Opinion
Why do we pay at the pumps, a higher Carbon Tax on long weekends?

It is becoming quite apparent that the Carbon Tax is only applied on weekends, especially long weekends. Why do I say that?
“The price of gas goes up 5 cents because of the carbon tax” has been said, stated, yelled, printed, and pointed out by so many people it must be true.
So why is the price of gas $1.03 on Tuesday, $1.14 on Friday, $1.09 on Monday, $1.18 on Friday, $1.11 on Tuesday then $1.22 the next Friday, before a long weekend?
The next question is: “Is the Carbon Tax higher in Red Deer than in Innisfail 28 kms. away?” Why is our gas more expensive than other neighbouring communities?
So if the “CARBON TAX” is the blame, why the discrepancies?
Everyone agrees that we are witnessing climate instability, even the Premier of Saskatchewan, admitted it on Question Period April 28, 2019 and almost everyone acknowledges that CO2 has a role to play, so why are we stuck on 2 words “Carbon Tax”?
I remember when cigarette smoke’s health issues were denied, the acid rain debate, recycling costs, and the importance of waste management. I remember when bottled water became the norm, I remember using DDT and politicians arguing about asbestos’s health issues.
Every month I pay the city to treat my wastewater, manage my garbage and recycling. I know there is a cost to pollute and I pay it. I don’t run my car in a closed garage because of the carbon monoxide, I believe there is also Carbon Dioxide pouring out my exhaust pipe and since it appears that it is part and parcel of our current climate instability then I am prepared to pay the cost.
The question is why does the carbon tax go up on the weekends?
espionage
Breaking: P.E.I. Urges RCMP Probe of Alleged Foreign Interference, Money Laundering

The Great Enlightment Buddhist Academy, PEI
Prince Edward Island’s government has formally asked the RCMP to investigate allegations of foreign interference and money laundering tied to Buddhist-affiliated organizations operating in the province — an escalation that follows The Bureau’s reporting and last week’s press conference on Parliament Hill calling for a federal public inquiry.
In a letter sent today to RCMP Commissioner Michael Duheme, Premier Rob Lantz and Minister of Housing Cory Deagle urge federal authorities to “review any evidence available, engage with the individuals who have made these claims, and conduct an investigation into any wrongdoing.” A companion letter was sent to FINTRAC, asking Canada’s financial intelligence unit to assess whether regulatory action is warranted.
The government move comes a week after The Bureau reported on findings presented at an October 8 news conference tied to the book Canada Under Siege: How P.E.I. Became a Forward Operating Base for the Chinese Communist Party.
In a following op-ed, co-author Garry Clement said the press conference had “set down a marker: Canada has entered a new era of contestation — over influence, sovereignty, and the integrity of its democratic institutions.” In related coverage by CBC, representatives of the religious groups have denied any links to the Chinese Communist Party or any improper dealings.
Clement and co-authors argued that the allegations demand “action, reform, and reckoning,” and called for a federal public inquiry with full powers — an appeal joined by former Solicitor General and long-time P.E.I. MP Wayne Easter, who urged an inquiry capable of compelling testimony and documents.
The Bureau also revealed a development that stunned Islanders: a response subpoenaed by P.E.I. lawmakers showed that an anticipated 2016–2018 Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission (IRAC) investigation into Buddhist-linked land holdings was never completed. A January 26, 2018 letter from IRAC’s appointed counsel notified firms representing the groups that the section 15 probe “has ended,” without public findings or any explanation of who ordered the closure or why. The disclosure raised fresh questions about oversight and potential conflicts, and now forms part of the backdrop to the province’s formal request for federal action.
The Bureau contacted IRAC last week with questions related to the agency’s management, including counsel relationships and prior positions within P.E.I. legal networks. New developments on this breaking story will be reported.
Today’s letter to RCMP Commissioner Duheme from the P.E.I. government explicitly references the October 8 statements by a former Solicitor General of Canada and a former RCMP Superintendent, noting it was “suggested that information exists that could provide grounds for a criminal investigation.” The Premier further flags assertions that P.E.I. has been used as “a forward operating base for the Chinese Communist Party,” calling the claim “serious” and stating it must be examined by federal agencies to determine whether any factual basis exists.
The province also points to what it describes as a newly mandated and ongoing investigation by IRAC into land holdings “associated with some of the same entities referenced in the public allegations,” using powers expanded in 2022 under the Lands Protection Act. Any findings with criminal or national-security implications, the letter says, will be referred to federal authorities.
The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Alberta
Alberta taxpayers should know how much their municipal governments spend

From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill and Austin Thompson
Next week, voters across Alberta will go to the polls to elect their local governments. Of course, while the issues vary depending on the city, town or district, all municipal governments spend taxpayer money.
And according to a recent study, Grande Prairie County and Red Deer County were among Alberta’s highest-spending municipalities (on a per-person basis) in 2023 (the latest year of comparable data). Kara Westerlund, president of the Rural Municipalities of Alberta, said that’s no surprise—arguing that it’s expensive to serve a small number of residents spread over large areas.
That challenge is real. In rural areas, fewer people share the cost of roads, parks and emergency services. But high spending isn’t inevitable. Some rural municipalities managed to spend far less, demonstrating that local choices about what services to provide, and how to deliver them, matter.
Consider the contrast in spending levels among rural counties. In 2023, Grande Prairie County and Red Deer County spent $5,413 and $4,619 per person, respectively. Foothills County, by comparison, spent just $2,570 per person. All three counties have relatively low population densities (fewer than seven residents per square kilometre) yet their per-person spending varies widely. (In case you’re wondering, Calgary spent $3,144 and Edmonton spent $3,241.)
Some of that variation reflects differences in the cost of similar services. For example, all three counties provide fire protection but in 2023 this service cost $56.95 per person in Grande Prairie County, $38.51 in Red Deer County and $10.32 in Foothills County. Other spending differences reflect not just how much is spent, but whether a service is offered at all. For instance, in 2023 Grande Prairie County recorded $46,283 in daycare spending, while Red Deer County and Foothills County had none.
Put simply, population density alone simply doesn’t explain why some municipalities spend more than others. Much depends on the choices municipal governments make and how efficiently they deliver services.
Westerlund also dismissed comparisons showing that some counties spend more per person than nearby towns and cities, calling them “apples to oranges.” It’s true that rural municipalities and cities differ—but that doesn’t make comparisons meaningless. After all, whether apples are a good deal depends on the price of other fruit, and a savvy shopper might switch to oranges if they offer better value. In the same way, comparing municipal spending—across all types of communities—helps Albertans judge whether they get good value for their tax dollars.
Every municipality offers a different mix of services and those choices come with different price tags. Consider three nearby municipalities: in 2023, Rockyview County spent $3,419 per person, Calgary spent $3,144 and Airdrie spent $2,187. These differences reflect real trade-offs in the scope, quality and cost of local services. Albertans should decide for themselves which mix of local services best suits their needs—but they can’t do that without clear data on what those services actually cost.
A big municipal tax bill isn’t an inevitable consequence of rural living. How much gets spent in each Alberta municipality depends greatly on the choices made by the mayors, reeves and councillors Albertans will elect next week. And for Albertans to determine whether or not they get good value for their local tax dollars, they must know how much their municipality is spending.
-
International2 days ago
Number of young people identifying as ‘transgender’ declines sharply: report
-
Alberta2 days ago
The Technical Pitfalls and Political Perils of “Decarbonized” Oil
-
National1 day ago
Democracy Watch Renews Push for Independent Prosecutor in SNC-Lavalin Case
-
Health2 days ago
Colorado gave over 500 people assisted suicide drugs solely for eating disorders in 2024
-
Alberta2 days ago
Enbridge CEO says ‘there’s a good reason’ for Alberta to champion new oil pipeline
-
Alberta22 hours ago
Click here to help choose Alberta’s new licence plate design
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days ago
Canada’s privacy commissioner says he was not consulted on bill to ban dissidents from internet
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days ago
Long-Distance Field Goals Have Flipped The Field. Will The NFL Panic?