Opinion
Molly Banister extension is before council again on Monday for the umpteenth time. Exhausting.

Melcor is asking the city once again to remove the Molly Banister Extension from future plans on Monday. If the city goes forward with this request it will mean another public hearing. I believe this issue has had more public hearings than any other that I can think of.
I get it, Melcor can build 70 more houses backing on to the creek and make millions of dollars. Guy Pelletier, of Melcor, said at a town hall meeting in Bower that if they remove the allowance now then the city could not build the bridge when they need it.
The city said that the current intersection at 40 Avenue and 19 Street will not be able to handle the traffic in 3-5 year s so a traffic circle will be needed.
32 Street will be needed to be expanded to 6 lanes. 22 Street is getting busier pushing more traffic onto 19 Street and 32 Street at 40 Avenue so by all means bottle neck all traffic at the intersection of 22 Street and 40 Avenue, 19 Street and 40 Avenue and 32 Street and 40 Avenue. Don’t ease traffic flow on 22 Street by extending it to Taylor Drive, that does not make any sense, alleviating traffic congestion, easing traffic on 19 Street and 32 Street. What was I thinking?
The traffic circle at 40 Ave. and 19 St. would only cost the city 20 million dollars? Widening 32 Street, a mere 30 million? I don’t know but that is petty cash if Melcor can build 70 more houses along the creek.
I always thought it would be better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. According to census reports our population is not growing so do we really need those 70 more houses? We will probably regret not having the Molly Banister extension in time, if we remove it.
Just asking. Please email [email protected] or [email protected] with your thoughts.
2025 Federal Election
Post election…the chips fell where they fell

From William’s Substack
William Lacey
I put a lot of personal energy into this election, trying to understand why it was that Canadians so wholeheartedly endorsed Mark Carney as their new leader, despite the fact that it was the same party who caused irreparable economic harm to the economy, and he has a similar philosophical outlook to the core outlook of the party. I truly believe that we have moved to a phase in our electoral process where, until something breaks, left leaning ideology will trump the day (pun intended).
Coming out of this election I have three questions.
1. What of Pierre Poilievre? The question for Conservatives is whether the wolves feed on the carcass of Poilievre (in my opinion the worst enemy of a Conservative is a Conservative) and initiate the hunt for a new leader (if they do, I believe the future should be led by a woman – Melissa Lantsman or possibly Caroline Mulroney), or does Poilievre move to Alberta and run for a “safe” seat to get back into the House of Commons, change his tone, and show people he too can be Prime Ministerial? His concession speech gives clues to this.
2. What of Mark Carney? Maybe (hopefully) Carney will see the light and try to bring the nation together, as there is an obvious east-west split in the country in terms of politics. Time will tell, and minority governments need to be cautious. Will we have a Supply and Confidence 2.0 or will we see olive branches extended?
3. What of the House of Commons? As I have mentioned previously, there has been discussion that the House of Commons may not sit until after the summer break, meaning that the House of Commons really will not have conducted any business in almost a year by the time it reconveens. If indeed “we are in the worst crisis of our lives” as Prime Minister Carney campaigned on, then should we not have the House of Commons sit through the summer? After all, the summer break usually is for politicians to go back to their ridings and connect with their constituents, but if an election campaign doesn’t constitute connecting, what does?
Regardless, as the election is behind us, we now need to see what comes. I will try to be hopeful, but remain cautious. May Canada have better days ahead.
Thanks for reading William’s Substack!
Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Banks
TD Bank Account Closures Expose Chinese Hybrid Warfare Threat

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
Scott McGregor warns that Chinese hybrid warfare is no longer hypothetical—it’s unfolding in Canada now. TD Bank’s closure of CCP-linked accounts highlights the rising infiltration of financial interests. From cyberattacks to guanxi-driven influence, Canada’s institutions face a systemic threat. As banks sound the alarm, Ottawa dithers. McGregor calls for urgent, whole-of-society action before foreign interference further erodes our sovereignty.
Chinese hybrid warfare isn’t coming. It’s here. And Canada’s response has been dangerously complacent
The recent revelation by The Globe and Mail that TD Bank has closed accounts linked to pro-China groups—including those associated with former Liberal MP Han Dong—should not be dismissed as routine risk management. Rather, it is a visible sign of a much deeper and more insidious campaign: a hybrid war being waged by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) across Canada’s political, economic and digital spheres.
TD Bank’s move—reportedly driven by “reputational risk” and concerns over foreign interference—marks a rare, public signal from the private sector. Politically exposed persons (PEPs), a term used in banking and intelligence circles to denote individuals vulnerable to corruption or manipulation, were reportedly among those flagged. When a leading Canadian bank takes action while the government remains hesitant, it suggests the threat is no longer theoretical. It is here.
Hybrid warfare refers to the use of non-military tools—such as cyberattacks, financial manipulation, political influence and disinformation—to erode a nation’s sovereignty and resilience from within. In The Mosaic Effect: How the Chinese Communist Party Started a Hybrid War in America’s Backyard, co-authored with Ina Mitchell, we detailed how the CCP has developed a complex and opaque architecture of influence within Canadian institutions. What we’re seeing now is the slow unravelling of that system, one bank record at a time.
Financial manipulation is a key component of this strategy. CCP-linked actors often use opaque payment systems—such as WeChat Pay, UnionPay or cryptocurrency—to move money outside traditional compliance structures. These platforms facilitate the unchecked flow of funds into Canadian sectors like real estate, academia and infrastructure, many of which are tied to national security and economic competitiveness.
Layered into this is China’s corporate-social credit system. While framed as a financial scoring tool, it also functions as a mechanism of political control, compelling Chinese firms and individuals—even abroad—to align with party objectives. In this context, there is no such thing as a genuinely independent Chinese company.
Complementing these structural tools is guanxi—a Chinese system of interpersonal networks and mutual obligations. Though rooted in trust, guanxi can be repurposed to quietly influence decision-makers, bypass oversight and secure insider deals. In the wrong hands, it becomes an informal channel of foreign control.
Meanwhile, Canada continues to face escalating cyberattacks linked to the Chinese state. These operations have targeted government agencies and private firms, stealing sensitive data, compromising infrastructure and undermining public confidence. These are not isolated intrusions—they are part of a broader effort to weaken Canada’s digital, economic and democratic institutions.
The TD Bank decision should be seen as a bellwether. Financial institutions are increasingly on the front lines of this undeclared conflict. Their actions raise an urgent question: if private-sector actors recognize the risk, why hasn’t the federal government acted more decisively?
The issue of Chinese interference has made headlines in recent years, from allegations of election meddling to intimidation of diaspora communities. TD’s decision adds a new financial layer to this growing concern.
Canada cannot afford to respond with fragmented, reactive policies. What’s needed is a whole-of-society response: new legislation to address foreign interference, strengthened compliance frameworks in finance and technology, and a clear-eyed recognition that hybrid warfare is already being waged on Canadian soil.
The CCP’s strategy is long-term, multidimensional and calculated. It blends political leverage, economic subversion, transnational organized crime and cyber operations. Canada must respond with equal sophistication, coordination and resolve.
The mosaic of influence isn’t forming. It’s already here. Recognizing the full picture is no longer optional. Canadians must demand transparency, accountability and action before more of our institutions fall under foreign control.
Scott McGregor is a defence and intelligence veteran, co-author of The Mosaic Effect: How the Chinese Communist Party Started a Hybrid War in America’s Backyard, and the managing partner of Close Hold Intelligence Consulting Ltd. He is a senior security adviser to the Council on Countering Hybrid Warfare and a former intelligence adviser to the RCMP and the B.C. Attorney General. He writes for the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.
-
Alberta14 hours ago
Premier Danielle Smith responds to election of Liberal government
-
International2 days ago
U.S. Army names new long-range hypersonic weapon ‘Dark Eagle’
-
Business2 days ago
Ottawa’s Plastics Registry A Waste Of Time And Money
-
Business2 days ago
Net Zero by 2050: There is no realistic path to affordable and reliable electricity
-
Addictions1 day ago
Four new studies show link between heavy cannabis use, serious health risks
-
COVID-191 day ago
Former Australian state premier accused of lying about justification for COVID lockdowns
-
Business2 days ago
Trump demands free passage for American ships through Panama, Suez
-
Also Interesting2 days ago
Top Used Ford SUVs for Families and Adventurers