Every year at this time the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the world’s most powerful alliance for the past 77 years, holds a conference in Munich to examine its state of health.

The one just past was really a wake, but it played out more like the immortal Dead Parrot sketch from Monty Python, in which a customer (John Cleese) enters a pet shop with a cage containing a dead parrot (a Norwegian Blue) and says:

“This parrot is definitely deceased, and when I purchased it not half an hour ago you assured me that its total lack of movement was due to it being tired and shagged out following a long squawk.”

Shopkeeper: “Well he’s…he’s, ah…probably pining for the fjords.”

One of the main projects on Mayor Scott Gillingham’s list of goals is an extension of the Chief Peguis Trail. Whether necessary or not, this is an extension the city simply cannot afford and which city council and the mayor should not proceed with.

The first reason why is fiscal. The mayor touts this project as being important to the economic future of Winnipeg, as per the CBC. The argument seems to come from the net present value (NPV) of the project (a metric which compares the costs of a project to how much income it will bring in the future). However, the NPV of the project just got downgraded from $98 million to $42 million, per a Deloitte assessment.

While this might seem like a good thing for the city, and while there is a report from city staff detailing an NPV of $280 million, the cost paid is enormous: $900 million, an amount that the city does not even have on hand, and would have to go further into debt for.

The repayment of this debt, plus any interest that accrues, will easily surpass the $42 million in benefits the city gets, with a different article on the subject by CityNews stating that this project would put us above our debt ceiling.

For the third year in a row, the atmosphere in Manitoba’s staffrooms during the provincial school funding announcement has been one of cautious relief rather than the dread we came to expect for a decade.

As a high school teacher-librarian and a parent with a child in the public system, I want to begin by acknowledging the progress made.

After the lean, adversarial years of the Brian Pallister and Heather Stefanson governments, years defined by the looming threat of Bill 64 and funding increases that didn’t even cover the cost of a box of pencils, the current NDP government has chosen a different path.

This $79.8-million injection for the 2026-27 school year, building on the $104-million and $67-million investments of the previous two years, represents nearly a quarter-billion-dollar shift in how we value our children’s future. For the nutrition programs, the salary harmonization, and the simple act of treating educators as partners rather than enemies: thank you.

I remember the build-up more than the moment itself.

I remember January 2020, hearing about a virus in China. February, watching numbers climb in many countries. The World Health Organization declaring it a pandemic on March 11. By the time everything locked down here in mid-March, we’d been watching it spread for weeks, this growing dread that it was coming for us too.

And then it arrived.

The deaths started mounting everywhere at once. Loved ones died alone in hospitals. Numbers climbed so fast we stopped being able to hold them as individual losses. Seniors homes were ravaged by a virus that moved through hallways and took lives before anyone understood how to stop it. Many had family members far away they couldn’t reach.

The ongoing difficulties arising from Winnipeg Transit’s network redesign has further spotlighted the urgent need for increased government funding to public transit operations in Manitoba, including urban, rural and northern systems.

As Mel Marginet, Adam Johnston, Tom Brodbeck and the editorial board have written in the Free Press in recent months, the lack of additional operating funding — which covers the day-to-day costs of transit — has severely undermined the effectiveness and public reception of Winnipeg’s new system. Local political commentator (and former Calgary city councillor) Brian Pincott recently described this dynamic well on his blog: “Buses not running frequently enough, bus service ending too early, buses being full … all these things are about service, not network.”

Significantly increased operating funding isn’t the only answer to this problem — more dedicated bus lanes are also an essential piece, for example — but it’s impossible to build a reliable, frequent and affordable transit system without it. While Winnipeg would be the major beneficiary of increased government funding due to the sheer size of its system, many other municipalities throughout the province including Brandon, Steinbach and Thompson require dedicated support to either provide or expand transit service.

There are many obvious reasons for governments to properly fund transit: improving access to jobs, groceries, appointments and recreation for people who can’t or don’t want to drive; reducing the cost of living for households currently forced to spend thousands of dollars a year on vehicle ownership; and enabling denser land-use planning focused on housing people, not parked cars.

From Minneapolis, to Tehran, to Bangladesh, people are taking to the streets to protest against perceived injustices.

Peaceful protest is a critically important line of defence against the unjust actions of governments.

Incredibly, here in Winnipeg, some members of our city council want to put strict limits on that essential right.

The proposed safe access to vulnerable infrastructure bylaw, if passed, would be the most draconian law of its kind in Canada.

Americans head to the polls again in November with no shortage of issues at stake. The White House’s weaponization of tariffs, immigration crackdown, government purges and foreign adventurism have roiled the nation. But calls to rein in artificial intelligence (AI) may ultimately gain the most traction for candidates.

The Trump administration’s AI Action Plan, released last summer, promises to assert U.S. technological dominance at breakneck speed. The strategy vows Washington will dismantle barriers to data centre construction, eliminate a raft of “woke” safety measures and lean on other nations to buy American tech.

Silicon Valley evangelists have fully bought in. Amazon, Meta, Google and Microsoft alone have announced US$650 billion in AI-related spending for 2026. That eclipses the GDP of countries such as Israel or Norway. It also doesn’t factor in other venture capital investments elsewhere, or outlays from OpenAI, Anthropic or the Elon Musk-owned xAI.

A market strategist told the Wall Street Journal last month that the U.S. could plausibly be in a recession if it weren’t for AI investments. Although this isn’t necessarily a good thing. America’s economic growth “has become so dependent on AI-related investment and wealth,” the paper reported,” that if the boom turns to bust, it could take the broader economy with it.”