fire season has become longer by about two weeks. In Canada, wildfire season usually starts in May. The 2023 fires have been compared to the 2016 Fort McMurray wildfire and the 2021 Lytton wildfire, but the fires this year were second worse. When people revert to blaming the now well-known slogan of “climate change” perpetuated by humans, we might do well to consider that the so-called ‘climate change’ is a natural and cyclic phenomenon depending on many variables, including the path of the earth in space. At the same time we must not ignore the basic issue of forest management. It seems that the political elite and elite scientists do not see the forest for the trees. Lightning causes roughly half of all wildfires in Canada; lightning strikes and lightning-caused fires are happening more frequently. Lightning-caused fires account for about 85% of land burned, often occurring in clusters in remote locations. The other half of wildfires in Canada are human-caused, often unintentionally sparked by discarded cigarette butts, abandoned smouldering campfires, sparks from braking trains and the like. However, let us face it: forest management is also a big factor in the cause/management of wildfires. So here we are; because Canada's forest management has focused on fire suppression, dry vegetation has accumulated on the forest floor. Canada has generally stopped performing controlled burns, which help reduce the risk of larger and more dangerous fires. It is difficult to get permission for controlled burns, especially for Indigenous groups who have historically performed them and are such disproportionately affected by wildfires. Canada lacks a national firefighting service, and local resources are stretched thin due to budget cuts. Pollution due to a global increase in wildfires has created widespread, long-term impacts on human health. Due to wildfire emissions, Canada has broken its record for annual carbon emissions several times. Have any of the so-called climate scientists calculated the contribution of forest fires to the total carbon emissions in Canada? Well ???? Furthermore, is there anyone in government or the public service working on or even considering establishing better forest management practices; a service long neglected by all levels of government in Canada? The answer seems to be a resounding NO. They introduce carbon taxes in various hidden forms, they subsidize fashionable electric vehicle batteries and spend on other politically correct projects, when the recent rash of forest fires in Canada has broken the record on carbon emissions and has made us the laughingstock of the world. It is time to seriously consider and invest in better forest management, rather than continue to spend huge amounts of money overseas and on politically correct pet projects. The forests are burning and people are suffering from coast to coast to coast, while politicians and their advisers in the Canadian public service are fiddling. Enough is enough! Canadians can do without more Neros! What do you think?

Nexus, Gender, and the Return to Reality

Nexus, Gender, and the Return to Reality By Councillor Lisa Robinson On August 6, 2025, Canada quietly announced that non-binary gender markers will no longer be accepted on Nexus card applications. If you don’t choose “male” or “female,” you won’t get a card. And if you already have a Nexus card showing something other than those two options, it will remain valid only until it expires. Why the sudden change? Because the United States — under a Trump executive order — now requires all federal identification to reflect one of only two sexes: Male or Female. Not feelings. Not identities. Biological reality. And since Nexus is a joint U.S.–Canada program, Ottawa had no choice but to align with Washington’s policy. For years, we’ve been told that gender is a spectrum, that biological sex doesn’t matter, and that acknowledging two sexes is somehow hateful. But now, at the border, ideology collides with law — and reality wins. This is not about hate. It’s not about erasing anyone’s lived experience. It’s about the limits of fiction in the face of law, security, and international agreements. Trusted traveler programs, passports, and visas must be grounded in something verifiable, consistent, and legally recognized. That means: Male or Female. Some will call this exclusionary. But we can care about people while still telling the truth. We can show dignity and compassion without rewriting the foundations of biology. And this isn’t a new conversation for me. When I was elected in Pickering, I stood up for the rights of boys and girls to access changerooms based on biological sex — not self-declared identity. For that, I was sanctioned and lost two months’ pay, and am still facing an ongoing battle. The message from the establishment is very clear: stand up for common sense, and you will be punished. When reality is bent too far, it eventually snaps back. First Nexus. Then passports. Soon, perhaps sports, prisons, shelters, and hospitals will have to face the same reckoning. This isn’t hatred. It’s clarity. Canada tried to erase sex. The nited States just said: “No more.” Whether we like it or not, the world runs on truth — not trends. And maybe this isn’t the end of inclusion, but the beginning of a return to common sense. Because there are only two sexes. And deep down… we all know it. XX “Strength Does Not Lie In The Absence Of Fear, But In The Courage To Face It Head On And Rise Above It” - Lisa Robinson 2023On And Rise Above It: Lisa Robinson 2023

Going Natural for Male Vitality

Going Natural for Male Vitality By Diana Gifford Mark Twain said, "Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter." But for many aging men, it matters a lot when their prized male organ starts to lose the vitality of youth. One of the most common yet often unspoken challenges is the decline in testosterone levels, a natural part of aging that can significantly impact physical and emotional well-being. Starting as early as the mid-30s, testosterone levels in men begin to decrease by approximately 1 percent per year. This gradual decline can lead to symptoms like fatigue, reduced muscle mass, irritability, and perhaps most distressing for many, a diminished libido. Not everyone aspires to be Don Juan. But for many, having sufficient upbeat libido is what drives life’s most intimate joys. Plus, having positive and healthy intimate connections can be an indication of broader good health. How many readers know that erectile dysfunction (ED), for instance, is often a precursor to cardiovascular problems? The healthy performance of the male organ can be an indication of the healthy performance of the heart. And when the former declines in prowess, one may surmise the heart is also losing vitality. But here’s the rub. Many men have trouble discussing their sexual health – with their partners and their doctors, both. The personal relationship with their partners suffers needlessly as a result. Those who do act make two common mistakes. The first is to leap immediately to pharmaceutical solutions that come with potential side effects. The second is to scour the Internet for promising products, nearly all of which are dubious. Searching the Internet causes another problem – the invitation for algorithms to send more and more trashy content that will certainly embarrass when popping up on the screen as someone else is watching! There’s a Gifford-Jones law that says, “Try natural remedies first.” Fortunately, there are some products available at natural health food and supplements stores that are tested and proven solutions to reignite men’s testosterone production and renew sexual interest. One example is Testo Charge, produced by Certified Naturals, a firm that specializes in clinically studied ingredients, uses no artificial additives, and packages capsules in the dosage scientists have tested in trials. Testo Charge is made using patented LJ100 tongkat ali, an extract derived from a Southeast Asian plant having a long tradition as a natural aphrodisiac and vitality booster. Studies have demonstrated its effectiveness in boosting testosterone levels, improving sexual performance, and enhancing mood and energy. There’s something to be said for another natural approach to macho manhood. Don’t forget that a little romance can a powerful aphrodisiac. Build a menu of loving options, each one of which is priceless – a kiss, a caress, a lasting cuddle. There need not always be a main course when the appetizers are filling enough. It’s perfectly natural for intimate relationships to evolve as the years go by. What’s often underestimated is the importance of talking about how personal abilities change. Yet being the one to open up such discussions is often very, very hard. Years ago, we told readers that bananas go well with hanky-panky. That’s because bananas are loaded with potassium, a nutrient that lowers blood pressure. Bananas also contain magnesium and calcium, nutrients that can help to ease strained muscles. We recommended putting a banana on the bedside table as a fun way to signal romantic intentions to a partner. Since laughter is such good medicine too, why not write to us with your stories of the amorous effects of your own bedside banana? We’ll print the best ones in a future column. _________________________________________________________________________ Sign-up at www.docgiff.com to receive our weekly e-newsletter. For comments, contact-us@docgiff.com. Follow us Instagram @docgiff and @diana_gifford_jones

They’re Turning Pickering Into a Nuclear Dump — And They’re Doing It Quietly

They’re Turning Pickering Into a Nuclear Dump — And They’re Doing It Quietly By Councillor Lisa Robinson Something is happening in Pickering, and most people don’t even know it. The federal government — through the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) has quietly approved a new nuclear waste storage structure at the Pickering Waste Management Facility (PWMF). You weren’t notified. You weren’t consulted. And unless you’ve been tracking federal regulatory bulletins, you probably didn’t even hear about it. But make no mistake — it’s happening. This facility is located right on the Pickering Nuclear site, just steps from the shoreline of Lake Ontario, and directly adjacent to residential neighbourhoods, schools, and parks. It’s operated by Ontario Power Generation (OPG), and is already used to store low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste — things like contaminated tools, filters, and building materials from inside the reactors. So what’s the big deal? This new structure is being built to handle waste from two sources: The decommissioning of Reactors 1 to 4 — which are already offline or being phased out. And — this is key — the possible future refurbishment of Reactors 5 to 8. Now here’s what they don’t want to say out loud: The refurbishment of Units 5 to 8 has not been approved. The formal application won’t even be heard until 2026. And yet — they’re already building the storage site for the waste it would create. This is what happens when decisions are made before the public has a chance to speak. The hearing is still a year away, but the groundwork is already being poured — physically and politically. Let’s talk numbers: Out of a city of over 100,000 people, just nine members of the public submitted feedback on this waste facility. Nine. There was no mailing. No town hall. No door-knocking. No real attempt to inform or involve the community. That’s not public consultation — that’s engineered silence. And while all of this is happening behind the scenes, look who’s suddenly setting up shop in Pickering: SNC-Lavalin — now rebranded as AtkinsRéalis — the same company tied to one of the biggest political scandals in Canadian history. They now own CANDU Energy, the engineering firm that handles nuclear refurbishments. They’ve worked on reactors at Bruce and Darlington — and now, they’re clearly positioning themselves to take on the refurbishment of Pickering’s Units 5 to 8. So let’s put it all together: A new waste facility has already been approved. A refurbishment that hasn’t been approved is being prepared for. A company with political ties is moving in early. And the people of Pickering have been completely cut out of the process. They’ll tell you this is about energy, progress, and modernization. But when radioactive waste is being stored beside homes — for reactors that haven’t even been given the green light — and residents aren’t even told? That’s not modernization. That’s a betrayal of public trust. Let’s be absolutely clear: This is not a done deal. The future of Units 5 to 8 is still subject to public hearings. But what’s being built — and who’s moving into town — tells you how little they care about what you think. So here’s what I’m asking you to do: Demand a public meeting. Ask OPG and the City why you weren’t consulted. File a Freedom of Information request. The paper trail matters. Talk to your neighbours. Most people still don’t know this is happening. Share this op-ed. Get the truth out before it’s too late. Make it clear: Pickering is not Canada’s nuclear dumping ground Email me your thoughts at lrobinson@pickering.ca “Strength Does Not Lie In The Absence Of Fear, But In The Courage To Face It Head On And Rise Above It” - Lisa Robinson 2023On And Rise Above It: Lisa Robinson 2023

Terminations by Employers for Off Duty Conduct

Terminations by Employers for Off Duty Conduct By Tahir Khorasanee, LL.M. Senior Associate, Steinbergs LLP When an employee’s misconduct occurs outside of office hours, employers must tread carefully between protecting their reputation and respecting individual privacy. Striking that balance has become a pressing challenge as social media and public visibility blur the line between personal life and professional role. Legal experts agree that discipline for off‑duty behaviour is only justified when there is a clear connection to the employment relationship. An employer needs to show that the conduct undermines its business interests, damages its reputation, or directly impacts workplace harmony. Without that link, disciplinary action risks violating privacy laws and human rights protections. Certain positions carry an elevated duty of public trust, making off‑duty discipline more readily defensible. Police officers, teachers, health‑care professionals and high‑level executives are held to a higher standard because misconduct outside work can erode public confidence and impede effective job performance. In one recent British Columbia case, a special provincial constable was terminated after an off‑duty altercation that received local media coverage. The court upheld the dismissal, noting the incident’s serious damage to the constable’s credibility and the force’s integrity. By contrast, employers should think twice before disciplining rank‑and‑file employees for private‑life choices. Courts have ruled that social media posts or lifestyle decisions, however distasteful, warrant discipline only if they are illegal or if they create a foreseeable risk in the workplace—such as disclosing confidential information or harassing co‑workers online. Employers need very strong, narrowly tailored policies to intervene in off‑duty conduct. To reduce legal exposure, organizations are advised to adopt clear, accessible off‑duty conduct policies that define the scope of prohibited behaviour, outline potential disciplinary measures, and provide examples of real‑world scenarios. Regular training for managers ensures consistent application and guards against unconscious bias. “A well‑drafted policy is your best defense,” says HR consultant Laura Patel. “Ambiguity invites disputes.” When an incident arises, fair process is essential. Employers should investigate thoroughly, afford the employee an opportunity to respond, and apply progressive discipline where appropriate. Immediate termination without warning may be defensible in extreme cases—such as violent or criminal acts—but risks being overturned if the employer cannot show prior guidance or if the conduct bears no direct link to the workplace. Beyond legal risk, off‑duty discipline carries reputational stakes. Public perception of an employer punishing someone for harmless personal conduct can prompt social‑media backlash, harming morale and consumer goodwill. A well‑known retailer learned this lesson after briefly suspending an employee over controversial political views expressed on social media. Public outcry prompted a swift reversal and a costly public apology. Experts also note the importance of proportionality. If an employee’s off‑duty conduct has no tangible effect on job performance, a verbal reminder may suffice; more serious infractions might call for written warnings or temporary suspension. In determining an appropriate response, employers should weigh factors such as the nature of the misconduct, its frequency, the employee’s disciplinary history, and the potential impact on co‑workers and clients. For companies operating across multiple jurisdictions, local legislation adds another layer of complexity. Privacy statutes in Canada, for example, protect employees from overly intrusive inquiries into personal social‑media activity. Employers must ensure that any monitoring or investigation of off‑duty conduct complies with provincial privacy laws and applicable human rights codes. As the boundary between personal and professional lives continues to blur, balancing organizational interests with respect for individual rights grows ever more complex. Employers that invest in clear policies, manager training, and fair investigative processes position themselves to respond effectively when off‑duty issues arise—protecting both their brand and their employees’ fundamental rights. In an era where a single social‑media post can reach thousands within minutes, the question is not whether off‑duty conduct will come to light, but how employers will respond. The answers lie in thoughtful policy design, consistent enforcement, and a measured approach to discipline that respects both the workplace and the private sphere.

DEAL BREAKER…

DEAL BREAKER... By Wayne and Tamara As I sit on my computer emailing a woman I could start an affair with, I search for answers. Your explanations about infidelity are plausible, reasonable, and thoughtful, but I still have questions I would like to ask. I would like to start by saying I love my wife, but we are at a crossroads. My wife seems to have an unknown mental aversion to sex, something neither of us recognized upon meeting the first time. She saved herself for marriage, only to find she did not care for sex. We have been and are in counseling. Our therapist has tried to give my wife tools and direction to focus on our sex life, while telling my wife and me she is surprised by my understanding, support, and patience. Unfortunately, in seven years not much has changed, and I'm looking for a balance between self and marital preservation. I work with someone who obviously has issues of her own with her marriage, and she introduced the idea of having an affair. I'm not one to complain about my wife openly, nor did I confide in this woman, prior to her offer, about my own marital problems. It simply was based upon a mutual unconscious attraction, as best as I can tell. Prior to having anyone in mind, I once asked my wife if she would allow me to have an affair. While crying and shaking her head no, she told me that I could. I am old enough to know I am reaching middle age where I will be more interested in planning my retirement than becoming the table-dancing, lampshade-on-the-head guy at the next wild party. I do not want to go into those years without a fulfilling, active sex life. My wife is the kindest, warmest, most caring human being I know. She would do anything for anyone, but she is greatly struggling with what her husband wants and needs. We work together to raise our children, pay our bills, and juggle our finances. So, standing upon the precipice of infidelity, I'm asking for advice. I’m beyond asking my wife and our therapist for help because the result is the same. Don Don, a fulfilling, active sex life is not something you can purchase at Walmart. You think your wife is standing between you and a given. It is not a given. You have a mental picture of what things will be like, but having an affair could change your life in ways you cannot imagine. You want a great sex life with someone who wants sex, but the woman who suggested an affair has more on her mind than a roll in the hay. She wants out of her marriage and a new man. Women don’t give away sex for free. A young girl having sex isn’t getting anything out of it except to say, “He’s my boyfriend, he loves me.” A mature woman may get pleasure from sex, but her underlying desire is still love. If you find a woman who wants only sex, you will get a woman who has been altered or damaged in some way. If you find a woman you have great chemistry with, you will think you love her and want to be with her. The idea of saving yourself for marriage goes hand in hand with the idea sex is for procreation, not pleasure. Perhaps your wife is the way she is because of religious conditioning. Possibly she is one of those women who are nonorgasmic. Since she is not excited about sex, it is a gruesome event. We don’t know what her issue is, but we do know she shook her head no. That’s her answer. The body doesn’t go along with lies coming from the mouth. It boils down to this. You have to decide what you want: wife and kids, or the risks that come from going outside your marriage. Wayne & Tamara