Calgary Sun Letters, Nov. 9, 2026: ‘Free parks pass doesn’t add up’

Article content

Bad Parks plan

Article content

So, Parks has announced the Canada Strong free-entry pass will once again be offered in 2027. This, despite the fact the initiative is estimated to have cost Parks nearly $160 million in potential revenue in 2025 and 2026, including the additional impact of a 25% reduction in camping fees in 2025. At the same time, Parks has been directed by the federal government to reduce its budget by $145 million over the next three years. These cuts are expected to result in the loss of more than 500 Parks employees, along with the services, expertise and operational capacity they currently provide. And let’s not forget Banff National Park, where visitor numbers have already placed enormous pressure on parks infrastructure, facilities and services during the peak summer months over the past two years. Is attracting even more visitors what the park really needs? So, the obvious question is: What exactly is senior management at Parks NHQ in Gatineau thinking? How does continuing to promote free park entry, while simultaneously facing budget reductions and workforce losses, make operational or financial sense? Canadians deserve some answers. They deserve to know how these decisions are being justified, what the anticipated consequences will be for Parks operations and services, and who is ultimately accountable for the direction the organization is taking? I think Parks needs a better map.

Article content

Recommended Videos

Article content

Article content

Article content

BOB GRUNDIE

(We like to see folks able to enjoy our parks, but numbers, especially in Banff, are creating some issues)

EU link terrible idea

Who has given Carney the mandate for seeking an EU associate membership? It surely is the population from our citizens of Canada. I do not know anyone who thinks this is a good idea let alone to pursue it. This is another Trudeau virtual-signalling that will cost us the loss of more jobs and money out of our pockets and higher taxes. He gave us a miniscule tax break to now take even more tax should this idea move forward. Our seniors are already broken.

LEE RANDELL

(The PM’s trying to reduce our dependence on the U.S., but this idea has been pretty polarizing)

Pipeline emergency

I agree with a recent article that stated Canada’s Energy Policy is now Canada’s Affordability Policy. Food costs being driven up by higher energy prices, as food products are delivered to our local grocery stores, are now crippling Canadian families. The fact government makes the problem worse by adding taxes to every litre of fuel purchased only exacerbates this disastrous situation. Government should end every penny of tax being charged to ‘food & fuel’ in our nation. Canada has the ability to lower world energy prices if we can sell our vast oil supplies to the world. Canada needs to stop shooting itself in the wallet and build pipelines to both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts so Canada can sell its oil to Europe and Asia. Building pipelines should not be called National Interest Projects… Building pipelines should be called ‘National Emergency Projects’ and built urgently with immediate full approvals and the importance needed for the immediate economic defence of Canada!

Article content

CHRIS ROBERTSON, Stony Plain

(Canada’s record on this issue isn’t great)

No business case

The No. 1 of business is to privatize the profits and socialize the costs. Oil companies do not want to spend their own money investing in oil infrastructure like oil pipelines. Instead, they want the taxpayers to do it, so that if the business case falls through, the taxpayers are on the hook for the enormous cost and the stranded assets. If they were a business case they would have funded themselves. As it is, oil companies are drawing down investments and cashing out.

KLAUS OAKES

(Oil companies would have been more inclined to spend money if the previous federal government hadn’t done its best to install policies to make pipelines a risky proposition)

What about seniors?

As a senior citizen who is still working past age 65, I am deeply troubled by Alberta’s upcoming Care-First auto insurance rules. We are constantly told seniors should be supported, yet these new regulations ensure older Albertans get the absolute short end of the stick. Under the new no-fault framework, anyone injured in a car accident can receive up to 90% of their net salary in income replacement. However, if you are over 65, that benefit vanishes. Instead, working seniors are arbitrarily dropped to a 70% retirement income framework, which is then slashed further by any CPP or OAS payments we receive. The government seems to assume turning 65 means your financial obligations simply disappear or that your labour is worth less protection. Many of us choose or need to keep working, contributing our skills and paying our taxes. To tell an active, working senior their income is inherently worth less protection than a younger driver’s is discriminatory and unfair. Why must older Albertans pay full insurance premiums only to receive fraction-of-the-dollar income protection when a crisis hits? If we are expected to buy extra, expensive voluntary riders just to protect our basic salaries, then the system is fundamentally broken. The province needs to rethink these rules before they take effect. A worker is a worker, regardless of the date on their birth certificate, and we deserve equal protection under the law.

Article content

DEREK BROWN

(Perhaps there is still room to tinker with some of the numbers. Sending a note to your MLA may be a start)

No to Nenshi

I ask Calgarians, after seeing Nenshi’s record of tax and spend. After seeing how Nenshi had a continuous tax increase on business and properties, year after year. After seeing Nenshi’s neglect of our water supply but still able to find money for his library project. I can go on and on, but I guess I really want to ask Albertans to look into his record in Calgary as mayor, and imagine him with a chequebook to our resources. With separatists splitting votes, it’s a reality now.

YANCY JONES, Okotoks

(It will be interesting to see how the separatists place themselves now that the numbers are in)

Can’t afford the new Farkas

What happened to the Jeromy Farkas who fought for taxpayers? Those who expected a champion of fiscal restraint are suffering severe buyer’s remorse. The man who built his brand on 0% tax freezes has transformed into the biggest spender in modern Calgary history. Leaked documents reveal a targeted direction toward multi-year, double-digit tax hikes, including a staggering 15% property tax increase target for 2027. This follows a bloated $4.6-billion operating budget for 2026 that drains city reserves and hikes utility rates. Instead of making hard choices to cut non-essential ‘wants,’ Mayor Farkas is throwing hundreds of millions at pet projects. If he doesn’t find his inner fiscal conservative immediately, he will spend Calgarians right out of their homes.

BONNIE BANKS

(It’s a pretty common criticism of the mayor these days)

Article content