Latest news with #CCRA
Globe and Mail
14-07-2025
- Business
- Globe and Mail
Bigfoot Crane Company Earns Second Consecutive Safety Award from the CCRA
Bigfoot Crane Company is recognized for outstanding safety practices and industry leadership in crane operations. Abbotsford, BC - July 14, 2025 - Bigfoot Crane Company is honored to announce that it has been awarded the Safety Award by the Canadian Crane Rental Association (CCRA), marking its second consecutive year of recognition for exemplary health and safety standards across its operations. The award was presented during the CCRA's Annual Conference held June 4–5, 2025, at the J.W. Marriott Hotel in Edmonton, Alberta. The Safety Award showcases organizations that consistently demonstrate rigorous safety protocols and a proactive approach to risk mitigation, underscoring the importance of safeguarding workers, equipment, and the communities they serve. 'This award is a testament to the dedication of our team and the safety culture we've built together. We are grateful to the CCRA for recognizing the hard work and high standards that keep our people and partners safe,' said Jonathan Domke, General Manager of Bigfoot Crane Company. Since 2014, Bigfoot Crane Company has built a strong reputation as a trusted partner for lifting solutions throughout Western Canada. Headquartered in Abbotsford, British Columbia, the company specializes in the sale and rental of self-erecting cranes, tower cranes, construction hoists, and a full line of underhook accessories. With a fleet designed to meet the diverse demands of residential, commercial, and industrial projects, Bigfoot offers solutions tailored to fit each site's unique challenges. Its reach extends throughout British Columbia, Alberta, and surrounding provinces, serving contractors and builders who value not only high-quality equipment but also dependable service and expertise. Bigfoot's inventory, meanwhile, features some of the most advanced crane technologies available, including Liebherr self-erecting cranes that offer remarkable efficiency and flexibility for compact job sites and robust tower cranes suited to complex, large-scale builds. What distinguishes Bigfoot Crane Company is its customer-first approach and emphasis on teamwork. Every rental or sale is backed by thorough inspections, jobsite consultations, and responsive maintenance to minimize downtime and maximize productivity. The company's Legendary Service model means clients can expect a seamless experience from consultation to project completion, with knowledgeable support always on hand. A key element of its earning accolades also lies in the Bigfoot Training Academy, a specialized training division designed to educate and certify crane operators and riggers. The Academy offers programs covering topics like rigging safety, fall protection, crane operation, and compliance with Canadian standards. By equipping the next generation of operators with the skills and confidence they need, the Academy strengthens the industry's safety culture while supporting client success. Receiving the Safety Award from the Canadian Crane Rental Association for the second year highlights the impact of these efforts. The CCRA serves as a national voice for crane rental companies, manufacturers, and service providers, advancing the industry through education, advocacy, and the promotion of safety and professionalism. Looking ahead, Bigfoot Crane Company continues to raise the standard for safe, reliable crane services. Whether it's supplying advanced equipment, training qualified operators, or delivering on-site support, Bigfoot remains a trusted partner to contractors who demand both quality and care. Learn more about Bigfoot Crane Company by visiting the website at About Bigfoot Crane Company Bigfoot Crane Company provides premier crane solutions and training throughout Western Canada, offering sales, rentals, maintenance, and certification programs that help clients achieve safer, more efficient projects. Media Contact Bigfoot Crane Company Address: 2170 Carpenter St, Abbotsford, BC V2T 6B4 Phone: (877) 852-2192 Website: Media Contact Company Name: Bigfoot Crane Company Contact Person: Ryan Burton Email: Send Email Country: Canada Website:
Montreal Gazette
11-07-2025
- Politics
- Montreal Gazette
Opinion: Automatic release must be reformed for cases involving organized crime
Op Eds Montreal is in the middle of a quiet war. On one side, law enforcement scores rare wins like the June 12 arrests of alleged Mafia leaders including Leonardo Rizzuto and Stefano Sollecito in a sweeping police operation across Quebec. On the other, violence keeps erupting in incidents such as the fatal shooting of a man in a Brossard park on July 2, which Longueuil police said may have been gang-related. The problem isn't that police aren't doing their job. It's that the law keeps handing criminal networks a second life. Take Nicola Spagnolo. An alleged associate of the Rizzuto clan, he was serving time for a 2020 stabbing. He had been turned down for parole due in part to affiliations with organized crime denied by Spagnolo but noted by Correctional Service Canada (CSC). And yet, under Section 127 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA), he automatically qualified for release after serving two-thirds of his sentence — until he was arrested in June as a murder suspect in the same case as Rizzuto and Sollecito, while he was still behind bars. If no new charges had been filed, he would have walked free. This is not a flaw. It is a design failure. The CCRA's statutory release mechanism was built on ideals of rehabilitation and reintegration. But in cases involving links to organized crime, those ideals are being exploited. CSC's assessments flagged Spagnolo as 'an active member of a security threat group or organized crime.' Yet legally, that status wasn't enough to deny his release — because in Canada, an assessment of affiliation with organized crime alone does not qualify as a sufficient reason to override statutory release. This must change. Parliament should amend Section 127 to create an exception to automatic release for individuals with links to organized crime. This exception should not be based on subjective suspicion, but on clear CSC assessments, intelligence, and behavioural records while in custody. This is about protecting the public, not punishing indefinitely. In addition, Canada should implement a national threat profile registry, which would classify inmates based on their operational risk rather than just their criminal record. This registry would allow authorities to consider gang membership, leadership roles and persistent criminal associations in evaluating release eligibility. Similar models are already used in certain situations in jurisdictions like Germany and the Netherlands. Moreover, release should not mean freedom without oversight. Canada's statutory-release system does permit curfews, halfway-house residency and other conditions, yet safeguards are limited when release itself is mandatory. For individuals flagged under the proposed registry, electronic monitoring, communication bans and mandatory reintegration plans would be imposed for at least the duration of the original sentence. Reintegration isn't passive — it requires structured conditions and accountability. Provincial prosecutors should also be empowered to contest statutory releases when public safety is at stake. Currently, their involvement in release procedures is minimal, yet they are the most familiar with the real-life consequences of letting violent gang members return to the same neighbourhoods they helped destabilize. Beyond legal reform, there's a societal dimension. Communities affected by violence are not just crime scenes — they are often left to pay the price for legal leniency. Residents lose faith in public institutions when the same names cycle through headlines and courtrooms year after year. Fighting organized crime must include breaking the cycle of predictable impunity. Montreal cannot afford to wage war on organized crime with laws that seem designed for first-time offenders. This is not about being tough on crime — it's about being smart on structural threats. Organized criminal networks exploit every loophole available. It is time the law stopped helping them. We need sentencing legislation that reflects the complexity of modern criminal networks, prioritizes sustained community protection and restores trust in the justice system. For that to happen, automatic release for documented members of organized crime must end. Anything less is an invitation to repeat the same cycle, with more victims next time.
Hindustan Times
21-06-2025
- Business
- Hindustan Times
HC confirms ₹9.76-crore Stamp Act penalty on IL&FS
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Wednesday confirmed a ₹ 9.76-crore penalty imposed on IL&FS Financial Services Ltd (IFIN) for failing to pay stamp duty on time following the demerger of the company. A single judge bench of justice Jitendra Jain dismissed the petition filed by the IL&FS group firm, challenging the levy of penalty over and above the stamp duty of ₹ 7.07 crore, which was payable towards registration of the court order on the company's demerger. (Shutterstock) IL&FS (Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services) underwent a demerger in 2007-08, wherein iIts ancillary businesses including IFIN were constituted as wholly-owned subsidiaries and IL&FS was transformed into a holding company focused on investments and lending to its group companies. After the Bombay high court operating under the Companies Act, 1956 sanctioned the demerger scheme in April 2008, the company lodged the document with the collector of stamps for adjudication of stamp duty. The company subsequently failed to supply documents and information sought by the collector of stamps, which resulted in the collector issuing a demand letter on December 19, 2014 for payment of stamp duty and penalty. On December 31, 2014, the collector of stamps issued a demand notice to the company, directing them to pay ₹ 7.07 crore towards stamp duty and ₹ 9.76 crore towards penalty under the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958. The company accepted the stamp duty, but opposed imposition of the penalty and appealed before the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority (CCRA) in January 2015. On March 25, 2015, the CCRA granted a stay on recovery proceedings for the penalty after the company deposited the stamp duty. After the CCRA dismissed the company's petition in 2017, it approached the high court. Before the high court, IL&FS argued that as per section 31(4) of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, penalty at the rate of 2% could be imposed only if the stamp duty payable under section 30 of the Act was not paid within 60 days from the date on which the notice of demand was served. The company contended that March 25, 2015 – the date of the interim order of the CCRA – was the date of serving demand notice under section 31(4) and since it had paid the stamp duty on March 27, 2015 – that is, within two days of the said interim order – there was no default and consequently, no penalty could be imposed. The court observed that the 60-day period would, at most, start from December 19, 2014 – the date on which the demand letter was issued; or December 31, 2014 – the date on which the demand notice was issued; or January 14, 2015 – then the company filed an appeal with the CCRA. 'The petitioner after having admitted the liability of payment of stamp duty vide letter dated December 19, 2014 and made the respondents (collector of stamps) to issue final demand notice dated December 31, 2014 failed to make payment within 60 days thereof, which would expire on March 2, 2015,' the court said, confirming the penalty imposed on the company.
New Indian Express
23-05-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Tenant Farmers in Andhra Pradesh's Srikakulam struggle to obtain CCRCs
SRIKAKULAM: The fate of tenant farmers remains unchanged as Crop Cultivators' Rights Cards (CCRCs) are still not being issued to all eligible individuals. The requirement for written agreements continues to hinder tenant farmers' access to land, as most landowners are unwilling to execute such agreements. The CCRC is vital for tenant farmers to access subsidised seeds and manure, avail crop insurance, receive compensation in the event of crop loss due to calamities, and obtain loans from banks through a simplified process. The previous YSRCP government passed the Crop Cultivators' Rights Act (CCRA) in 2019, which made a written agreement a prerequisite for the issuance of CCRCs. Due to the lack of written agreements, only a limited number of tenant farmers have received CCRCs. In Srikakulam district, just 223 CCRCs have been issued; in Parvathipuram Manyam, 300; and in Vizianagaram, only 73. 'We can issue CCRCs to tenant farmers only after receiving written consent from the landowner, as per the CCR Act 2019,' said Joint Director for Agriculture (JD-A) K. Trinadha Swamy to TNIE. 'Most landowners are unwilling to provide such consent, so we are unable to issue CCRCs to all tenant farmers,' he added.
Yahoo
19-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Why federal Direct PLUS Loans are under fire — and how their potential end impacts your student loan options
Congressional Republicans are considering closing the federal Direct PLUS Loan program in an effort to limit federal loan borrowing. Canceling this program could have many downstream effects, including increased reliance on private student loans for grad students and parents of undergrads. Student loan borrowers still have many options to cover education costs. If paying for college is a buffet — picture the student and their family browsing for various aid — one item may soon be coming off the menu. Congressional Republicans are progressing toward budget reconciliation that could close the federal Direct PLUS Loan program (in addition to cuts across other sectors). In this process, the House and Senate may adopt much of the College Cost Reduction Act (CCRA), which would include removing this type of student loan for graduate students and the parents of undergrads. But some experts in the know say that congressional committees currently hunting for budget cuts — the next step of reconciliation — might be looking in the wrong place: The PLUS Loan program doesn't actually cost Uncle Sam any money. 'This is one of the only portions of the [federal loan] portfolio that does make a profit, which says a lot about why [it] would be used as kind of a [political] football,' says Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) student loan ombudsman Julia Barnard. 'And just so everybody knows, if the government does make a negative subsidy — or what some might think of as a profit — on any part of the portfolio, that money immediately goes back to the Treasury. To be used for other things that we probably care about as a society.' Besides the federal government's bottom line, though, closing the PLUS Loan program could have cascading effects for higher education financing for years to come. What are Direct PLUS Loans? Direct Loans are federal student loans that parents and students can borrow from the Department of Education for participating schools. Direct PLUS Loans are available to parents of an undergraduate student and graduate or professional students. Other Direct Loans include Direct Subsidized Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Loans and Direct Consolidation Loans. The CCRA, which gained more than 150 Republican cosponsors during Congress's last session, isn't the most recent attempt to shutter the PLUS Loan program. In January, the Senate introduced the Graduate Opportunity and Affordable Loans Act with the same aim. Related: Federal student loan legislation tracker The question is, why cast such a bright spotlight on PLUS Loans? Conservative lawmakers make an accountability argument: If Congress limits federal loan borrowing, universities will have to compete for students and be less able to drive up tuition costs that shift the overwhelming expense to Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer. If that doesn't happen — or until it does — graduate students and undergraduates' parents may flock to private lenders as an alternative funding source. While former Education Department Under Secretary James Kvaal says he's not thrilled about that outcome, he also advocates for federal lending that's more responsible. Holding schools — who are unsurprisingly arguing against shutting off the firehose of federal funding — accountable could be a spot for bipartisan agreement. 'You do see people taking out loans to get degrees that are never intended to lead to a high-wage job — it might be a divinity school or a theater school, or it could be that the program is routinely not very good,' says Kvaal. 'So, we do need to have a real conversation about when loans are appropriate for graduate schools and when those schools are intended to deliver an ROI for students.' Related: Dismantling the Education Department won't fix how Americans pay for college About 5.4 million borrowers owe $222.4 billion in federal Direct PLUS Loans, according to the Department of Education's Federal Student Aid (FSA) office. That's about 13 percent of the country's outstanding student loan debt. Closing the PLUS Loan program would bar new applicants, while existing borrowers would still be legally obligated to repay their debt. If you think of America's education debt as a 10-slice pie, eight slices would be federal loans and two would be private. Get rid of PLUS Loans and the ratio is sure to change. Just don't expect any argument from banks, credit unions and online lenders. 'This has been on the wish list of the private student loan companies for over a decade,' says the CFPB's Barnard. 'Before we had [PLUS Loans], the private student loan companies were able to offer much larger loans to graduate students. And of course, as everyone can imagine, graduate students are more likely to earn higher incomes. So, that's a population that the private student loan market is very interested in.' Related: CFPB ombudsman's message to federal student loan borrowers: 'Demand' what you're 'legally entitled to' If you (as a grad student or parent of an undergrad) or your potential cosigner has strong credit and income, relying on private student loans might not be such an issue, considering federal loan rates have been on the rise for four straight years (Congress sets them annually). Loan type 2024-25 interest rate Fee Federal Direct Grad PLUS Loans 9.08% 4.228% Private graduate student loans 3.47% to 14.83%* Varies by lender Federal Direct Parent PLUS Loans 9.08% 4.228% Private student loans for parents 3.39% to 17.99* Varies by lender *Rates advertised by Bankrate's partner lenders as of April 2025 'When I worked in a financial aid office like 15 years ago, [Parent] PLUS Loan interest rates were around the seven-ish percent mark,' says Colleen Campbell, former executive director of the office of loan portfolio management at the Department of Education. 'And so it was a value proposition that was somewhat neutral between, 'Do you get a home equity line of credit, or do you get a PLUS Loan?' The challenge now is that, because of where we're at in terms of things like inflation or [where] interest rates are at for federal student loans … the [PLUS] programs seem really tenuous to people.' The problem with removing a federal loan slice of the pie is that they're the predominant option for a reason: They provide fixed interest rates and far-reaching repayment safeguards — and on a mass scale, to borrowers of most credit tiers. In fact, FSA only requires that PLUS Loan applicants don't have 'adverse credit history,' which includes a recent delinquency, default or bankruptcy. There's no mention of a minimum credit score. 'PLUS Loan credit standards are extremely low, akin to the mortgage bonanza before the Great Recession, to the point where we are making hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans to parents [and grad students] with very low incomes,' says Campbell. Private student loans, by comparison, award competitive rates only to students with strong credit or, more commonly, a creditworthy cosigner. They also feature fewer protections than federal loans. Most notably: You can't just change your repayment plan as you wish, or require your lender (or loan servicer) to temporarily pause your monthly dues. So, it's reasonable to argue that the absence of PLUS Loans would drive more borrowers to private loans — at varying levels of risk. Applicants with weaker credit, lower incomes could conceivably face higher interest rates or, worse, rejection. Taking it one step further: It's logical to assume that some grad students and parents would also seek out loans from less scrupulous lenders that have intentionally loose eligibility criteria. There are many pitfalls of getting a student loan with bad credit. 'Something that we have learned in over a decade of CFPB work is that borrowers really will sign pretty predatory contracts in order to go to school,' says Barnard. 'And I understand why people feel that they have to make a deal with the devil in this economy.' Colleges and universities are anticipating the largest class of first-year students ever next fall, according to New York Times reporting, but that trend could soon reverse. After all, if students and their families are shut out of private student lending — either because the interest rates and fees are too high or because they can't gain loan approval — they might have to skip their preferred but pricier four-year university. Possible downstream effects of PLUS Loans' dissolution Students opting for community colleges, other lower-cost schools States ramping up efforts of providing financial aid Already-struggling private colleges, including Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), facing closure Campbell anticipates schools mounting a pressure campaign on the elected officials who serve their districts and states. That's what occured when the Obama Administration sought to stiffen the eligibility criteria for PLUS Loans about a decade ago. 'So what we saw back in 2013 was that some colleges, in particular, higher-cost colleges that enroll a lot of low-income borrowers, like HBCUs in particular in this situation, really had a strong response to any kind of [heightened] eligibility restrictions… And so I think that we would likely see that this time as well.' Then the question turns from whether the PLUS Loan program should be effectively canceled to whether there remains enough motivation to do it. 'This is really when the rubber hits the road in higher ed,' adds Campbell. 'Every senator has dozens, if not hundreds, of colleges in their state, and every single representative in Congress has a college in or a campus that employs people that brings money into their district — and they will immediately get the knock at their door should something in their district be threatened.' If you or your student are in school or on their way, you might be concerned about losing an option for higher education financing. Don't stress, at least not yet. Congressional Republicans haven't yet finalized their budget, so keep an eye on student loan news coverage. Know that, long-term, you'll still have various options for covering your education costs (though attending a lower-cost school is worthy of your consideration). To get a head start on these options, consider our guide for how to pay for grad school and how to pay for college with no money. Sign in to access your portfolio
