Local News
U.S. military expert John Spencer to speak in Winnipeg Sept. 11… argues Israel isn’t committing genocide in Gaza
(Canadian Jewish News Sept. 10, 2024) Maj. (Ret.) John Spencer is an American army veteran who heads the Modern War Institute at the U.S. military’s prestigious West Point Academy in New York State. His books and courses about fighting historic urban and tunnel wars have been widely quoted—he’s even interviewed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—who name-dropped the former combat officer’s research during his speech to Congress in July. The Israel Defence Forces like Spencer’s work so much that they’ve brought the Iraq veteran with them three times inside some of the captured Hamas tunnels under Gaza.
Ahead of two speaking engagements in Canada this week—in Winnipeg on Sept. 11 and Toronto on Sept. 12 —Spencer joined The CJN Daily podcast to share his eyewitness accounts of three research tours with the IDF inside the terrorists’ tunnels. Spencer explains why the Philadelphi corridor and 100 tunnels between Egypt and Gaza are what’s holding up a ceasefire deal that some believe could free the hostages.
Although Spencer wasn’t present 10 days ago when the IDF discovered the bodies of six executed hostages under Rafah, he understands why the entrance to that tunnel was actually hidden in the bedroom of a Palestinian child’s room in Gaza. Despite the latest heinous war crime that has rocked Israel and people around the world, Spencer feels Israel is still winning the war against Hamas.
The CJN: Readers may not have been following your prolific writings about what’s been happening in Israel since Oct. 7, but they may have seen when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu name-dropped you in his speech to Congress. Can you just give our listeners a bit of background on what role, if any, you are playing officially or unofficially advising the Israeli government in this war?
Spencer: Sure. So I’m playing absolutely no official or unofficial role, but my research and my writings have been used significantly to fight the disinformation. I have done multiple visits to Israel and three visits into Gaza with the IDF since Oct. 7, which has informed my writing and research, but no official or unofficial role.
My research has been, including by the prime minister, many, many times, used to fight the disinformation about what the IDF are actually doing in Gaza to pursue the political objectives provided by the government for the war against Hamas.
The CJN: We’re interviewing you just a few days after the bodies of the six Israeli executed hostages were discovered in a 20-metre deep tunnel under Rafah. What can you tell us about this particular tunnel, and what is significant about it?
Spencer: There’s a lot of unknowns about it, but we know that it was in conjunction to the IDF recent discovery of a living hostage. Nobody knew that in those targeted operations, because intelligence drives operations. Israel was conducting this operation in the Rafah area, successfully retrieving the live hostage in a tunnel, but without knowing nearby Hamas saw and heard the IDF and then entered another tunnel without the IDF’s knowledge, basically in very close proximity. And because of that IDF operation, I believe that Hamas entered their deep tunnel that they were holding the hostages for all their reasons that are illegal and not in accordance with the law of war, and brutally murdered each one of those six hostages. Then we saw the release of the videos that were very recently filmed.
We don’t know if that was filmed in the tunnel, but we do know where the bodies were found was in this 20-metre deep tunnel in Rafah, which does pain a lot of people because of the different delays in the Rafah operation to basically search and clear the areas in which now where this all occurred, where they were later discovered through the IDF operation and brought home, finally to their families.
The CJN: You’ve been in the tunnels. Tell us what you saw. Where did you go?
Spencer: My first visit (was) in December. I actually was taken to the massive tunnel that was discovered outside of the Erez humanitarian zone. So this is a two-and-a-half mile tunnel that went a hundred feet underground. It was a massive invasion tunnel that you could drive trucks through, that had advanced wiring, ventilation, power, telecommunications. It was a multimillion-dollar tunnel that went right up to the Israeli-Gaza wall. It wasn’t used on Oct. 7, but the discovery is just massive. And then it went all the way back into the Gaza urban areas and had many branches. For me as somebody who studies underground warfare, just the sophistication of this and the realization that this is just one of hundreds of massive tunnels that they have found. And the realization of this underground world that Hamas built.
I got to tour this one, but it was also a realization of the 400-plus miles of tunnels in Gaza, costing billions of dollars, unmeasurable amounts of concrete and steel to build this infrastructure underground for the sole purpose of terror. No civilians are allowed in this.
When I went back in February, I went with the IDF, the 98th division, into Khan Younis.
It was really going through all they’re doing to protect civilians, which I’m sure we’ll talk about, but also just how hard it is to find the tunnels. One of the places I went with the division commander was where they had had intelligence that there was a tunnel, but you just couldn’t see it while standing on the surface. And actually they were doing their procedures to drill and look for the tunnel that was really connecting to a mosque and was coming out of a mosque.
And they found that tunnel. I was basically standing on top of an enemy tunnel that was deep underground. When I went back in July 2024, I went into the Netzarim corridor with the IDF. This area where they’re creating a corridor, not just a road, from Israel all the way to the Mediterranean through Gaza, to create this security zone.
I had this realization and saw on the maps how many tunnels were just in the corridor. You can’t take a step in Gaza without actually feeling and having some belief that there’s a tunnel underneath you.
Now, I also learned through these different visits from December, February, and July that there are different types of tunnels in Gaza. As you were wrestling with, well, how many tunnels, how many tunnels has the IDF destroyed, is that there are levels of tunnels: from strategic ones, like that one I was in December that is for large movements or there are ones that actually connect northern Gaza to southern Gaza, which most people didn’t know. They’re in the Netzarim corridor. This is in the area of the Wadi Gaza, which is this river basin that splits northern Gaza and southern Gaza. It used to be a river, but it isn’t anymore. They’ve discovered over a mile-long, two-mile-long tunnels that go underneath that river basin. So something they just didn’t think was possible. So you can basically enter northern Gaza, the very tip of Gaza and come out in Rafah basically in a tunnel.
And those are strategic tunnels. But there are also little tactical tunnels that go from one building to another.
There are tunnels that are used for command and control, like in Khan Younis they found luxury tunnels for the leadership of Hamas, with air conditioners and ceilings and, you know, kitchens and barracks. The IDF is then making a decision on which ones are critical to military capabilities that have to be destroyed. Can you ever really destroy all these? That’s some of what I’ve learned.
The CJN: What are the challenges for the IDF in this kind of warfare that we wouldn’t know about from, let’s say,the equipment that doesn’t work, that would work above ground?
Spencer: So this is getting into the classes I teach in our urban warfare operations course. Underground, people think it’s just the extension of the surface. You have something like a building or something, you have an underground.
The CJN: Yeah, well we’re used to subway tunnels where the Wi-Fi works, right?
Spencer: Yes. When you enter the underground, it’s more like going underwater. You can’t breathe without assistance underground and all the contaminants that are underground. It’s very dangerous to just breathe. You can’t see. For military personnel, none of your night vision goggles work, because usually night vision relies on ambient light. And this is a “no light” area.
You can’t communicate because most communication equipment relies on line-of-sight or satellites. So you can’t communicate underground. You can’t navigate. GPS, all of that doesn’t work. You can’t even shoot your weapons because of the concussion of your weapon. So you have to have all specialized equipment designed only for the underground.
Now, unique to Israel, and this is why I’ve been studying Israel for years, is they developed a special unit, the Yahalom, it’s their basic version of a tunnel rats, an entire brigade of special forces engineers who try to develop the equipment, all the drones and robots and dogs and everything that can operate underground, but also the equipment for the soldiers, the tactics. They have the biggest world force that has been dedicated to being able to operate underground and they have been used heavily in Gaza. I also came to the quick realization that yes, you have this specialized unit, soldiers, equipment, everything, but it’s nowhere near the amount that you will need for the size of the tunnels in Gaza.
The CJN: Okay. And you were mentioning the fact that the IDF is being pilloried for not being humanitarian enough in its military operations and you’ve studied war in tunnels as well in other countries and you’ve been deployed yourself. Why do you feel that the world is not giving Israel a fair shake in terms of how it’s doing this war against civilians?
Spencer: Well, at the macro level, it seems for Israel, Gaza is where the truth dies. The accusation that Israel has been disproportionate, indiscriminate, excessive, or starving the population. While none of those are true, there’s actually a counterfactual huge body of evidence, actually real and physical. Like the “starvation”. I went to the Netzarim corridor, saw where the (U.S. humanitarian) pier used to be, and there were just mountains, a whole field of humanitarian aid that just hadn’t been picked up. But from the actual execution of war, like you said, for the IDF, there’s no comparison. So the IDF was being compared to other operations where just this tunnel challenge of being able to find and operate with an entire world underneath the urban areas.
Hamas built this world underneath their civilians for the sole purpose of using everything on the surface to cause [criticism from] the international community. the destruction, the civilian casualties, everything, but all these lies about being disproportionate, proportionality–nobody’s faced this challenge in modern history. No military has.
And then the other thing, which is what the prime minister and other Israeli officials or government use, which is backed up by data, is that in this execution of this war against Hamas, a defender who’s had 15 years to prepare for the attack of the IDF, Israel has done more and has implemented more civilian harm-mitigation measures than any military in the history of war, to include the U. S., Canada, the coalitions, to prevent civilian casualties and destruction. Like evacuating cities, like dropping [leaflets], the use of daily pauses, the use of certain munitions. There’s a long list that I go through. There’s actually over 10 civilian harm-mitigation measures that Israel has implemented, some that have never been created before in the history of war, like tracking civilian populations with their cell phones on or off and then restricting them. This is what I saw in Khan Younis, restricting the IDF operations because of that overriding aspect of preventing civilian harm, trying to get the civilians out of harm’s way, even though Egypt, which owns a lot of the destruction, the civilian casualties, and [took in] not a single refugee. So even that aspect of fighting a war against a military who’s trying to get their civilians killed without a complete area to move civilians to, into the Sinai, which would be really realistic. So the idea of how to find a way to create a safer zone within Gaza while still moving against Hamas.
The CJN: I know that a lot of people have criticized your view saying, ‘Well, it’s hard for them to be humanitarian when they’re trapped, or their cell phones aren’t working’. But we don’t have to talk about that now, I just wanted to raise the point that some people wouldn’t agree.
I want to talk about what the challenges are for Hamas in these tunnels. You said Israel can’t see, some of their stuff doesn’t work. But in terms of Hamas and the soldiers that are living down there, I read somewhere recently that there’s sort of an operations manual that was recently discovered that they have to switch them out, because they can’t be in the dark. It’s bad for their mental health. What do you know about the psychological and physical challenges for Hamas [and the hostages and the IDF] to stay down there?
Spencer: Well, so it’s being sensory deprived basically. So when you enter a tunnel, you’re being sensory deprived. And matter of fact, not all soldiers can operate underground. You get things like vertigo, you get claustrophobia. Just for the breathing, you start to get breathing problems, right? Because even if you have ventilation, which many of these [tunnels] do, there’s still immense amounts of contaminants, from going to the bathroom down there. It’s foreign to the human body. So all of those start to come into place. You can’t spend your life underground without ever coming to the surface. They rotate them because of that psychological impact of being sensory deprived, the contaminants in the air, all really human functions that you’re dealing with down there. You can lose a sense of time.
We kind of know that you kind of need vitamin D every once in a while, so you need the sunlight. So there’s a whole bunch of reasons why it’s really bad. For me, it reckons the understanding that the hostages have been held, many of them—although some of them have been held in civilian apartments and doctors’ apartments and things like that—are being held in this place that’s really unhealthy, inhumane, and unsanitary for humans to live in.
For Hamas, which I don’t really care about, yeah, it’s bad for them to stay underground for a long time. And if they’re rotated, it may help with that.
The CJN: In terms of where (Hamas leader) Yahya Sinwar is, does anyone know if there is any evidence that he’s still in a tunnel somewhere?
Spencer: I consult open source intelligence, I do only unclassified. There is, I guess, direct evidence. I think from all rational, reasonable analysis that is the belief that he’s there and what he would lose if he left just from a war objective stance. Just for the fact that Israel was able to take out Mohammed Deif, who is considered like the ghost of Hamas, the original founder of Hamas’s military. I think it’s highly likely that Israel, to include all of the intelligence organizations, have a really good idea of where he’s at in Gaza, but that he has surrounded himself with hostages and that he’s likely surrounded himself with tens of thousands of Palestinians in the areas in which Israel has had to create the safer zones that Hamas has since day one used for their advantages to include firing rockets from within. Mohammed Deif was within a stone’s throw of the humanitarian zone.
So yes, I believe that Israel has a really good idea of the general area. Although it’s a small area, right? Gaza, the Gaza Strip, is 25 miles long, seven to five miles wide in its longest area. It’s still two million people for one person to hide. There’s rumours of him dressing up like a woman, things like that, to hide and move within the tunnels.
There’s one video of him and his family, which is interesting because it’s the only civilians ever allowed in the tunnels, moving through the tunnels of Khan Younis back in the beginning of the war. I think he’s there. I think he is mostly underground for most of the time, like a rat, but that he’s also within this area of hundreds of thousands of civilians. It would be really hard to know exactly where he’s at.
The CJN: Your position is Israel actually winning this war? Because you’ve said yes and, and I’d like to explore that a bit.
Spencer: I wrote a Foreign Affairs article countering actually four major articles that have been published on ‘Israel isn’t winning. Israel is actually creating more terrorists than it’s killing’. All of these wrong frameworks.
Israel absolutely is winning its war against Hamas in Gaza, because I taught strategy at West Point. Wars have a start, they have an end. They have political goals, which can change, although Israel hasn’t changed its three primary goals for the war against Hamas. Those are: number one, return the hostages. Number two, destroy Hamas, its political and military power in the Gaza Strip. And number three, secure the borders.
There’s different wording for them, but those are the three goals. And Israel is absolutely [winning] all three of those. Especially with the hostages. They brought home over half the hostages to include over a hundred living hostages. But there is the myth that Israel could have brought them home a different way. It could have been negotiated in the beginning.
It could have done it without military force. It’s just not reality.
And I go through that in this Foreign Affairs article, that it’s been a combination of diplomatic, military, and other forms of national power that have brought over half the hostages home.
The CJN: So is Israel’s border with Gaza safer now? We’re not even talking about Hezbollah because that’s a whole other thing, and same with the West Bank, we don’t have time. How is Israel’s border safer today than on Oct. 7?
Spencer: Yeah, absolutely. The whole security framework that was before Oct. 7th will not ever happen again. The reliance on only technologies, minimal forces, the wall, everything. So Israel is building a buffer zone of up to a kilometer from where the wall was. It’s created more corridors through Gaza, which will allow it to project power. It’s secured, which is vital, the southern border between Gaza and Egypt and eliminated the super highway that we now know was there for underground smuggling of weapons, men, weapons, equipment, financing, everything. It sealed that. So just from an overall sense of securing southern Israel from Gaza and the threats of Gaza, it’s massive engineering projects, both creating the buffer zone all the way around, eliminating all the tunnels that were there, creating the Netzarim corridor. There’s new entry points into Gaza that will allow for this new security framework to be in place.
The CJN: You mentioned the Netzarim corridor, so let’s talk about it before we end. Our listeners may have started to hear the words Philadelphi corridor as part of the reason for the holdup [in any ceasefire deal] and the latest huge controversy out of Israel this past week between the government. You mentioned where it is. It’s the border between Gaza and Egypt, which Israel withdrew from in its agreement to disengage from Gaza years ago. And then they’ve reoccupied it because Egypt was allowing, as you said, all this smuggling to go through. And that’s been a big flashpoint.
Why is that so important now in what happens next?
Spencer: In order to destroy Hamas, which is not the idea of Hamas, but the military power and the political power of Hamas, what Israel has done along this border between Gaza and Egypt, which is only like an eight-to-10-mile stretch of land, but they have moved in, secured it and cut off the bloodline to Hamas, which is in wars actually unique because even in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, that ability for the enemy to be resupplied, to have sanctuary, to get new stuff in, the U.S. military really struggled with it. But Israel has been able to actually cut off Hamas now because of the Philadelphi corridor, from all of that resupply of rockets, everything, even financing. Now the contention is how long does Israel need to hold that piece of ground? Does it always need to have forces there, physically there, securing it? I personally believe not so.
The Israel-Gaza wall, the border wall between Israel and Gaza actually worked. It has a very deep subterranean aspect to it with a bunch of advanced sensors. Egypt was talking about that before it was actually discovered that there’s over a hundred massive tunnels going between Egypt and Gaza to include ones you can drive giant trucks through. Egypt was talking about putting up that wall. Eventually, I think there will be a new, basically an Israeli-style wall there that will prevent that subterranean traffic because on the surface, you can use advanced technologies, although you don’t rely only on that. Egypt did send a division of armour, basically an armoured brigade to the border, early in the war, and put up a new wall because they also didn’t want anybody coming across their border.
Why is this such a big issue for Hamas? Why is Hamas saying ‘You will not get any hostages back unless you leave the Philadelphi corridor’? Because it’s their vital aspect of surviving. All they have to do to win this war is survive.
They have ideas on how to do that. They’re grasping for this corridor. This highway for them is very vital to their survival and to be able to bring more weapons in, to be able to get out, all these things. But they also have ideas to give up political power. I call this the Hezbollah model. Hamas has put forward a plan to bring in some technocrats to govern Gaza, but they maintain military power. Sounds a lot like Hezbollah in Lebanon, although Hezbollah is also part of the government. So they’re grasping at trying to survive the war and basically win. And Israel has said that’s not going to happen. We’re going to demilitarize the strip. We’re going to actually start de-radicalization programs. We’re going to secure the entire border around so that Hamas can’t survive.
The CJN: How long is this going to take and can Israel actually win or this is going to happen again?
Spencer: So I got this [question] actually in October. How long will this take? How long will it take to clear the urban areas of Hamas’s military capabilities, tunnels, infrastructure? I mean, they found deep buried weapons manufacturing plants and just nobody knew that they were there, that it was possible to do that.
I always say, it isn’t how much time it will take, but how much time do they have?
Even General Dwight Eisenhower, after World War II said it would take 50 years to re-educate the Nazis. And if you ever thought we were going to give them the ability to wage war again, you were crazy. How long will it take to demilitarize the Gaza Strip? A very long time.
How long will it take to de-radicalize Hamas? But there is a path, right? It is up to Israel.
Israel is winning, but it’s up to Israel as a democratic country. It’s up to Israel if it ultimately wins, because what is very common in war, is you have to bring in another power. You can demilitarize and you can degrade Hamas to where it’s this guerrilla force, which Israel is very close to doing. Hamas doesn’t have military capability. It’s a guerrilla force hiding in the shadows, governing from the shadows, using humanitarian aid as coercive power over the people. But Israel has to basically help put in a new power. That will be the ultimate win, is that Hamas never rules again.
You have to put in another power. There are many ways to do that. You have to start post-conflict operations like de-radicalization programs, reconstruction, and new governance, institutions, all this stuff, which is very common in war, but it will take a very, very long time. And Israel has to, for their survival, the Israeli people especially have to understand that basically.
The CJN: Canada stopped arms permits to Israel back in January. Does that even make a difference to Israel? Are they being hurt by this?
Spencer: I’m sure it absolutely is a problem. It might not be what Canada is providing, it’s the international context that sends a signal to other allies. Israel’s strength is its allies in all wars. So when one ally of Israel says, ‘Because of this, because of these lies, this misinformation, we’re not going to support you with this small item’, which might not have an immediate impact, but globally, you know, in the international context, in the multi-international allies that is Israel’s strength, including in the region Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, it matters. So it’s a horrible signal to send to the world and to send to Israel.
The CJN: And then Britain just did it too.
Spencer: Yeah, Britain did it too. It’s very bad because it’s baseless. It’s based on disinformation. It’s based on things like 40,000 Palestinians killed in Gaza, which is not true. It’s a lie. Where does the number come from? What does it mean? Because now there’s this effect-based ideology, kind of like we see with Canada, Britain, and others, they’re using the data on how many people have died. Look how much destruction. There was another way.
The huge myth of this war is that there was another way to bring the hostages home, remove Hamas from power so it can’t do another Oct. 7. Because since Oct. 7, Hamas has publicly said that’s their goal. They will do this as many times as it takes to achieve our goal. The idea that there was another way. And it’s actually a fallacy.
Local News
Winnipegger liver recipient Mark Kagan now in need of new kidney
By MYRON LOVE About a year ago, Winnipegger Mark Kagan reached out to the Jewish community through the pages of the Jewish Post (and jewishpostandnews.ca) in his efforts to find a liver donor. At the time, his liver and his health were rapidly failing and he was quickly running out of time.
Back then, the former Best Western Hotels manager – who is in his mid-60s – reported that there is no cure for his condition (a non-alcohol related rare liver disease called Nodular Regenerative Hyperplasia).
“My only hope for survival is a liver transplant,” he said.
The good news is that he was able to get a liver transplant this past April in Toronto and his recovery went well. Within a short time, he was able to eat normally and resume exercising. He spent three weeks post-op in the hospital in Toronto and another two weeks at the Health Sciences Centre before being cleared to go home again.
The bad news was that once his liver failed, in turn, it caused his kidneys to fail. “My doctors originally hoped that my kidney function would return on its own once the liver was transplanted,” he notes.
That didn’t happen. Now Kagan has to have dialysis three times a week while trying to find a kidney donor.
On Tuesday, December 9, Kagan’s quest for a kidney donor will be the focus of a program at the Rady JCC hosted by Renewal Canada, a Toronto based organization that works within the Jewish community to find kidney donors and facilitate transplants. The event – that begins at 7:30 pm – is described as a Kidney Donation Awareness and Swab Drive with the hope that a donor can be found for Kagan. Speakers will include Rabbis Carnie and Kliel Rose – both discussing the mitzvah of organ donation, Penny Kravetsky representing Renewal Canada, and past donor Esther Dick, as well as Kagan.
Kagan adds a special thank you to Rebbitzen Bracha Altein for her role in directing his mother to Renewal Canada.
Comments that Kagan made last year in the Post article still ring true:
“Your support means everything to me and my family,” Kagan said. “Even if you cannot donate, sharing my story could connect me with someone who can. Thank you for taking the time to read and consider helping in this crucial time.”
Interested readers can register by going online at https://www.renewalcanada.org/
Local News
Manitoba trained Jewish physician now living in US laments state of medical care in Canada
By BERNIE BELLAN (Nov. 27, 2025) Introduction: We received a comment this morning from a former Winnipegger who had something to say about the state of medical care in Manitoba. Once you read her message you will be able to read an exchange of emails into which we entered that give more information about her:
I’m a physician who graduated from the University of Manitoba medical school (class of 1999). After training, I moved to Arizona to practice as a gastroenterologist. During my training in Winnipeg, I was always told how bad the American health care system was. I am here to tell you that this is incorrect. The poorest American who can’t afford health insurance and qualifies for state funded insurance has better health care than ALL of you.
I work in private practice. Yes, I’m busy. Yes, it takes many weeks to see me. However , if a family physician calls me and asks me to see a patient urgently, I will. If a patient needs a procedure urgently, I will get it done. If a patient needs to speak to me after my office hours or on weekends and holidays, I call them back. I am not the exception to the rule. I am practicing standard of care.
My niece has been in an out of the children’s emergency room (in Winnipeg) for several weeks because of kidney stones. She has been told numerous times by numerous physicians that her case is not “urgent”. Apparently, you can only get care if you become “urgent”. Urgent means that you are really sick and have developed complications. So, my niece has to end up in the ICU with sepsis (infection) and in renal failure for her to have the procedure she needs? What she was given was a prescription for morphine. Great, getting a teenager hooked on opiods as a way to treat kidney stones , that’s the answer? Her urologist told her mother (my sister) that the system is broken. Finally, an honest answer but in no way a solution.
The American health care system is not perfect but it’s significantly better than what you have. I’m appreciative of my excellent training I received in Winnipeg however, I could never work in your broken system as now I know better.
Good luck to you all.
Dr. Elisa Faybush
In response to Dr. Faybush’s comment, we sent her the following email:
Hi Dr. Faybush,
I read your message about the state of health care in Manitoba with great interest.
I wear 2 hats: I’m both an editor at the Jewish Post newspaper, also the publisher of a website called jewishpostandnews.ca
I would consider printing your message, but I’m curious: Is there a particular reason that you sent it to a Jewish publication?
For instance, are you Jewish yourself? It might put things into some sort of context which would explain why the letter was sent to us – or perhaps you sent the same message to other publications.
It would be helpful if you could elaborate on why you sent your message to us.
Regards,
Bernie Bellan
Dr. Faybush responded:
Hi Bernie
Yes I’m Jewish. Raised in garden city. My grand parents were Ann and Nathan Koslovsky
I sent the letter to the Winnipeg free press and was contacted for an interview but they wanted to interview my sister as well. Unfortunately my sister didn’t want to be interviewed.
I read your publication on line regularly to keep up with the Jewish community in Winnipeg.
My family still lives in Winnipeg and I was home this past summer for my niece’s graduation
I will always consider Winnipeg my home.
I’m so frustrated with the Canadian health care system and wanted the people from Winnipeg to know they deserve better.
Elisa Faybush
We wrote back:
Thanks for the speedy reply Elisa. I’ll add something to the end of your message about your roots.
And, for what it’s worth, I agree totally with you about the state of health care in Canada. It’s a sacred cow but this cow should be put out to pasture.
She responded:
100% agree
Feel free to call if you would like
(number redacted)
We wrote:
Well, if you’d like me to do a profile of you – which we do quite often of doctors who left Manitoba, usually written by Gerry Posner, I’d be glad to do that.
But it would be a full-on profile, not just a lament for the Canadian health care system. By the way, I searched your name in the History of Jewish Physicians in Manitoba, which was authored by Eva Wiseman a few years ago. I didn’t see your name in there, but one of the criteria for inclusion in that book was someone must have practised in Manitoba for at least 5 years after graduating. I assume you left before 5 years had elapsed. Is that right?
Elisa responded:
You are correct. I left after residency to complete my fellowship in gastroenterology in Arizona and never left.
I went to garden city collegiate graduated in 1991 and then went on to complete my bachelor of science at the u of w.
I’m not looking for a profile but thank you for the offer. I just need to express my opinion and I appreciate you giving me an outlet to do so.
We wrote:
When did you graduate from medical school?
Elisa responded:
1999
We wrote:
And did you go to Arizona immediately upon graduating?
Elisa responded:
After graduating u of m medical school in 1999 I completed my internal medicine residency at the u of m from 1999-2002. I then left to go to the university of Arizona in Tucson for my gi fellowship from 2002-2005. I then moved to Phoenix and started private practice. I just completed 20 yrs in practice this year.
We wrote:
ok great – I think it’s important to provide a fuller description of your career to lend some further significance to your original comment. By the way, you must have studied under Chuch Bernstein – right?
She responded:
Yes. He is the reason I did my fellowship in the USA. He encouraged me to do so. He probably thought I would come back to work in Winnipeg like he did!
We wrote:
He’s a great guy. I bet I know a lot of your schoolmates from med school. It’s too bad the Canadian medical system has alienated so many talented people. I still have lots of friends who were doctors and who still live here, but they’re all so embittered about our system.
Elisa responded:
I never practiced in Winnipeg but I hear about the problems with it as family members have to navigate through this broken system.
If I lived and practiced in Winnipeg I would know the doctors and specialists that I could call to help my family members but I’ve been gone for so long I don’t have any relationships with anyone anymore:
Local News
Simkin Centre shows accumulated deficit of $779,426 for year end March 31, 2025 – but most personal care homes in Winnipeg are struggling to fund daily operations
By BERNIE BELLAN The last (November 20) issue of the Jewish Post had as an insert a regular publication of the Simkin Centre called the “Simkin Star.”
Looking through the 16 pages of the Simkin Star I noticed that three full pages were devoted to financial information about the Simkin Centre, including the financial statement for the most recent fiscal year (which ended March 31, 2025). I was rather shocked to see that Simkin had posted a deficit of $406,974 in 2025, and this was on top of a deficit of $316,964 in 2024.
In the past month, I had also been looking at financial statements for the Simkin Centre going back to 2019. I had seen that Simkin had been running surpluses for four straight years – even through Covid.
But seeing the most recent deficit led me to wonder: Is the Simkin Centre’s situation unusual in its having run quite large deficits the past two years? I know that, in speaking with Laurie Cerqueti, CEO of the Simkin Centre, over the years, that she had often complained that not only Simkin, but many other personal care homes do not receive sufficient funding from the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority.
At the same time, an article I had read by Free Press Faith writer John Longhurst, and which was published in the August 5, 2025 issue of the Free Press had been sticking in my brain because what Longhurst wrote about the lack of funding increases by the WRHA for food costs in personal care homes deeply troubled me.
Titled “Driven by faith, frustrated by funding,” Longhurst looked at how three different faith-based personal care homes in Winnipeg have dealt with the ever increasing cost of food.
One sentence in that article really caught my attention, however, when Longhurst wrote that the “provincial government, through the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, has not increased the amount of funding it provides for care-home residents in Manitoba since 2009.”
Really? I wondered. Is that true?
As a result, I began a quest to try and ascertain whether what Longhurst claimed was the case was actually the case.
For the purpose of this article, personal care homes will be referred to as PCHs.
During the course of my gathering material for this article I contacted a number of different individuals, including: Laurie Cerqueti, CEO of the Simkin Centre; the CEO of another personal care home who wished to remain anonymous; Gladys Hrabi, who wears many hats, among them CEO of Manitoba Association for Residential and Community Care Homes for Everyone ( MARCHE), the umbrella organization for 24 not-for-profit personal care homes in Manitoba; and a representative of the WRHA.
I also looked at financial statements for six different not-for-profit PCHs in Winnipeg. (Financial statements for some, but not all PCHs, are available to look at on the Province of Manitoba website. Some of those financial statements are for 2025 while others are for 2024. Still, looking at them together provides a good idea how comparable revenue and expenses are for different PCHs.)
How personal care homes are funded
In order to gain a better understanding of how personal care homes are funded it should be understood that the WRHA maintains supervision of 39 different personal care homes in Winnipeg, some of which are privately run but most of which are not-for-profit. The WRHA provides funding for all personal care homes at a rate of approximately 75% of all operational funding needs and there have been regular increases in funding over the years for certain aspects of operations (including wages, benefits, and maintenance of the homes) but, as shall be explained later, increases in funding for food have not been included in those increases.
The balance of funding for PCHs comes from residential fees (which are set by the provincial government and which are tied to income); occasional funding from the provincial government to “improve services, technology, and staffing within personal care homes,”; and funds that some PCHs are able to raise on their own through various means (such as the Simkin Centre Foundation).
But, in Longhurst’s article about personal care homes he noted that there are huge disparities in the levels of service provided among different homes.
He wrote: “Some of Winnipeg’s 37 personal-care homes provide food that is mass-produced in an off-site commercial kitchen, frozen and then reheated and served to residents.” (I should note that different sources use different figures for the number of PCHs in Winnipeg. Longhurst’s article uses the figure “37,” while the WRHA’s website says the number is “39.” My guess is that the difference is a result of three different homes operated together by the same organization under the name “Actionmarguerite.”)
How does the WRHA determine how much to fund each home?
So, if different homes provide quite different levels of service, how does the WRHA determine how much to fund each home?
For an answer, I turned to Gladys Hrabi of MARCHE, who gave me a fairly complicated explanation. According to Gladys, the “WRHA uses what’s called a global/median rate funding model. This means all PCHs—regardless of size, ownership, or actual costs—are funded at roughly the same daily rate per resident. For 2023/24, that rate (including the resident charge) was about $200+ (sorry I need to check with WRHA the actual rate) per resident day.”
But, if different residents pay different resident charges, wouldn’t that mean that if a home had a much larger number of residents who were paying the maximum residential rate (which is currently set at $37,000 per year) then that home would have much greater revenue? I wondered.
Laurie Cerqueti of the Simkin Centre provided me with an answer to that question. She wrote: “Residents at any pch pay a per diem based on income and then the government tops up to the set amount.” Thus, for the year ending March 31, 2025 residential fees brought in $5,150,657 for the Simkin Centre. That works out to approximately $27,000 per resident. I checked the financial statements for the five other PCHs in Winnipeg to which I referred earlier, and the revenue from residential fees was approximately the same per resident as what the Simkin Centre receives.
Despite large increases in funding by the WRHA for personal care homes in recent years, those increases have not gone toward food
I was still troubled by John Longhurst’s having written in his article that the “provincial government, through the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, has not increased the amount of funding it provides for care-home residents in Manitoba since 2009.”
These days, when you perform a search on the internet, AI provides much more detailed answers to questions than what the old Google searches would.
Thus, when I asked the question: “How much funding does the WRHA provide for personal care homes in Winnipeg?” the answer was quite detailed – and specific:
“The WRHA’S total long-term care expenses for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2024 were approximately $632.05 million.” There are approximately 5,700 residents in personal care homes in Winnipeg. That figure of $632.05 million translates roughly into $111,000 per resident.
“The budget for the 2024-2025 fiscal year included a $224.3 million overall increase to the WRHA for salaries, benefits, and other expenditures, reflecting a general increase in health-care investments.” (But, note that there is no mention of an increase for food expenditures.)
But, it was as a result of an email exchange that I had with Simkin CEO Laurie Cerqueti that I understood where Longhurst’s claim that there has been no increase in funding for care-home residents since 2009 came from.
Laurie wrote: “…most, if not all of the pchs are running a deficit in the area of food due to the increases in food prices and the government/wrha not giving operational funding increases for over 15 years.” Thus, whatever increases the WRHA has been giving have been eaten up almost entirely by salary increases and some additional hiring that PCHs have been allowed to make.
Longhurst’s article focused entirely on food operations at PCHs – and how much inflation has made it so much more difficult for PCHs to continue to provide nutritious meals. He should have noted, however, that when he wrote there has been “no increase in funding for care home residents since 2009,” he was referring specifically to the area of food.
As Laurie Cerqueti noted in the same email where she observed that there has been no increase in operational funding, “approximately $300,000 of our deficit was due to food services. I do not have a specific number as far as how much of the deficit is a result of kosher food…So really this is not a kosher food issue as much is it is an inflation and funding issue.
“Our funding from the WRHA is not specific for food so I do not know how much extra they give us for kosher food. I believe years ago there was some extra funding added but it is mixed in our funding envelope and not separated out.”
So, while the WRHA has certainly increased funding for PCHs in Winnipeg, the rate of funding increases has not kept pace with the huge increases in the cost of food, especially between 2023-2024.
As Laurie Cerqueti noted, in response to an email in which I asked her how the Simkin Centre is coping with an accumulated deficit of $779,426, she wrote, in part: “The problem is that the government does not fund any of us in a way that has kept up with inflation or other cost of living increases. If this was a private industry, no one would do business with the government to lose money. I know some pchs are considering out (sic.) of the business.”
A comparison of six different personal care homes
But, when I took a careful look at the financial statements for each of the personal care homes whose financial statements I was able to download from the Province of Manitoba website, I was somewhat surprised to see the huge disparities in funding that the WRHA has allocated to different PCHs. (How I decided which PCHs to look at was simply based on whether or not I was able to download a particular PCH’s financial statement. In most cases no financial statements were available even to look at. I wonder why that is? They’re all publicly funded and all of them should be following the same requirements – wouldn’t you think?)
In addition to the Simkin Centre’s financial statement (which, as I explained, was in the Simkin Star), I was able to look at financial statements for the following personal care homes: West Park Manor, Golden West Centennial Lodge, Southeast Personal Care Home, Golden Links Lodge, and Bethania Mennonite Personal Care Home.
What I found were quite large disparities in funding levels by the WRHA among the six homes, either in 2025 (for homes that had recent financial statements available to look at) or 2024 (for homes which did not have recent financial statements to look at.)
Here is a table showing the levels of funding for six different personal care homes in Winnipeg. Although information was not available for all homes for the 2025 fiscal year, the figures here certainly show that, while the WRHA has been increasing funding for all homes – and in some cases by quite a bit, the rate of increases from one home to another has varied considerably. Further, the Simkin Centre received the lowest percentage increase from 2024 to 2025.
Comparison of funding by the WRHA for 6 different personal care homes
We did not enter into this project with any preconceived notions in mind. We simply wanted to investigate how much funding there has been from the WRHA for personal care homes in Winnipeg in recent years.
As to why some PCHs received quite large increases in funding, while others received much smaller increases – the WRHA response to my asking that question was this: “Due to the nature and complexity of the questions you are asking regarding financial information about PCHs, please collate all of your specific questions into a FIPPA and we can assess the amount of time needed to appropriately respond.”
Gladys Hrabi of MARCHE, however, offered this explanation for the relatively large disparities in funding levels among different PCHs: “Because funding is based on the median, not actual costs, each PCH must manage within the same per diem rate even though their realities differ. Factors like building age, staffing structure, kitchen setup, and resident complexity all influence spending patterns.
“The difference you found (in spending between two particular homes that I cited in an email to Gladys) likely reflects these operational differences. Homes that prepare food on-site, accommodate specialized diets (cultural i.e. kosher), or prioritize enhanced dining experiences (more than 2 choices) naturally incur higher total costs. Others may use centralized food services or have less flexibility because of budget constraints.
“The current model doesn’t adjust for inflation, collective agreements, or true cost increases. This means many homes, especially MARCHE members face operating deficits and have to make tough choices about where to contain costs, often affecting areas like food, recreation, or maintenance. The large differences you see in food spending aren’t about efficiency —–they’re a sign that the current funding model doesn’t reflect the true costs of care.”
But some of the disparities in funding of different personal care homes really jump off the page. I noted, for instance, that of the six PCHs whose financial statements I examined, the levels of funding from WRHA for the 2024 fiscal year fell between a range of $63,341 per resident (at Golden Links Lodge) to $78,771 at the Simkin Centre – but there was one particular outlier: Southeast Personal Care Home, which received funding from the WRHA in 2024 at the rate of $98,321 per resident. Not only did Southeast Personal Care Home receive a great deal more funding per resident than the other five PCHs I looked at, it had a hefty surplus to boot.
I asked a spokesperson from the WRHA to explain how one PCH could have received so much more funding per capita than other PCHs, but have not received a response.
This brings me then to the issue of the Simkin Centre and the quite large deficit situation it’s in. Since readers might have a greater interest in the situation as it exists at the Simkin Centre as opposed to other personal care homes and, as the Simkin Centre has reported quite large deficits for both 2024 and 2025, as I noted previously, I asked Laurie Cerqueti how Simkin will be dealing with its accumulated deficit (which now stands at $779,426) going forward?
Now, as many readers may also know, I’ve been harping on the extra high costs incurred by Simkin as a result of its having to remain a kosher facility. It’s not my intention to open old wounds, but I was somewhat astonished to see how much larger the Simkin Centre’s deficit is than any other PCH for which I could find financial information.
From time to time I’ve asked Laurie how many of Simkin’s 200 residents are Jewish?
On November 10, she responded that “55% of residents” at Simkin are Jewish. That figure is consistent with past numbers that Laurie has cited over the years.
And, while Laurie claims that she does not know exactly how much more the Simkin Centre pays for kosher food, the increases in costs for kosher beef and chicken have outstripped the increases in costs for nonkosher beef and chicken. Here is what we found when we looked at the differences in prices between kosher and nonkosher beef and chicken: “Based on recent data and long-standing market factors, kosher beef and chicken prices have generally gone up more than non-kosher (conventional beef and chicken). Both types of meat have experienced significant inflation due to broader economic pressures and supply chain issues, but the kosher market has additional, unique cost drivers that amplify these increases.”
In the final analysis, while the WRHA has been providing fairly large increases in funding to personal care homes in Winnipeg, those increases have been eaten up by higher payroll costs and the costs of simply maintaining what is very often aging infrastructure. If the WRHA does not provide any increases for food costs, personal care homes will continue to be squeezed financially. They can either reduce the quality of food they offer residents or find other areas, such as programming, where they might be able to make cuts.
But, the situation at the Simkin Centre, which is running a much larger accumulated deficit than any other personal care home for which we could find financial information, places it in a very difficult position. How the Simkin Centre will deal with that deficit is a huge challenge. The only body that can provide help in a major way, not only for the Simkin Centre, but for all personal care homes within Manitoba, is the provincial government. Perhaps if you’re reading this you might want to contact your local MLA and voice your concerns about the lack of increased funding for food at PCHs.