Premier Danielle Smith’s choice to join Tucker Carlson is a misstep that could tarnish her office’s integrity. Carlson has consistently espoused views against immigration, LGBTQ+ rights, and has undermined election legitimacy. These positions starkly contrast with the premier’s responsibility to represent all citizens of Alberta impartially. Aligning with such views, even indirectly, suggests endorsement and risks the province’s commitment to diversity and solidarity.
(The impartiality shouldn’t change because of that event in January.)
Savings idea hits home
The Sun’s reply to Peter Szecsy’s letter (Nov. 9) asks: “What would you like them to cut?” One of the first things city council could cut is having the taxpayer pay for their home security. As of Jan. 1, 2023, the salary for a councillor is $117,913.69 and for the mayor it is $208,707.26. I can’t think of any other entity in the world where the employer, in this case the Calgary taxpayer, pays for its employees’ home security. It isn’t much, but it’s a start and the argument that they are public officials and therefore they deserve it, doesn’t hold water. My family is important to me, but if I went and asked my boss to cover my home security, I would be told no and told to get lost. In October 2025, Calgarians need to tell a few councillors to get lost.
(You’re not the only one with ideas on the subject. Read on.)
Reduce, reduce, reduce
A response to the editor comments of what the city should cut to reduce tax burden. Quit building bike lanes and clearing; reduce staffing levels; reduce golden handshakes and pensions; reduce pay at any and all levels. All of these continue to increase every year. They keep reducing the property taxpayers’ and business incomes with hands out for more money, so they too should be hit.
(A little fiscal restraint at city hall would go a long way.)
Parking or artwork?
In letters to the editor, the editor asked where the city could cut the budget? For a start, how about instead of spending $3.3 million on a piece of artwork, spend it to pay for what they want to charge for parking. They sure know how to spend but not how to cut. Also, it’s not fair that some people may have to pay to park in front of their own residence AND have to pay if they want company. How many council members would be affected by this? Zero, none.
(Parking is a big issue.)
It’s a regional Bloc
I agree with Don McDonald (Nov. 9 letter) and disagree with the editor’s reply. The bloc maybe classified as a national party but since they only run candidates in Quebec, they are regional. They shouldn’t have power to vote on national matters such as the carbon tax. Quebec only worries about Quebec. They are an entitled, spoiled sibling that needs to go. Quebec’s only nationalist interests are receiving equalization payments from the west.
(Regardless of their motives, Bloc MPs have rights, too.)
Share this article in your social network