Welcome to Need to Know, The Hub’s twice-weekly roundup of expert insights into the biggest economic stories, political news, and policy developments readers need to be keeping their eyes on.
Edmonton and Calgary chart different courses in their municipal elections
By Falice Chin, The Hub’s Alberta bureau chief
Alberta’s two big cities appear to be moving in different directions, in some ways becoming more like themselves in the process. This week’s municipal elections didn’t deepen polarization so much as reveal each city’s distinct civic temperament.
In Edmonton, the election of Andrew Knack as mayor—an even-keeled, three-term councillor known for his methodical approach—signals a deepening of the city’s administrative instincts. His win over a more corporate-backed Tim Cartmell, coupled with the apparent re-election of eight of nine incumbents on council, suggests that a city full of public servants is, after all, drawn to order over spectacle.
Calgary, meanwhile, chose a more unpredictable path.
Jeromy Farkas—once the council’s most combative figure—will return to city hall as mayor, newly rebranded as a centrist fix-it type (assuming the results of an expected recount hold). He’s set to lead Calgary’s least experienced council in decades, with 10 rookies and a patchwork of independents and party-affiliated members.
This eclectic mix reflects years of unresolved frustration over blanket rezoning, rising taxes, and stalled infrastructure. The clear rejection of incumbent mayor Jyoti Gondek shows, at least in part, what Calgarians don’t want, which is more process and deference from a policy wonk. Her predecessor, now Alberta NDP leader Naheed Nenshi, wasn’t universally liked, but he at least commanded city administration with authority like a “strong mayor.”
In short, Edmonton is tightening its bureaucracy just as Calgary is trying to loosen its own—without blowing it up entirely.
Neither city fully embraced the province’s experiment with municipal parties, though Edmontonians rejected the idea more decisively. This, too, reflects the city’s familiar distance from the UCP orbit. After all, it was Danielle Smith’s government that introduced the pilot project in the first place.
One caveat is that voter turnout was abysmal. And the sluggish, delay-ridden polling process, with some voters waiting as long as two-and-a-half hours to cast their ballots, did little to help.
How to fix Ontario’s underperforming childcare program
By Peter Jon Mitchell, family program director at Cardus
Ontario needs to change course on child care. The Canada-wide Early Learning and Child Care (CWELCC) program underperforms, treats families unequally, and simply doesn’t meet their diverse care needs. Frankly, the province has other options to better serve families excluded from the federal program.
The CWELCC program is extremely expensive. Although federal funding rises annually, Ontario has carried over most of the federal funding from the early years of the five-year, $10.2 billion agreement into the latter years. In a mid-term evaluation, the province acknowledged that if it continues as-is into 2026-27, the program’s estimated shortfall would hit almost $2 billion.
Perhaps these colossal amounts would be OK if the program worked. But it doesn’t. Ontario is failing to meet its space-creation targets. The provincial auditor general found that Ontario came 25 percent short of its target for new spaces by December 2024. (The problem isn’t unique to Ontario, though, as the federal auditor general has confirmed.) The provincial and federal governments share the blame for this. The federal government insists on favouring only non-profit child care providers. Meanwhile, Ontario agreed to tie one hand behind its back by capping the proportion of child care businesses receiving CWELCC funding at 30 percent of the child care sector.
Edmonton vs. Calgary: Which city's approach to governance is more sustainable long-term?
Ontario's childcare program: Is the federal model inherently flawed for diverse family needs?
Canada-India relations: Can shared interests overcome significant trust deficits?
Comments (0)