Request For Quotations – Sayward Fire Hall #1 Renovation

The Village of Sayward is seeking quotations from qualified vendors to complete FireSmart renovation work at Firehall #1, located at 620 Kelsey Way, Sayward, British Columbia.

Quotations must be clearly labeled “Firehall #1 – FireSmart Renovations” and submitted to:

Village of Sayward PO Box 29 652‑A H’Kusam Way Sayward, BC V0P 1R0

The submission deadline is 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time on Friday, February 27, 2026.

All pricing must be provided in Canadian dollars, with applicable taxes listed separately. Quoted prices must remain valid for at least 120 days from the closing date.

Vendors are solely responsible for ensuring their quotation is received by the Village of Sayward before the deadline.

Evaluation Criteria Quotations will be assessed based on: a) Ability to meet the timelines and requirements outlined in this RFQ b) Relevant experience and qualifications c) Lowest overall cost to the Village of Sayward

Inquiries All questions regarding this RFQ should be directed to: Shaun Koopman Phone: 250‑830‑6702 Email: skoopman@srd.ca

Any addenda issued for this RFQ will be posted on the Village of Sayward website and the BC Bid website. Verbal communications are not binding unless confirmed through written addenda.

Canadian’s Face Another Tax Hike With Alcohol Tax Set To Increase On April 1st

The federal government has confirmed that alcohol excise taxes will rise again on April 1, 2026, as part of the automatic annual increase applied to beer, wine, and spirits.

This built‑in adjustment — commonly known as the alcohol escalator tax — raises excise duties each year based on inflation, without requiring a separate vote in Parliament. The upcoming increase amounts to two per cent, a change industry estimates suggest will generate roughly $41 million in additional federal revenue for 2026–27.

First introduced in the 2017 federal budget, the escalator mechanism ties alcohol taxes to the Consumer Price Index. Since then, industry data indicates these automatic hikes have added about $1.6 billion to federal excise revenues.

Reaction to the latest increase is mixed. Brewers, distillers, and hospitality groups have long warned that repeated tax hikes compound pressures on producers already dealing with rising input costs, tariffs, and economic uncertainty. Some say ongoing increases could influence pricing and production decisions.

Observers also note that excise duties are only one component of alcohol pricing in Canada, with provincial markups and retail rules playing a major role. Because the federal increase is automatic, it continues to fuel debate over whether annual tax changes should require parliamentary approval.

The scheduled hike comes at a time when Canadians are already facing significant cost‑of‑living pressures, with rising prices across many sectors of the economy.

Conservative Member Of Parliament Declines Upcoming Automatic Pay Raise

A federal Conservative member of Parliament says he will not accept his scheduled annual pay increase, citing concerns about affordability and the economic pressures facing many Canadians.

Mike Dawson, the MP for Miramichi—Grand Lake, has written to the clerk of the House of Commons requesting that his salary be frozen ahead of an automatic adjustment set to take effect in April. Under current legislation, MP salaries rise each year according to a formula tied to private‑sector wage settlements, which this year amounts to an estimated increase of about $8,000 on top of the roughly $210,000 base salary.

In a letter shared publicly, Dawson said he could not “in good conscience accept a wage increase” at a time when Canadians are struggling with rising costs for essentials such as food and housing. He described the upcoming raise as “distasteful” given the financial strain many households are experiencing.

His stance has drawn attention within the Conservative caucus. Reports indicate that at a recent caucus meeting, party whip Chris Warkentin addressed the issue, noting that the annual pay adjustments are mandated by law and cannot be declined outright. Some MPs reportedly expressed discomfort with the situation, and Dawson attempted to explain his position before leaving the meeting following comments from colleagues.

The Parliament of Canada Act sets out the pay‑increase formula, meaning MPs who wish to forgo the raise must do so through other means — such as donating the additional amount — since the adjustment is applied automatically.

Dawson’s decision has been noted by advocacy groups focused on government spending, some of which have praised the move as a symbolic gesture of restraint. At the same time, political observers are watching how the discussion around elected officials’ compensation intersects with broader public concerns about inflation, wage growth, and economic affordability.

We’ve reached out to North Island MP Aaron Gunn asking if he will join his colleague in refusing the automatic pay raise. We will update once we hear back from his office. If you want to contact Mr. Gunn to follow up on this question, his contact information is below.

Aaron Gunn

http://aarongunnmp.ca/

Campell River Office 250-434-0300

Powell River Office 604-764-9061

Ottawa Office 613-992-2503

Community Radon Testing Shows Low Risk Across Strathcona Regional District

Results from a regional radon testing initiative in the Strathcona Regional District show that most participating homes recorded low indoor radon levels, a positive finding given the gas’s link to long‑term lung cancer risk. Even so, health officials are encouraging residents to continue testing regularly to ensure their homes remain safe.

During the winter of 2024–2025, the Strathcona Regional District partnered with the national Take Action on Radon campaign through the 100 Radon Test Kit Challenge. Volunteers from communities including Campbell River, Oyster River, Tahsis, and Zeballos placed long‑term test kits in their homes to measure radon concentrations over several months.

Of the 117 homes tested, 96 per cent recorded radon levels below 100 becquerels per cubic metre (Bq/m³), well under Health Canada’s guideline of 200 Bq/m³. A small number of homes showed elevated readings: about 2 per cent fell between 100 and 200 Bq/m³, and roughly 2 per cent exceeded the national guideline, with the highest result measuring around 214 Bq/m³.

Radon is an invisible, odourless radioactive gas produced by the natural decay of uranium in soil and rock. It can seep into buildings through cracks and gaps in foundations, accumulating indoors at levels that pose health risks over time. Health Canada identifies radon as the second leading cause of lung cancer after smoking, and the leading cause among non‑smokers.

While the Strathcona results are reassuring, officials emphasize that radon levels can vary widely from one building to the next — even between neighbouring homes. Soil conditions, weather patterns, and how tightly a home is sealed all influence indoor concentrations. Because of this variability, testing remains the only reliable way for homeowners to understand their exposure.

Local leaders are urging residents to maintain awareness and test their homes every three to five years, or after major renovations that affect a building’s structure or ventilation. Long‑term tests, typically conducted over the winter when homes are sealed and radon levels tend to be higher, provide the most accurate picture of average exposure.

For households that discover elevated levels, effective mitigation options are available. Certified radon professionals can install systems that vent the gas safely outdoors, often reducing concentrations significantly. Although costs vary, experts agree that mitigation can greatly reduce long‑term health risks.

Information on radon testing and how to obtain test kits is available through the Strathcona Regional District and Health Canada, and homeowners can find additional resources online to help protect their families from this often‑overlooked indoor hazard.

Almost All Federal Executives Received Bonuses Despite Mixed Performance Results

Nearly all senior federal executives received taxpayer‑funded bonuses last year, even though government departments achieved just over half of their own performance targets, according to newly released federal data.

Access‑to‑information records obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation show that about 98 per cent of federal executives were awarded bonuses or performance pay in the 2024–25 fiscal year, amounting to roughly $201 million.

Departments and agencies evaluate their performance using targets laid out in their annual plans. In the same year that bonuses were distributed almost universally, government figures indicate that departments collectively met only about 54 per cent of those targets.

The bonus system includes a range of incentive payments — such as performance awards, “at‑risk” pay, and other allowances — intended to reward executives for meeting or exceeding objectives. Critics argue that these payments are being handed out broadly even when organizational goals fall short.

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation’s federal director said the high rate of bonuses raises questions about how performance is being measured and rewarded, noting that such payments are supposed to recognize strong results.

Records also indicate that executive bonuses are part of a long‑standing pattern of substantial compensation for senior public servants. Over the past decade, federal bonus payments — including performance‑linked pay — have totaled billions of dollars, even as some public services face staffing shortages and operational pressures.

Separate federal data from a Treasury Board report shows that performance pay has become standard across the core public service, with nearly all executives receiving some form of variable compensation in recent years. This reflects a system in which portions of executive pay are tied to both individual and organizational outcomes.

Supporters of performance‑based pay argue that it helps attract and retain skilled leaders and aligns compensation with responsibility. They also note that performance targets for complex programs can be affected by factors outside an executive’s direct control.

Still, the widespread distribution of bonuses has drawn public scrutiny at a time when many Canadians are concerned about government spending and service delivery. Some analysts say the situation underscores the need to reassess how performance outcomes are defined and measured, and whether the current bonus framework effectively drives improvements in public service results.

Refugee Health Funding Under Spotlight While Canadians Struggle To Access Timely Care

Federal projections showing a steep rise in healthcare spending for refugees and asylum seekers are reigniting debate over priorities within Canada’s already strained healthcare system.

New estimates from the Parliamentary Budget Officer indicate that costs tied to the Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP) are expected to grow substantially in the coming years, potentially surpassing $1.5 billion annually by the end of the decade. The IFHP provides temporary healthcare coverage for refugees, asylum claimants, and other eligible groups who are not yet enrolled in provincial or territorial health plans.

The program covers essential medical services — including physician visits and hospital care — and often extends to prescription drugs, mental health supports, dental care, and vision benefits. Rising expenditures are largely attributed to an increase in asylum claims, longer eligibility periods, and greater use of healthcare services.

The projected cost growth comes at a time when many Canadians continue to face significant barriers to accessing care. Millions are without a family doctor, emergency departments are grappling with staffing shortages, and wait times for diagnostics and procedures remain lengthy in many regions. Health policy researchers have linked prolonged delays to preventable complications and, in some cases, premature deaths, underscoring the broader pressures on Canada’s publicly funded system.

Critics argue that although refugee healthcare is a federal responsibility, the rapid escalation in IFHP spending raises questions about sustainability and fairness when provincial systems are already under heavy strain. Some point to the contrast between comprehensive federal coverage for newcomers and the challenges many long-term residents face in obtaining timely care.

The Liberal Party of Canada has defended the program, emphasizing that providing healthcare to refugees and asylum seekers is both a humanitarian obligation and a public health necessity. Federal officials note that untreated conditions can lead to more serious outcomes and higher long-term costs, and that access to care helps reduce pressure on emergency services.

Supporters also highlight that refugees and asylum seekers often arrive with unmet health needs and limited financial resources, and that healthcare access is central to Canada’s international commitments.

Opposition parties and advocacy groups are calling for greater transparency and oversight. Some are urging a detailed review by the Auditor General or further analysis by the Parliamentary Budget Officer to clarify cost drivers, patterns of benefit use, and whether adjustments are needed to balance humanitarian goals with system capacity.

The debate unfolds as provinces continue pressing for increased federal health transfers and long-term reforms to address physician shortages, staff burnout, and aging infrastructure. With healthcare access already a top concern for Canadians, the anticipated rise in refugee health spending is likely to remain a sensitive political issue in the months ahead.