Local opinion writer not in favour of Molly Bannister Drive extension and development

This article is submitted by Red Deer Resident Tim Lasiuta

Dear City of Red Deer

Firstly, I am very surprised that the Bower sisters sold the pristine land to Melcor. Very surprised.

Secondly, After all this time and development in Red Deer the most valuable land in the city has changed hands. Let us pray that they have the wisdom to follow what has unparalleled potential for future generations.

Thirdly, the concept of a road across the creek by Bower would be positive and allow splendid traffic flow but decisions like this need to be seen with eyes that look 100 years into the future.

As a future Red Deer citizen looking back, I would look back to a time when Alberta was in tough economic times and the phase out of gas powered vehicles had started. However, with the advent of flying cars and hover boards and personal flying suits, roads have gone out of vogue so roads that were once busy according to old photographs, are now long stretches of greenery, much like what once may existed. With one exception. Looking back on wildlife counts and the many green spaces around Red Deer, over the last 100 years, the flow of animals came to a standstill as the wanton destruction of pristine environments accelerated. Precedent after precedent allowed the desecration of The Kerry Wood area and green spaces alongside Highway 2.

As a present Red Deer citizen, I look at the example of Central Park, New York. More than a century ago, a civic minded individual donated land to create a timeless refuge for urban dwellers in the big city. Today, it is the #1 draw for tourists and those wanting to find peace in a busy city.

I imagine that the future citizen would see the same IF the proposed bridge goes across. The flow of animals, and desecration of virgin land that David Thompson, Leonard Gaetz, Sgt McLeod, and countless native tribes walked on would be severe.

I am aware the Melcor wants to develop a park, but I propose it is the entire land purchase, not a small fraction.

100 years from now, our descendants will be able to look at a pristine land area that hearkens to a time and leadership that dares make hard decisions on what could be an easy solution with incredible cost.

As a past candidate in one election, I would advocate that the good decision on this is NO bridge, and pressure on Melcor to preserve what will be our greatest resource and potential recreation area.

Fourthly, with land that is undefiled as the area is, the archaeology that is beneath must be incredible and must be examined. If it is not, it is in violation of Dalgemuuq and federal regulations on land development. In this case, an aerial examination of the land is not sufficient. There MUST be boots on the ground. Based on Cree habitation of this area, it is indeed possible that there is even a village beneath the area. In Red Deer, only two areas can boast summer village dating to pre-contact, and they are both under danger of desecration. Let us not make this a third. There would be legal action if action proceeds without in depth investigation.

I am in favor of development, but perhaps this is a time for future based decisions.

IF this development does come up and a bridge is truly proposed. I will run again, and strongly oppose it. STRONGLY.

Tim Lasiuta, Red Deer, Alberta

Up Next

If I was a Politician I would vote me a raise to cover all these new costs.

Don't Miss

What the USMCA Might Mean for Agriculture and Biotechnology?

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Daughter convinces healthy father to die in double assisted suicide with mother

Alberta / 7 hours ago

Click here to help choose Alberta’s new licence plate design

National / 8 hours ago

Democracy Watch Renews Push for Independent Prosecutor in SNC-Lavalin Case

National

Democracy Watch Renews Push for Independent Prosecutor in SNC-Lavalin Case

Published on October 15, 2025

Todayville

Dan Knight's avatar Dan Knight

Group says Ontario Crown used “clearly incorrect” legal test to shield Trudeau from private prosecution, calls for independent process free of political ties

Democracy Watch has launched a fresh bid to reopen the door to prosecuting former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau over his alleged role in the 2018 SNC-Lavalin affair, accusing Ontario Crown Counsel of using a legally flawed standard to shut down its private prosecution and continuing what it calls “a smelly cover-up” that began under the Trudeau government.

Read the full press release here

In a new letter sent Wednesday to Ontario Attorney General Doug Downey and Randy Schwartz, the province’s Assistant Deputy Attorney General for Criminal Law, the non-partisan watchdog group is again calling for an independent special prosecutor to review evidence that Trudeau obstructed justice and breached public trust by pressuring then–Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould to intervene in the SNC-Lavalin prosecution seven years ago.

This latest appeal comes after Ontario’s Director of the Complex Prosecutions Bureau, John Corelli, used his authority in September to halt Democracy Watch’s private prosecution before it reached a preliminary “pre-enquête” hearing. In that letter, Corelli said there was “no reasonable prospect the Crown could prove that Mr. Trudeau acted with the requisite criminal intent.”

Democracy Watch disputes that reasoning, arguing it misstates the law.

“Crown prosecutors stopping this prosecution for a legally incorrect reason, just like the RCMP did in addition to suppressing key evidence, amounts to a smelly cover-up,” said Duff Conacher, the group’s co-founder and legal expert. “It shows clearly that Canada does not have independent, effective anti-corruption law enforcement and, as a result, corruption in the highest public offices across the country is effectively legal.”

The group’s new letter marks the second time it has asked Ontario’s Attorney General to intervene. In its first request in March, Democracy Watch urged Downey to establish a non-partisan selection committee to appoint a special prosecutor. Downey’s office declined that request in May.

Now, the group is reiterating the demand, saying the independent prosecutor should be chosen by a committee composed of people with no party ties, working alongside opposition leaders, to ensure public confidence in the process.

Conacher’s team argues that Corelli’s reasoning — that the Crown cannot prove Trudeau acted with “criminal intent” — applies the wrong legal test. In its filings, Democracy Watch cites the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R. v. Beaudry (2007), which clarified that obstruction of justice requires only that an act be done “willfully” to frustrate the course of justice — not that it be done with corrupt or deceitful intent.

“The Supreme Court has already set the threshold,” Conacher said. “Proof of ‘criminal’ intent isn’t required. It’s enough that someone acted willfully to obstruct the process. That’s what the Crown ignored.”

The group also says that the case against Trudeau is unprecedented and cannot be dismissed out of hand without judicial review. It accuses the RCMP of conducting a “negligently weak and incomplete investigation” that left key questions unanswered and accepted the government’s refusal to release Cabinet records from the time.

Democracy Watch’s original filing included testimony and documents obtained from the RCMP after a two-year access battle. It alleges that the Mounties failed to interview key witnesses, including Wilson-Raybould’s chief of staff Jessica Prince and former Liberal minister Jane Philpott, and withheld portions of their answers in documents finally disclosed. The proposed pre-enquête hearing — which Corelli stopped — would have allowed those witnesses to testify under oath and allowed a judge to decide if the evidence was sufficient to proceed.

The group’s case was supported by Wayne Crookes, founder of Integrity B.C., and represented by Jen Danch of Swadron Associates law firm.

Conacher is now urging Ontario’s Attorney General to “do the right thing” and reverse course.

“Canadians can only hope Ontario’s Attorney General will work with opposition party leaders to establish a fully independent committee that will choose a fully independent special prosecutor to review the evidence,” Conacher said.

He also renewed his call for structural reform of Canada’s anti-corruption enforcement, noting that Quebec’s independent anti-corruption police and prosecution units (UPAC) have operated since 2011, while the RCMP remains under the direct control of Cabinet appointees.

“The RCMP lacks independence from the Prime Minister and Cabinet ministers who handpick its leadership,” Conacher said. “They serve at the pleasure of the government, so they are vulnerable to political interference. To ensure integrity, Canada needs a fully independent anti-corruption police force and independent prosecutors.”

Democracy Watch’s campaign underscores a broader concern that the Trudeau-era SNC-Lavalin controversy, which saw Wilson-Raybould’s resignation, Philpott’s exit, and an Ethics Commissioner finding of improper political pressure, has never been subjected to a full criminal review.

For Conacher, the issue is bigger than one case. It’s about restoring the principle that no one, not even a Prime Minister, stands above the law.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Business

Over two thirds of Canadians say Ottawa should reduce size of federal bureaucracy

Published on October 15, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Matthew Lau

From 2015 to 2024, headcount at Natural Resources Canada increased 39 per cent even though employment in Canada’s natural resources sector actually fell one per cent. Similarly, there was 382 per cent headcount growth at the federal department for Women and Gender Equality—obviously far higher than the actual growth in Canada’s female population.

According to a recent poll, there’s widespread support among Canadians for reducing the size of the federal bureaucracy. The support extends across the political spectrum. Among the political right, 82.8 per cent agree to reduce the federal bureaucracy compared to only 5.8 per cent who disagree (with the balance neither agreeing nor disagreeing); among political moderates 68.4 per cent agree and only 10.0 per cent disagree; and among the political left 44.8 per cent agree and 26.3 per cent disagree.

Taken together, “67 per cent agreed the federal bureaucracy should be significantly reduced. Only 12 per cent disagreed.” These results shouldn’t be surprising. The federal bureaucracy is ripe for cuts. From 2015 to 2024, the federal government added more than 110,000 new bureaucrats, a 43 per cent increase, which was nearly triple the rate of population growth.

This bureaucratic expansion was totally unjustified. From 2015 to 2024, headcount at Natural Resources Canada increased 39 per cent even though employment in Canada’s natural resources sector actually fell one per cent. Similarly, there was 382 per cent headcount growth at the federal department for Women and Gender Equality—obviously far higher than the actual growth in Canada’s female population. And there are many similar examples.

While in 2025 the number of federal public service jobs fell by three per cent, the cost of the federal bureaucracy actually increased as the number of fulltime equivalents, which accounts for whether those jobs were fulltime or part-time, went up. With the tax burden created by the federal bureaucracy rising so significantly in the past decade, it’s no wonder Canadians overwhelmingly support its reduction.

Another interesting poll result: “While 42 per cent of those surveyed supported the government using artificial intelligence tools to resolve bottlenecks in service delivery, 32 per cent opposed it, with 25 per cent on the fence.” The authors of the poll say the “plurality in favour is surprising, given the novelty of the technology.”

Yet if 67 per cent of Canadians agree with significantly shrinking the federal bureaucracy, then solid support for using AI to increasing efficiency should not be too surprising, even if the technology is relatively new. Separate research finds 58 per cent of Canadian workers say they use AI tools provided by their workplace, and although many of them do not necessarily use AI regularly, of those who report using AI the majority say it improves their productivity.

In fact, there’s massive potential for the government to leverage AI to increase efficiency and control labour expenses. According to a recent study by a think-tank at Toronto Metropolitan University (formerly known as Ryerson), while the federal public service and the overall Canadian workforce are similar in terms of the percentage of roles that could be made more productive by AI, federal employees were twice as likely (58 per cent versus 29 per cent) to have jobs “comprised of tasks that are more likely to be substituted or replaced” by AI.

The opportunity to improve public service efficiency and deliver massive savings to taxpayers is clearly there. However, whether the Carney government will take advantage of this opportunity is questionable. Unlike private businesses, which must continuously innovate and improve operational efficiency to compete in a free market, federal bureaucracies face no competition. As a result, there’s little pressure or incentive to reduce costs and increase efficiency, whether through AI or other process or organizational improvements.

In its upcoming budget and beyond, it would be a shame if the federal government does not, through AI or other changes, restrain the cost of its workforce. Taxpayers deserve, and clearly demand, a break from this ever-increasing burden.