Opinion
3,000 acres of farmland, yet nowhere to build a pool.

There are 3000 acres but nowhere to plant a pool. Councillor Buchanan asked Mr. Curtis the city manager, during budget deliberations November 20, 2018, if there was anywhere north of the river to build a pool, Mr. Curtis said no. Four years ago I was appointed to sit on the Community Action Committee to look at the need or recommendations for an Aquatic Centre in Red Deer. A new Mayor and a new Council and time was of the essence.
The city wanted in 2014 to renovate the downtown pool and it was obvious by the paperwork and answers. They repeated, Michener pool was owned by the province. Timberlands had no room available as it was filled with 3 planned high schools and sports fields. Hazlett Lake was too many years down the road, and the Canada Games was in 2019. It had to be built downtown.
That was 4 years ago and we are no closer to having a 50m pool, than we were 4 years ago. But now the city wants it built in Timberlands near the high schools. It would be like the Collicutt Centre near high schools. Also it will be like the Collicutt, in that it will be east of 30 Ave, between 29 Street and 69 Street. 30 Ave will become like Calgary’s Deerfoot Trail with all that traffic.
In about 300 acres we will have 3 high schools, sports fields, pickle ball courts and an aquatic centre, but in 3,000 acres north of 11A there is no room to park a pool.
Councillor Wong asked about, in my mind, the perfect spot just north of 11a near Hazlett Lake, visible to the QE2 and Mr. Curtis said the road allowance would be too narrow and they would have to buy private land to accommodate the pool and services. That would add uncertainty to the costs, but they do not mention that costs uncertainty when they talk about buying 2.5 acres of private land in the Timberlands. Is it a done deal, have they already made a conditional seal subject to council approval? I do not know.
Mr. Curtis reminded council that the city has had 2 opportunities to build a 50m pool in the last 20 years and they were squandered away. One when building the Collicutt and again when they renovated the downtown pool. Will they do it again?
The city just built the Servus Arena and the college just opened a new ice facility and the city wants to build a new rink to replace the Kinex arena when it fails. The Mayor says Red Deer services what it has. Looks like we will get another new arena, slated for the Dawe but many are expressing doubts about the feasibility of that venture and feel that it will be ultimately built by the Collicutt Centre.
In 2001 the city opened it’s 4th and last pool with a population of about 70,000 people. The city services what it has. If you read the financial statements you will notice 2 things that our population is just shy of 100,000 people and that they expect the Michener Pool will be closed at some point in the next capital budgetary cycle. Leaving us with 3 pools.
If we renovate downtown pool we could be downtown to 2 pools for awhile then back to 3 pools for many years to come. We only build or renovate pools every 20-30 years and by then the Dawe and Collicutt pools will be 70 and 50 years old.
Using the Aquatic Centre as a catalyst to spur development if we built it north of 11a where development has yet to start. Shoehorning it in with 3 new high schools, new sports fields and pickle ball courts will not get the same bang for the buck.
Why not combine the new ice rink and 50 meter pool into a Collicutt style complex in an empty field on the north west corner of Red Deer like we did with the Collicutt Center on the south-east corner of Red Deer.
Spurring development and enjoyed by 60% of recreation facility users in Red Deer, far surpassing all other pools combined.
This will not happen, because the city is too focused on process and awaiting good fortune to come a calling. I watched the debate and I noticed that council sits in a semi-circle facing in and I marvelled at how their attention is focused in and not out.
I also noticed that the Mayor and City Manager sit so much higher than council, reigning supreme over the lowly council. Enforced in my mind by little actions like the Mayor telling a councillor his question has taken 6 minutes, though there are no time lines to follow. Shouldn’t an elected councillor in his elected duties as guardians of the public purse be allowed the same latitude and time as the equally elected mayor?
We have 9 strong and very intelligent elected members looking after our well being, should they not be allowed to bring their strength to the table? We have people trained in law, economics, planning, business, agriculture, politics, law enforcement, education, history, to name but a few. Showcase them don’t muzzle them.
If they have concerns don’t dismiss them or limit their time, get to the bottom of it, that is why we elected them. The city has for many years survived the booms and busts of the Alberta economy but we have not recovered and are not enjoying the rebounding economy like the rest of the province for the last few years, why? Our economy is failing while everyone else is enjoying growth and our declining population is facing more doom and gloom while those around us our seeing positive growth. Perhaps it is time to stop waiting for potential future development to land in our lap and make Red Deer attractive to businesses, residents, tourists and athletes to name but a few.
As one gentleman wrote about us hosting the Canada Games but we can’t hold some of the events, and we are showcasing to the country what we don’t have. Poor publicity. If only we had looked outward and acted those other times. Just saying.
Mental Health
Headline that reads ‘Ontario must pay for surgery to give trans resident both penis and vagina: appeal court’ a sign of the times in Canada

From LifeSiteNews
Gender ideology so entrenched, surgical mutilation is no longer considered fringe
If you’d like a glimpse of what 10 years of progressive rule has done to Canada in a single sentence, I submit to you this April 24 headline: “Ontario must pay for surgery to give trans resident both penis and vagina: appeal court.”
Imagine reading a headline like that in, say, 2010. You’d wonder what country you were living in — that is, if you weren’t trying to figure out what you just read. But in Canada in 2025, this stuff isn’t fringe. It’s establishment.
The Ontario Court of Appeal, the province’s top court, issued a ruling this week stating that the province must pay for a “penile-sparing vaginoplasty” for a resident who identifies as transgender but does not identify “exclusively” as either male or female and thus would like to possess both a penis and a vagina.
According to the Post, “a three-judge panel of the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed a lower court’s ruling that the novel phallus-preserving surgery qualifies as an insured service under the Ontario Health Insurance Plan.” In case you’re tempted to write this off as an aberration at the hands of a handful of activist judges, this ruling is the third unanimous decision in favor of the “patient,” identified in court records as “K.S.”
“K.S. is pleased with the Court of Appeal’s decision, which is now the third unanimous ruling confirming that her gender affirming surgery is covered under Ontario’s Health Insurance Act and its regulation,” K.S.’s lawyer, John McIntyre, told the Post. K.S., as it turns out, identifies as neither male nor female … but uses female pronouns:
The legal battle between K.S., whose sex at birth was male, dates to 2022, when the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) refused her request to pay for the cost of surgery at a Texas clinic to construct a vagina while sparing the penis, a procedure this is not available in Ontario, or anywhere else in Canada. K.S. uses female pronouns but does not identify as either fully female or fully male.
Previously, saner generations would have no idea how to interpret the preceding paragraph, but gender ideology has made fools of us all. OHIP attempted to argue that “because the vaginoplasty would not be accompanied by a penectomy, the procedure isn’t one specifically listed in OHIP’s Schedule of Benefits and therefore shouldn’t be publicly funded” and also that the surgery is “experimental” in Ontario and thus can’t be covered.
But K.S., who has a male member but would also like a neo-vagina, appealed to the Health Services Appeal and Review Board, which overturned OHIP’s decision. OHIP appealed to the Divisional Court but lost; the latest appeal, heard November 26, was also rejected because a “penectomy,” the removal of the penis, was “neither recommended by K.S.’s health professionals nor desired by K.S.,” according to the court’s decision.
I wonder if the judges thought that they’d be ruling on whether a man who identifies as neither a man or a woman was entitled to obtain a vagina while retaining his penis when they were going to law school.
The court stated that K.S., who is in his early 30s, “has experienced significant gender dysphoria since her teenage years, as well as physical, mental and economic hardships to transition her gender expression to align with her gender identity.” Of course, K.S. isn’t “transgender,” per se — because he doesn’t identify as the opposite sex, even though he uses the pronouns of the opposite sex. He wants to be … both, somehow. And he wants the taxpayer to pay for it.
As the Post reported:
K.S.’s doctor submitted a request to OHIP for prior funding approval for the surgical creation of a vaginal cavity and external vulva. The request made it clear that K.S. wasn’t seeking a penectomy. In a letter accompanying the request, her doctor said that because K.S. is “not completely on the ‘feminine’ end of the spectrum” it was important for her to have a vagina while maintaining her penis, adding that the Crane Center for Transgender Surgery in Austin, Tx.,” has an excellent reputation” for gender-affirming surgery, “and especially with these more complicated procedures.”
The surgeries, depending on which are performed, range in cost “from US $10,000 to $70,000.” The court also ordered Ontario to pay K.S. $23,250 after dismissing OHIP’s appeal; the province has until June 23 to seek leave to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Alberta
Preston Manning: Canada is in a unity crisis

Preston Manning
A Canada West Assembly would investigate why
The election of a minority Liberal government on Monday, and the strong showing of the Conservative party under Pierre Poilievre, cannot mask the fact that Canada remains seriously fractured on many fronts. Thus, one of the primary tasks of the Carney government will be to unite us for the sake of our own national well-being — not simply for the sake of presenting a strong front in future dealings with the United States.
But how is that to be done? When parliament meets as scheduled on May 26, will the government’s throne speech acknowledge the main sources of national disunity and propose the immediate adoption of remedial measures? Or will it ignore the problem entirely, which will serve to further alienate Quebec and the West from Ottawa and the rest of Canada, and weaken Canada’s bargaining position vis a vis the United States?
The principal tactic employed by the Liberal party to unite Canadians behind it in the recent election was to employ the politics of fear — fear of U.S. President Donald Trump trying to “break us so that America can own us,” as Liberal Leader Mark Carney has repeatedly said.
But if the only way to unite Canadians is through the promotion of anti-Americanism fostered by fear of some alleged American takeover — if reaction to the erratic musings of an American president is the only way to motivate more Canadians to vote in a federal election — then not only national unity, but Canadian democracy itself, is in critical condition.
We need to pinpoint what actually is fracturing the country, because if we can clearly define that, we can begin the process of removing those divisive elements to the largest extent possible. Carney and the Liberals will of course declare that it is separatist agitations in Quebec and now the West that is dividing us, but these are simply symptoms of the problem, not the cause.
Here, then, is a partial list of what underpins the division and disunity in this country and, more importantly, of some positive, achievable actions we can take to reduce or eliminate them.
First and foremost is the failure to recognize and accommodate the regional character of this country. Canada is the second-largest country by area on the planet and is characterized by huge geographic regions — the Atlantic, Central Canada, the Prairies, the Pacific Coast and the Northern territories.
Each of these regions — not just Quebec — has its own “distinctive” concerns and aspirations, which must be officially recognized and addressed by the federal government if the country is to be truly united. The previous Liberal government consistently failed to do this, particularly with respect to the Prairies, Pacific and Northern regions, which is the root of much of the alienation that even stimulates talk of western separation.
Second is Ottawa’s failure to recognize and treat the natural resources sector as a fundamental building block of our national economy — not as a relic from the past or an environmental liability, as it was regarded by the government of former prime minister Justin Trudeau.
Will the throne speech announce another 180-degree turn for the Liberal government: the explicit recognition that the great engine of the Canadian economy and our economic recovery is not the federal government, as Carney has implied, but Canada’s agricultural, energy, mining, forestry and fishery sectors, with all the processing, servicing, manufacturing and knowledge sectors that are built upon them?
A third issue we’ve been plagued with is the division of Canadian society based on race, gender, sexual preferences and other identity traits, rather than focusing on the things that unite us as a nation, such as the equality of all under the law. Many private-sector entities are beginning to see the folly of pursuing identity initiatives such as diversity, equity and inclusion that divide rather than unite, but will the Liberal government follow suit and will that intention be made crystal clear in the upcoming throne speech?
A final issue is the federal government’s intrusion into areas of provincial jurisdiction — such as natural resources, health, municipal governance, along with property and civil rights — which is the principal cause of tension and conflict between the federal and provincial governments.
The solution is to pass a federal “act respecting provincial jurisdiction” to repeal or amend the statutes that authorize federal intrusions, so as to eliminate, or at least reduce, their intrusiveness. Coincidentally, this would be a legislative measure that both the Conservatives and the Bloc could unite behind if such a statute were to be one of the first pieces of legislation introduced by the Carney government.
Polling is currently being done to ascertain whether the election of yet another Liberal government has increased the growing estrangement of western Canada from Ottawa and the rest of Canada, notwithstanding Carney’s assurances that his minority government will change its policies on climate change, pipelines, immigration, deficit spending and other distinguishing characteristics of the discredited Trudeau government.
The first test of the truthfulness of those assurances will come via the speech from the throne and the follow-up actions of the federal government.
Meanwhile, consultations are being held on the merits and means of organizing a “Canada West Assembly” to provide a democratic forum for the presentation, analysis and debate of the options facing western Canada (not just Alberta) — from acceptance of a fairer and stronger position within the federation based on guarantees from the federal government, to various independence-oriented proposals, with votes to be taken on the various options and recommendations to be made to the affected provincial governments.
Only time will tell whether the newly elected Carney government chooses to address the root causes of national disunity. But whether it does so or not will influence the direction in which the western provinces and the proposed Canada West Assembly will point.
Preston’s Substack is free today.
But if you enjoyed this post, you can tell Preston’s Substack that their writing is valuable by pledging a future subscription.
-
Alberta1 day ago
Premier Danielle Smith responds to election of Liberal government
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
In Defeat, Joe Tay’s Campaign Becomes a Flashpoint for Suspected Voter Intimidation in Canada
-
Automotive2 days ago
Major automakers push congress to block California’s 2035 EV mandate
-
Mental Health2 days ago
Suspect who killed 11 in Vancouver festival attack ID’d
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
Poilievre loses seat but plans to stay on as Conservative leader
-
COVID-1922 hours ago
Freedom Convoy leaders’ sentencing judgment delayed, Crown wants them jailed for two years
-
Banks22 hours ago
TD Bank Account Closures Expose Chinese Hybrid Warfare Threat
-
2025 Federal Election22 hours ago
Post election…the chips fell where they fell