Connect with us

Opinion

What did Lethbridge, Surrey, London, Singapore and Beijing do that Red Deer will not consider?

Published

8 years ago

3 minute read

Lethbridge Alberta, population just shy of 100,000, Surrey B.C., population of 500,000, Singapore, population of 5,000,000, London England, population of 8,800,000 and Beijing, population of 21,500,000 all have man made lakes.
These cities, some are land locked, and some on the ocean, all invested in creating a man made lake. Parks, recreation, sports or works of art they were all investments for their residents.
Red Deer does not have to build a man made lake for it’s residents because it has natural lakes. It also has a river, which Red Deer has invested hundreds of millions relocating the public works yard, re-aligning roads, upgrading and burying services to build an exciting new riverfront neighbourhood downtown.
A river is not the same as a lake. In a lake you have more opportunities to safely swim, dive, boat or skate. The above mentioned cities saw the potential in having a lake and invested, but not Red Deer.
Red Deer, for one reason or another cannot see opportunities in our lakes. Lethbridge took a slough and turned it into a tourist attraction, Red Deer will bury a lake in a residential development.
What am I saying? I am saying that we have a multi-faceted opportunity at our door step being wasted and nobody is saying anything. What?
Hazlett Lake is that golden opportunity. What is Hazlett Lake?
Hazlett Lake is a natural lake that covers a surface area of 0.45 km2 (0.17 mi2), has an average depth of 3 meters (10 feet). Hazlett Lake has a total shore line of 4 kilometers (2 miles). It is 108.8 acres in size. Located in the north-west sector of Red Deer.
Hazlett Lake sits on the corner of Hwy 2 and Hwy 11A, is highly visible and just screams opportunities. Red Deer needs a 50m pool and plans on incorporating it in an Aquatic Centre but they are planning on building it in a parking deprived downtown location.
Why not build an Aquatic Centre on a lake? They have held Olympics using man made lakes why not have the Aquatic Centre on a lake?
Put Red Deer on the radar for water sports, kick start development on the north side, increase tourism, diversify the economy, attract young families, supply a need, and I can go on.
If we do not act now, it will be a lost opportunity because the city is planning on wrapping the lake with houses. The current plans shows a residential neighbourhood, a trail around it, some placards, a community shelter and a lost opportunity.
We have a number of new neighbourhoods and plenty of empty lots. Last year we built about 375 new houses while our population decreased by 975 residents. Perhaps we should look at something to attract new residents besides more empty lots?
We could always wait a few more years and build a man made lake.
Why though when we have a real lake in our back yard? Anyone?

Related Topics:

Follow Author

More from this author
Business / 41 mins ago

The U.S. Strike in Iran-Insecurity About Global Oil Supply Suddenly Makes Canadian Oil Attractive

Business / 52 mins ago

The Passage of Bill C-5 Leaves the Conventional Energy Sector With as Many Questions as Answers

Bruce Dowbiggin / 1 hour ago

What Connor Should Say To Oilers: It’s Not You. It’s Me.

Bruce Dowbiggin

What Connor Should Say To Oilers: It’s Not You. It’s Me.

Published on June 23, 2025

By

This just in. Connor McDavid is on track to be the greatest hockey player ever. Apologies to the Gretz/ Orr/ Howe partisans. But if he stays healthy and gets the hell out of Edmonton he will be hands-down the best ever. He is equal measures of Gretzky’s intuitive genius, Orr’s 200-foot impact. Howe’s sandpaper attitude. It’s an honour to watch him.

We know, we know, if he is so great why couldn’t he get the Oilers over the hump, particularly the past two seasons against Florida? Gretz, Orr, Howe all won Stanley Cups while leading their teams. So did Mario Lemieux. Fair point. But Howe in his prime never played more than two series in the postseason. Orr often played just three. Gretz teams often bagelled opponents for years.

McDavid’s teams the last two years have had lengthy paths to tred. Just getting to a Final is a huge accomplishment. Repeating that feat (going seven then six games) in the Final is humungous. It’s exhausting, mentally and physically. That’s why so few teams do it.

Still, that’s not the point. We have been asking since 2018 how long McDavid will hobble his legacy by staying in Edmonton. Those early columns were talking about a team that missed playoffs or did a Maple Leafs fold early on. The current iteration of the Oilers has gotten to the brink. They have players who’ve been around a while. And fell short.

Now the Oilers are an old team, the oldest in the  regular season, the oldest team in the playoffs this year. Teams carrying more than two plus-30 players have a miserable track record of winning Cups. And the Oilers have zero Grade A prospects in the pipeline. At 28, McDavid is a young guy on their roster. Not good.

As the hockey world knows he can sign an extension on July 1 to follow the contract he has now. Money will be no object as the NHL salary cap (finally) goes up. Term will be forever if he wants it. His running mate Leon Draisaitl is tied up till age 36. The Oilers desperately want him to stay after the Gretzky fiasco in 1988. So what is he going to do? He’s got national endorsements in Canada, but in the U.S.? Connor who? The sky is the limit.

Oilers fans palpitating over the future of their star were looking for hints as to his mindset when he met the media following the Oilers loss in six games to Florida. It was a chance for him to say he’s staying, he loves the place, his wife is committed to freezing every winter in the Alberta capital. He could have cried and said “Mess told me not to do that”.

What they got was a lot of maybe. Yes, he kept the doors open, but he said he needs time to see the landscape till the clock tolls on July 1. He needs to examine whether this veteran team has a future. Because in a few years they’ll be like Howe’s Detroit teams in the 60s, a played-out dynasty.

Under NHL rules no team can contact him about signing. But he will know that everyone will want him at a max deal. Some will offer no state income tax. Some will have teams on the cusp of the Cup he desires (see Matthew Tkachuk to Florida in 2023). Some will be giant U.S. media cities with the ability to make him what Gretzky became in L.A. Some will offer warm weather and anonymity away from the rink.

These are all knowns. For the impatient,  teams can approach the Oilers now about a trade. So he’s holding all the cards. It’s prom night and he gets his pick. Unless Edmonton (gulp) jumps the gun on a trade.

Let’s play Peter Pocklington for a minute here and see this from the Oilers’ POV. Pocklington traded Gretzky, because Peter was broke. That’s not Darryl Katz’s problem. His problem is his team is about to get ancient. There is no McDavid for Draisaitl on the horizon. Plus, you’ve tied up several players (Nurse, Nugent Hopkins) to contracts they can’t hope to play up to. And youngish players coming into free agency.

He must address the other side of the 1988 Gretzky equation. How to get full market value for a superstar? Which means getting another star to help Draisaitl going forward. You could let the two play out the string together in Edmonton, of course. But with so many strong teams in Colorado, Vegas, Dallas, even Winnipeg that would be a hard slog. And by the time you realized that it would be too late.

The smart play, as Michael Corleone would say, is move fast. Trade McDavid before the start of next season for a boatload of young players to supplement Draisaitl. Take a short-term PR hit but live to compete another day.

Of course, Katz is not going to trade McDavid. He’s a fanboy owner. He’ll throw the Rexall kitchen sink at him and hope that’s enough. McDavid will be patient (if he’s smart). The “will-he-sign?” drama will bleed into the next season, a millstone for the team. The distractions will mount before Edmonton realizes that an unsigned McDavid is a liability. And Connor on a max deal with a minus team is no bargain either.

Remember the re-structured Oilers won a Cup in 1990 using Mark Messier and the players they got for Gretzky. Think about it, Edmonton.

Bruce Dowbiggin @dowbboy is the editor of Not The Public Broadcaster  A two-time winner of the Gemini Award as Canada’s top television sports broadcaster, his new book Deal With It: The Trades That Stunned The NHL And Changed hockey is now available on Amazon. Inexact Science: The Six Most Compelling Draft Years In NHL History, his previous book with his son Evan, was voted the seventh-best professional hockey book of all time by bookauthority.org . His 2004 book Money Players was voted sixth best on the same list, and is available via brucedowbigginbooks.ca.

Continue Reading

Business

Federal fiscal anchor gives appearance of prudence, fails to back it up

Published on June 23, 2025

By

From the Fraser Institute

By Jake Fuss and Grady Munro

The Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO)—which acts as the federal fiscal watchdog—released a new report highlighting concerns with the Carney government’s fiscal plan. Key among these concerns is the fact that the government’s promise to balance its “operating budget” does not actually ensure the nation’s finances are sustainable. Instead, the plan to balance the operating budget by 2028/29 gives the appearance of fiscal prudence, but allows the government to continue running large deficits and borrow more money.

First, what’s the new government’s fiscal plan?

While the Carney government has chosen to delay releasing a budget until the fall—leaving Canadians and parliamentarians in the dark about the state of government finances and where we’re headed—the Liberal platform and throne speech lay out the plan in broad strokes.

The Carney government plans to introduce a new framework that splits federal spending into two separate budgets: The operating budget and the capital budget. The operating budget will include “day-to-day” spending (e.g. government salaries, cash transfers to provinces and individuals, etc.) while the capital budget will include spending on “anything that builds an asset.” Within this framework, the government has set itself an objective—also called a ‘fiscal anchor’—to balance the operating budget over the next three years.

Fiscal anchors help guide policy on government spending, taxes and borrowing, and are intended to prevent government finances from deteriorating while ensuring that debt is sustainable for future generations. The previous federal government made a habit of violating its own fiscal anchors—to the detriment of national finances—but the Carney government has promised a “very different approach” to fiscal policy.

The PBO’s new report highlights two critical concerns with this new approach to finances. First, the federal government has not yet defined what “operating” spending is and what “capital” spending is. Therefore, it’s difficult to know whether any new spending policies—such as the recently announced increase in defence spending—will hurt efforts to achieve the government’s goal of balancing the operating budget and how much overall debt will be accumulated. In other words, the government’s plan to split the budget in two simply muddies the waters and makes it harder to evaluate federal finances.

The PBO’s second, and more alarming, concern is that even if the government achieves its goal to balance the operating budget, federal finances may still continue to deteriorate and debt may rise at an unsustainable rate (growing faster than the economy).

While the Liberal election platform does outline a fiscal path that appears to balance the operating budget by 2028/29, this path also includes higher deficits and more borrowing than the previous government’s plan once you factor in capital spending. Specifically, the Carney government plans to run overall deficits over the next four years that are a combined $93.4 billion more than was previously planned in last year’s fall economic statement. This means that rather than the “very different approach” that Canadians have been promised, the Carney government may continue (or even worsen) the same costly habits of endless borrowing and rising debt.

The PBO is right to call out the major transparency issues with the Carney government’s new budget framework and fiscal anchor. While the devil will be in the details of the government’s fiscal plan, and we won’t know those details until it releases a budget, the government’s new fiscal anchor gives the appearance of prudence without the substance to back it up.

Continue Reading

Trending

X