Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Opinion

Speed on Green?

Published

4 minute read

Hey everyone,

As of August 11 the intersections in our city that currently have red light cameras will also now have the ability to issue tickets for speeding through them on green lights.

What do you think of this?

Could we frame this discussion as a speeders tax or a fee-to-speed? Perhaps.

But either way let’s not fool ourselves; these cameras are only marginally effective at making our roads safer. As soon as drivers learn where these cameras are they slow down temporarily and then they defiantly speed up again as soon as they’re out of range. So, yes, these cameras probably do make specific intersections safer. But on the other hand I suspect the gains might be lost if drivers are dangerously slamming on their brakes to avoid having their picture taken as soon as they catch a glimpse of the camera as they speed by. I suppose the data will bear out the fact of the matter. My mind will remain open.

Also, while the focus on catching speeders does give us a good feeling of accomplishment, the question remains; how do we address the other major factors such as distracted and impaired driving? I hear Police ride the bus in some cities and call in distracted drivers they see through the window as they cruise around the city. But that’s a whole other topic.

One thing that has worked well is installing timers at many intersections around our city. I really like how I can see from a distance that I have enough time to safely slow down and stop. So I’d like to put it forward that, if we must have speed-on-green cameras then we should use the money to pay for things like timers at intersections and other things that improve traffic safety.

I also wonder if we should be having the conversation about timing traffic lights better? “Red-Light-Deer” is a social media meme which is growing in popularity. So the bigger picture question here is how can we make traffic flow better in our city?

Lastly, another discussion that we should be having is how to improve safety in our school zones. Since we know that traffic cameras only temporarily slow drivers down and we also know that many drivers are unwilling to temporarily slow down near schools, it seems like there is an obvious solution to the problem, let’s put traffic cameras in school zones. Can we do that? Call it a cash grab, sure, just please don’t run my kids over. The scariest thing to a parent is a speeding car in school zone!

With all of that said, the reality is that we can’t legislate the sort of cultural change that needs to happen. I recently became a defensive driving instructor and this is something that I talk about a lot. People need to obey the rules of the road not because they’re afraid of getting a ticket but because they care about their own safety and respect the safety and well-being of everyone else in their community. This is the ultimate way to be proactive when it comes to road safety. It starts with you and the attitude that you choose to have when you get behind the wheel.

Cheers,

Before Post

I have lived in Red Deer since I was a child. This is the community that I choose to raise my family in and where I choose to operate my business. I am grateful for all of the opportunities I have had in this city and I will give back to the community through service, passion and conversation. I am curious. I am personal. I am BOLD.

Follow Author

More from this author
Opinion / 8 years ago

Speed on Green?

Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

2025 Federal Election

Liberal MP Paul Chiang Resigns Without Naming the Real Threat—The CCP

Published on

The Opposition with Dan Knight     Dan Knight

After parroting a Chinese bounty on a Canadian citizen, Chiang exits the race without once mentioning the regime behind it—opting instead to blame “distractions” and Donald Trump.

So Paul Chiang is gone. Stepped aside. Out of the race. And if you’re expecting a moment of reflection, an ounce of honesty, or even the basic decency to acknowledge what this was really about—forget it.

In his carefully scripted resignation statement, Chiang didn’t even mention the Chinese Communist Party. Not once. He echoed a foreign bounty placed on a Canadian citizen—Joe Tay—and he couldn’t even bring himself to name the regime responsible.

Instead, he talked about… Donald Trump. That’s right. He dragged Trump into a resignation about repeating CCP bounty threats. The guy who effectively told Canadians, “If you deliver a Conservative to the Chinese consulate, you can collect a reward,” now wants us to believe the real threat is Trump?

I haven’t seen Donald Trump put bounties on Canadian citizens. But Beijing has. And Chiang parroted it like a good little foot soldier—and then blamed someone who lives 2,000 miles away.

But here’s the part you can’t miss: Mark Carney let him stay.

Let’s not forget, Carney called Chiang’s comments “deeply offensive” and a “lapse in judgment”—and then said he was staying on as the candidate. It wasn’t until the outrage hit boiling point, the headlines stacked up, and groups like Hong Kong Watch got the RCMP involved, that Chiang bailed. Not because Carney made a decision—because the optics got too toxic.

And where is Carney now? Still refusing to disclose his financial assets. Still dodging questions about that $250 million loan from the Bank of China to the firm he chaired. Still giving sanctimonious speeches about “protecting democracy” while his own caucus parrots authoritarian propaganda.

If you think Chiang’s resignation fixes the problem, you’re missing the real issue. Because Chiang was just the symptom.

Carney is the disease.

He covered for it. He excused it. He enabled it. And now he wants to pose as the man who will stand up to foreign interference?

He can’t even stand up to it in his own party.

So no, we’re not letting this go. Chiang may be gone—but the stench is still in the room. And it’s wearing a tailored suit, smiling for the cameras, and calling itself “leader of the Liberal Party.”

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

2025 Federal Election

PM Carney’s Candidate Paul Chiang Steps Down After RCMP Confirms Probe Into “Bounty” Comments

Published on

Sam Cooper

 

Just after midnight Monday, Liberal MP Paul Chiang announced he is stepping down as the Liberal candidate in Markham–Unionville — hours after Canada’s federal police confirmed it was “looking into” allegations that he endorsed handing a political rival to a foreign government in exchange for a bounty.

“This is a uniquely important election with so much at stake for Canadians,” Chiang wrote in a late-night statement. “I do not want there to be distractions in this critical moment. That’s why I’m standing aside as our 2025 candidate.”

The announcement followed a day of escalating controversy, triggered by The Bureau’s Friday report and a series of breaking developments over the weekend and Monday, detailing Chiang’s remarks at a January meeting with Chinese-language media.

At a January news conference with Chinese-language media, Chiang suggested that Joe Tay’s criminal charge in Hong Kong would create a “great controversy” if he were elected to Parliament, according to the Ming Pao newspaper. He then reportedly crossed into territory that Hong Kong rights groups have asked the RCMP to investigate — potentially amounting to counselling kidnapping and violating Canada’s foreign interference laws — by suggesting that Tay, a Canadian citizen wanted under Hong Kong’s National Security Law, could be “taken” to the Chinese Consulate in Toronto to claim a HK$1 million bounty.

The UK-based human rights NGO Hong Kong Watch filed a formal letter to RCMP Commissioner Mike Duheme on Monday morning, requesting a criminal investigation. The letter alleged Chiang’s comments may amount to “counselling to commit kidnapping” under Canada’s Criminal Code, and potentially violate the new Foreign Interference and Security of Information Act.

By late evening, the RCMP confirmed it was “looking into the matter,” citing the serious and growing threat of foreign interference and transnational repression. While no criminal charges have been laid, and no details about potential protective measures have been released, the federal police said it is working closely with intelligence and law enforcement partners.

Chiang did not reference the controversy directly in his resignation statement, instead framing his decision as a step to protect the broader interests of the Liberal campaign. He expressed pride in his record and gratitude to his community.

“For the past three-and-a-half years, it has been the greatest honour of my life to serve the people of Markham–Unionville as their Member of Parliament,” he wrote. “Every single day, I served with integrity and worked to deliver results.”

The move comes after mounting calls for Chiang’s removal, including from more than 40 Hong Kong diaspora groups and international human rights advocates who said his remarks endorsed Beijing’s tactics of transnational repression. Joe Tay, the Conservative candidate targeted in the remarks, revealed Monday that he had contacted the RCMP for personal protection even before the comments were made public.

Chiang had previously apologized for what he called a “terrible lapse in judgment,” but had retained the backing of Prime Minister Mark Carney — until Monday night.

More to come on this breaking story.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Support a public interest startup.
We break international stories and this requires elite expertise, time and legal costs.
Continue Reading

Trending

X