Business
To the US, Mexico, or…

Deciding on, and then entering foreign markets requires homework, careful analysis and best practice. If you’re in the oil and gas services sector in Red Deer, industry-based direction setting is available, in this new free “get abroad right” certificate training.
By Lesley Young
Good advice on getting abroad? There’s a wealth of experience from local industries.
For more than a year, Jerry Raduy researched whether to take his small, Calgary-based drilling company, Clear Directional Drilling Solutions, into the Middle East.
After travelling to a free trade zone in the Persian Gulf and investing in professional service firms to investigate what’s involved to do business in Iran—from accounting to shipping equipment to legal and insurance concerns—Raduy recently decided to put the expansion plans on pause… temporarily.
“We don’t know what’s going to happen yet with Canada and U.S. relations when it comes to some Middle Eastern countries,” said Raduy, adding that his research also revealed there were too many unknowns beyond the political uncertainty.
“We don’t want to be first. We want to be a close second. Let somebody else go through the pain and misery to pave the path,” he said. So why did they bother at all? The promise of future growth—day rates for oil and gas services in some Middle Eastern countries are three to four times what they are in North America—is tempting despite the risks, such as waiting six months to a year for receivables.
“It’s high risk, but it’s also high reward,” said Raduy.
Expanding into other markets isn’t for everyone. That’s all the more reason why small to medium-size enterprises (SMEs) need to be smart about their plans to enter foreign markets, said Edy Wong, director of the Centre for International Business Studies at the Alberta School of Business
“Internationalization is not for everyone or for every business. An SME should diversify, but only if they have a product that is truly competitive and if they can reap benefits from economies of scale,” he said. “Having said that, the economy is now global. So, any business should consider how the global market may become part of their business plans over time and have a long view on that.”
After two earlier training sessions, the Petroleum Services Association of Canada, in partnership with Alberta Economic Development, Alberta School of Business, and the Red Deer College Donald School of Business, will be hosting a 1.5-day training program for Central Alberta’s oil and gas service and technology SMEs to share and expand on international market entry essentials.

What were some of the tips gleaned from these earlier workshops and cases? There were many, such as “choose your time”, “make sure you have money to spend”, “find a partner”, or “consider cultural differences.” From participants’ feedback though, what mattered most, even beyond such key takeaways, “was the full joint experience of this training.”

Business
Canada is failing dismally at our climate goals. We’re also ruining our economy.
From the Fraser Institute
By Annika Segelhorst and Elmira Aliakbari
Short-term climate pledges simply chase deadlines, not results
The annual meeting of the United Nations Conference of the Parties, or COP, which is dedicated to implementing international action on climate change, is now underway in Brazil. Like other signatories to the Paris Agreement, Canada is required to provide a progress update on our pledge to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 40 to 45 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030. After decades of massive government spending and heavy-handed regulations aimed at decarbonizing our economy, we’re far from achieving that goal. It’s time for Canada to move past arbitrary short-term goals and deadlines, and instead focus on more effective ways to support climate objectives.
Since signing the Paris Agreement in 2015, the federal government has introduced dozens of measures intended to reduce Canada’s carbon emissions, including more than $150 billion in “green economy” spending, the national carbon tax, the arbitrary cap on emissions imposed exclusively on the oil and gas sector, stronger energy efficiency requirements for buildings and automobiles, electric vehicle mandates, and stricter methane regulations for the oil and gas industry.
Recent estimates show that achieving the federal government’s target will impose significant costs on Canadians, including 164,000 job losses and a reduction in economic output of 6.2 per cent by 2030 (compared to a scenario where we don’t have these measures in place). For Canadian workers, this means losing $6,700 (each, on average) annually by 2030.
Yet even with all these costly measures, Canada will only achieve 57 per cent of its goal for emissions reductions. Several studies have already confirmed that Canada, despite massive green spending and heavy-handed regulations to decarbonize the economy over the past decade, remains off track to meet its 2030 emission reduction target.
And even if Canada somehow met its costly and stringent emission reduction target, the impact on the Earth’s climate would be minimal. Canada accounts for less than 2 per cent of global emissions, and that share is projected to fall as developing countries consume increasing quantities of energy to support rising living standards. In 2025, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA), emerging and developing economies are driving 80 per cent of the growth in global energy demand. Further, IEA projects that fossil fuels will remain foundational to the global energy mix for decades, especially in developing economies. This means that even if Canada were to aggressively pursue short-term emission reductions and all the economic costs it would imposes on Canadians, the overall climate results would be negligible.
Rather than focusing on arbitrary deadline-contingent pledges to reduce Canadian emissions, we should shift our focus to think about how we can lower global GHG emissions. A recent study showed that doubling Canada’s production of liquefied natural gas and exporting to Asia to displace an equivalent amount of coal could lower global GHG emissions by about 1.7 per cent or about 630 million tonnes of GHG emissions. For reference, that’s the equivalent to nearly 90 per cent of Canada’s annual GHG emissions. This type of approach reflects Canada’s existing strength as an energy producer and would address the fastest-growing sources of emissions, namely developing countries.
As the 2030 deadline grows closer, even top climate advocates are starting to emphasize a more pragmatic approach to climate action. In a recent memo, Bill Gates warned that unfounded climate pessimism “is causing much of the climate community to focus too much on near-term emissions goals, and it’s diverting resources from the most effective things we should be doing to improve life in a warming world.” Even within the federal ministry of Environment and Climate Change, the tone is shifting. Despite the 2030 emissions goal having been a hallmark of Canadian climate policy in recent years, in a recent interview, Minister Julie Dabrusin declined to affirm that the 2030 targets remain feasible.
Instead of scrambling to satisfy short-term national emissions limits, governments in Canada should prioritize strategies that will reduce global emissions where they’re growing the fastest.
![]()
Elmira Aliakbari
Artificial Intelligence
Lawsuit Claims Google Secretly Used Gemini AI to Scan Private Gmail and Chat Data
Whether the claims are true or not, privacy in Google’s universe has long been less a right than a nostalgic illusion.
|
When Google flipped a digital switch in October 2025, few users noticed anything unusual.
Gmail loaded as usual, Chat messages zipped across screens, and Meet calls continued without interruption.
Yet, according to a new class action lawsuit, something significant had changed beneath the surface.
We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.
Plaintiffs claim that Google silently activated its artificial intelligence system, Gemini, across its communication platforms, turning private conversations into raw material for machine analysis.
The lawsuit, filed by Thomas Thele and Melo Porter, describes a scenario that reads like a breach of trust.
It accuses Google of enabling Gemini to “access and exploit the entire recorded history of its users’ private communications, including literally every email and attachment sent and received.”
The filing argues that the company’s conduct “violates its users’ reasonable expectations of privacy.”
Until early October, Gemini’s data processing was supposedly available only to those who opted in.
Then, the plaintiffs claim, Google “turned it on for everyone by default,” allowing the system to mine the contents of emails, attachments, and conversations across Gmail, Chat, and Meet.
The complaint points to a particular line in Google’s settings, “When you turn this setting on, you agree,” as misleading, since the feature “had already been switched on.”
This, according to the filing, represents a deliberate misdirection designed to create the illusion of consent where none existed.
There is a certain irony woven through the outrage. For all the noise about privacy, most users long ago accepted the quiet trade that powers Google’s empire.
They search, share, and store their digital lives inside Google’s ecosystem, knowing the company thrives on data.
The lawsuit may sound shocking, but for many, it simply exposes what has been implicit all along: if you live in Google’s world, privacy has already been priced into the convenience.
Thele warns that Gemini’s access could expose “financial information and records, employment information and records, religious affiliations and activities, political affiliations and activities, medical care and records, the identities of his family, friends, and other contacts, social habits and activities, eating habits, shopping habits, exercise habits, [and] the extent to which he is involved in the activities of his children.”
In other words, the system’s reach, if the allegations prove true, could extend into nearly every aspect of a user’s personal life.
The plaintiffs argue that Gemini’s analytical capabilities allow Google to “cross-reference and conduct unlimited analysis toward unmerited, improper, and monetizable insights” about users’ private relationships and behaviors.
The complaint brands the company’s actions as “deceptive and unethical,” claiming Google “surreptitiously turned on this AI tracking ‘feature’ without informing or obtaining the consent of Plaintiffs and Class Members.” Such conduct, it says, is “highly offensive” and “defies social norms.”
The case invokes a formidable set of statutes, including the California Invasion of Privacy Act, the California Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, the Stored Communications Act, and California’s constitutional right to privacy.
Google is yet to comment on the filing.
|
|
|
|
Reclaim The Net is reader-supported. Consider becoming a paid subscriber.
|
|
|
|
-
Carbon Tax2 days agoCarney fails to undo Trudeau’s devastating energy policies
-
Alberta2 days agoAlbertans choose new licence plate design with the “Strong and Free” motto
-
Health2 days agoNEW STUDY: Infant Vaccine “Intensity” Strongly Predicts Autism Rates Worldwide
-
Alberta2 days agoEdmonton and Red Deer to Host 2027 IIHF World Junior Hockey Championship
-
Business1 day agoNearly One-Quarter of Consumer-Goods Firms Preparing to Exit Canada, Industry CEO Warns Parliament
-
Daily Caller1 day agoDemocrats Explicitly Tell Spy Agencies, Military To Disobey Trump
-
Energy22 hours agoCarney bets on LNG, Alberta doubles down on oil
-
Addictions2 days agoActivists Claim Dealers Can Fix Canada’s Drug Problem



