Connect with us

Opinion

OPINION: On Monday November 26 2018 will the Mayor and City Council vote to give themselves 14-18% pay raise?

Published

4 minute read

The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the writer and should not be interpreted as reflecting the editorial policy of Todayville, Inc.

Will the Mayor and our 8 city Councillors have the discipline to stand by their principles and convictions of fiscal conservatism? I hope so.
We have all suffered and we feel their pain. We all know of someone who has lost a job, shown up at their workplace to find it padlocked, had hours cut, pay roll backed, gone bankrupt, had medical expenses go skyrocketing, seniors boarding up rooms to save on extreme heating costs, had their vehicles repossessed, homes foreclosed, forced to go to food banks, forced to take on a second or third job to feed children, forced into early retirement, or just lost their life savings.
City council has talked about declining resources and rising costs for increasing taxes, franchise fees, bus fares, recreational fees, and other services even if you lost your job, seen hours cut, your rent increased, and had your car repossessed.
The Mayor and Councillors have all seen or heard these tales and have used them to cut spending and services for the good people of Red Deer.
On Monday November 26, 2018 they will be given the chance to prove their mettle, show their disciplined convictions to fiscal conservatism and not vote them selves a raise to cover the end of a tax subsidy, only they and not the average citizen enjoyed for years.
Unlike many of us who lose jobs, income, or bonuses suddenly and unexpectedly, they saw it coming.
Will the Mayor and our 8 city councillors suffer a perceived salary cut? Every business owner, tradesman and even the Alberta Government employees saw roll backs, cuts and decreased profits. Didn’t former Conservative Premier Ralph Klein roll back all government employees pay by 5% and kept frozen for years afterwards?
I say perceived because they are not actually seeing a salary cut but an equalization of taxes, compared to non-politicians. They had the benefit of a 1/3 tax free earnings subsidy which ceases to exist on January 1 2019.
The subsidy was granted to offset personal expenses peculiar to the role of being a politician. Politicians were also given expense accounts to cover the costs of these same personal expenses so the benefit was rather redundant. Some would call this unintentional double-dipping.
Being human they became accustomed to having the extra funds, forgetting the reason for them.
Now they are like the rest of society and facing a possible net pay decrease. So the question is; “If they do not vote themselves a raise, who will stay and who will go?”
October 2017 there were 2 candidates for mayor and 29 candidates for city council, how many of them ran for the pay cheque and how many would have withdrawn their nomination papers if they knew that the 1/3 exemption would end in 2019?
I do not believe any one would have withdrawn from the campaign and I do not think our mayor or any of our councillors will resign due to this hardship. Do you?
On November 26, 2018 will the Mayor and Councillors have the discipline and convictions to stand by their fiscal conservative oratories or will they just stick their hands back in the public trough for more money to sustain their rather nice life style? I hope not. Just saying.

Follow Author

National

Anger towards Trudeau government reaches new high among Canadians: poll

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Canadians’ anger towards Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his Liberal government has reached a record high, according to a new poll.   

According to a national survey published by Nanos Research this month, 31% of Canadians feel anger and pessimism towards the Trudeau government, which marks an all-time low in satisfaction for government leadership.  

“Which of the following feelings best describes your views of the federal government in Ottawa?” the poll questioned.  

In addition to the 31% feeling angry and pessimistic respectively, 11% feel uninterested, while only 1% and 10% feel satisfaction and optimism, respectively. 6% were unsure of their feelings towards the Trudeau government.  

“Feelings of anger toward the federal government have increased or held steady in every region, with the largest increases among residents of Quebec (December: 12%; March: 24%) and Atlantic Canada (December: 21%; March: 38%). Pessimism and anger remain the top emotions Canadians say best describe their views of the federal government in Ottawa,” the research found.  

In recent months, Trudeau’s popularity has plummeted, with polls projecting a massive Conservative victory in the upcoming election.   

Trudeau’s popularity has been falling and his government has been embroiled in scandal after  scandal, one of the latest being a federal court ruling that the prime minister’s use of the Emergencies Act to end the 2022 Freedom Convoy was “not justified.”    

Even top Liberal party stalwarts have called for him to resign.    

Indeed, Canadians anger and dissatisfaction with Trudeau has become a topic of conversation on many social media platforms, with Canadians detailing how the Trudeau government has made their life less affordable.   

Numerous videos are being uploaded to social media by Canadians explaining that they struggling to make ends meet amid the rising cost of living and Trudeau’s ever-increasing carbon tax, while many immigrants are telling others not to come to Canada.  

 

Continue Reading

Frontier Centre for Public Policy

Budget 2024 as the eve of 1984 in Canada

Published on

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Michael Melanson

Those who claim there are unmarked burials have painted themselves into a corner. If there are unmarked burials, there have had to be murders because why else would anyone attempt to conceal the deaths?

The Federal Government released its Budget 2024 last week. In addition to hailing a 181% increase in spending on Indigenous priorities since 2016, “Budget 2024 also proposes to provide $5 million over three years, starting in 2025-26, to Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada to establish a program to combat Residential School denialism.” Earlier this spring, the government proclaimed:

The government anticipates the Special Interlocutor’s final report and recommendations in spring 2024. This report will support further action towards addressing the harmful legacy of residential schools through a framework relating to federal laws, regulations, policies, and practices surrounding unmarked graves and burials at former residential schools and associated sites. This will include addressing residential school denialism.

Like “Reconciliation,” the exact definition of what the Federal government means by “residential school denialism” is not clear. In this vague definition, there is, of course, a potential for legislating vindictiveness.

What further action is needed to address “the harmful legacy of residential schools” except to enforce a particular narrative about the schools as being only harmful? Is it denialism to point out that many students, such as Tomson Highway and Len Marchand, had positive experiences at the schools and that their successful careers were, in part, made possible by their time in residential school? If the study of history is subordinated to promoting a particular political narrative, is it still history or has it become venal propaganda?

Since the sensational May 27, 2021, claim that 215 children’s remains had been found in a Kamloops orchard, the Trudeau government has been chasing shibboleths. The Kamloops claim remains unsubstantiated to this day in two glaring ways: no names of children missing from the Kamloops IRS (Indian Residential Schools) have been presented and no human remains have been uncovered. For anyone daring to point out this absence of evidence, their reward is being the target of a witch hunt. As we recently witnessed in Quesnel, B.C., to be labeled as a residential school denialist is to be drummed out of civil society.

If we must accept a particular political narrative of the IRS as the history of the IRS, does our freedom of conscience and speech have any meaning?

To the discredit of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, fictions of missing and murdered children circulating long before the Commission’s inception were subsumed by the TRC (Truth and Reconciliation Commission). Unmarked graves and burials were incorporated into the TRC’s work as probable evidence of foul play. In the end, the TRC found no evidence of any murders committed by any staff against any students throughout the entirety history of the residential schools. Unmarked graves are explained as formerly marked and lawful graves that had since become lost due to neglect and abandonment. Unmarked burials, if they existed, could be construed as evidence of criminal acts, but such burials associated with the schools have never been proven to exist.

Those who claim there are unmarked burials have painted themselves into a corner. If there are unmarked burials, there have had to be murders because why else would anyone attempt to conceal the deaths? If there are thousands of unmarked burials, there are thousands of children who went missing from residential schools. How could thousands of children go missing from schools without even one parent, one teacher, or one Chief coming forward to complain?

There are, of course, neither any missing children nor unmarked burials and the Special Interlocutor told the Senate Committee on Indigenous People: “The children aren’t missing; they’re buried in the cemeteries. They’re missing because the families were never told where they’re buried.”

Is it denialism to repeat or emphasize what the Special Interlocutor testified before a Senate Committee? Is combating residential school denialism really an exercise in policing wrongthink? Like the beleaguered Winston in Orwell’s 1984, it is impossible to keep up with the state’s continual revision of the past, even the recent past.

For instance, the TRC’s massive report contains a chapter on the “Warm Memories” of the IRS. Drawing attention to those positive recollections is now considered “minimizing the harms of residential schools.”

In 1984, the state sought to preserve itself through historical revision and the enforcement of those revisions. In the Trudeau government’s efforts to enforce a revision of the IRS historical record, the state is not being preserved. How could it be if the IRS is now considered to be a colossal genocide? The intent is to preserve the party in government and if it means sending Canada irretrievably down a memory hole as a genocidaire, so be it.

Michael Melanson is a writer and tradesperson in Winnipeg.

Continue Reading

Trending

X