EN - Travel
Domestic Flights Within Canada To Become Significantly Cheaper This Summer
Perhaps it's time to consider a staycation.
Don't have an account?
By continuing, you agree to our Terms & Conditions
Please check your e-mail to reset your password.


We use cookies to personalize content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyze our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners who may combine it with other information that you’ve provided to them or that they’ve collected from your use of their services. Learn More
The Supreme Court of Canada plans to hear arguments today from a coalition challenging the constitutionality of legislation that smooths the way for major changes at Ontario Place.
The case unfolding in Canada's top court could reverberate far beyond the Toronto waterfront park that opened in 1971.
Over the years, the theme park featured a spherical theatre that showed movies on a huge screen, children's play areas, a revolving concert stage and several pavilions suspended above the water.
The provincial government wants to redevelop Ontario Place to include an elaborate spa operated by a private company, a relocated Ontario Science Centre, revamped play and shoreline areas, a parking facility and a provincial police detachment.
The coalition Ontario Place Protectors challenged the province's Rebuilding Ontario Place Act on the basis that it insulates state action from scrutiny by the courts and therefore violates the Constitution.
The coalition also argued that exemptions from environmental and heritage laws and municipal noise regulations amount to a breach of public trust.
An Ontario judge dismissed the application in 2024 and a challenge of the ruling in the provincial Court of Appeal was also unsuccessful.
Writing on behalf of a unanimous Court of Appeal, Justice Grant Huscroft said there was no doubt that the provincial government's decision to redevelop Ontario Place is strongly opposed by a number of concerned citizens and organizations.
Political opposition to the plan has not swayed the government and the coalition has turned to the court in an effort to stop it, Huscroft said.
"But there is no basis for the court to do so. The court is not an alternative forum for resolving political grievances. The only legitimate question for the court is whether the impugned provisions of ROPA violate the law or the Constitution," he wrote.
"They do not, and the appeal must be dismissed."
In January, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Ontario Place Protectors' case.
The coalition says provincial superior courts have historical and inherent jurisdiction to review laws and government actions protected under section 96 of the Constitution Act, 1867, and to provide effective remedies when governments do not respect the limits on their powers.
The coalition says the Rebuilding Ontario Place Act's scope is unprecedented and appears to violate section 96 by removing the essential core powers of the courts.
It argues the legislation severely limits or entirely eliminates the ability of courts to hold Crown officials accountable through declaratory actions, damage awards and injunctions when they have acted beyond their powers.
The coalition is also seeking to have the doctrine of public trust acknowledged as an unwritten constitutional principle rooted in English common law and inherited by Canada.
It argues the doctrine of public trust maintains that natural and cultural assets are essential to public welfare and must be safeguarded by the state in its role as trustee.
Margie Zeidler, the daughter of Ontario Place architect Eberhard Zeidler, remembers visiting the park as a child.
"It was extraordinary. It was a public place," she said in an interview. "You could have a picnic in the forest. You could watch films at Cinesphere. You could watch any musical performance at the forum."
Zeidler, a member of the Ontario Place Protectors coalition, says the provincial government's actions have made the fight about more than just the historic theme park. "It became more, not about Ontario Place, but about, wait a minute, what democracy are we living in here?" she said. "I didn't know governments could do that."
In their written submission to the Supreme Court, the Crown and the Ontario attorney general say the case should be dismissed.
The immunity provided by the provincial legislation does not go as far as the coalition alleges, the submission says: "(The act) does not make Ontario Place a lawless zone."
Rather, it immunizes the Crown, its servants and agents from civil causes of action arising from specific circumstances, the submission says.
The Crown and attorney general also urge the court to reject the claim that the legislation is invalid because of the doctrine of public trust.
"The novel doctrine articulated by the Appellant is not an unwritten constitutional principle, and even if such a doctrine existed in law, which is denied, there is no evidence in the record that could warrant applying this far-reaching new doctrine to Ontario Place," the submission says.
The case has attracted submissions from interveners, including several provinces, First Nations, civil liberties groups and environmental organizations.
The Supreme Court often reserves its decisions until a later date, meaning a ruling in the case might not come until next year.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 15, 2026.
By Jim Bronskill | Copyright 2026, The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.
The first day of advance voting is in the books in Alberta’s separation referendum — and the numbers suggest voter interest remains very high.
Elections Alberta says close to 175,000 voters trekked to the polls on the first day of advance voting on Tuesday, with the official polling day set for Monday.
A spokesperson for the agency says that's higher than the daily average of nearly 152,000 people seen during the advance voting period in the 2023 provincial election.
Michelle Gurney says a few polling stations stayed open late to accommodate the people in line, including one that was open until 11 p.m., three hours after it was supposed to close.
Elections Alberta has said it's expecting record voter turnout for Premier Danielle Smith's 10-question referendum, which includes one on whether the province should hold a second, binding vote on separating from Canada.
The province saw unprecedented interest in mail-in ballot requests last month, and the agency says two-thirds of the roughly 658,000 special ballots requested have now been returned.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 14, 2026.
By Jack Farrell | Copyright 2026, The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.
Eligible parents and caregivers can expect money as a direct deposit or cheque.
Payments of the Canada Child Benefit (CCB) in October will be deposited into bank accounts and delivered to mailboxes soon.
Some Canadians can receive up to $573 or $679 per child from this federal benefit, depending on the child's age.
Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) issues this government payment monthly to eligible parents and caregivers.
Whether you're expecting the first payment this month or receiving another installment of the benefit, here's what you need to know about the CCB in October, including the payment date and amounts.
The CCB is a tax-free monthly payment to help eligible families with the cost of raising children who are under 18 years old.
It can also include amounts for the child disability benefit and related provincial and territorial programs.
You may be eligible for the CCB if you live with and care for a child who is under 18 years of age.
Also, you must be a resident of Canada for tax purposes, and you or your spouse/common-law partner must be a Canadian citizen, permanent resident, protected person, temporary resident, or an individual who is registered or entitled to be registered under the Indian Act.
You can't get the CCB for a foster child in your care who already receives the Children's Special Allowance.
Eligible parents and caregivers aren't automatically enrolled in this program.
You should apply for the CCB as soon as you or your spouse/common-law partner meet the eligibility criteria, and any of the following happens:
You can apply through a birth registration or through your online CRA My Account.
If you're eligible for the CCB, the amount of money you receive is based on how many children you have, the age of the eligible children in your care, and your adjusted family net income.
With the October payment, you can get up to:
CCB payments are issued at the maximum amounts if your 2025 adjusted family net income is less than $38,237.
If your income is more than $38,237 and up to $82,847, the amount is reduced by a percentage of your income greater than $38,237. That percentage changes depending on the number of eligible children in your care.
If your income is over $82,847, the benefit is reduced by a fixed amount and an additional percentage of your income over $82,847. The fixed amount and percentage are based on how many eligible children you have.
In shared custody situations, each parent receives 50% of what they would have received if they had full custody of the child. The payment amount is calculated based on the parent's own adjusted family net income.
The next CCB payment date is Tuesday, October 20, 2026.
CCB payments are issued via direct deposit or cheque, depending on your preferred payment method.
If you have direct deposit set up with the CRA, you'll receive the CCB payment as a direct deposit into your bank account.
If you haven't signed up for direct deposit, you'll get the payment as a cheque delivered to your mailbox.