 By Tom Parkin
March 5th, 2025
BURLINGTON, ON
Carney’s “opening to the right” hits limits as past supporters refuse to go along.
liberal-voters-massively-oppose-carneys?utm_source=email&redirect=app-store&utm_campaign=email-read-in-app”>READ IN APP
So you support or oppose air strikes on Iran by US and Israel?
When on Tuesday he finally did speak to reporters during his latest global swing, Prime Minister Mark Carney’s E.
Only a month before, on January 30, as U.S. president Donald Trump threatened to invade Greenland, Carney told the Davos elite Canada would follow a “principled and pragmatic” foreign policy that upheld rule of law.
Rule of law tossed out like expired milk
His leadership in the world would be “principled in our commitment to… the prohibition of the use of force except when consistent with the UN Charter,” Carney pledged to the assembly of politicians and wealthy.
And within days of the Davos united front of European states, Canada and others, Trump backed down on his Greenland threat. Carney’s approval numbers soared.
But then on Saturday February 28, Trump and Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched rocket attacks assassinating the political leadership of Iran. They also killed over 100 schoolgirls. It led to a spiral of escalation.
That same day Carney’s commitment to rule of law was tossed out like expired milk.
Carney, in India, said Canada “supports the United States” in its attack on Iran. But on this move in his opening to the right, his base was not going to follow.
A survey by Angus Reid taken on Monday was released yesterday showing only 17 per cent of 2025 Liberal voters shared Carney’s support for US President Donald Trump’s war. Only 11 per cent of them believed Trump’s rocket attacks would make the world safer.
Is this military action making the world safer?
Carney’s opening to the right had been premised on being able to carry they left as he moved. But his support for Trump only resulted in stiffening the spine of NDP voters, just eight per cent of whom supported Trump’s missile attack, and was massively opposed by past Liberal voters.
Amid shock and resistance to his position, on Sunday Carney cancelled media availability, leaving foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand dealing with reporters to buy time for himself. A minister’s statement was posted then mysteriously deleted.
However Carney used the time he gained, when he did speak to the media on Tuesday, his statements continued to echo Trump talking points even as they sought to reposition away from him.
Carney clarification adds to foreign policy incoherence
When Carney finally spoke to media he didn’t withdraw his support for Trump’s attack, but now said it was made “with regret.” He argued his commitment to rule of law remained, but had been misunderstood: it extended to Canada’s own actions, but not to Canada’s statements about the actions of Trump.
He now called for more diplomacy, but repeated Trump’s talking points that diplomacy had failed, Trump’s justification for war.
This was not the Davos Man who proclaimed that honesty means “acting consistently, applying the same standards to allies and rivals.” And as with so much of what Donald Trump says, it was a lie that no one should believe, let alone repeat.
It was Trump who ended enforcement of law against Iran
Technically, Carney’s claim that diplomacy and rule of law had failed against Iran was correct. What he didn’t mention was Trump and Netanyahu created that failure.
Before Trump’s first term, rule of law had constrained Iran. The 2015 Iran nuclear deal, officially the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA, put UN atomic agency inspectors on the ground in Iran monitoring for compliance with the Nonproliferation Treaty.
In January 2016, inspectors from the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed Iran’s compliance, as they did in each of their quarterly “Verification and Monitoring” reports until 2018.
But the goal of MAGA and Netanyahu was not nonproliferation, it was regime change. The deal had to be killed to reopen that path.
Trump tore up the JCPOA deal in 2018. Enforcement of law against Iran was lifted. And after that there have been strong suspicions Iran has restarted its nuclear weapons development program. Yes, diplomacy failed. Trump and Netanyahu ensured it. Carney should not validate their false history.
Carney’s opening to the right has certainly put Pierre Poilievre off balance, leading to low polling support and MP defections. But this latest attempt to subvert the Conservative Party by adopting conservative policy — if that’s what it was, rather than plain stupidity — has run into resistance from those who elected him
Davos Carney argued, in the past, Canada gained mutual benefit with the United States by “living the lie” that rule of law was enforced evenly. But with Trump’s “rupture,” which completely rejected rule of law, that fiction had to stop.
Carney claimed “you cannot ‘live within the lie’ of mutual benefit through integration when integration becomes the source of your subordination.”
Davos Carney was right. Which is why on Iran he was completely wrong.
 By Jim Barnett
March 3rd, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
Jim Barnett, a long time resident of Burlington delegated at Council yesterday. His opinion is well worth reading
Good morning, everyone.
The mayor’s preamble still contains instructions against any form of demonstration during the meeting. Is it because most of the demonstrations would be against the position of council and maybe embarrassing?
It sounds like Donald J. Trump signing an executive order limiting decent. Open dialogue, freedom of expression, and freedom of assembly are the cornerstone of democracy. Limiting these freedoms are a limit on democracy. This issue needs to be revisited.
 Jim Barnett My last delegation was on the problems that I saw in the budget. I pointed out that salary increases were double that being granted in the private sector and the tabled tax increases were more than double the inflation in the general economy.
Added to this was the inclusion of the education levy, to make the increases appear less than what was actually taking place, which to some makes it a fraudulent presentation. The budget passed, with only councilor Kerns saying we can do better and voting against it. I hope the citizens remember this when they cast their ballots in the municipal election in the fall.
I am dismayed that council has been able to find a way to provide pool time for people outside of Burlington before looking after the needs of the people of Burlington, who were the primary contributors for pool construction and operation.
Some of you were party to designating the “phone booth” in downtown Burlington at a transportation hub that has led to the dramatic change in planning for Burlington that the vast majority do not like and has been a major contributor to the transportation gridlock in what was our fair city.
Now it appears that some of you believe the removal of development charges are good for the people of Burlington. In fact, the only beneficiaries of the proposal are land speculators, material suppliers and contractors. It would be beneficial if we knew who from this group contributed to the council member’s campaign. It would be helpful, and add to transparency if we knew who were lobbying council members in favor of this policy. Should the city lawyers be looking into this?
Eliminating development charges from new construction will reduce the selling price of the housing currently constructed. The current homeowners paid the development charges and now will lose that investment. This does not seem to be fair to me.
What it does do is make it easier for land speculators to maximize their profits on their speculation. This is not the business the city should be in.
I have paid for development charges on three houses in Burlington. Now some of you want me to pay the development charges for complete strangers. This is unfair.
I suggest that the forecasts for housing needs are in error. Colleges and universities are dramatically cutting back. The Trump meddling in the economy is slowing GDP growth. Yet it seems that council thinks that they can go forward like nothing has changed. There are too many signs that many things have changed and council has an obligation to plan for a more difficult future.
One of the main costs of housing is property taxes. Council says they want to encourage affordable housing but at the same time they are increasing taxes at record levels. You cannot have it both ways! It is particularly hard on the lower twenty five percent of income families who are forced to hard life style decisions, including going to food banks.
 In my opinion, you need to spend your time concentrating on needs, cancelling or at least delaying wants until economic conditions improve. At the same time, you can cut back on the proliferation of newsletters and photo ops that look more like electioneering than communication.
Life is about choices. When I bought my first house on Cosburn Crescent, for the next two years there was no going on vacations as we had to furnish the house, buy drapes, do the landscaping and pave the driveway. It is time for council to start making some tough choices.
It is time to cut back on the size of municipal government. Departments that are there for growth can be downsized and those that are catering to wants can be eliminated.
It is time for council to start listening and dialoging with those that delegate such as Lynn Crosby, Gary Scobie, Tom Muir, David Barker, Joe Gaeton and Jim Thomson to name a few.
I offer three suggestions:
Our population is aging. We need to spend more time and money in this area. The forestry programs can be delayed.
Secondly, one of the Committee of the Whole meetings should be moved to the evening, say the third Monday of the month. At this meeting, any topic can be brought forward and dialogue would take place. It is time for council to get more involved with the people with more transparency.
Last, it is time for councilors to treat citizens like customers. It would keep them out of the do-do they are in today.
To conclude are some suggestions for affordable housing
- Tiny houses as part of the Bateman project.
- Basement apartments with lower fees with fewer restrictions with faster processing.
- Remove GST on two or more bedroom units renting for under $2000 per month
- Remove GST on housing under $500,000 per unit.
 By Ray Rivers
February 22, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
I have to disagree with my publisher on just how decent the City of Hamilton is at handling our tax dollars. In his recent editorial, he complimented the City’s mayor, Andrea Horwath, with bringing in a decent budget by “whittling down the proposed tax hike to 3.85%”.
 A Hamilton style pot-hole Excuse me, but 3.8% is almost twice the general inflation rate which hovers around 2%. And Hamilton, though no longer the highest taxed of Ontario municipalities is still up there with the worst. And what do we tax payers get for all those taxes we pay Well, yes there are those overpriced tiny houses (see link below). And anyone who has driven in the City can tell you why Hamilton has become famous for the worst-maintained roads in the province.
It’s true that a 3.85% increase is considerably better than the rate increase facing Burlington residents, but calling Horwath’s budget decent should be faint praise, at best. Kudos for the small budgetary cuts like ending free lunches for council and senior staff – literally feeding at the public trough. And the City did eventually kill the proposed expensive and dysfunctional stoplight they tried to push onto the peaceful Carlisle residents.
 Rural Hamilton Of course, the budget numbers are helped by the City gouging rural residents to help pay for the urban residential storm-water management. I’ve lived in rural Hamilton for over twenty years and since amalgamation it has only become more expensive. Now Windsor or Vaughan have brought in budgets with zero tax increases. That is what I’d call a decent budget.
 Ray Rivers, a Gazette Contributing Editor, writes regularly applying his more than 25 years as a federal bureaucrat to his thinking. Rivers was once a candidate for provincial office in Burlington. He was the founder of the Burlington citizen committee on sustainability at a time when climate warming was a hotly debated subject. Ray has a post graduate degree in economics that he earned at the University of Ottawa. Tweet @rayzrivers
Background links:
Editorial – Tiny Homes – Worst Roads – Carlisle Stop Light – Just Getting More Expensive – Vaughan Zero Tax Increase –
 By Lynn Crosby
February 22, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
I have delegated a few times, essentially on four topics: the undemocratic strong mayor powers; issues around development; the need for responsible fiscal management; and citizen engagement.
 For this resident, the answer is a resounding NO, and I expect that I am in the majority. I’m here today because this one agenda item covers each of these. I’ll begin with engagement because it’s pretty much a fluke that I’m here today at all. Normally, I can’t be on a random Tuesday in the daytime, as residents who are working or attending school can’t be, but by chance, I was free today. If council cares about real engagement, they should not have cancelled evening council meetings. Further, in what seems to be too common, this matter was rushed through to the extent that the vast majority of citizens would not know enough (if anything) about it to come and delegate on it today anyway, and certainly would not have had time to spend their Family Day weekend in preparation. I’m here because I happened to see something about it in the media on Friday. By that time, it was already too late to register to delegate by the deadline. I happen to be among a small minority who knows that I can register late and may still get to speak; most would not know this. It’s the oldest trick in the book to release news one might not want the public to notice just before a long weekend.
This is an extremely important issue, at a cost of almost $100 Million over two years, and it is unacceptable for council to not have supported Councillor Nisan’s request last Tuesday to delay this decision for two months. He explained well his rationale: that this time would allow for staff and council to do fulsome research, and it would allow for the gathering of opinions and feedback from residents. Oh yes! residents, remember us? Do residents think that we should be the ones helping developers increase their profits? Well since you haven’t given us time to answer, I guess you can’t say. For this resident, the answer is a resounding NO, and I expect that I am in the majority.
I don’t believe there is any justification for developers to be bailed out of their obligations and costs of doing business. If the market isn’t giving them enough profits for their liking, then they can stop building and sit on their investment until it turns around or they can reassess what it is the public actually wants and needs, and build those things instead. More expensive towers on Burlington’s waterfront for example, sped up now thanks to the Mayor’s direction, do nothing to provide the affordable housing and the types of housing that families and young people want and need. It is not on municipalities or citizens to solve the complex issues surrounding the housing crisis, but it sure is used as a great excuse by the development industry and by governments who decide for various reasons that they wish to help them “build build build, anywhere and everywhere.”
 Being the first municipality to make a hugely expensive mistake isn’t a precedent one should want to set. I’m gobsmacked that any of you think it is acceptable to transfer this financial obligation onto an already overburdened taxpayer, particularly in these times where so many are in dire straits. And whether this magical provincial and federal funding materializes or doesn’t – certainly you don’t know whether it will or won’t in the end – I will remind you again there is only ONE taxpayer so that all comes from us too. Regardless, it is irresponsible to hand over our money and hope that other levels of government may pay it all back. And can we be honest enough to not call it a freeze? A freeze signifies that the rate charged last week won’t be increased for two years. It doesn’t mean their charges have been wiped out completely.
More misleading language. There are many other municipalities which have exceeded their housing targets without waiving development charges. Being the first municipality to make a hugely expensive mistake isn’t a precedent one should want to set. Every dollar of OURS that you hand to the developers is not only one less dollar in the pockets of taxpayers: it’s much worse than that. It’s one less dollar that could instead be being spent on far more important things, and that is the same whether we are talking about municipal, provincial or federal dollars. The consequences are huge and cannot be summed up by staff members producing a rushed report at the request of their strong mayor, who holds the power to hire and fire senior staff, I might add.
 While I’m not surprised the mayor has used her powers in this manner, I’m appalled that she has. That leads me to the undemocratic strong mayor powers which no mayor should accept, let alone use, ever. While I’m not surprised the mayor has used her powers in this manner, I’m appalled that she has. There’s an old saying about how even the appearance of a conflict of interest is one which must be avoided. A similar concept holds true for a strong mayor having unilateral power over staff members to which she gives directions. The public can never actually trust that the staff members are telling us what they believe or what they feel that they need to say they believe. This is as unfair to them as it is to the public. It’s one reason the powers should not exist.
In closing, it is disrespectful to your council colleagues and especially Councillor Nisan for the Mayor to have used the powers and gone over their heads. It is disrespectful to citizens that this is being done in a way where we are not being properly informed, and are not given the opportunity to be heard, and in which even the most basic standards of engagement seem to have been bypassed. It is disrespectful to put the onus on staff to rush through and produce reports in unnecessarily tight timeframes. It is disrespectful to every other business owner in Burlington whose profits are likely also waning in today’s economy that you’ve decided to bail out big developers with “deep pockets” as Mayor Meed Ward was fond of calling them. So please spare us the talk about respect. Respect is a two-way street.
Editor’s note: In 2018 Lynn Crosby served as Mayor Meed Ward’s driver, driving her from event to event and picking up coffee for the two of them.
By Joe Gaetan
February 15th, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
The issue raised in this article goes directly to the heart of transparency and accountability in municipal governance.
From a news report in the Gazette.
It’s Friday afternoon. The city is heading into a long weekend – Family Day on Monday.
The agenda for the Council meeting is on line. Some people make a point of checking it out.
There are several reasons to at least glance at it.
There is an item on the agenda that, if passed, would have the city not collecting development charges.
The meeting agenda for this coming Tuesday’s Regular Meeting of Council has not been made available to the public.
People who want to delegate have to register by noon on the business day before the meeting.
City Hall will close at the end of the day.
Quite why the City Clerk would let something happen is beyond understanding.
One would have thought that at least one Council member would have seen the problem and taken corrective action.
A decision not to collect Development Charges has the very real risk of costing the city a big bundle of money. And that money will eventually come out of the pockets of the taxpayers.
Link to the complete article.
The City bylaw that governs council meetings consists of more than minor administrative detail – it is a safeguard. The requirement that agendas be posted at least seventy-two hours before a regular Council meeting exists so that members of the public can review the business before Council, assess its implications, and decide whether to delegate. Without that notice, meaningful public participation becomes practically impossible. What is not known is when the 72 hour clock starts ticking. As this is a long weekend, the 72 hour notice requirement is technically attainable.
The Clerk’s role under section 7.1 includes ensuring notice of meetings is provided as set out in the by-law.
However, another section of the bylaw states that lack of receipt of notice does not invalidate a meeting. That clause should not be interpreted as a license to dilute transparency. It protects the City from technical challenges – it does not excuse avoidable failures in providing proper notice.
In a matter as significant as potentially foregoing Development Charges – with real financial consequences for taxpayers – the public deserves clear, timely disclosure. Seventy-two hours is not excessive; it is the minimum standard set by Council itself.
If the agenda was not posted within the prescribed time frame, that raises legitimate questions about the City’s procedural rules. More importantly, it undermines public confidence. Deferral, as suggested, may well be the prudent course – not only to clarify the financial implications, but to restore public trust in the process.
Transparency is not a courtesy. It is a condition of accountable government.
 Young adults today face unemployment rates reminiscent of a recession as well as a housing crisis that leaves many unable to afford necessities. The Canadian economy is leaving many young people behind. Young adults today face unemployment rates reminiscent of a recession as well as a housing crisis that leaves many unable to afford necessities. Some 78 per cent of Canadians expect the next generation to be worse off than their parents. Growing wealth inequality has made young people even more pessimistic as they see mounting evidence that the economy is not working for them. They are earning less, saving less and face high barriers to owning assets unless they have help from family.
 We also know that Canada’s taxes and benefits are skewed heavily towards serving older people. It is estimated that government spending on those 65-plus is three to four times greater than on those under 45. While Old Age Security (OAS) has become more generous over the last 50 years, government transfers to younger Canadians remain unchanged. At the same time, many seniors pay little or no tax thanks to overly generous tax exclusions, deductions and credits.
Last fall’s budget extended small amounts of funding to various youth employment programs, but the overall numbers don’t lie. The budget includes an increase of $28.3 billion in OAS spending by 2029, but less than $1 billion in new youth employment spending. As our policymakers grapple with how to structure a broad policy response to changes in global economics and geopolitics, we need to address problems with our taxes and benefits as well.
A youth employment supplement (YES) to the Canada Workers Benefit (CWB) would be a creative, scalable, cost-efficient way to motivate young people to get a job, as well as help those who are working but don’t make enough to save and invest. An early version of this model was proposed in a project by graduates Gabriel Blanc, Samuel De Grâce, Kiran Gill and Jacob Kates Rose from the Max Bell School of Public Policy at McGill University.
The Canada Workers Benefit
The CWB offers means-tested tax relief to lower-income working Canadians in the form of a refundable tax credit. All Canadians over 19, except those who are enrolled in post-secondary education or are incarcerated, become eligible for the benefit after the first $3,000 of employment income.
The refundable tax credit increases as income goes up. In 2025, it topped out at $1,633 for individuals and $2,813 for families. The CWB is gradually reduced once adjusted net income reaches a certain threshold. No benefit is received if net earnings are greater than $37,742 for individuals and $49,393 for families. Alberta, Quebec and Nunavut have different negotiated thresholds. Federal legislation allows provinces autonomy in how the CWB is structured.
 The CWB, which grew out of a similar benefit introduced in 2007, has had support across the political spectrum and has encouraged people to work and helped reduce poverty amongst those who are employed. However, young people are the group most likely to live in poverty and the workers benefit does not do enough for them.
How would a youth employment supplement work?
A youth employment supplement could be created through an amendment to the Income Tax Act that would double CWB payments for single workers between 19 and 29 years old to an additional maximum of $2,000. To ensure the YES were properly targeted, the supplement would be calculated using existing CWB phase-in and clawback rates. Based on 2024 tax data, the average YES benefit for singles would amount to $1,179.
The supplement would not place any administrative burden on recipients. The Canada Revenue Agency would be able to determine eligibility and disburse funds using existing tax data. Based on the current proportion of CWB recipients between the ages of 19 and 29, a YES could benefit close to two million Canadians. And, as the CRA expands automatic filing, even more young workers could seamlessly receive the benefit.
Expected impact
Young adults today face higher hurdles to economic security, home ownership and saving for retirement or emergencies than previous generations. And building assets requires disposable income to invest and save. A 2024 report from Statistics Canada found that 55 per cent of people between the ages of 25 and 44 had difficulty meeting day-to-day expenses. . And a rental survey last summer found that almost half of respondents between 18 and 24 were spending more than 50 per cent of their income on rent, while facing an increasingly insecure job market.
At the same time, young people are carrying growing debt that many are unable to pay off. These debts are increasingly to private credit services that charge extremely high interest rates. A YES would not only help young Canadians meet basic needs, but would also aid them in establishing a viable financial foundation.
Income support programs like this have been shown to improve post-secondary educational outcomes and workforce participation. Research also shows that programs like a YES encourage financial planning and help maintain a stable, consistent standard of living in the face of uncertain income patterns.
 Canada is facing significant economic transformation driven by climate change, technology and a rupture in North American and global trading and security. Canada is facing significant economic transformation driven by climate change, technology and a rupture in North American and global trading and security. Although the long-term trends are uncertain, we are already seeing reduced hiring, particularly for entry-level professional jobs. Our taxes and benefits need to provide more security and income support to younger workers.
Costing and potential funding sources
In the 2024 tax year, a YES for single adults, defined as those with no spouse or dependents, would cost $2.29 billion. This figure does not include the cost of any changes to the disability supplement (to the CWB) or a YES for couples. These would need to be designed differently and would have additional costs.
By encouraging young adults to work, the added supplement to the CWB would, over time, lead to workforce retention and increased employment rates. And due to its inherent flexibility, it could easily be scaled or altered. Additional income tax revenue from the YES would also offset some of the costs.
New targeted programs, such as a YES, could be funded by reforms to our taxes and benefits. Paul Kershaw, founder of and lead researcher at Generation Squeeze, estimates that modest changes to Old Age Security and age and pension income tax credits would save between $14 billion and $19 billion annually.
An agenda for young adults
 Canada is overdue for a broader debate on intergenerational fairness and how our taxes and benefits support — and exclude —different age groups. We continue to live with programs designed by baby boomers to provide security to seniors — even if they are well off. Yet young adults in our country face challenges entering the labour market, securing stable employment and saving to build some measure of economic security in the face of rising costs in almost every sector.
There is almost no government agenda to address this growing disparity. We need policies designed to make the economy work for younger Canadians and to show that Ottawa is responding to their needs. A youth employment supplement could help rebuild financial security and allow younger adults to buy homes, finance education for themselves or their children and save for the future.
Editor’s note: The authors would like to acknowledge Jennifer Robson, Paul Kershaw and Gillian Petit for their insightful comments.
Matthew Mendelsohn is the CEO of Social Capital Partners. He is a former deputy minister with the federal and Ontario governments and was a professor of political science at Queen’s University and director of the Mowat Centre at the University of Toronto.
 By Tom Parkin
February 9th, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
Not all food prices are rising,. Maybe some can be fixed, but specific problems require specific actions.
What’s driving food inflation
Price increase, Dec 2024-Dec 2025, among foods increasing more than 10 per cent
Food inflation is being driven by specific products, according to Statistics Canada data released last week, suggesting specific supply chain and input costs are the culprits behind food inflation, not macroeconomics.
The price of a litre of milk increased just 1.2 per cent in a year. White bread is up 2.3 per cent. Eggs are down 1.1 per cent. But other items are up — some by a lot.
No solution to food inflation from Poilievre or Carney
Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre has done a good job complaining about food inflation. And he’s not wrong that food inflation is higher in Canada that other G7 nations.
But his analysis of the problem doesn’t fit the evidence. Inflation’s attack has not been even across the board, as it would be if caused by taxation or money supply, the only two sources Poilievre has ever considered. And there’s no way he doesn’t know this.
Nor will Mark Carney’s $10 billion grocery tax credit do anything to fix the drivers of food inflation. It’s a very expensive talking point that takes money from health care or increases the deficit. And it’s not possible Mark Carney doesn’t know this.
Tackling inflation, a targeted fight?
Inflation being specific isn’t easy politics. Because it doesn’t make for easy solutions.
The cost of coffee is way up. So is beef and chicken. And certain produce. If governments are really interested in tackling food inflation — which has recently been the driving force in broader inflation — it’s going to take an approach focused on the specific problems.
Part of the reason for higher coffee prices appears to be environmental. And another reason is a gift from our friend and ally, Donald J. Trump. Most coffee sold in Canada apparently runs through U.S.-based buyers. And last April, Trump levied a baseline 10 per cent tariff on coffee. He added more tariffs on Columbia, Brazil and Vietnam. Perhaps Canadian retailers could find new suppliers to side-step Trump’s tariffs and prevent Canadians from paying Trump tariffs, but that doesn’t seem to have happened. Perhaps our government can make introductions.
Beef inflation suggests higher income from mark-ups across the supply chain
Another big increase is in the cost of beef. Stewing beef is up 22 per cent in one year. Ground beef is up 11 per cent.
Some of that hike is due to an increase in price for live cattle. The latest StatsCan livestock data, from November, shows the price of cattle up 24.7 per cent in a year. Data Shows has not dug into the causes of that big price hike. But economist Iglika Ivanova, co-director of BC Policy Solutions, recently told Left East to West environmental conditions are hiking the cost of maintaining herds.
But the price of livestock is only about 40 per cent of the retail cost of beef, according to the Cattlemen’s association. A 24.7 per cent increase to the input cost doesn’t explain a 22 per cent increase in the final retail cost.
If the cost of cattle was $4 in a $10 retail purchase and increased 24.7 per cent to $4.98, the retail price would shift up to $10.98, about 10 per cent, if higher input costs were passed along at cost. But a 22 per cent increase puts the price to $12.20, an additional $2.20 on the final sale, $1.22 more than the increased input cost. That’s not passing on inflation, it’s adding to it.
Supply chain mark-ups driving prices?
Suspicion falls on the possibility companies along the supply chain are riding a mark-up on percentage and taking a revenue hike — even though there’s been no change in their costs or work being done. That, too, is going to take more research.
But finally, let’s note food inflation is corrosive. Inflation keeps interest rates up, which hurts business loans, capital investment and jobs. And food inflation hits low income families particularly hard because they spend a higher percentage of their income covering the basics. Canada cannot succeed as a pricing paradise for rentiers and a price hell for working class people.
Cattle sale price, monthly, hundredweight Jul 2022-Nov 2025
 By Pepper Parr
February 6th, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
OPINION
There are times when you need a scorecard to understand who is going to run for office – the why is rarely explained.
 Doly decided Ottawa was nicer than Toronto. House of Commons appealed to her. Doly Begum, who was Deputy Leader of the provincial New Democratic Party.
She had a very close working relationship with Leader of the Opposition Maris Stiles.
Begum was the member of Provincial Parliament (MPP) representing Scarborough Southwest for the Ontario New Democratic Party from 2018 to 2026, serving as a deputy leader of the Ontario NDP from 2022 to 2026, until she resigned her seat to run as a Liberal in the federal seat in that constituency.
 Bill Blair will become a High Commissioner. Doly saw a better offer and decided to run for the federal seat Scarborough West) that was going to be vacant when Bill Blair, a former Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair is made High Commissioner for Canada in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, which is the title used for what is essentially an Ambassador.
A by-election would have to be called to replace Dolly in the Scarborough West federal seat.
 Becoming Premier of Ontario appeals to Nate. Nathan Erskine Smith, (Nate) is currently the MP for Beaches East York had run for the leadership of the provincial Liberal Party. He was beaten by Bonnie Crombie. While leader of the provincial Liberals Bonnie couldn’t get herself elected and turned out to be less than what the Liberals wanted as a leader. She resigned. The provincial Liberals now needed a new leader.
Nate had run for the job before and was keen on running again; he wasn’t doing all that well as a federal Liberal.
Nate, was in the first federal Cabinet formed by Mark Carney when he was made Liberal Leader. When Carney called the federal election in 2025 and won, he dropped Nate from Cabinet.
The Nate nose was very much out of joint. He thought he had a very strong relationship with Carney.
By running for the Scarborough West provincial seat, that would make him a member of the provincial party (assuming he wins) and lining him up for another run at the provincial party leadership which would make Nate Premier of the province – should he win.
Nate isn’t the only person looking for a different arrangement of the seats in the House of Commons.
 Prime Minister Mark Carney is betting that he can pull of getting a majority government. Mark Carney is just one seat short of having a majority. A majority would mean the federal Liberals would not have to constantly worry about a federal election being called.
 Chrystia Feeeland: It is what it is. Chrystia Freeland resigned (had to) making her University Rosedale seat due for a by election.
These by-elections are expensive – but that isn’t a concern to the politicians looking for the most comfortable seat in the House of Commons or at Queen’s Park.
Am I being cynical here? I’m a journalist – we are supposed to be cynical.
And the public should rise up on its hind legs and start biting some bums.
There are likely going to be a few other by-elections. There are people Prime Minister Mark Carney wants to move out of his government and bring in people a little younger and more in tune with what he is setting out to do with the country.
With a majority government, he rids himself of Pierre Poilievre who by now should realize that his political future is stalled for at least the next seven years
BY Tom Parkin
February 5th, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
Air travel to USA hits new low in December: 161,000 fewer air passengers to the USA in December 2025 than the same month a year before.
December is always a strong month for Canadian travel to international destinations as the snow starts to fly and the holiday season unites families across boarders.
But for those with family in the United States, it may have been a year for them to come north, as Trump’s domestic chaos and violence, his new and invasive border rules and his threats against Canada each month get worse.
And while Canadians escaping the cold may have enjoyed temperatures in Florida or Arizona in the past, Mexico and the Caribbean have the quaint charm of not being ruled by madman.
In December 2025, just 41 per cent of passengers screened for international travel were heading to the United States, the lowest percentage since at least 2019.
Screenings for USA travel was down 161,000 passengers from December 2024. For trips to other international locations, screenings were up 133,000. And screenings for travel inside Canada was also stronger, up 57,000 from December 2024.
Compared to December 2023, domestic screenings were up 267,000 and other international passengers were up 195,000. But passengers to the USA were down by 74,000.
Previous GDP data has shown strength in the Canadian tourism industry. But that strength is happening despite a decline in incoming travelers, a sign that Canadians discovering their own country is helping offset Trump’s tariffs and threats. Canadians spending their money in Canada on Canadian products made by Canadian workers appears to be making a difference.
The latest data on travel to Canada by residents of other countries, from November, shows about 92,000 fewer people travelling into Canada than November 2024. Travel from Europe, Asia, Africa and the Americas excluding the USA were all up. Travel from the USA was down 131,000.
In the peak July tourism month, 102,000 fewer US residents visited Canada in 2025 than 2024, but 93,000 more residents of other states visited.
Visits from European states were up by 46,000 people, with visits from UK, France, Italy and Belgium up about 10 per cent from July 2024. Visits from residents of Asian states increased by 26,000 with 19 per cent more visitors from Japan, 28 per cent more from South Korea, and 31 per cent more from China.
By Ray Rivers
February 3rd, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
In many ways, there has been too much discussion about Canada’s EV mandate, introduced during the Trudeau years as a climate change initiative. It is one of the few remaining vestiges of climate policy that we associate with former PM Justin Trudeau.
 Gaz guzzlers: Advertising taught us to love them. An EV mandate has long been opposed by the big three US automakers since it would ultimately mean the end of the gas guzzler. They are opposed to essentially scrapping their outdated internal combustion infrastructure. A second reason has to do with the symbiotic relationship of these large corporations and those in the petroleum sector.
The mandate included a 20% interim 2026 target for EVs. When PM Carney, realized, among other factors, that the 20% target would not be attainable this year he paused the interim requirement. That pausing raised the hopes of the conventional auto industry that the entire mandate was also on its way out the door.
EV sales in North America have fallen off a cliff since Mr. Trump put a curse on them after returning to office. And the father of the modern EV, Elon Musk, almost killed the Tesla as buyers penalized him for all he did during his disastrous stint at the White House.. That is the USA, but too many of us Canadians tend to follow America’s lead – so Canadian EV sales here have also crashed.
Built into the federal EV mandate is an option for a kind of EV trading scheme. The mandate allows credits to be created by those overachieving the mandated levels and allowing them to sell credits to those who don’t. This is a bizarre provision which complicates the mandate and creates potentially unintended consequences.
 50,000 of these Electric Vehicles will arrive in Canada – what will the take up be? The domestic makers complain that imported Chinese EVs will be able to earn credits. And selling those credits would hypothetically put an estimated billion dollars into Mr. Xi’s Beijing bank account. That should be enough to kill the mandate, they say.
As for the so-called Big Three, nobody serious about the environment should ever take their advice. GM and Ford were heavily complicit in masking and hiding how their products would hasten the advent of climate change. For over 50 years ago they have hidden this truth from the public. They can’t be trusted with our future.
Those American based auto makers are on their way out anyway, being called home by Mr. Trump. The number of vehicles the big three produce in Canada and the number of people they employ to make them have dramatically tumbled over the last decade. Honda and Toyota have replaced them and they also build better cars, according to most reviews. So Canadians need to say good riddance as the last factory built US car plant in Canada eventually closes.
The EV mandate, notwithstanding disappointing sales of those vehicles this past year, has probably already been a success in signalling to the industry and consumers that it is time to change up their ride. The history of subsidies for EV purchases has been moderately successful, particularly when there had been a significant price differential.
What is lacking is adoption of a standardized universal auto charging system and a national highway of reliable, easy to use EV chargers from sea to sea to sea. That is currently one of the biggest drawbacks to broader EV adoption. Otherwise EVs should sell themselves. They are faster, quieter, less costly to operate and virtually maintenance free – with or without an EV mandate.
There is a place for mandates and prohibitions. A federal appeal court has just ruled that plastic is a toxic substance allowing the continued banning of unnecessary plastic products like shopping bags and drink straws. Surely no reasonable person would argue that car exhaust is any less toxic.
Ray Rivers, a Gazette Contributing Editor, writes regularly applying his more than 25 years as a federal bureaucrat to his thinking. Rivers was once a candidate for provincial office in Burlington. He was the founder of the Burlington citizen committee on sustainability at a time when climate warming was a hotly debated subject. Ray has a post graduate degree in economics that he earned at the University of Ottawa. Tweet @rayzrivers
Background links:
Auto Complaints – GM/Ford complicity – Big Three on Their Way Out – Plastic Toxicity –
By Tom Parkin
February 3rd, 2025
BURLINGTON, ON
Foreign currency exchange rates are complex. A deep understanding is vital for any organization buying or selling products and services. Values and profits can vanish in a second because of a change in an exchange rate.
Canadian dollar down against Krona, Peso, Euro and Pound
Change in exchange rate value, Jan 1, 2025 to Jan 30, 2026
The constant chaos of Donald Trump has pushed the United States dollar down against all major currencies including six per cent against the Canadian dollar since January 1, 2025, according to Bank of Canada data.
From C$1.44 on January 1, 2025, the U.S. dollar dropped from C$1.38 to C$1.36 — 2.52 cents — against the Canadian loonie since just January 21, 2026 when Trump gave his bizarre, meandering and overtime speech in Davos amid threats to invade Greenland and counter-threats from European Union countries, the UK and Canada to aid the defence of the Denmark territory.
Mexican peso, Swedish krona strong against loonie
 Currency used by Sweden But the Canadian loonie is only looking strong compared to the falling US dollar. The Swedish krona is up over 18 per cent against the Canadian dollar and the Mexican peso is up over 12 per cent. The euro and pound are also more expensive for Canadians than a year ago.
Despite the krona’s strong appreciation, which pushes up the cost of imported goods, Sweden has very low inflation, just 0.3 per cent in December. The Nordic nation has keep it’s bank interest rate at 1.75 per cent, helping GDP growth, which was tepid in 2025 but expected to hit 2.6 per cent in 2026. Sweden joined the European Union in 1995 but did not adopt the Euro and the European Central Bank.
 The rate at which the Canadian dollar trades against the American dollar will impact the price of just about everything we buy. Canada’s bank rate remains at 2.25 per cent with inflation at 2.4 per cent in December and a 2026 economic growth forecast of 1.3 per cent.
Mexico’s 1.2 per cent growth outlook for 2026 is similar to Canada. But inflation is running hotter. At 3.69 per cent in December, inflation is above its target of 3.00 per cent and Mexico’s central bank is still holding interest rates at 7.00 per cent. That high interest rate is attractive for investors outside Mexico, boosting foreign exchange into the peso.
Global mistrust driving US dollar downward spiral
Sentiment about global politics has increasingly moved toward pessimism. In times of uncertainty the U.S. dollar has often been a “safe haven” for investment, pushing up the dollar. But in this situation, it is the United States — its president, specifically — that is the cause of uncertainty.
There has been a growing lack of currency trust as Trump threatens war against a fellow NATO county, throws out tariff threats on a nearly daily basis and moves to load cronies onto the Federal Open Market Committee, which sets U.S. interest rates.
The result is a U.S. dollar down more than 10 per cent against the Euro, which makes stock returns from even the most profitable United States companies less appetizing to Europeans managing capital pools. For an investor operating in euros, a 10 per cent stock return in 2025 was reduced to zero by dollar depreciation. That, in turn, drives a spiral of further dollar depreciation as foreign exchange into dollars to make investments drops, amplifying the mistrust of the U.S. dollar under Trump.
The European Union’s annual GDP of about $20 trillion represents a significant global base of wealth and European mistrust for the Trump currency can inflict damage. The EU’s GDP combined with that of the UK, at almost $5 trillion, and Canada, at $2 trillion, nearly matches the US economy at $28 trillion.
By Ray Rivers
January 31st, 2926
BURLINGTON, ON
One day Canadians may actually be thanking Donald Trump for slamming Canada with tariffs and shaking us into standing up for Canada. CUSMA re-negotiations won’t be completed this year, but it is unlikely it’ll be anything like previous ‘free trade’ deals. And this past year has been one of economic uncertainty which we’d all like to move past.
The South Korean automotive giant Hyundai had once made cars in Canada. But with the implementation of the 1989 Canada/US free trade agreement, unlike Japanese car makers Toyota and Honda, it left only to set up operations in the USA.
So, just last week the Carney government released information that signifies the potential return of Hyundai. The details have yet to be released of a memorandum (MoU) with the South Korean government, but it sounds like Hyundai and other South Korean industrial giants are expected to bring their operations over here. In the mix are other potential manufacturing opportunities including Canada’s new submarines, EV batteries and vehicles, satellites, AI and nuclear technology.
 Algoma Steel has begun to use “arc” based technology in its steel plant in Sault St. Marie. This announcement comes on the heels of a partnership agreement between Sudbury’s Algoma steel and the Hanwha Ocean submarine maker for a quarter billion dollar investment in Algoma and a long term term profit-sharing agreement. Algoma had recently been forced to close down some of its older operations and lay off staff, in part because of the 50% Trump tariffs on steel products from Canada.
This agreement, should it pan out as expected, embodies the kind of message that Mr. Carney had previewed with his well received Davos address. Middle nations finding their own way to economic welfare and security out from the control of their powerful and more autocratic neighbours.
 The intention is for the Canadian Navy to have a fleet of12 submarines. Ending free trade with America may well be the best thing Canadians will have done for their economic future. One door opens when another shuts.
Ray Rivers, a Gazette Contributing Editor, writes regularly applying his more than 25 years as a federal bureaucrat to his thinking. Rivers was once a candidate for provincial office in Burlington. He was the founder of the Burlington citizen committee on sustainability at a time when climate warming was a hotly debated subject. Ray has a post graduate degree in economics that he earned at the University of Ottawa. Tweet @rayzrivers
Background links:
Video – MoU – Korea Agreement – More Agreement – Algoma –
By David Barker
January 31st, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
The following is a comment David Barker made on the Focus Burlington website; they have given us permission to reprint the opinion.
I understand Gary’s frustration with the way the delegation process works. But I would suggest unless the delegate can show that his/her position is supported by more than just himself/herself It is unlikely that Council will take much note of it. And why would it? Let’s say you get up and delegate a certain position on a matter and then I get up and delegate the complete opposite position. Who should they listen to? Who should they act upon? I suggest one needs to be able to show that one’s delegation is for and on behalf of a large and representative grouping. An exception to this might be when a delegation is made by a particular individual of repute, knowledge and expertise.
 David Barker delegating at a City Council meeting. Having said that, as I understand it, one can only delegate to council in regards to a matter on its agenda. If that is so I would suggest it is a little bit stupid. I believe a resident should be able to delegate to council on any matter at any time.
So I would suggest that a separate day or maybe two half days each month be set aside for delegations to be made to council in regard to any matter affecting the city. I suggest one would still have to register in advance the intention to delegate in order to allow Council and staff to manage time effectively.
This, in my opinion, would truly expand the democratic process.
The same issues that I have highlighted above will still exist.
But miracles might happen, and maybe a delegate will bring to council’s attention an issue and make a suggestion as to how to deal with the issue and a light will go on in each of the council members’ heads and they will take up that idea.
 David Barker One may make a delegation, but again the delegation is on behalf of the single person making it unless it can be shown otherwise.
People might say that residents can bring up any item they like through their ward Councillor. Theoretically, that is true. In practice, it is not. Ward Councillors act as filters.
Personally, I am not a fan of providing information about what I wish to delegate upon and give advance notice to council members. I think that allows them to turn off and not really listen to the delegation. I think they need to be taken by surprise so to speak. Maybe that would encourage more questioning from the council members.
So to reiterate my main suggestion is – let’s have a delegation day or days when anybody can make a delegation about any matter they wish to bring to council’s attention.
 David Barker is a Burlington resident, a retired insurance executive. He lives in a historical home on Lakeshore Road for which he has been given grants to upgrade the home.
 By Joe Gaetan
January 26th, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
Special To the Gazette
 Doug Ford in a classic photo op. You know Doug Ford is coming in hot when his voice jumps three octaves and he uses one of his trademark catchphrases such as, when the cheese slips off the cracker. As he did recently over the Crown Royal bottling plant closure in Amherstburg. In the wake of that, Ford threatened to pull all Crown Royal off Ontario’s LCBO shelves. Why is he doing this? Aside from doing his job standing up for Ontario jobs, this makes no sense – and here’s why.
Wab Kinew Premier of Manitoba will tell you Crown Royal is made in Gimli, Manitoba. If you don’t know much about Gimli, it became famous for the Air Canada “Gimli Glider” incident. Air Canada Flight 143, from Montreal to Edmonton, ran out of fuel on July 23, 1983. The incident was caused by a series of issues, including a failed fuel-quantity indicator sensor (FQIS) and confusion over pounds and kilograms. Canada’s transition to the metric system started in 1970 and continued until 1985. But I digress.
The distillery, located on a 360-acre site, operates 24/7, mashing, distilling, and aging all Crown Royal products on Seagram Road. Another opportunity to digress, but I won’t. The site has 51 warehouses, draws fresh water from Lake Winnipeg, and employs Canadians. So there you have it. Going forward, bottling of Crown Royal for the Canadian market will take place at Diageo’s plant in Valleyfield, PQ – again, employing Canadians. On paper, most of the value-add is Canadian.
Diageo PLC is a British multinational alcoholic beverage company headquartered in London, England. It operates 132 sites in nearly 180 countries. Diageo announced it will bottle Crown Royal for the U.S. market in Plainfield, Illinois. Which makes little to no sense, as the plant is actually about 100km further north than Amherstburg, Ontario. However, the plot thickens, as Diageo just built a large plant and warehouse operation in Montgomery, Alabama.
“The new facility, which will be referred to as ‘Diageo Montgomery,’ will provide a new point of operations closer to the company’s beverage distributors in the southern region. The site’s strategic location is expected to reduce required road travel, significantly helping to further mitigate carbon emissions associated with logistics operations. The new facility will also employ state-of-the-art technology for more efficient water and energy usage across the site.”
(Source: Diageo Montgomery, AL – January 30, 2025)
 Wab Kinew Premier of Manitoba: “What I don’t understand is how pulling Crown Royal products off LCBO shelves – products with close to 100% Canadian content – solves the problem.” I fully understand why Premier Ford is upset and wants to stand up for Ontario jobs. What I don’t understand is how pulling Crown Royal products off LCBO shelves – products with close to 100% Canadian content – solves the problem. Diageo also produces many other products stocked by the LCBO – so what, exactly, is the point of singling out Crown Royal?
Seems to me this goes against the grain of the “all-Canadian, no provincial barriers” discussion. Standing up for Ontario jobs matters – but punishing Canadian workers elsewhere while shrinking consumer choice here doesn’t get us any closer to that goal.
 Joe Gaetan: Full disclosure: The author enjoys the odd dram of Speyside Scotch – and yes, Crown Royal Black – which may explain why he cares as much about good policy as he does about good whisky.
By Joe Gaetan
January 24th, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
As epic as Mark Carney’s Davos speech was, the real story isn’t just what he said – it’s how Carney got here, and what that says about us as voters.
Let’s be honest: Carney didn’t become prime minister in a vacuum. Carney may be PM in part due to Pierre Poilievre, and the Carbon Tax. Who can forget how he relentlessly hammered away at “axing the tax”. The tax imposed on Canadians to be rebated in full (but not before or without adding the cost of administering the merry-go-round). That drumbeat like it or not may have helped reshape our and possibly the worlds political landscape.
Looking back, instead of using our energy resources to help friendly countries, we were told we should leave it in the ground. When we knew LNG is cleaner than coal, we were told there was “no business case for LNG,” while some provinces said, “not through our land.” And while EVs are part of the solution, instead of investing first in nationwide charging infrastructure, we were about to impose an EV mandate on the entire country. While there was more going on than the energy file, it serves as a proxy for, be careful what you vote for. Who we elect is just as important – if not more – than what our leaders say on the hustings or on the world stage.
 When we elect someone because we are charmed by appearance, rather than substance, we get what we deserve. When we elect someone because we are charmed by appearance, rather than substance, we get what we deserve. When we elect someone who sees the bigger picture – who understands we can be green while still ethically developing and exporting oil, gas, and SMRs – then we start firing on all cylinders.
 Democracy isn’t just about showing up. If you don’t think who you vote for matters as much as what you vote for, ask yourself: where would Canada be today if, collectively – not unanimously, but meaningfully – we hadn’t given Carney a chance to show what he was made of? For some the jury is still out on that question. While others are giddy over Carney.
And now, due to floor-crossing and political volatility, we may be heading back to the polls sooner than later.
So here’s the real question for voters:
Will you only vote for the party you’ve always voted for?
Will you vote just because you like your local candidate?
Will you vote because a candidate says its 2026?
Will you vote after taking a serious look at the effect your vote has on the future of our country?
Will you vote at all?
The last year has been a wake-up call. Not just about politics – but about our voting responsibility. Because democracy isn’t just about showing up. It’s about thinking harder, digging deeper, voting smarter, and understanding that leadership choices shape everything from your tax bill to Canada’s place in the world. And just in case you think this only applies to federal elections, think again. We will soon be voting on Municipal candidates. And this is not the time to sleepwalk through it.
 By Joe Gaetan
January 17th, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
Special to the Gazette
Strong mayor powers were supposed to make municipal government more efficient. What we are now seeing, however, is a shift in democratic balance that risks weakening Council, concentrating authority, and confusing accountability.
A recent exchange sparked by Hamilton Councillor Rob Cooper, and then echoed here in Burlington, should not be dismissed as sour grapes or rookie frustration. Cooper’s observation that council feels “ornamental” under strong mayor powers cuts to the heart of the issue: elected Councillors increasingly lack the authority to meaningfully shape budgets, staffing decisions, and strategic direction – the very things voters care most about.
Mayor Marianne Meed Ward’s response in the Hamilton Spectator, is legally correct and politically careful. Yes, Councillors can propose amendments. Yes, mayors can choose to collaborate. Yes, vetoes can be overridden with a two-thirds vote. But those are procedural safeguards, not structural guarantees.
The real issue is not whether collaboration is possible – it is whether it is required.
 Mayor Marianne Meed Ward wearing the Chain of Office and exercising Strong Mayor Powers. Under strong mayor powers, collaboration depends entirely on the goodwill of the person wearing the chain of office. That is not governance by design; that is governance by discretion. Democracy should never depend on the restraint of one individual.
In Burlington, Council formally asked the mayor to delegate discretionary strong mayor powers, including control over hiring and firing the Chief Administrative Officer. That request was declined. Two CAOs have been hired in two years. Tax increases have exceeded those of the previous council term. And despite claims of broad support, Council does not vote on the budget as a whole – a striking departure from decades of democratic practice.
Pretending this represents shared governance confuses participation with power.
 Ward 2 Councillor Lisa Kearns  Ward 3 Councillor Rory Nisan – chooses to live in ward 2 Councillors Lisa Kearns and Rory Nisan are correct to call out the erosion of council authority. Their argument is not partisan. It is principled. It is rooted in a simple democratic premise: authority must come with accountability, and accountability must come with consent.
What makes this moment particularly consequential is that strong mayor powers are now shaping the electoral landscape. Hamilton Councillor Cooper’s comment – “My name will be on the ballot. The question is, where?” – signals what many are beginning to realize: if the mayor alone controls the budget, staffing, and strategic direction, then the mayoral race becomes disproportionately powerful, while Councillor campaigns risk becoming little more than advisory exercises.
Strong Mayors cannot wash their hands.
The province deserves blame for creating this framework, but mayors cannot wash their hands of responsibility while retaining the powers. You cannot hold the authority of the office and disclaim responsibility for its outcomes. Leadership means owning both.
“Strong Mayor Powers” versus Reality
Strong mayor powers were supposed to strengthen municipal governance. Instead, they are weakening trust, distorting accountability, and centralizing decision-making in ways that voters neither asked for nor endorsed.
Efficiency without legitimacy is not progress.
Authority without accountability is not leadership.
And democracy without meaningful council participation is not democracy at all.
As voters head toward the next municipal election, the question is no longer just who should lead – but what kind of governance we are willing to accept.
 Joe Gaetan a resident of Burlington who comments frequently on civic matters
By Pepper Parr
January 15th, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
OPINION
There is a cute little squabble between two city Councilors and the Mayor over the use Mayor Meed Ward makes of the Strong Mayor Powers (SMP) given to her by the Provincial government.
Mayor Meed Ward has an iffy success in choosing City Managers (CAO) The Mayor gave away much of the SMP – she held on to the right to hire and fire the City Manager (CAO). A fair question is to ask: How has that gone sofar?
The day after she was sworn in Mayor, Meed Ward fired James Ridge – that decision cost the city a bundle.
 Commisso left the city he loved – his Mayor treated him poorly. She hired Tim Commisso as the Interim and later made that a permanent position. Commisso, after getting a hefty increase in salary some time later, advised Council shortly after that he would not be renewing his contract. He wasn’t prepared to put up with the Mayor’s backstabbing.
 Hassaan Basit With Commisso out of the picture, the Mayor hired Hassaan Basit. Basit started out strong, but 16 months after starting he resigned to take on a job at the Deputy Minister level with the province.
Council was nearing the end of its term, and the Mayor needed a City Manager (CAO) She made Curt Benson the CAO. At the time Benson was the Commissioner for Development and Growth Management for the city. His CAO job is in place until the Day the next City Council is sworn in – which will be in November – a short 10 months away.
 Curt Benson came to the city as the head of Planning, and was appointed the CAO when Basit left before his contract expired. Too early to tell how well Benson will develop as an administrator. He did very well as a Planner with the Region and was doing very well as the Commissioner.
He has had to acquire the skills needed to administrate along the way.
The Mayor cannot lay claim to being skilled at picking and then learning how to work with the people she chooses. Holding Strong Mayor Powers didn’t make much in the way of a difference.
Related news stories:
The squabble
Commission leaves early
Basit moves from Conservation to City Hall
Curt Benson made City CAO
 By Tom Parkin
November 19th, 2025
BURLINGTON, ON
42,000 fewer workers were employed in construction in October than two years ago.
Why does a sector hurt so damaged by bad government policy continue loyalty to the PC Party?
Ontario housing starts second-lowest
Ontario housing unit starts, per month, Jun 2022-Oct 2025
It’s now been 41 months since Ontario’s Ford PC government pledged to meet housing targets requiring a pace of 12,500 housing starts per month. Data released Tuesday by CMHC shows in October, as in the previous 40 months, the actual number of starts was nowhere close to meeting the promise.
In October, only 3,567 housing units started construction in Ontario, just 28.5 per cent of the monthly target. It was the second-worst result since the promise was made.
The collapse of residential construction under the Ford PCs, and their refusal to spur starts by tapping non-profit or co-op development, has killed construction sector jobs and business revenues. Ontario’s construction sector now employs 42,000 fewer workers than two years ago, seasonally adjusted, according to StatCan’s most recent Labour Force Survey.
Ontario construction employment down by 42,000 jobs
Ontario construction sector employment (thousands), Jun 2022-Oct 2025, seasonally adjusted.
By Tom Parkin
November 12th, 2025
BURLINGTON, ON
Doug Ford deflects responsibility for crime-on-bail onto judges and federal politicians, but it’s his own trial delays that are putting more people on bail.
Fewer charged with crimes receive decision within a year
Percentage of charges decided within one year:
After a disappointing leadership support vote in September, opposition NDP leader Marit Stiles has vowed to “take down” the Ford PC government with a strategy that aims at the legs of PC support and competes with Ford on the central concerns of votes.
The fist salvo in that plan has been a persistent line of attack on Doug Ford’s over his poor jobs record. Ontario unemployment has been persistently above the national average under the Ford PCs and while 800,000 Ontarians are jobless, the premier offers no jobs plan or even any Buy Canada policy.
Another line of attack serving the same strategy could be to actively redirect Ford’s “crime-on-bail” deflections. Certainly there is a clear path.
Ford has frequently picked up on crime-on-bail incidents, a problem he deflects onto judges and federal legislators. But it’s a problem Ford has caused and cynically seeks to benefit from.
Up to now, his deflections haven’t received much push-back. For both electoral and deeply principled reasons, they should.
Numbers out on bail up due to Ford’s trial delays
Longer trial delays mean longer time on bail for those charged. It means more people on bail awaiting trial. And Ontario’s trial delays are getting significantly longer, data shows.
For example, in 2010/11, over 75 per cent of robbery trials were decided in less than a year. But by 2024/25, only 52 per cent of robbery charges were decided in less than a year. The result of delayed trials is a lot more people on bail for robbery.
And while bail time of a year or less used to be the norm for those charged with sexual assault, attempted murder and murder, under the Ford PCs the norm is bail lasting longer than a year.
Percentage of cases decided within one year from first hearing
No evidence of a provincial bail-check program
And even as Ford’s trial delays increase the numbers on bail, it appears that once a judge sets bail conditions there is no provincial follow-up program to ensure bail compliance.
Despite research and requests to police forces and the Ministry of the Solicitor-General, Data Shows can find no evidence of any provincial strategy, or even data being provincially collected, on bail checks by police, who are responsible for enforcing bail orders.
Perhaps municipal speed cameras could free many officers from traffic duty, allowing them to be reassigned to enforcing bail conditions.
A public safety agenda is open to NDP
A public safety agenda that cuts trial delays and checks bail compliance is wide open for Ford’s political competitors. Adopting it may be strategically valuable both electorally and as an important counter-move against conservative anti-charter politics.
For Conservative politicians, it’s been open season to use crime-on-bail incidents to bolster their campaign against the Charter and to normalize notwithstanding clause use.
Feelings of fear, victimization and rage about crime-on-bail are being used by conservatives to build an emotional reservoir of antipathy against the Charter. That reservoir is then used to drown Charter rights for any reason, as is currently being done in Alberta, where Premier Smith justifies elimination of workers’ rights “because I can”
Those feelings need to be redirected and that reservoir needs to flood back as disgust against those who create a crisis by mismanaging public institutions then cynically attempt to political benefit from the crisis their mismanagement created.
Opposition counter-attacks — or better yet, pre-emptive attacks — on crime-on-bail incidents by citing Ford’s failure to manage public institutions can likely redirect at least some of the emotional flow, protecting democratic rights.
And those opposition attacks would be strengthened if backed by propositions, tested with stakeholders, to reverse court delays and implement a provincial bail-check program.
Such attacks and propositions could advance Stiles’ “take down” strategy, undermining strength of another leg of PC support, a perceived advantage on crime and public safety. But they would also serve a historic purpose: defending rights and freedoms from the conservative campaign against them.
By Tom Parkin
November 11th, 2025
BURLINGTON, ON
Fewer employers who skirt workplace safety laws are paying consequences under the Ford PCs, according to data from the Ontario Court of Justice.
But workers continue to pay the price. At least 305 Ontario workers died from workplace injuries or exposures in 2023, the most recent year of settled data from the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board. That’s an eight per cent increase from 2015, when 283 were killed.
Yet the number of employers who pay any court cost for violating health and safety law has dropped by more than half under the Ford PCs.
In 2015, prosecutors working for the Ministry of Labour brought 2,974 OHSA charges to court. By 2023 it had fallen by half to 1,524.
Workers paying the price for Ford PCs, says OFL
“Doug Ford lowers costs for unsafe employers, and workers are the ones left paying the price – sometimes with their lives,” said Laura Walton, president of the Ontario Federation of Labour.
Under the PCs, not only have OHSA charges dropped by half, but charges against employers for violating the Employment Standards Act have fallen 90 per cent, the Ontario Federation of Labour and Data Shows recently revealed.
The Employment Standards Act (ESA) is intended to protect workers and prosecute employers who commit wage theft, stealing tips or not paying wage premiums, such as vacation pay, holiday pay or overtime rates.
|
|
