Dear Premier and Ministers, In your efforts to do the right thing you may be tempted to follow Quebec and Ontario in adopting a Carbon Cap and Trade system. Please do not. Day traders and stock market speculators may want this, but scientists and economists say it is a huge mistake. Businesses that use carbon fuels need price stability to safely plan for the future, and the volatility of a Cap and Trade market hurts any chance of that. The European cap and trade system doesn't reduce GHG's. It encourages big polluters to buy their way out of excessive pollution by investing in dubious carbon credit schemes. It is just another way to get rich on market volatility and that seems quite dangerous; to put the fate of our children in the hands of day traders. By implementing a broad base fixed price on carbon such as a $50/tonne "Carbon Damage Fee", we could replace fossil fuels with sustainable energy on the Alberta power grid by 2025 and employ as many people as our oil sands. All this for an additional direct cost of only 66 cents per person per day. There is a preponderance of evidence to prove that a $50/tonne(2015) carbon price is the minimal fair price for Albertans to pay. Even the think tank for the U.S. coal lobby "The Heritage Institute" admits that the real cost of carbon damage is US$52.35/tonne, the U.S. EPA charts show that US$61/tonne is fair and U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN - IPCC) concluded that, " a lower benchmark of US$50/tC is reasonable". A Carbon Damage Fee of $50 /tonne works out to an "additional direct cost" of only 66 cents per person per day. Dear Premier and Ministers we ask you, "At what price is our survival?" Right now we have a once in a lifetime opportunity to actually achieve our dream of a survivable world, not just an opportunity to fight for it. Time is running out and we in Alberta may never have a chance like this again. I ask you to please do not let this slip through our fingers.

Right now in BC, around 13,000 people living with HIV are vulnerable to prosecution based on the current charge guidelines surrounding HIV exposure. The science says there is almost no risk of transmitting HIV if you use a condom properly or have undetectable viral load (this is when meds you take fully suppress the virus in your blood). But people living with HIV are being prosecuted for a very serious crime—aggravated sexual assault—even if there’s no chance of their transmitting the virus. This is unjust. Our 14 Recommendations include: - Presumption against prosecution when transmission does not occur - The involvement of the Provincial Medical Officer in all HIV non-disclosure cases - The inclusion of relevant and up to date medical research surrounding transmission - Meaningful consultation of persons living with HIV in forming the guidelines We can’t change the federal law, but we can put guidelines in place that will ensure such unjust prosecutions don’t happen in BC. Help us achieve that. For more info, please see our executive summary or the full position paper on the need for new HIV non-disclosure charge assessment guidelines Executive Summary: http://ow.ly/LswKh Position Paper: http://ow.ly/NCaMS

We know that the only reason Adam Vaughan voted to support C-51 is because Justin Trudeau forced his M.P.’s to support it for tactical and political reasons. He made that decision before people learned about what was in Bill C-51, the Anti-Terrorism Bill. The tide quickly turned and a vast majority of the public now opposes this scary legislation, despite the passage of the bill in the House of Commons. Now, with a majority of Liberal Senators rejecting their party leader’s position on this vague and dangerous law, there is no more political or tactical reason forcing Adam Vaughan to support infringing on our basic civil liberties. With an election looming, we will consider this a performance review for our Member of Parliament, and it comes with one very explicit condition for renewal of his term as our representative in the new riding of Spadina-Fort York: We need to hear a commitment from him to fully repeal Bill C-51.

An independent panel has been appointed by the Minister of Natural Resources, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to conduct a public review and advise the Minister on the socio-economic and environmental implications of the hydraulic fracturing process. However, the Minister of Natural Resources and his department focuses clearly on natural resource development and supporting regulations and not health, safety and the environment. Three of the Hydraulic Fracturing Review Panel members prior to their appointment have stated publically that they supported approval of hydraulic fracturing with appropriate regulations. These three members constitute a majority and are clearly not independent. They believe fracking can be done safely. The drillers' dreams of fracking New York succumbed to the growing mountain of proof that this dangerous process causes birth defects and respiratory illness, while polluting the air and drinking water with carcinogens like benzene and formaldehyde. Why did Minister Dalley appoint a biased panel to conduct an "independent review" when jurisdictions like New York, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia have already studied the issue and determined Hydraulic Fracturing to be unsafe? Newfoundland and Labrador has placed a moratorium on all hydraulic fracturing applications pending this review. The review panel is flawed. Here is a link to a list of jurisdictions worldwide that have banned hydraulic fracturing. http://keeptapwatersafe.org/global-bans-on-fracking/ The citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador deserve the same respect and leadership from their elected representatives as do the citizens residing in the communities on the fracking ban list. This issue is a moral issue. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33182065 These companies poison water without remorse - Please Share http://youtu.be/j5kn8qL5G-w #fracking #environment #ClimateChange

The Harper government allowed this relatively small spill to become a serious tragedy by closing the Kitsilano Coast Guard station, and they’re inviting even worse tragedies if they allow expanded tanker traffic on the B.C. coast. Kinder Morgan is proposing a pipeline and tanker that would bring hundreds of huge tarsands oil tankers through Vancouver’s harbour each year -- putting us at risk of a catastrophic oil spill when we weren’t even prepared for a spill that would be considered small by industry standards. In the wake of the Vancouver oil spill, thousands of people are looking for answers. If we raise our voices together now, we can expose how the Harper Government’s negligence turned this spill into a tragedy. With an election coming up, Conservative MPs in the Lower Mainland will be under tremendous pressure to give us a real plan to protect the B.C. coast. Sources: [1] Fuel oil spill from freighter in Vancouver harbour triggers cleanup. http://www.surreyleader.com/news/299210961.html [2] Now-closed Kisilano Coast Guard Base would have responded to oil spill instantly (Vancity Buzz). http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2015/04/now-closed-kitsilano-coast-guard-base-responded-oil-spill-instantly/

Because as David Suzuki has explained to the public, the earth is dying of a thousand cuts. To think globally and then act locally, I plan to warehouse the above non-bleached products and sell it to friends and neighbours at cost. Eventually, the movement will grow, until our whole town of Amherstburg, Ontario knows where to obtain unbleached paper products. -- Susan Monaghan, Amherstburg, Ontario

Taxpayers must know the costs around the installation of community mailboxes. The city of Hamilton just put out a report on the costs. It's going to cost taxpayers $522./site and an overall cost of 2.1 million that the taxpayers of Hamilton will have to pay. When community mailboxes are installed near a home owner, studies have shown it decreases property values. The city of Brampton shouldn't have to be burdened with additional costs and decreased service.

Taxpayers must know the costs around the installation of community mailboxes. The city of Hamilton just put out a report on the costs. It's going to cost taxpayers $522/site and an overall cost of 2.1 million that the taxpayers of Hamilton will have to pay. When community mailboxes are installed near a homeowner, studies have shown it decreases property values. The City of Mississauga shouldn't have to be burdened with additional costs and decreased service.

Over the past year at least 400 childcare spaces have been lost in the Davenport area. The Old Orchard building houses both the West End Parents' Daycare and The Orchard Montessori School, which collectively provide childcare for nearly 200 kids. Without these crucial services, Davenport parents will face a genuine daycare crisis. It's crucial that the province act immediately with the City of Toronto and other stakeholders to ensure this childcare resource and its surrounding greenspace is not lost.

Canada Post and the Harper Conservatives plan to eliminate door to door mail delivery over the next 4 years. We feel these service cuts are unnecessary and specifically targets people with mobility issues and seniors. Canada Post has profited 17/18 years and in 2014 3 Quarter profits of 63 million. Canada Post is a traditional and valuable service to Canadians and we must maintain door to door service. Community mail boxes devalue properties, attract litter, theft, graffiti and are never properly maintained in the winter.

Currently in the province of Saskatchewan no requirements exist for refineries to have a formal inspection plan or any requirement to submit regular inspection plans to a Provincial Government regulator.

Taxpayers must know the costs around the installation of Community Mail Boxes. The City of Hamilton just put out a report on the costs. Its going to cost taxpayers $522/Site and a overall cost of 2.1 Million that the Taxpayers of Hamilton will have to pay. When Community Mail Boxes are installed near a Home Owner, studies have shown it decreases property values. The City of Toronto shouldn't have to be burdened with additional costs and decreased service.