Wednesday's letters: Alberta squeezes seniors, disabled despite surplus
Alberta posts $8.3-billion surplus was the headline on the front page on June 28. Great news. Unless you're an AISH recipient. Or a senior. Or someone wanting a COVID vaccine.
Article content
Alberta is the only province or territory that will claw back the Canada Disability Benefit of $200, which could make a difference to AISH recipients trying to live on $1,900 (or less) per month. Also, Alberta is increasing the co-pay amount for seniors' prescriptions and no longer covering seniors' eye exams. To some seniors, this may not be a big deal. But to those on limited incomes or with medical conditions requiring several medications, this can be a big hit.
Article content
Article content
Article content
Debbie Cavaliere, Edmonton
Article content
Readers and Edmonton Journal reporters should be reminded that Crestwood and Glenora, who are constantly in the news, are only two of 163 community leagues in Edmonton. Their representations to city council on the current review of zoning do not represent the views of the remaining community leagues.
Article content
Article content
The Edmonton Federation of Community Leagues represents all community leagues. Each community obviously has particular interests but overall they all want a thriving community with varied housing, diverse age groups that will fill their schools, provide support for their activities, coaches for their sports teams, good infrastructure. The community leagues are not just a front for homeowning residents.
Article content
I am sure I speak for a lot of Edmontonians, who are thankful to councillors in continuing their review into what would have been their vacation time, in order that it is completed and not allowed to fester all summer long.
Article content
The beautiful potted flowers lining 100 Avenue (The Promenade) between 117 Street and 121 Street are sorely missed this summer. I'm not sure why the city decided to cut back on probably one dozen pots. These are the same ones that line River Valley Road and can be found in other parts of the city.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Edmonton Journal
8 minutes ago
- Edmonton Journal
Another federal court blocks Trump's push to end birthright citizenship
FILE - Demonstrators holds up a banner during a citizenship rally outside of the Supreme Court in Washington, May 15, 2025. Photo by Jose Luis Magana / AP BOSTON — A federal judge on Friday blocked the Trump administration from ending birthright citizenship for the children of parents who are in the U.S. illegally, issuing the third court ruling blocking the birthright order nationwide since a key Supreme Court decision in June. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Exclusive articles by David Staples, Keith Gerein and others, Oilers news from Cult of Hockey, Ask EJ Anything features, the Noon News Roundup and Under the Dome newsletters. Unlimited online access to Edmonton Journal and 15 news sites with one account. Edmonton Journal ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles, including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Exclusive articles by David Staples, Keith Gerein and others, Oilers news from Cult of Hockey, Ask EJ Anything features, the Noon News Roundup and Under the Dome newsletters. Unlimited online access to Edmonton Journal and 15 news sites with one account. Edmonton Journal ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles, including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin, joining another district court as well as an appellate panel of judges, found that a nationwide injunction granted to more than a dozen states remains in force under an exception to the Supreme Court ruling. That decision restricted the power of lower-court judges to block government actions on a nationwide basis. The states have argued Trump's birthright citizenship order is blatantly unconstitutional and threatens millions of dollars for health insurance services that are contingent on citizenship status. The issue is expected to move quickly back to the nation's highest court. Get the latest headlines, breaking news and columns. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again Lawyers for the government had argued Sorokin should narrow the reach of his earlier ruling granting a preliminary injunction, arguing it should be 'tailored to the States' purported financial injuries.' 'The record does not support a finding that any narrower option would feasibly and adequately protect the plaintiffs from the injuries they have shown they are likely to suffer,' Sorokin wrote. Sorokin acknowledged his order would not be the last word on birthright citizenship. Trump and his administration 'are entitled to pursue their interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and no doubt the Supreme Court will ultimately settle the question,' Sorokin wrote. 'But in the meantime, for purposes of this lawsuit at this juncture, the Executive Order is unconstitutional.' The administration has not yet appealed any of the recent court rulings. Trump's efforts to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily will remain blocked unless and until the Supreme Court says otherwise. An email asking for the White House's response to the ruling was sent Friday. A federal judge in New Hampshire issued a ruling earlier this month prohibiting Trump's executive order from taking effect nationwide in a new class-action lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante in New Hampshire had paused his own decision to allow for the Trump administration to appeal, but with no appeal filed in the last week, his order went into effect. On Wednesday, a San Francisco-based appeals court found the president's executive order unconstitutional and affirmed a lower court's nationwide block.
Montreal Gazette
5 hours ago
- Montreal Gazette
Cancelled across Canada, MAGA singer Sean Feucht is playing in a Montreal church Friday
U.S. evangelical singer and MAGA-affiliated activist Sean Feucht is expected to perform in Montreal Friday night, following a week of venue cancellations and last-minute changes across Canada. The event, part of his 'Revive in 25' Let Us Worship tour, will take place at Église MR, a Spanish-speaking church in the Plateau. It comes after all six of Feucht's previously scheduled concerts across eastern Canada were cancelled by local authorities, citing concerns over public safety, security, and community standards. Despite the setbacks, Feucht has continued the tour, relocating shows to alternative sites. Cities said the cancellations were prompted by 'heightened public safety concerns' and the potential for protests. Feucht's outspoken views on abortion, gender identity and LGBTQ+ rights has drawn criticism and been cited as a source of tension, though he has described the cancellations as a form of religious discrimination. 'If I had shown up with purple hair and a dress, claiming to be a woman, the government wouldn't have said a word,' he posted earlier this week. On Friday afternoon, Feucht claimed the pastor of the Montreal church had been 'pressured, threatened and attacked' for agreeing to host the concert. Then, in a follow-up post, he appeared to maintain that the show would still go ahead. 'This pastor and his church ARE NOT BACKING DOWN!!!,' he wrote. Earlier in the day, Feucht reported that his tour bus was struck by another driver in Quebec. 'The Quebec police on the scene were unbelievably kind and other driver acknowledged he slammed into our bus and somehow 'lost control,'' he wrote. The Let Us Worship movement began during the COVID-19 pandemic as a protest against public health restrictions on religious gatherings. Feucht, a former worship leader and political activist aligned with the MAGA (Make America Great Again) movement, has since gained a national profile in the United States and brought his message to Canada despite growing controversy. He has nearly 600,000 followers on Facebook. This story is developing. This story was originally published July 25, 2025 at 2:47 PM.
Global News
6 hours ago
- Global News
Law experts, observers raise questions as Ontario adds virtual courtroom restrictions
Ontario's lower courts are introducing restrictions on who can attend proceedings virtually after what they describe as an escalation of interruptions, a move that law experts and observers say raises questions about transparency. The Ontario Court of Justice released a new policy last week that would stop observers from accessing court proceedings online unless they receive authorization from the judge or justice of peace overseeing the case. Those interested in attending court cases are encouraged to show up in person, the policy says. It does not apply to proceedings at the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. The lower court attributes the move to a rise in deliberate disruptions of court proceedings referred to as 'Zoom bombings,' which is when participants disturb a virtual call with inappropriate content or messages. 'These disruptions are an impermissible attack on the integrity of the justice system and the administration of justice,' an interim policy notice said, adding that they often cause delays and can have negative effects for participants, court staff and jurists. Story continues below advertisement Boris Bytensky, president of the Criminal Lawyers' Association, says changes to the observer policy were needed because of the 'despicable acts of disruption' caused by certain attendees in virtual courts. 'This is the only way to ensure that proceedings that are conducted by Zoom and bring the significant benefits to the system and to the parties that virtual proceedings offer are free from any unacceptable interference,' Bytensky said in an emailed statement. But some experts warn that the policy could be a step back when it comes to openness. Virtual court hearings on Zoom were first adopted in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic so court processes could continue amid government-mandated physical distancing rules. The continued use of videoconferencing technology in courtrooms since then has created a level of access people now expect, complicating the decision to change the policy, said Teresa Scassa, law professor at the University of Ottawa. Get breaking National news For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy 'At this point, the meaning of open courts or what is an open court has changed, and now you're taking away something that's there,' she said in an interview. While the new policy says physical attendance is still on the table, that is not an option for everyone, Scassa said. People with disabilities, those who don't drive and anyone who lives far away from courts do not always have the option to attend in person, she said. Story continues below advertisement 'I have some sympathy for the challenges the courts are dealing with. But I do have some questions about whether the route that they've chosen is really the route that best respects the open court principles,' said Scassa. A small number of court proceedings only take place virtually. To observe these cases, the court says people need to request permission by emailing the court's communications officer — the same contact that media use to request access to virtual proceedings. Scassa said she has questions about how judges will decide who should and shouldn't get access: 'Does everybody get permission? Who gets denied permission? Is there some hierarchy?' The Ontario Court of Justice did not respond to a request for more information about the authorization process before deadline. Avid court observer Jenny Pelland said the court's new policy isn't surprising, as they've witnessed Zoom bombings many times over the past few years, especially in high-profile cases. 'I've seen some where it's been very graphic,' Pelland said in an interview, adding that the disruptions often display violent or pornographic content. Since the observer policy was announced, Pelland said courts have already been applying the rules differently, with some posting notices in the Zoom waiting room that public access is banned and others allowing access but requiring attendees to provide their full legal name or have their camera turned off. Story continues below advertisement Such differences are not novel, with Pelland saying they've noticed limitations on access even in cases when they reached out to a judge or court clerk for permission in advance. 'For some courts in Ottawa, it's been almost impossible to log in for the past few months,' Pelland said. 'Some judges don't allow observers at all and it's not something new.' Alyssa King, associate professor of law at Queen's University, said understaffing is already a concern in Ontario courts, and adding more administrative burden for judges will cause inconsistencies in the way policies are applied across the province. 'It's not because anybody is acting in bad faith or trying to prevent the public from accessing the court,' she said. 'But they are people with a big workload and sometimes very high stress decisions that they need to make quickly … so any time you add to what they have to do administratively, that's tough.' A different process is still followed to allow access to virtual courts for victims and complainants. The court says they should get in touch with their local Crown attorney's office or victim witness assistance program. Jasminder Sekhon, director of community engagement, EDI and policy at Victim Services Toronto, said the court should consider updating its policies on that process to make sure it is more accessible and survivor-informed. Story continues below advertisement 'Not just the victims should be able to apply, but also people should be able to apply on their behalf,' Sekhon said, adding that people who support survivors should also be considered to receive virtual access. For Linda McCurdy, a criminal defence lawyer based in Windsor, Ont., adding an extra step to prevent disruptions is a good way to preserve the integrity of the courts. 'I barely notice people in the court, but you really notice people on Zoom when they're doing stuff,' said McCurdy, adding that people tend to forget about formalities when calling in from their own homes. 'If you want to come and watch the proceedings, come to the court, come sit in the court. That's the way it's always been.'
