Federal Report Questions Financial Case for Rooftop Solar in Canada

by | Sep 3, 2026 01:03 | National

Natural Resources Canada memo estimates residential solar systems can take 10 to 30 years to recover their costs, depending on location and circumstances

A federal Natural Resources Canada memo is raising questions about the financial case for residential rooftop solar in much of the country, estimating that homeowners may need between 10 and 30 years to recover the cost of a solar installation.

The May 20 memorandum, prepared for Natural Resources Minister Tim Hodgson and obtained by Blacklock’s Reporter, concludes that the economic case for widespread residential rooftop photovoltaic systems remains limited in most Canadian jurisdictions compared with some international markets.

According to the document, residential systems can cost between approximately $10,000 and $45,000, including associated debt-servicing costs. The length of time required to recover that investment varies depending on electricity prices, installation costs, solar production and other local factors.

Economics vary across Canada

Natural Resources Canada attributes part of the challenge to the economics of the Canadian electricity market.

The department notes that residential solar can be less financially competitive in Canada than in countries such as Australia, where electricity prices are generally higher. Canadian homeowners also face comparatively high installation labour costs, according to the memorandum.

That combination can make the electricity generated by a rooftop system worth less relative to the cost of installing it.

The memo therefore characterizes rooftop solar as an option that is more accessible to homeowners who have the financial capacity to absorb significant upfront costs or take on financing.

Federal incentives helped, but adoption remained limited

Government subsidies can improve the economics of rooftop solar by reducing the homeowner’s initial investment.

The former Canada Greener Homes Grant provided up to $5,000 for eligible home improvements. The program is now closed to new applicants, with applications having ended in February 2024 and final documentation due by the end of 2025.

Natural Resources Canada’s latest program figures show that 38,500 households received grants for solar panels through the initiative. That put solar behind heat pumps, windows and doors, insulation and air sealing among the program’s most common retrofit categories.

The federal memo cited the relatively limited participation as part of the broader challenge facing residential solar.

Solar can provide benefits beyond the homeowner

The department’s assessment does not argue that rooftop solar has no value.

Officials noted that distributed generation could potentially reduce pressure on large-scale electricity infrastructure by producing power closer to where it is consumed.

However, the memorandum also cautioned that determining the value of those broader system benefits is highly dependent on local circumstances and is difficult to apply consistently across the country.

That distinction is important because the financial return experienced by an individual homeowner is not necessarily the same as the broader economic value of distributed electricity generation.

A history of subsidizing renewable energy

The rooftop-solar assessment also echoes conclusions from an earlier federal evaluation of the Renewable Energy Deployment Program.

A 2021 Natural Resources Canada evaluation examined the $1.5-billion program, which provided financial support for renewable-energy projects including wind, solar and geothermal generation.

The evaluation found that the supported projects generally would not have been profitable without the program’s funding. The program provided producers with a direct subsidy of one cent per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated.

The comparison illustrates a recurring issue in renewable-energy policy: projects can deliver environmental or energy-system benefits while still requiring financial support to make their economics attractive to investors or consumers.

The 30-year question

A 30-year payback period is particularly significant for homeowners considering solar as a financial investment.

A system that takes decades to recover its initial cost leaves homeowners exposed to changes in electricity prices, financing costs, equipment performance and maintenance requirements over the life of the installation.

That does not necessarily mean rooftop solar is uneconomic everywhere. The federal assessment itself points to substantial differences between jurisdictions, and the economics can change considerably depending on local electricity rates, solar conditions, installation costs and available incentives.

For some households, those factors can produce a substantially shorter payback period.

The central finding of the federal memorandum is narrower: Canada’s current economic conditions do not make widespread residential rooftop solar financially compelling in most jurisdictions without considering additional benefits or government support.

Solar remains part of Canada’s energy transition

Despite the financial concerns outlined in the memorandum, rooftop solar continues to be part of Canada’s broader effort to expand renewable electricity.

Natural Resources Canada’s final Greener Homes figures show that tens of thousands of Canadian households chose solar through the federal program, while provincial utilities continue to develop their own incentives.

For example, Hydro-Québec introduced a 2026 solar grant providing up to $1,000 per kilowatt installed and covering as much as 40 per cent of eligible costs. The utility said the incentive was intended to reduce current solar payback periods of roughly 25 to 30 years to approximately 10 to 12 years for eligible customers.

The result is a complicated picture for Canadian homeowners: solar technology is becoming increasingly common, but whether installing it makes financial sense remains highly dependent on where a homeowner lives, how much electricity they use, what the installation costs and what incentives are available.

For many Canadians, the question may therefore be less about whether rooftop solar works—and more about whether the numbers work for their particular home.

Source: Natural Resources Canada memorandum. The payback estimates are federal departmental assessments, not guarantees applicable to every household. The Canada Greener Homes figures are independently confirmed by Natural Resources Canada.

Canada’s Economic Gap With the United States Has More Than Doubled

by | Sep 3, 2026 00:52 | National

New Fraser Institute study finds Canada has fallen behind the United States on living standards, incomes, investment, employment and productivity since the beginning of the century

VANCOUVER — Canadians are increasingly falling behind their American counterparts on some of the economic measures that most directly affect household prosperity, according to a new study examining the economic performance of Canada and the United States over the first quarter of the 21st century.

The report, “Squandering the Canadian Century: Part 1 — Comparing Economic Performance in Canada and the United States,” was published by the Fraser Institute on September 1.

Its central finding is stark: the gap in inflation-adjusted GDP per person between the two countries has more than doubled since 1999.

In 1999, GDP per person in the United States was approximately C$10,766 higher than in Canada.

By 2024, the difference had grown to C$23,757.

The authors — Fraser Institute senior economist Joel Emes, senior policy analyst Grady Munro and director of fiscal studies Jake Fuss — argue that the deterioration cannot be explained by a single economic indicator.

Instead, Canada has fallen further behind across five broad areas examined by the study: living standards, employment income, employment, business investment and labour productivity.

The numbers behind the growing gap

The difference becomes particularly apparent when looking at inflation-adjusted GDP per person.

In 1999, Canada’s figure was approximately C$48,076, compared with C$58,842 in the United States.

By 2024, Canada’s figure had risen to C$59,529.

The American figure, meanwhile, had climbed to C$83,286.

That left the United States with an advantage of nearly C$24,000 per person.

The significance of the comparison is not that Americans necessarily have an additional $24,000 sitting in their bank accounts.

GDP per person is an economic measure rather than a direct measure of household income.

But the widening difference does provide an indication of how much more economic output is being generated per person in the United States — and, over time, that divergence can translate into differences in wages, investment, employment opportunities and government revenues.

For Canadians already dealing with high housing costs, taxes and other household expenses, the direction of the trend is particularly important.

The income gap is widening too

The difference isn’t confined to national economic output.

The study also examines inflation-adjusted median employment income.

In 2010, the earliest year for which the researchers say comparable data were available, median employment income in the United States was approximately C$6,126 higher than in Canada.

By 2024, that difference had increased to C$8,663.

That represents a growing gap in the amount of income earned by the typical worker.

For individual Canadians, that distinction can be much more tangible than GDP statistics.

Higher employment income can mean greater ability to save, invest, purchase housing, support a family or absorb rising living costs.

Canada’s private sector is shrinking as a share of employment

Another difference identified by the study involves the composition of employment.

Between 1999 and 2024, the share of Canadian employment accounted for by the private sector declined from 81.2 per cent to 78.5 per cent.

The authors say this reflects government-sector employment growing faster than private-sector employment.

The United States moved in the opposite direction.

Its private-sector share of employment increased from 85.8 per cent to 86.5 per cent over the same period.

The figures don’t mean that government employment itself is inherently bad or that every public-sector job comes at the expense of a private-sector job.

Rather, the researchers use the trend as one indicator of the different directions taken by the two economies.

A growing private sector can provide a broader base of businesses investing, producing goods and services and competing for workers.

Investment may be the bigger warning sign

Perhaps the most consequential finding concerns business investment.

Investment is important because businesses need machinery, technology, buildings, equipment and other capital to increase production and improve efficiency.

According to the Fraser Institute study, Canada’s business investment per worker has deteriorated significantly relative to the United States.

In 2007, Canadian investment per worker was equivalent to nearly 90 cents for every dollar invested per worker in the United States.

By 2024, that had fallen to just 54 cents.

In other words, for every dollar being invested per American worker, Canadian businesses were investing only about 54 cents.

That matters because today’s investment becomes tomorrow’s productive capacity.

A company that buys better equipment, adopts new technology or expands its facilities can potentially produce more with the same number of workers.

When investment remains weak for years, productivity growth can suffer.

And that’s precisely what the study says has happened.

Canada’s productivity problem

Labour productivity is one of the most important measures in the report.

The study finds that between 1999 and 2025, labour productivity increased by:

Canada: 26.7 per cent

United States: 67.9 per cent

The American increase was therefore more than twice Canada’s.

Productivity essentially measures how much economic output is produced from a given amount of labour.

It doesn’t mean Canadian workers are working less hard than American workers.

Rather, productivity is heavily influenced by the tools, technology, infrastructure, capital and processes available to workers.

A worker equipped with modern machinery and technology can potentially produce considerably more than a worker performing the same task with outdated equipment.

The Fraser Institute argues that Canada’s weak productivity growth is therefore closely connected to its weak investment performance.

Jake Fuss, one of the study’s authors, said the ability to transform inputs into goods and services increased by more than twice as much in the United States as in Canada over the period examined.

The turning point came after 2014

One of the more interesting aspects of the report is that the authors don’t argue Canada was always falling behind.

Instead, they identify 2014 as an important turning point.

According to the study, Canada generally kept pace with the United States — and in some cases exceeded it — across several economic measures before 2014.

The divergence became considerably more pronounced afterward.

The timing is significant.

In 2014, global oil prices began a dramatic decline, creating a major shock for Canada’s energy-producing provinces and reducing investment in Canada’s resource sector.

But the Fraser Institute’s argument is that the oil-price collapse alone does not explain Canada’s subsequent performance.

The broader problem, according to the researchers, is that Canada has struggled to create an economic environment capable of attracting sufficient investment and generating stronger productivity growth.

That interpretation is likely to generate debate.

What does this mean for British Columbia?

While the study compares Canada as a whole with the United States, its implications extend to British Columbia and Vancouver Island.

B.C.’s economy is heavily connected to the United States through trade, investment and tourism.

The province also faces many of the same issues identified in the report, including housing affordability, infrastructure requirements, labour shortages and questions about business investment.

For communities such as those on northern Vancouver Island, productivity and investment aren’t abstract concepts.

They can affect whether companies expand, whether new businesses open, whether major projects proceed and whether younger workers can find well-paying employment without leaving the region.

A national productivity problem can therefore eventually become a local economic-development problem.

Why the comparison matters

Canada and the United States are unusually useful countries to compare.

They share a continent, extensive trade relationships, similar legal and financial institutions and highly integrated economies.

Yet their economic performance has increasingly diverged.

The Fraser Institute study argues that the comparison should force Canadians to look beyond headline employment numbers and ask a more fundamental question:

Is the Canadian economy creating enough wealth and productive capacity to support rising living standards?

The report’s answer is no.

At least, not at the rate necessary to keep pace with the United States.

The policy debate

The Fraser Institute’s conclusions are likely to be controversial.

The organization is a free-market public-policy think tank and has long advocated policies emphasizing lower taxes, reduced regulatory barriers, greater competition and increased private investment.

Its researchers argue that Canada needs significant economic reforms to reverse the trend.

But the underlying economic measurements themselves extend beyond the Fraser Institute’s policy preferences.

The GDP, income, employment, investment and productivity figures are the basis for the report’s comparison, while the interpretation of why Canada has underperformed — and what governments should do about it — is where political and economic debate begins.

That distinction is worth keeping in mind.

The numbers tell one story.

The causes and solutions are more complicated.

A quarter-century of missed opportunity?

When the 21st century began, there was optimism that Canada could emerge as an increasingly prosperous economic power.

A quarter-century later, the Fraser Institute argues that the country has instead watched its economic position deteriorate relative to its largest neighbour.

The report’s title — “Squandering the Canadian Century” — deliberately frames the issue as a missed opportunity.

The authors argue that the first quarter of the century has already been lost and that policymakers now need to focus on reversing the trend rather than accepting slower growth as inevitable.

“After squandering the first quarter of the 21st century,” Munro said, policymakers need to enact reforms that can make the most of the remainder of the century.

Whether Canadians agree with the Fraser Institute’s diagnosis or its proposed solutions, the underlying comparison presents a difficult question for the country.

In 1999, Canada and the United States were already different economies, but the gap in GDP per person was relatively modest.

Twenty-five years later, the difference has more than doubled.

Canadian employment incomes have fallen further behind.

Business investment has weakened relative to the United States.

And American productivity has grown more than twice as quickly.

For Canadians, the most important question may therefore be less about how the country performed over the past 25 years and more about what happens next.

If the first quarter of the Canadian century was a missed opportunity, can Canada change course before the next quarter passes?

Source: Fraser Institute, Squandering the Canadian Century Part 1: Comparing Economic Performance in Canada and the United States, by Grady Munro, Jake Fuss and Joel Emes. The Fraser Institute’s original page was not directly accessible during research, so the article’s figures and findings were cross-checked against the Institute’s September 1 news release and multiple reproductions of the study summary.

Fraser Institute — Squandering the Canadian Century, Part 1

Squandering cdn century pt1 comparing econ performance canada and us infographic

Ottawa Defends Federal Prison Gender Policy as Constitutional Challenge Moves Forward

by | Sep 3, 2026 00:41 | National

Government acknowledges sexual-assault charges and other complaints involving transgender inmates in women’s institutions while maintaining that its placement policy does not violate the rights of female prisoners

OTTAWA, ON — The federal government is defending its policy governing the placement of transgender inmates in federal correctional institutions, even as court documents acknowledge sexual-assault charges and other complaints involving transgender inmates housed in women’s facilities.

The issue is now before the Federal Court as part of a constitutional challenge brought by Canadian Women’s Sex-Based Rights (CAWSBAR).

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, which is funding lawyers representing CAWSBAR, announced this week that the federal government has filed its Statement of Defence in the case. The government is asking the court to dismiss the challenge.

At the centre of the dispute is Correctional Service Canada’s Commissioner’s Directive 100, which establishes the federal government’s approach to gender-diverse offenders.

Under the policy, an inmate can request placement in a men’s or women’s institution according to their gender identity or expression. Requests involving a move between institution types are assessed individually and include consideration of security classification, risks and potential health and safety concerns.

The government maintains that the system provides appropriate safeguards.

CAWSBAR argues that it does not.

What the government acknowledges

The federal Statement of Defence contains details about several incidents that have become central to the case.

According to the JCCF’s summary of the government’s court filing, an inmate identified in the documents as S/M was charged with one count of sexual assault and one count of criminal harassment in May 2020 following a complaint by a female inmate.

A second inmate, identified as KF/R, was charged with two counts of sexual assault after a complaint by a female inmate in October 2024.

The government’s Defence also acknowledges other complaints involving transgender inmates in women’s institutions.

Those include a 2018 complaint that resulted in a police investigation but no charges, a 2021 complaint alleging sexual and physical assault at Fraser Valley Institution, and a 2019 report of sexual assault at Okimaw Ohci Healing Lodge.

It is important to distinguish between complaints, charges and convictions. The existence of a criminal charge does not establish guilt, and allegations that did not result in charges have not been proven in court.

The federal government’s position is also clear: it denies that the alleged harms were caused by the implementation of Directive 100.

Ottawa says safety remains a consideration

Correctional Service Canada says its policy is intended to balance the rights, dignity and safety of gender-diverse offenders with the safety of other inmates and staff.

The government’s published policy says offenders requesting placement in an institution that does not correspond with their sex can be placed according to their gender identity or expression unless there are overriding health or safety concerns that cannot be resolved.

Transfer decisions are not supposed to be automatic.

According to Directive 100, each request requires an assessment that considers security classification, risks, health and safety concerns and possible mitigation measures.

CSC has also told Parliament that safety is a priority and that a placement or transfer request can be denied where overriding health or safety concerns cannot be effectively mitigated.

How many inmates are involved?

The number of transgender inmates involved in the federal correctional system is relatively small compared with the overall inmate population.

CSC reported that gender-diverse individuals represented 0.83 per cent of its offender population at the end of fiscal year 2024–25.

Between 2017–18 and 2024–25, CSC received 129 requests from 57 people assigned male at birth seeking placement or transfer to a women’s institution.

Of those requests:

  • 35 were approved
  • 72 were denied
  • 22 were withdrawn

As of October 2025, CSC reported that there were 90 self-identified transgender women in federal correctional institutions. Seventy-three were housed in men’s institutions and 17 were housed in women’s institutions.

Those figures provide important context to the debate.

The policy does not mean that every transgender inmate who requests placement in a women’s institution is transferred there.

The policy dates back to changes following Bill C-16

The current policy framework developed following Parliament’s 2017 passage of Bill C-16, which added gender identity and gender expression to the prohibited grounds of discrimination under the Canadian Human Rights Act and made corresponding changes to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act.

Correctional Service Canada subsequently developed policies governing gender-diverse offenders.

The current Commissioner’s Directive 100 took effect on May 9, 2022.

Under the directive, placement decisions are based on a combination of the offender’s expressed gender identity or expression and an individualized assessment of security and safety considerations.

A constitutional challenge

CAWSBAR launched its Federal Court challenge in April 2025.

The organization argues that housing transgender inmates who are biologically male in women’s federal prisons can expose female inmates to physical and psychological harm and violates their rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Among the provisions cited in the lawsuit are sections 7, 12 and 15, dealing with life, liberty and security of the person, protection from cruel and unusual treatment, and equality rights.

The federal government attempted to have the case struck before it proceeded to a full hearing.

That effort failed.

In May 2026, the Federal Court rejected the government’s motion to strike the lawsuit and granted CAWSBAR public-interest standing, allowing the organization to pursue the constitutional challenge on behalf of federally incarcerated women.

The court did not rule that CAWSBAR’s allegations were proven.

Rather, the ruling allowed the constitutional arguments to proceed for consideration on their merits.

Why public-interest standing matters

The court’s decision on standing is significant because individual federal inmates can face practical barriers to bringing constitutional litigation themselves.

CAWSBAR argued that incarcerated women could be reluctant to challenge the policy because of concerns about their treatment within the correctional system or possible consequences for their incarceration and parole.

The Federal Court concluded that CAWSBAR could pursue the case as a public-interest litigant.

That means the court will now have an opportunity to examine the underlying constitutional questions rather than ending the case at an early procedural stage.

Ottawa’s position

The federal government disputes the central premise of CAWSBAR’s lawsuit.

According to the JCCF’s account of the Statement of Defence, Ottawa denies that the alleged harm to female inmates resulted from Directive 100.

The government maintains that its individualized assessment process and safeguards provide an appropriate framework for managing the risks associated with gender-diverse offenders.

That distinction will likely be important as the case develops.

The court is not simply being asked whether incidents have occurred.

It will ultimately have to consider whether the government’s policy itself violates constitutional rights and, if so, whether the government’s approach can be legally justified.

A debate that reaches beyond prisons

The case touches on a much broader Canadian debate over how governments should balance sex-based protections, gender identity, individual rights and institutional safety.

Federal prisons present an especially complicated environment because inmates cannot simply choose to leave if they feel uncomfortable or unsafe.

The government therefore has competing responsibilities: it must protect inmates, maintain institutional security, comply with the Charter and accommodate gender-related needs.

The challenge brought by CAWSBAR asks the court to determine whether the balance struck by the federal government is constitutionally acceptable.

The government says it is.

CAWSBAR says it is not.

The case continues

The latest Statement of Defence does not resolve the dispute.

Instead, it adds the government’s formal position to a case that has already survived an attempt to have it dismissed at the preliminary stage.

The court will now have to consider evidence and legal arguments surrounding Directive 100, institutional placement, inmate safety and the Charter rights asserted by CAWSBAR.

For now, the federal government’s position remains that its individualized placement process provides adequate safeguards and that the incidents identified in its Defence do not demonstrate that Directive 100 itself caused the alleged harm.

CAWSBAR, meanwhile, maintains that women in federal custody should not be required to share correctional institutions with transgender inmates who are biologically male where doing so creates unacceptable risks to their safety and constitutional rights.

The Federal Court has not yet decided the underlying constitutional questions.

The case is therefore far from over.

What began as a challenge to a federal correctional policy is now positioned to become a significant test of how Canadian law balances gender identity, sex-based rights and safety inside the country’s federal prison system.

GoSayward.com has independently summarized the publicly available court and government material. Allegations and complaints described in the proceedings should not be interpreted as findings of guilt or judicial findings that the government’s policy caused the alleged incidents.

Sources: Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms — case information and Statement of Defence summary; Correctional Service Canada — Commissioner’s Directive 100; Correctional Service Canada — 2026 parliamentary briefing material; Department of Justice Canada — transition material on the constitutional challenge

Six Years in the Making: Four Points by Sheraton Finally Breaks Ground in Campbell River

by | Sep 2, 2026 23:33 | Local

We Wai Kai Nation’s 102-room hotel at Quinsam Crossing is now moving into construction, with an opening targeted for spring 2028

After years of planning, delays and a changing economic landscape, a long-awaited hotel project at Quinsam Crossing has finally reached a major milestone.

The Four Points by Sheraton Campbell River has officially broken ground, clearing the way for construction of a 102-room hotel that is expected to open in spring 2028.

The project is being developed and owned by We Wai Kai Nation at 200 Brant Drive, with Hotel Equities providing development services and expected to operate the property once it opens under Marriott International’s Four Points by Sheraton brand.

For Campbell River, the groundbreaking represents more than the arrival of another hotel.

It marks the latest step in the continuing development of Quinsam Crossing, an ambitious commercial area on We Wai Kai Nation lands that is increasingly becoming a gateway to Campbell River and a significant economic-development hub for the North Island.

A project six years in the making

The hotel has been a long time coming.

Hotel Equities first announced plans for the Four Points by Sheraton in March 2020. At the time, construction was expected to begin in the third quarter of that year.

The original announcement described the project as a new-build hotel owned and developed by We Wai Kai Nation, with Hotel Equities providing development services and taking responsibility for hotel operations once the property opened.

Then the world changed.

The announcement came just as the COVID-19 pandemic was beginning to disrupt travel, tourism, construction and investment across Canada.

The planned 2020 construction start did not happen.

Instead, the Four Points project remained in development for years before finally reaching the groundbreaking stage in July 2026.

The delay means the project has taken approximately six years to progress from its original public announcement to construction.

Now, however, the project has moved from planning to reality.

A 102-room hotel at Quinsam Crossing

The new hotel will be located at 200 Brant Drive, within the larger Quinsam Crossing development.

The 102-room property will carry the Four Points by Sheraton name, one of Marriott International’s hotel brands.

Hotel Equities will operate the hotel after completion, while We Wai Kai Nation will remain the owner and developer.

The development team includes Hotel Equities, Marriott International, Urban Design Group Architects and Ketza Pacific Contracting.

The construction involvement of local and regional companies could also mean that the economic impact begins well before the first guest checks into the hotel.

The project is expected to generate construction employment before creating ongoing positions once the hotel opens.

For We Wai Kai Nation, however, the longer-term objective goes beyond employment.

The Nation describes the hotel as an investment in its future and another component of its broader economic-development strategy.

Building economic independence

We Wai Kai Nation has been developing its economic interests on and around its Campbell River-area lands for years.

The Nation’s Quinsam Reserve is home to the Quinsam Crossing Economic Development Area, which includes existing commercial businesses and additional development planned for the future.

We Wai Kai describes Quinsam Crossing as a 60-acre gateway location adjacent to the Inland Island Highway and only minutes from downtown Campbell River and the Campbell River Airport.

The broader development is envisioned as a destination containing commercial and retail services, restaurants, community and recreational amenities and a hotel.

That makes the Four Points project particularly important.

It isn’t being built on an isolated parcel of land.

It is part of a larger strategy to turn Quinsam Crossing into a commercial destination serving Campbell River and the wider North Island.

The Nation says the development is intended to create opportunities for retail while becoming a highway gateway to the community.

The hotel fits directly into that vision.

A different kind of hotel project

There is also a significant Indigenous economic-development component to the project.

We Wai Kai Nation is not simply providing land for an outside hotel company.

The Nation owns and is developing the hotel, while bringing in experienced partners to handle the hospitality side of the business.

That distinction is important.

Once operating, the hotel is intended to provide an ongoing commercial revenue stream for the Nation while creating employment opportunities for its members.

Jason Wilson, We Wai Kai Nation’s director of economic development, described the groundbreaking as a milestone for everyone who had worked on the project.

He said the hotel represents an investment in the Nation’s future, with opportunities for economic growth, employment and long-term prosperity for members.

Chief Ronnie Chickite similarly described the development as an economic-development initiative intended to benefit both the Nation and the broader Campbell River and North Island communities.

The groundbreaking included a traditional ceremony

The official groundbreaking also reflected the cultural importance of the project.

The ceremony included a traditional Kwakwaka’wakw eagle down blessing ceremony, known as K’amk’amxwaliła.

Campbell River Mayor Kermit Dahl attended the event, along with Hereditary We Wai Kai Chief Yakawidi, also known as Shawn Decaire.

The cultural ceremony placed the construction milestone within the broader history and identity of We Wai Kai Nation.

For a project intended to generate economic benefits for generations to come, the ceremony also provided an opportunity to connect the new development with the Nation’s cultural traditions.

Campbell River’s hotel supply

The developers are also betting on continued demand for accommodation in Campbell River.

Hotel Equities senior vice-president Ryan McRae said Vancouver Island tourism demand has outpaced hotel supply for years, describing Campbell River as a clear example of the gap.

Marriott likewise identified the area’s outdoor recreation and marine tourism as important sources of visitor demand.

Campbell River occupies a strategic position on the east coast of Vancouver Island.

The city serves as a base for visitors travelling for fishing, boating, wildlife viewing and other outdoor activities, while also serving business and industrial traffic moving through the region.

Its position on Discovery Passage gives the community a particularly strong connection to marine tourism.

Adding 102 branded hotel rooms could therefore provide additional capacity during periods when accommodation demand is high.

It may also make Campbell River more attractive to visitors who prefer nationally recognized hotel brands when planning trips.

A changing Campbell River

The Four Points project is arriving at a time when Campbell River itself is changing.

New residential, commercial and infrastructure projects are reshaping portions of the community, while development continues both within the city and on neighbouring First Nations lands.

Quinsam Crossing is an important part of that growth.

The City of Campbell River recently approved a major sewer project intended in part to increase capacity and support future growth on We Wai Kai Nation lands, along Quinsam Road and throughout Campbellton. The project has a total budget of approximately $5.1 million.

That infrastructure investment illustrates the interconnected nature of development in the area.

As commercial and residential activity expands, supporting infrastructure becomes increasingly important.

The hotel is therefore arriving alongside a broader pattern of growth rather than as a standalone investment.

What’s next for the site?

With groundbreaking complete, attention now turns to construction.

The current target is an opening in spring 2028.

The project is expected to provide construction employment during the building phase and hospitality jobs after opening.

Hotel Equities will bring its hotel-management infrastructure to the project, including expertise in operations, revenue management, sales, food and beverage and talent development. The company currently operates hotels across several Canadian provinces.

For Marriott, the Campbell River property will add another Four Points location to its Canadian portfolio.

For We Wai Kai Nation, the implications are potentially much larger.

The hotel becomes another operating business within a broader portfolio of economic-development initiatives.

Part of a much bigger picture

The most important thing to understand about the Four Points project may be that the hotel isn’t the whole story.

Quinsam Crossing is being developed as a larger commercial destination.

We Wai Kai Nation’s plans call for a mix of commercial and retail services, restaurants and other amenities, with the development positioned to serve residents, travellers and businesses throughout the region.

Federal records have also described ongoing and planned development on the Quinsam Reserve, while the Nation has continued investing in infrastructure and amenities that support the area’s growth.

As additional pieces are completed, the character of the area around the Inland Island Highway could change significantly.

A hotel brings visitors.

Visitors create demand for restaurants, retail, transportation, recreation and other services.

And those businesses, in turn, can help make the commercial development more viable.

That is the economic-development model behind much of the investment taking place at Quinsam Crossing.

From a plan on paper to a construction site

Perhaps the most notable part of the Four Points announcement is simply that the project has finally reached this point.

When the hotel was first announced in 2020, construction was supposed to begin within months.

Six years later, the ceremonial groundbreaking has taken place.

There is still considerable work ahead before the first guests arrive, but the project has crossed the line that matters most in any major development: construction has begun.

If the current schedule holds, Campbell River will welcome the Four Points by Sheraton in spring 2028.

By then, the hotel will be joining a community that has continued to evolve during the six years since the project was first announced.

And for We Wai Kai Nation, the new building will represent more than 102 guest rooms.

It will be another piece of a long-term strategy to build economic capacity, create employment and establish lasting sources of revenue for future generations.

For Campbell River and the North Island, it will mean something more immediate: 102 additional hotel rooms, a new internationally recognized hotel brand and another major piece of the growing Quinsam Crossing commercial district.

After six years of waiting, the project is finally moving. Construction is underway.

Ottawa’s ‘Axe the Fax’ Program Shut Down After Nearly $300 Million in Federal Spending

by | Sep 2, 2026 23:21 | National

PrescribeIT was intended to modernize prescription delivery across Canada. After years of development and limited adoption, the national e-prescribing service has been discontinued, prompting new questions about how the money was spent.

A federal effort to replace fax machines in Canada’s health-care system has come to an end after nearly a decade, with the program having received close to $300 million in federal funding and accounting for less than five per cent of prescriptions nationwide.

The program, known as PrescribeIT, was created to provide doctors and other prescribers with a secure electronic method of sending prescriptions directly to pharmacies. Instead of printing, faxing or manually entering prescriptions, the system was intended to allow information to move electronically from a health-care provider’s electronic medical record into pharmacy software.

The goal was straightforward: modernize a system that had become increasingly out of step with the rest of the digital economy.

Instead, PrescribeIT was shut down on May 29, 2026, after failing to achieve widespread adoption.

From a $40-million plan to nearly $300 million

PrescribeIT was announced in 2016 with an initial federal commitment of approximately $40 million. Canada Health Infoway, a federally funded not-for-profit organization, subsequently developed and operated the service.

Over the following decade, federal spending grew dramatically.

Health Canada has acknowledged federal spending of more than $290 million on the program, while some parliamentary discussions have referred to the figure as approximately $300 million.

The investment was intended to create a national digital infrastructure for prescriptions, with the long-term expectation that the system would eventually become financially self-sustaining.

That did not happen.

By the time PrescribeIT was discontinued, fewer than five per cent of prescriptions were being processed through the platform.

According to testimony before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health, approximately 11 million prescriptions were fulfilled using PrescribeIT in the previous year — but that represented only about five per cent of prescriptions across Canada.

The vast majority continued to move through traditional systems, including fax and paper.

Why did adoption remain so low?

The problems surrounding PrescribeIT appear to have been more complicated than simply convincing doctors to stop using fax machines.

Canada Health Infoway’s leadership told parliamentary committees that adoption among physicians and other prescribers was lower than expected. The Canadian Pharmacists Association also raised concerns about the financial model surrounding the service.

In 2025, pharmacies began being charged 20 cents per prescription processed through PrescribeIT after federal funding was reduced.

Rather than encouraging greater participation, the fee became another source of concern for pharmacies already operating under financial pressure.

The program also faced the challenge of convincing provinces and health-care organizations to take responsibility for its continuing operating costs.

Ultimately, provinces did not take on those costs, and Canada Health Infoway announced that PrescribeIT would be discontinued.

The organization said it would instead move toward an open-standards approach, rather than continuing to operate a centralized national network.

Telus Health and the question of intellectual property

Another issue attracting parliamentary attention is the relationship between Canada Health Infoway and TELUS Health, which served as the program’s primary technology vendor.

Approximately $98 million reportedly went to Telus Health in connection with the program. Parliamentary and other reporting has also raised questions about ownership of the intellectual property developed through the project.

One report cited by parliamentary watchdogs says Telus retained approximately 85 per cent of the underlying intellectual property, while the federal government did not retain ownership of the platform itself.

That arrangement has prompted MPs to ask a basic question: after hundreds of millions of dollars in public funding, what assets ultimately remained under public control?

Those questions remain part of the broader examination of PrescribeIT.

Parliamentary scrutiny increases

The program’s failure has attracted increasing attention on Parliament Hill.

Members of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health have sought access to documents relating to the program, including contribution agreements, information about intellectual property, annual adoption figures and revenue generated by the prescription fees.

During committee proceedings, MPs questioned Canada Health Infoway executives about the program’s cost, performance and governance.

Conservative MPs have also called for an investigation by the Auditor General, arguing that Canadians deserve a clearer accounting of how the money was spent and why the program failed to achieve its central objective.

The political debate has become particularly contentious because the program was ultimately unable to deliver the nationwide transition away from fax-based prescriptions that it was created to achieve.

An audit is now being pursued

The federal government announced in June that it would conduct an audit and broader review of Canada Health Infoway.

The review is expected to examine not only the PrescribeIT program but also issues involving governance, operations and executive compensation.

On August 26, the federal government posted a request for proposals seeking an outside contractor to audit contribution funding provided to Canada Health Infoway.

The proposed audit is expected to continue through the end of 2026.

That means Canadians may have to wait considerably longer for a complete accounting of the program’s finances and the reasons behind its failure.

The bigger issue: modernizing health care

The failure of PrescribeIT raises questions that extend beyond fax machines.

Electronic prescriptions are hardly a new concept. Digital prescribing systems are used in health-care systems around the world, making Canada’s continued reliance on paper and fax particularly notable.

For patients, the technology behind a prescription may seem like a minor detail. But outdated communication systems can contribute to delays, transcription problems and additional administrative work for health-care professionals.

That makes the objective behind PrescribeIT difficult to dispute.

The question is whether the federal government chose the right approach — and whether the project was adequately managed once problems with adoption became apparent.

After nearly a decade and hundreds of millions of dollars in public spending, the country has effectively returned to the starting point in many parts of the health-care system.

The federal program intended to “axe the fax” is gone, while faxing remains.

For Canadians watching the cost of government programs, the next important question is no longer whether the technology can replace the fax.

It is why nearly $300 million was spent attempting to do so without achieving widespread adoption — and what can be learned before another national health-care technology project is launched.

The forthcoming audit should provide at least some of those answers.

GoSayward.com has summarized and independently contextualized reporting and publicly available parliamentary records concerning the PrescribeIT program. Claims regarding political responsibility and alleged misconduct remain matters of debate and should not be treated as established findings unless supported by evidence.

Sources: Parliamentary records and reporting on Canada Health Infoway and PrescribeIT, including House of Commons committee proceedings and recent reporting on the federal audit.

Northern Lights Could Join a Nearly-Blood-Red Lunar Eclipse Across Canada Tonight

by | Aug 27, 2026 09:37 | National

Skywatchers across Canada could be in for an unusually dramatic night as two very different celestial events potentially unfold at the same time: a deep partial lunar eclipse and an outburst of the northern lights.

On the night of Thursday, August 27, into the early hours of Friday, August 28, the full Sturgeon Moon will move through Earth’s shadow. At the eclipse’s maximum, roughly 96 per cent of the Moon will be immersed in Earth’s darkest shadow, leaving only a small portion of the lunar surface directly illuminated.

At the same time, increased activity from the Sun is creating the possibility of auroras across much of Canada.

If skies are clear and geomagnetic activity develops as forecast, observers could potentially see a reddish, eclipsed Moon in one part of the sky while green, red or purple auroral light shimmers elsewhere.

A nearly total “blood moon”

Although this week’s event is technically a partial lunar eclipse, it will be an unusually deep one.

At maximum eclipse, about 96 per cent of the Moon will be inside Earth’s umbra — the darkest central portion of the planet’s shadow. That leaves only a thin section of the lunar disk directly illuminated by sunlight.

As the Moon moves deeper into the umbra, much of its surface can take on a copper, orange or reddish appearance. The effect happens because some sunlight passes through Earth’s atmosphere before reaching the Moon. Earth’s atmosphere scatters more of the shorter blue wavelengths, while allowing more red and orange light to continue through.

That’s the same basic phenomenon responsible for the reddish appearance of a total lunar eclipse.

This event doesn’t quite reach totality, but the difference will be difficult to appreciate at a glance. With almost the entire lunar disk immersed in Earth’s shadow, the Moon should have a distinctly different appearance from an ordinary full Moon.

The event is also significant because it will be the deepest partial lunar eclipse visible from North America for several years. A total lunar eclipse on New Year’s Eve in 2028 will provide the next major opportunity for a fully eclipsed Moon.

The Sun is adding another ingredient

The lunar eclipse isn’t the only reason to look up.

Solar activity has increased in recent days, with a powerful solar flare from sunspot region 4513 accompanied by coronal mass ejections (CMEs). A CME is a massive cloud of magnetized plasma expelled from the Sun that can travel through interplanetary space and interact with Earth’s magnetic field.

A separate high-speed stream of solar wind is also expected to increase geomagnetic activity.

Those disturbances are important for aurora watchers because they can energize particles trapped around Earth and drive them into the upper atmosphere. When those particles collide with atmospheric gases, they produce the glowing curtains and arcs known as the aurora borealis.

NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center has forecast the possibility of minor geomagnetic storm conditions around Thursday, with stronger G2-level conditions possible Friday as additional solar activity reaches Earth.

Forecasts are never a guarantee of an aurora display, however. The strength and timing of the incoming solar material — particularly the orientation of its magnetic field — can determine whether a storm produces a spectacular show or a much more subdued display.

Why the eclipse could actually help aurora watchers

There is an interesting twist to having the northern lights appear during a full Moon.

Normally, a bright full Moon can make an aurora harder to see. The Moon illuminates the surrounding sky, reducing the contrast between relatively faint auroral light and the darkness around it.

Tonight, however, the Moon will spend much of the most interesting part of the evening moving through Earth’s shadow.

As the lunar disk darkens, the surrounding sky becomes noticeably darker. That could improve the contrast between the aurora and the night sky, particularly for observers under otherwise dark conditions.

It doesn’t make an aurora more likely to occur. Instead, it may make an existing aurora easier to notice.

That distinction is important because an aurora forecast and an eclipse forecast are describing two completely independent phenomena.

Where could Canadians see the northern lights?

The aurora’s visibility will depend heavily on how far south geomagnetic activity reaches.

Northern and central Canada generally have the best odds, while a stronger-than-expected geomagnetic response could push the auroral oval farther south.

Recent forecasts have indicated the possibility of aurora visibility extending into portions of the northern United States, which means many Canadians farther south could also have an opportunity if the storm strengthens.

For Canadian observers, the best strategy is to get away from city lights and find a location with a broad, unobstructed view toward the northern horizon.

And don’t rely exclusively on what the aurora looks like to the naked eye.

A camera or modern smartphone can sometimes record colours and structure that are difficult to see directly, particularly when the aurora is faint. Night or astrophotography modes can make a substantial difference.

The eclipse won’t look identical across Canada

Where you live will make a significant difference.

Eastern Canada has an advantage because the Moon will already be above the horizon as the eclipse progresses through its most dramatic stages.

In much of western Canada, however, the Moon rises while the eclipse is already underway.

For example, in British Columbia the Moon rises shortly before the eclipse’s darker stages, meaning observers there won’t see the entire event from beginning to end. The same issue affects parts of Alberta and Saskatchewan.

The maximum eclipse occurs at different local times across the country:

– British Columbia: about 9:12 p.m. PDT

– Alberta: about 10:12 p.m. MDT

– Saskatchewan: about 10:12 p.m. CST

– Manitoba: about 11:12 p.m. CDT

– Ontario and Quebec: about 12:12 a.m. EDT

– Atlantic Canada: about 1:12 a.m. ADT

– Newfoundland: about 1:42 a.m. NDT

The exact visibility also depends on the Moon’s position above the local horizon and, of course, the weather.

How to watch both events

You don’t need specialized astronomical equipment.

For the lunar eclipse, simply find a location with a clear view of the Moon. Lunar eclipses are safe to observe directly with the naked eye. Binoculars or a telescope can reveal additional detail in the Moon’s changing surface and shadow.

For the aurora, darkness is much more important.

Move away from bright urban areas if possible and give your eyes time to adjust. Look toward the northern sky, although a strong aurora can spread much farther across the sky.

Ideally, choose a location where you can see both a large portion of the sky and the horizon rather than standing beneath trees or beside tall buildings.

And keep checking the forecast throughout the evening.

Auroral activity can change rapidly, so a forecast several hours earlier doesn’t necessarily tell you what will happen when you actually step outside.

A rare combination — but don’t expect a guaranteed spectacle

The most important word for tonight is potential.

The lunar eclipse is predictable: Earth’s shadow will cross the Moon on schedule.

The aurora is different.

Solar-wind conditions can change quickly, and even when a geomagnetic storm is forecast, the resulting aurora may be faint, localized or occur at a different time than expected.

That makes the possibility of seeing both phenomena together especially intriguing.

At maximum eclipse, the Moon could appear as a dark copper-red disk, while an auroral glow develops along the northern horizon. In a particularly favourable location, a camera could potentially capture both phenomena in the same wide-angle image.

Even if the northern lights don’t cooperate, the eclipse itself is worth watching.

And if the geomagnetic storm arrives at the right time, Thursday night could offer something considerably more unusual: a darkened, reddish Moon sharing the sky with the northern lights.

For anyone with clear skies across Canada, it may be worth stepping outside and looking up.