big proponent of it but this dish has none. My belief is that when you think about food and all the enveloping flavours, the


Italians really did


come up with a winner with this dish. Personally speaking, I


like the sweetness of the peppers coupled with the flavours of cheese. ‘Chicken Parmesan Stuffed Peppers’ have it all going on. From super quick and easy to pre- pare, to a low carb delight. It is a per- fect appetizer or a full on hearty meal.


Ian Leatt Foodies


Stuffed Peppers, just what the doctor ordered M


ost Italian dishes include ol- ive oil, not that that is a bad thing. I am a


All the flavor of a real Italian dinner without any of the guilt!


Ingredients: 1 cup cooked and shredded chicken 1 cup marinara sauce 1 ½ cups grated mozzarella 1/3 cup freshly grated Parmesan 2 teaspoons minced garlic ¼ teaspoon red pepper flakes 1 teaspoon Oregano freshly chopped Season salt and pepper 4 bell peppers ½ cup of water


Directions: Preheat the oven to 350 degrees C. Place the chicken, marinara sauce, ½ cup of mozzarella, Parmesan, garlic, red pepper flakes, oregano and salt and pepper, in to a large mixing bowl.


Blend together thoroughly, then set to one side. Wash and cut the peppers in half lengthwise, then remove all the seeds and membranes. Place peppers in to a large rectangular oven proof dish. Using a large spoon, spoon the


chicken mixture evenly in to all the peppers, then top with the remaining mozzarella cheese. Pour the cup of water in to the dish, then seal the dish with foil tightly. Bake in the oven for 25 minutes until the peppers are soft and to your liking. Depending on the time of day, a light


lunch, an appetizer or even an evening meal served on its own or with a nice Caesar salad, of course not forgetting a nice glass of your favourite wine. Ian Leatt is general manager of Pega- sus Publications and a trained chef.


Let’s call a john a john and stop using “news” to cover up “I


f you do not read the newspa- per, you are not informed; if you read the newspaper, you


are misinformed.” So said Mark Twain. Does mainstream news publish false stories? Definitely, for young children, they do. We are annually given details on how NORAD tracks Santa Claus. Recently, we were told the Easter Bunny and Tooth-Fairy are considered essential services,


unaffected by Covid-19.


Am I a “Grinch” for questioning this “fake news”?


Should report-


ers publish what is not true, even if “Everybody” knows it is not true? What other “adult, tongue in cheek, jokes” appear in newspapers? Do ani- mosities between various groups be- gin at a very young age when some children berate fellow schoolmates for their “stupid” belief in Santa Claus? Are adults having a laugh at the ex- pense of naïve, innocent, and gullible children? Some psychologists assert that these type of “innocent white lies” do children no harm, while other psy- chologists believe this behaviour does


extensive injury. Reporters knew what Peter Nygård


Wayne Weedon Food for Thought


was up to thirty years ago, but chose to turn a blind-eye. Nygård was in- volved with members of the British Royal Fam- ily. The Royal Family was also involved with Jeffrey Epstein and Sir James Wilson Vincent Savile OBE KCSG (Jimmy Sav- ile). For more than forty years Dr. Kevin Annett, a former United Church minister, has been alleg- ing that Canada has sev- eral pedophile rings run by influential men. Annett also alleges, for more than a dozen years now, all me- dia in Canada have been banned from mentioning


his name or printing any of his articles. British newspapers are now admit-


ting, for over fifty years, they, as well as the British police, were turning a blind eye towards Jimmy Savile’s ac- tivities. Seven national British news- papers refused to publish a story from Miles Goslett, a freelance reporter, be- fore The Oldie, a small little known British publication, printed Goslett’s story which exposed Jimmy Savile’s atrocities. It was only then did other


reporters admit that Savile’s activities had long been discussed in their press circles, but never published. Johnny Rotten, of the Sex Pistols, claims that, as far back as 1978, he was banned by BBC, and silenced with threats of libel lawsuits when he tried to expose Jim- my Savile. Recently,


world-wide newspapers


were printing stories about pedophile cover-ups by all levels of governments, various religious institutions, as well as mainstream media. Do we have cover- ups in Winnipeg? If I provide Winni- peg police with a video of a man ille- gally soliciting sex on the street, I am considered the criminal. Authorities accuse me of invading this man’s pri- vacy, and harassing him as if he is the victim. Winnipeg police admit their mandate is not to arrest johns. They claim they are out to help the young girls who these men are exploiting. Male police officers pose as johns in order to apprehend these girls who are then branded for life as sex workers. The Canadian Women’s Foundation recommends, “Reverse stings, where female police officers pose as women engaged in prostitution” in order to ar- rest johns. When Winnipeg police arrest under- age girls, they claim they take them to a “safe place”, a euphemism for a gaol


charges are


of one sort or another. Police, once in a while, will pick up a few johns and send them to a one-day “John School”. No criminal


brought


against these johns and no records are kept. This goes against The Canadian Women’s Foundation


recommenda-


tions of “shaming” by “publicizing the identities of arrested johns through news outlets, police websites,


and/


or billboards.” They also recommend cameras should be used, “to discour- age sex buyers and to provide evidence against them.” In Winnipeg, girls as young as eleven, and possibly younger, have been forced into prostitution and are working the streets. They are being exploited. They are the true victims who will eventually end up either behind bars or dead. If there were no johns, there would be no prostitutes. Why is Manitoba not fol- lowing the Canadian Women’s Foun- dation’s recommendations for getting the johns off the streets? Today, is it because of the Covid-19 pandemic dominating the news, that sex exploitation and pedophilia are no longer mentioned? Or, is this just the beginning of another cover-up? Wayne Weedon is an Indigenous Mani- toba writer of novels and short stories. To sample his wonderful work go to Wattpad. com.


Why should government be taking EI funds into general revenues? Fred Morris


surpassed the rural population. This led to increased problems in the urban workplace. Politicians


A from across the politi-


cal spectrum began to advocate unem- ployment insurance in order to provide Canadians with bridge income during employment


interruption. The idea


was included in the 1919 Liberal Poli- cy Convention, the 1933 CCF Regina Manifesto, and the 1935 Bennett New Deal. One of the strongest advocates for EI was Paul Martin Sr. during his first term as a Liberal MP between 1935 and 1940. In the late 1930s, the provinces unani- mously agreed to let the federal govern- ment assume this responsibility. In Au- gust 1940, unemployment insurance finally became law. Does the current EI fund have enough


money to cover the costs of the COVID related unemployment? Between 1940 and 1990, EI funding was split between the federal govern- ment, employers, and employees. In


8 whatsupwinnipeg.ca


fter World War 1 and the Span- ish Flu pandemic, the popula- tion of Canada's urban centers


1990, all EI taxpayer funding ceased. However, the federal government still makes the rules. Regional unemploy- ment rates, the availability of other jobs, and quitting a job without just cause (whatever that means) are used as excus- es for denying employment insurance. Finance Minister Paul Martin Jr.’s


1995 federal budget speech stated, “A key job for unemployment insurance must be to help Canadians stay off un- employment insurance.” In other words, Mr. Martin Jr. thought that EI is really a payroll tax for employers and a second income tax for employees. The obvious difference between the principles of Paul Martin Sr. and the actions of Paul Mar- tin Jr. indicates that the implementation of the EI has gone off the rails. Recent


federal governments have


denied Canadians access to their own money.


In 2008, a large EI surplus created by the strict eligibility rules was diverted into general revenues. The total transfer was just under $58 billion. This amount represented almost three years of every cent put into EI by both employers and employees. In 2015, the Harper govern- ment transferred another $2.7 billion of EI funds into general revenues. Recent federal governments have misused EI


funds.


EI should be a forced savings account administered by the federal government. The only role of the federal government would be to hold the employee's contri- bution including their employer’s con- tributions on their behalf in trust until a ROE proves unemployment. The unemployed person should then be al- lowed use some or all of their forced savings account. How much money would Canadians


have if the EI system had been operat- ing as a forced savings account since the EI became self sufficient in 1990. (No tax dollars)?? I will use three examples. Some of these numbers would be higher if we went further back. I found accurate figures for my last 11 years of employment. During this time, I worked between 30 and 60 hours a week at one or two slightly above mini- mum wage jobs. My total contribu- tion including the employers share was $11,404. If we assume proper indexing for inflation, I and my employers have contributed about $31,000 to EI in the last 30 years. In 2015, I unsuccessfully tried to claim EI when I was medically unable to work for five weeks. How much has a person and their employer making the maximum annual


insurable income (currently $54,200) contributed to EI? Let us assume that this person has not filed a claim. I took the figures for the past 22 years off the EI web site and extrapolated the num- bers assuming proper indexing for the other eight years. This employee includ- ing the employer's contribution on their behalf has contributed about $60,000 to EI.


Finally, all employees would have something. Many employees who pay but have no hope of ever collecting a cent could draw on their forced sav- ings account. A student working at their first minimum wage summer job could get between $150 and $200. Work- ing seniors could withdraw funds from their forced savings and not have their pensions subtracted from this EI claim clawing the EI benefit back to zero. If the federal government had used EI


as a forced savings account, some of the uncertainty and anxiety of thousands of suddenly unemployed Canadians would be lessened. They could draw on their forced EI savings for a few months be- fore considering applying for tax payer funded supports. Fred Morris describes himself as a politi-


cal activist and sometime political candi- date.


May 2020


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20