Connect with us

Alberta

“We’re doing our best to be prepared for anything”

Published

4 minute read

Little more than a month ago, members of the Alberta Colleges Athletic Conference – and the fans and parents who care about this under-valued level of college sport — were seriously focused on next week – specifically a Monday morning meeting in Medicine Hat.

For many years, interest and intensity have grown at this time of year. The month of May marks the formal start of preparation for the coming season, primarily soccer and golf and cross-country. A lot of details are needed to have everything ready when the first flag flies.

This year is bound to be different. Possible change, everywhere, is set for debate during the five-day annual general meeting.

Mark Kosak, the ACAC’s chief executive officer, made clear his belief that the major issues, time and money, must be faced head-on. Several outlines will be considered in a virtual meeting – “lots of protocols and requirements in place.” All participants have some insight to his combination of caution and aggression.

“So many complexities, so many variables,” Kosak said. “We’re doing our best to be prepared for anything.” He specified the pressure of dealing with COVID-19, of course, but also dealt with an ongoing issue in minor and amateur sports at all levels: “Everybody has financial troubles” that existed long before the pandemic arrived.

Front and centre is the need for the Augustana Vikings to complete the elimination of men’s soccer (the women’s program will survive) and to continue the community- and alumni-led bid to keep men’s hockey alive despite intense financial pressures. An interesting conundrum presented by Kosak: the backlash faced by Keyano College officials when they eliminated their Huskies hockey team a few years back and resulted in an about-face. “We have a proposal from Keyano to enter both men’s and women’s hockey; now, Keyano has agreed to wait until next year for a decision.”

“Honestly, there’s no real chance to tell what’s going to happen,” Jason Richey, head of the NAIT Ooks athlete program, said in a brief recent discussion. “As far as I can tell, the only way to avoid cutting some of our early sports is if, somehow, the distancing regulations are changed in time, but it’s too early to count on that, I think.”

Three options – all tied to the paced of reopening the economy — will be discussed in Medicine Hat. One Saskatchewan team, the Briercrest Clippers, may face regulations different from the bulk of ACAC members.

Kosak’s proposals:

* Start on schedule, Sept. 15 or thereabouts, with first-term sports such as soccer, cross-country and golf;

* Prepare for a potential Oct. 1 start, requiring less play in those three sports but maintaining full activity in the others.

* Eliminate the early events if necessary and prepare to begin remaining sports after Christmas. keeping them at the busiest possible level: futsal indoors rather than the outdoor game; maybe one full golf tournament in the fall; possibly a series of indoor track meets.

Kosak and others have been somewhat successful, in building fan interest in the ACAC, whose sports have been attended for years by mostly small crowds. Some growth in regional and national interest has shown in college-level championships, although crowds still remain far below the level of attendance for Canada’s national university playoffs.

The world is full of options

Follow Author

Alberta

A Christmas wish list for health-care reform

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Nadeem Esmail and Mackenzie Moir

It’s an exciting time in Canadian health-care policy. But even the slew of new reforms in Alberta only go part of the way to using all the policy tools employed by high performing universal health-care systems.

For 2026, for the sake of Canadian patients, let’s hope Alberta stays the path on changes to how hospitals are paid and allowing some private purchases of health care, and that other provinces start to catch up.

While Alberta’s new reforms were welcome news this year, it’s clear Canada’s health-care system continued to struggle. Canadians were reminded by our annual comparison of health care systems that they pay for one of the developed world’s most expensive universal health-care systems, yet have some of the fewest physicians and hospital beds, while waiting in some of the longest queues.

And speaking of queues, wait times across Canada for non-emergency care reached the second-highest level ever measured at 28.6 weeks from general practitioner referral to actual treatment. That’s more than triple the wait of the early 1990s despite decades of government promises and spending commitments. Other work found that at least 23,746 patients died while waiting for care, and nearly 1.3 million Canadians left our overcrowded emergency rooms without being treated.

At least one province has shown a genuine willingness to do something about these problems.

The Smith government in Alberta announced early in the year that it would move towards paying hospitals per-patient treated as opposed to a fixed annual budget, a policy approach that Quebec has been working on for years. Albertans will also soon be able purchase, at least in a limited way, some diagnostic and surgical services for themselves, which is again already possible in Quebec. Alberta has also gone a step further by allowing physicians to work in both public and private settings.

While controversial in Canada, these approaches simply mirror what is being done in all of the developed world’s top-performing universal health-care systems. Australia, the Netherlands, Germany and Switzerland all pay their hospitals per patient treated, and allow patients the opportunity to purchase care privately if they wish. They all also have better and faster universally accessible health care than Canada’s provinces provide, while spending a little more (Switzerland) or less (Australia, Germany, the Netherlands) than we do.

While these reforms are clearly a step in the right direction, there’s more to be done.

Even if we include Alberta’s reforms, these countries still do some very important things differently.

Critically, all of these countries expect patients to pay a small amount for their universally accessible services. The reasoning is straightforward: we all spend our own money more carefully than we spend someone else’s, and patients will make more informed decisions about when and where it’s best to access the health-care system when they have to pay a little out of pocket.

The evidence around this policy is clear—with appropriate safeguards to protect the very ill and exemptions for lower-income and other vulnerable populations, the demand for outpatient healthcare services falls, reducing delays and freeing up resources for others.

Charging patients even small amounts for care would of course violate the Canada Health Act, but it would also emulate the approach of 100 per cent of the developed world’s top-performing health-care systems. In this case, violating outdated federal policy means better universal health care for Canadians.

These top-performing countries also see the private sector and innovative entrepreneurs as partners in delivering universal health care. A relationship that is far different from the limited individual contracts some provinces have with private clinics and surgical centres to provide care in Canada. In these other countries, even full-service hospitals are operated by private providers. Importantly, partnering with innovative private providers, even hospitals, to deliver universal health care does not violate the Canada Health Act.

So, while Alberta has made strides this past year moving towards the well-established higher performance policy approach followed elsewhere, the Smith government remains at least a couple steps short of truly adopting a more Australian or European approach for health care. And other provinces have yet to even get to where Alberta will soon be.

Let’s hope in 2026 that Alberta keeps moving towards a truly world class universal health-care experience for patients, and that the other provinces catch up.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Calgary’s new city council votes to ban foreign flags at government buildings

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

It is not yet clear if the flag motion applies to other flags, such as LGBT ones.

Western Canada’s largest city has put in place what amounts to a ban on politically charged flags from flying at city-owned buildings.

“Calgary’s Flag Policy means any country recognized by Canada may have their flag flown at City Hall on their national day,” said Calgary’s new mayor Jeromy Farkas on X last month.

“But national flag-raisings are now creating division. Next week, we’ll move to end national flag-raisings at City Hall to keep this a safe, welcoming space for all.”

The motion to ban foreign flags from flying at government buildings was introduced on December 15 by Calgary councilor Dan McLean and passed by a vote of 8 to 7. He had said the previous policy to allow non-Canadian flags to fly, under former woke mayor Jyoti Gondek, was “source of division within our community.”

“In recent months, this practice has been in use in ways that I’ve seen have inflamed tensions, including instances where flag raisings have been associated with anti-Semitic behavior and messaging,” McLean said during a recent council meeting.

The ban on flag raising came after the Palestinian flag was allowed to be raised at City Hall for the first time.

Farkas, shortly after being elected mayor in the fall of 2025, had promised that he wanted a new flag policy introduced in the city.

It is not yet clear if the flag motion applies to other flags, such as LGBT ones.

Despite Farkas putting forth the motion, as reported by LifeSiteNews he is very much in the pro-LGBT camp. However, he has promised to focus only on non-ideological issues during his term.

“When City Hall becomes a venue for geopolitical expressions, it places the city in the middle of conflicts that are well beyond our municipal mandates,” he said.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, other jurisdictions in Canada are considering banning non-Canadian flags from flying over public buildings.

Recently a political party in British Columbia, OneBC, introduced legislation to ban non-domestic government flags at public buildings in British Columbia.

Across Canada there has also been an ongoing issue with so-called “Pride” flags being raised at schools and city buildings.

Continue Reading

Trending

X