Calgary Sun Letters, Nov. 2, 2026: ‘Search-and–rescue head-scratcher’

Article content

Search-and–rescue head-scratcher

Article content

When I investigated the warden sidearm issue more than 25 years ago in my capacity as a Federal Occupational Health and Safety Officer, I ultimately directed Parks Canada to arm its wardens. That experience left me with the distinct impression Parks Canada did not fully understand the scope of the wardens’ responsibilities or how vital their role was to protecting the health, safety, and security of those who work in our National Parks, as well as the millions of people who visit them each year. Sadly, in 2026, I am left wondering how much has really changed. Eliminating the search-and-rescue dog program based out of Banff National Park is unlikely to make any meaningful difference to Parks Canada’s overall annual budget. However, it could have profound consequences for individuals whose lives may depend on the unique, specialized, and often life-saving capabilities this program has provided for more than 55 years. Given the program’s long and well-documented record of success, it is difficult to understand why Parks Canada would consider eliminating such a proven and essential service. What meaningful savings could possibly justify the loss of a program whose value cannot simply be measured in dollars, particularly when the lives and safety of those who visit our National Parks may one day depend on it? It makes my head spin.

Article content

Recommended Videos

Article content

Article content

Article content

BOB GRUNDIE

(There are times when safety ought to take precedence)

Money to burn

(Re: ’City paid more than $1.75 million to chair of Bearspaw South feeder main review panel,’ calgarysun.com) The City of Calgary seems to have money to burn? And yet, Calgarians are faced with huge, daunting increments to both their property and water taxes. What’s up with that?

DONALD K. MUNROE, Three Hills

(Calgary city councils have been much too Liberal with the public purse)

Carney’s fantasy

PM Mark Carney should read Brian Lilley’s (‘Carney’s European romance hits the rocks’) and Lorrie Goldstein’s (‘Magic beans won’t fix Canadian economy’) columns in Thursday’s edition (Oct. 29) of the Sun so he can be reminded many in the EU don’t want Canada as any kind of quasi-associate member. As Brian reported, 10 member states have yet to sign on to a free trade deal with us, and most recently, Germany, France, and Greece have declared they don’t want associate members to the EU. That’s 13 so far, that aren’t favourable to Canada becoming a sibling in the EU. Also, Brian notes Norway, Ireland and Liechtenstein had to adopt a ‘whole host of European rules and regs’ just to do trade with the EU. And in Lorrie’s column, he reported the export value of trade last year with the EU was $43 billion, whereas export trade with the U.S. was $779 billion for the same fiscal year. Time to put the brakes on imagining an economic marriage with the EU that can replace the trade relationship Canada has had with the U.S. for multiple generations. Please, Mr. Carney, put what is good for Canada ahead of your personal fantasies.

Article content

KEN PELLAND

(Diversifying trade is wise, so long as we don’t forget where our bread is buttered)

Live within your means

So let’s see … 20% increase in property taxes, 20% in water rates, CPS wanting big bucks for their budget, saying yes to more useless bike lanes. Where in the h.e.double hockey sticks are Calgarians supposed to come up with all this money when so many are suffering? Yet the city rainy-day fund grows in leaps and bounds. Mayor Farkas and council, live within your means. You are not being reasonable. For someone who campaigned on fiscal responsibility, you are a big disappointment.

BRUCE HAYNES

(Spending is getting out of hand)

More democracy, please

Albertans have proven they can walk and chew gum at the same time. Albertans navigated the 10 questions of the referendum like pros on their very first try! Kudos to Elections Alberta for counting all the answers fairly quickly, as we really knew which way Albertans were leaning on election night. Now the NDP has questioned the cost of the referendum but democracy does have a cost. Switzerland has National Referendums four times per year. Maybe we should ask how Switzerland does this, because they, most likely, have perfected the most cost-effective model. I, as an Albertan, like this new democracy where the government is more tightly controlled by the electorate, being morally bound to carry out the majority will of the people. That’s how democracy should work. I disagree with the NDP, who want to do away with referendums and give us less democracy. Let me offer this simple solution. Let’s keep the clarity of one-issue referendum questions and simply confine future referendum questions to be answered at the same time as provincial elections when we are incurring the costs of voting already. On an important issue, I like the UCP and NDP being bound by the democratic choice of all Albertans whichever party is elected to government. In Alberta, let democracy reign!

Article content

CHRIS ROBERTSON, Stony Plain

(The NDP are likely aware many of their policies would get shot down in a referendum)

Get on the ball

For years our council has underfunded infrastructure and water is now biting us big time. As I understand, we, the taxpayers, have accumulated a large fund for emergencies. The growth of the fund was due to surplus money at the end of the fiscal year. It stands to reason had the money been spent on infrastructure in the first place the fund would not have grown, so perhaps it is time to reduce the big bucket of money and use it how it should have been in the first place.

JIM HOPE

(We would hope council is looking at all options)

Seniors beware

Alberta seniors who may have private health care coverage or employee coverage from a company you worked for eg: a Defined Benefits Pension. I checked with my pharmacist to know exactly how the UCP government’s Bill 11 will impact our pension health-care benefit. With this new Bill 11, the Alberta UCP government has abdicated all drug cost and our company pension benefit plan is paying the entirety of the cost. I am (angry) because Albertans who have no private or employee benefit plans will still have the benefit of the UCP government covering most of the cost of their drugs. Our pharmacist said Alberta used to pay 70%. I understand this is a lot of money. Do ya think they could have said we are only paying 50%? No, just cut us seniors with an employee benefit right off. Well, I hope the seniors impacted by this cheap trick remember this in October 2027 or ’28 when Alberta will be in election time. I have a question for our premier and her health minister: Is any part of the health dollars that come from the federal government meant to be part of paying for the province’s drug benefit?

GORD PETERS, Chestermere

(Bill 11 has quickly accumulated its share of detractors)

Article content