Local News
Ben Carr answers questions at Gwen Secter Centre about his candidacy for the Liberals in Winnipeg South Centre
By BERNIE BELLAN It might have seemed an odd venue for a candidate in a federal byelection in to be grilled about his candidacy, but on Thursday, May 18, Liberal candidate for Winnipeg South Centre Ben Carr (in a byelection that will take place on June 19) faced a series of tough questions from audience members at the Gwen Secter Centre (which is in the north end) who were there for the second session of the Remis luncheon series.
As a preamble, I should note that Ben Carr was invited to speak to the Remis luncheon group well before the byelection was called in Winnipeg South Centre. Just as I have written about other speakers who have appeared at a Remis luncheon (and elsewhere in this paper you can read my account of the first of this years’ speakers, Joan Druxman, who spoke on May 11), I decided to write about Ben Carr’s appearanc at a Remis forum.
Ben Carr is the 37-year-old son of the late Jim Carr and Dr. Ruth Simkin. I have to make an admission at this point: I’ve known Carr ever since he was a classmate of my daughter Shira, beginning in Grade 7. That didn’t stop me, however, from throwing some pointed questions at him.
When he got up to speak Carr joked that he had been out campaigning recently in Tuxedo and when he knocked on people’s doors at least four individuals told him that they were related to him (which came as no surprise to him, he said, since he’s found through the years that both the Carr and Simkin families have many relatives in Winnipeg – and elsewhere).
Still, being the son of a famous politician, whose mantle he is now trying to adopt, has its pros and cons. I asked him, for instance, whether he’s encountered people who have accused him of capitalizing on his father’s name in running for the Liberals in the same riding that Jim Carr held for seven years until his untimely death last December?
Carr said “no,” that hasn’t been brought up to him personally.
“I recognize that I was gifted a set of principles by my parents,” he said. “You don’t choose where you come from, but you choose what you do with that.”
Someone else asked Carr whether he had ever been to Israel? He said that he had, when he was 24, when he was on a Birthright trip there – and had his bar mitzvah at the Kotel (Western Wall).
How that came about was an amusing story. Carr said that there were two rules all members of Birthright were supposed to follow: Stick with the group always and no drinking.
But, one time when the group was in Jerusalem, he and his cousin Joel decided to venture away from the group at one point, he explained. They came across someone who “looked like a rabbi,” Carr recalled. (To be honest, how hard is it to find someone who looks like a rabbi in Jerusalem?) They asked the individual whether he was a rabbi and when the man said he was, Carr said that he would like to be bar mitzvah’d.
The rabbi said to Carr and his cousin, “Okay, if you’re going to be bar mitzvah’d we’re going to the Kotel” and that’s where Carr was bar mitzvah’d.
As well, the rabbi happened to have a bottle of vodka, Carr added, which led to him and his cousin breaking the second Birthright rule.
And, although he’s relatively young, Carr has already had a varied career. After graduating from the French Immersion program at Kelvin, Carr became a teacher, he said, later a principal at Maples Met High School which, he explained, has an innovative program whereby some students attend school three days a week, and apprentice in a workplace the other two days.
Most recently Carr has been Vice President of something called the Indigenous Strategy Alliance, working in tandem with an Indigenous woman by the name of Rebecca Chartrand. He described their relationship as “what reconciliation should look like.”
Of course, growing up in a household immersed in politics (Jim Carr was first elected as an MLA in 1988, Carr pointed out, as part of the resurgent provincial Liberal showing led by then-leader Sharon Carstairs), he has had more than his share of exposure, both to campaigning and the day to day workings of government.
In 2015, when Jim Carr was elected to the House of Commons for the first time, Ben went along with his father to live with him in Ottawa for four months. Later, Ben held various positions in the federal government, including serving as Director of Parliamentary Affairs to the Minister of Canadian Heritage.
Still, while Winnipeg South Centre has been a Liberal-held seat for the past eight years, it has also been won by Conservatives in the past, most recently by Joyce Bateman (in 2011).
Carr said that “there are three issues I’m most proud of”: The national child care program, “which has lifted 450,000 kids out of poverty;” the government’s position on climate change where, he said, the government has found “a good balance;” and the national day care plan, “which is going to help women get back in the work force.”
He added that the government has introduced “changes in support for seniors,” including “dropping the age of eligibility to receive the Old Age Pension from 67 to 65 and increasing the Old Age Supplement.”
I said to Carr that there are two other issues that clearly distinguish the Liberals from the Conservatives: gun control and abortion. Since gun control was not likely to be an issue in Winnipeg South Centre though, I wondered whether abortion has been brought up to him since he’s been out knocking on doors?
He answered: “For us, this (abortion) was settled a long time ago. You cannot be a candidate for the Liberal Party of Canada unless you stand for a woman’s right to choose. I don’t know where my opponents stand on abortion, but I’d like to hear from them.”
Someone else asked him who else is running in the byelection? Carr said that the Conservative candidate is Damir Stipanovic, the NDP candidate is Julia Riddell, and the Green Party candidate is Doug Hemmerling. (Given how important the Jewish vote is in Winnipeg South Centre and how many of our readers live in the riding, we will try to profile each of the three other candidates in the June 7 issue.)
Someone wondered whether Carr had encountered any anti-Semitism while on the campaign trail? He said that he hadn’t, but he did offer an anecdote that illustrated how prejudice can work both ways.
One time when Ben was out campaigning for his father in River Heights, he said, he was confronted by a woman when he knocked on her door, he said, who told him that Justin Trudeau was an “antisemite.”
The reason she felt that way, Carr explained, was that Trudeau “had let so many Muslims into the country.”
That led me to ask Carr whether he has had anyone tell him that they’re not happy with the Liberal position on Israel, (e.g., either voting for or abstaining during votes on resolutions at the UN which are critical of Israel)?
Carr was adamant that the “Liberal government has been equal to or better than the Harper government was.” (It’s somewhat fitting that in this same issue we devote a fair bit of space to what Stephen Harper had to say about Israel at the Negev Gala.)
He went on to say that there is “an attempt within the Conservative movement in Canada to position itself as the only defender of Israel within the House of Commons.
“There is a little bit of a misconception when it comes to the Liberal Party’s position on Israel,” Carr continued.
“The fundamental principle is that Israel has a right to exist and is the homeland of the Jewish people,” he said.
Turning once again to the Conservative Party, Carr said the Conservative Party today is not the Progressive Conservative Party of “Joe Clark and Brian Mulroney.
“What Pierre Poilievre is trying to leverage,” Carr maintained, “ is the worst in us – and combining it with a kind of populism to turn us against one another.
“The vast majority of Conservatives that I talk to in Winnipeg South Centre identify with the PC Party.”
Carr brought up something that had been posted to the Damir Stipanovic website, (votedamir.ca) but has apparently been expunged, but not before someone had captured a screenshot of what was written:
“It is becoming increasingly clear that the Trudeau Liberals benefitted from corruption and interference in the 2019 and 2021 elections. Leaks from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) indicate that the Trudeau Liberals were aware of alarming reports and did not respond to the threats.
“An open and transparent public inquiry is now needed. With Winnipeg South Centre heading into a by-election, how do we know that the Chinese Communist Party is not funding Ben Carr and the Liberal party in this very riding?”
As noted, we will attempt to contact each of the three other candidates in Winnipeg South Centre in time for our June 7 issue, including Damir Stipanovic, whom we will also ask about the question posed on his website.
Local News
Gray Academy students shine in provincial, national debating competitions
By MYRON LOVE It has been another good year for Gray Academy’s high school students who participated in provincial and national debating competitions. The best results were recorded by Grade 9 student Noa Mednikov, who finished fourth overall nationally, fourth in interpretive reading, and fifth in persuasive speaking at the junior National Public Speaking Championship in early May in Vancouver.
Last October, in the Junior Provincial British Parliamentary Championship – which was held at St. John’s-Ravenscourt – Noa and her partner, Raya Braunstein, finished third as a team while Raya placed third in individual debating.
Their fellow Grade 9 student Maxim Moscalenkov tied for first in persuasive speaking in Vancouver, while the Gray Academy team of Gabe Tapper and Aaron Koplovich finished fifth. Aaron also finished fifth in his individual debate.
Earlier, in March, Maxim finished fifth in the Provincial Juniors debating competition, which was held at Balmoral Hall He and his debate partner, Nate Shenkarow, finished seventh among the teams entered. Last November, he and partner, Ethan Tenenbein, finished seventh in the Junior Prepared Tournament – just behind the Gray Academy team of Nate Shenkarow and Jack Kay.
At the senior high level in that competition, the team of Jacob Tenenbein and Jonah Novoseller finished fourth and Jacob was recognized as fifth best in an individual capacity. Jonah and Jacob also paired up to win the Asper Cup, which was held at their home school.
Jacob represented Manitoba at the Junior National Speech Championship in Vancouver in May and, last October, he and Grade 12 Gray Academy students Julie Krozkin and Daniel Bokser represented Canada at an international debating tournament in Bermuda.
Gray Academy’s debating program was introduced by Linda Martin in 2003. She also led the debating teams at Balmoral Hall. In 2011, Martin was succeeded by Gray Academy high school English teacher Andrew Kaplan.
“Andrew has done a wonderful job with the debating program” says Martin, who has a debating trophy at Gray Academy named in her honour, as well as a provincial trophy for best individual junior debater. “Over the years, Gray Academy students have done very well in many local, national and international competitions,” she adds.
About three weeks ago, this writer had the opportunity to sit down with Andrew Kaplan and six of the school’s top debaters while they discussed the benefits of learning how to debate. According to Noah Strauss – who competed in the Junior Provincials at Balmoral Hall in March, public speaking leaves him with a feeling of accomplishment.
“It’s a good skill set to have,” he observes. “It builds confidence.”
“A benefit of being able to debate is that you learn how to convince people that you know what you are talking about,” adds Maxim Moscolenkov.
Raya Braunstein notes that being able to debate is a skill that she expects to be helpful in many university courses which she may choose to take.
As Andrew Kaplan notes, the ability to express yourself has a great impact in whatever career you choose to pursue.
He points out that debating is compulsory at Gray Academy for all Grade 7 and 8 students – and students can continue debating as an option in the higher grades
Of course, competitive debating is not for everyone. For those students who opt to take that path, the journey begins with internal school debate competition – with the top debating teams and individuals qualifying for local tournaments and – potentially – beyond.
Andrew Kaplan reports that a small number of high schools in Winnipeg and southern Manitoba have active debating programs – including St. Johns Ravenscourt, St. Paul’s High School, St. Mary’s Academy, Garden City and Maples Collegiates in the Seven Oaks School Division, St. Maurice (a Catholic School), as well as Morden Collegiate and Dasmesh, a Sikh private school.
Kaplan expresses his appreciation to the Asper Foundation and an endowment spearheaded by the Kives Family for providing funding for the Gray Academy debating program – as well as the Andrew Slough Foundation – which was established by his friends in memory of the outstanding former Ravenscourt student debater and lawyer who passed away suddenly two years ago at the still young age of 38.
I am confident that our Jewish community can look forward to the continued success of Gray Academy’s star debaters and to the continual emergence of future stars as the times goes by.
Local News
Antisemitism has crept into grade school in Canada
Antisemitism in Canada has moved beyond protests and politics; it is now entering classrooms and altering how Jewish children see themselves functioning within them.
A a university student I have observed the experience of my younger brother in grade eight as a Jewish student. Over the past few months, his school has been at the center of several deeply troubling incidents that have made him feel unsafe in our parks, community, and even his school. Swastikas were drawn around the community, in parks and ponds. Additionally, an older man, who claims to be a pro-Palestinian influencer, stood outside his predominantly Jewish school wearing a keffiyeh, filming a video which then circulated between students on TikTok.
This same man later showed up to our local Jewish community center in keffiyeh to allegedly watch his son play basketball where my brother and many of his classmates go for their lessons, basketball games, and Jewish events. These moments made him and his peers feel watched and targeted just for being Jewish. Local political representatives condemned the incidents and raised awareness about antisemitism, but the fear among students didn’t go away. The feeling of being targeted for simply existing has been taught to my brother, something my parents had tried their hardest to escape from.
Most recently, my brother was chosen to represent his school at a regional science fair. When one of the judges arrived wearing a keffiyeh, he froze. For many, including my brother after the incidents he has faced, the keffiyeh represents a political message. But even more so for my younger brother, it is tied to the fear and intimidation he had already experienced. He felt nervous, distracted, and unsure of how to act.
This is not about silencing political expression. It is about a child who came to share his ideas and left feeling uncertain and afraid. It is about the atmosphere forming in Canadian schools, where Jewish students are being made to feel targeted and unwelcome.
His school made an effort to address the incidents, but the impact is lasting. Posts on social media, much can be very vague at times about inclusion cannot fully undo the feeling of being singled out. A kind word from a teacher does not erase the fear that builds when threats are left unspoken but deeply felt.
I am writing this as a sister who watched her younger brother lose a moment that should have been filled with confidence and pride. He deserved to feel safe. So do all Jewish students in this country.
Moving forward, schools must take concrete steps to protect all students. Antisemitism cannot only be addressed when it becomes violent or overt. It must also be recognized when it appears as intimidation, symbolic targeting, or political messaging that creates fear among students. Children should never have to question whether they are safe in their own classrooms or community spaces.
Events that are meant to support and celebrate students must remain focused on them. Individuals who feel the need to bring political symbols or messages into school grounds or children’s events should not be welcomed in those spaces. Schools must make it clear that their environments exist to support learning, safety, and inclusion, not to host agendas that can intimidate or isolate students.
Administrators and educators must develop clear guidelines for identifying and responding to antisemitic behavior in all its forms. This includes strengthening security measures, offering ongoing staff training, and engaging directly with Jewish families to understand their concerns. Inclusion is not a one-time statement. It is a responsibility that must be reflected in everyday decisions and actions. No child should ever feel unsafe or unwelcome because of their identity.
The author is a Campus Media Fellow with HonestReporting Canada and Allied Voices for Israel who lives in Toronto.
Local News
Despite JNF Canada losing its latest appeal in the Federal Court of Canada to have its charitable status restored, it will continue the appeal process all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, if necessary
By BERNIE BELLAN (June 17, 2025) Readers may recall that last August, in what was a shocking decision by the Canada Revenue Agency, JNF Canada lost its charitable status, which meant that it could no longer issue tax receipts for charitable donations. Further, JNF Canada was facing the prospect of having to wind down its operations and disburse all its assets by November 13, 2024, or face a 100% tax.
At the time, Canadian Jewish News reporter Ellin Bessner wrote a detailed examination of what had happened and why it happened.
Bessner noted the following reasons that the CRA had revoked JNF Canada’s charitable status:
“The agency’s findings in the audit ranged from where the charity’s books and records had been kept in 2011 and 2012 (mostly in Israel, which was a no-no), to what language the paperwork and receipts were kept in (mostly in Hebrew, which is not illegal but makes work difficult for auditors), to the conclusion that JNF Canada’s founding charitable purposes of relieving poverty in Israel by paying the salaries of indigent labourers, were not being met.”
Why would the CRA not enter into negotiations with JNF Canada over a new compliance agreement?
In an email received from Lance Davis, CEO of JNF Canada, on June 6, 2025, however, Davis addressed the particular concern to which Bessner referred in her August 2024 article – that JNF Canada was not meeting its “charitable object.”
Davis wrote: “The revocation is based on the CRA’s belief that our current charitable objective is no longer an acceptable charitable objective (after being acceptable for almost 60 years). It is not that the objective isn’t being met. It should be noted that we offered 10 new charitable objectives, which were previously approved for other charities, but the CRA never acknowledged these new objectives and continued to reject our requests for a compliance agreement. “
The CJN article offers more reasons for the CRA decision to revoke
Bessner’s article continued: “Another major issue was that because of missing paperwork and superficial oversight on the ground in Israel, it was felt the Montreal-based JNF Canada hadn’t been in control of or directing its own operations overseas. CRA believed the charity was acting merely as a funnel of money to the Jerusalem-based agency, the Jewish National Fund/Keren Kayemeth LeIsrael, which ran the projects.
“A further red flag for auditors were several projects in 2011 and 2012 that benefited the Israel Defence Forces, such as construction of buildings and green areas on IDF military bases. Registered charities are not permitted to support a foreign military financially, under Canadian laws. Some other projects were located in the West Bank and on other disputed land, the CRA found, something which Canada’s foreign policy frowns on.
Bessner further noted that “JNF Canada disagreed with the CRA’s view of that last category—and still does. But in 2019, the charity assured the public that it had stopped funding both kinds of projects after 2016, in order to comply with CRA requirements in good faith.”
A 2019 internal CRA memo says JNF Canada’s charitable status would not be revoked until the appeals process was exhausted
Immediately upon learning that the CRA had revoked JNF Canada’s charitable status, representatives of JNF Canada launched a series of legal appeals to have that decision reversed.
What is even more perplexing, however, notwithstanding the various reasons the CRA may have given for revoking JNF Canada’s charitable status, is why the CRA took that step when apparently, in August 2019, senior administrators within CRA had decided not to revoke JNF Canada’s charitable status until such time as JNF Canada had exhausted all its appeals including going so far as appealing to the Supreme Court of Canada.
In an internal email circulated among three CRA employees in August 2019 (shown here), and which was written by Melissa Shaughnessy, who is currently listed as the “Acting /Manager, Charities Directorate, Compliance Division | Canada Revenue Agency,” Ms. Shaughnessy wrote: “I confirmed that our process would then be to await the decision of the objection and any possible subsequent FCA (Federal Court of Canada)/SCC (Supreme Court of Canada) appeals before taking any further steps toward revocation.” (emphasis ours)
As Lance Davis noted in an email sent to me on June 6, JNF Canada had already begun an appeal process to avoid having its charitable status revoked by the CRA. When the August 2024 decision to revoke its status was suddenly issued, notwithstanding the decision among CRA administrators, evident in the memo seen here, to await the results of the entire appeals process to which JNF Canada was entitled before revoking its charitable status, JNF Canada was blindsided.
Davis noted, with reference to what was written in that August 2019 CRA memo: “This approach was consistent with past practice of the CRA as reflected in its policies, publications and internal communications, and we relied on this assurance in our decision-making. Nonetheless, in 2024, the CRA published our revocation despite our Appeal 1 being active. …Appeal 2 is the appeal that we’ve now had two hearings on, both of which ruled on jurisdiction but not yet on the merits of revoking our status. We are currently determining with our leadership if we will proceed with another hearing to rule on the merits of our case, which we still believe are strong.”
We asked the CRA why that August 2019 memo which said revocation would not take place until JNF Canada’s appeals process in the courts was exhausted was reversed?
We contacted the CRA media department on June 10 to ask why, if the August 2019 memo gave clear indication that the CRA was not going to revoke JNF Canada’s charitable status until such time as all appeals by JNF Canada in the courts had been exhausted, the CRA had gone ahead in August 2024 and revoked JNF Canada’s charitable status? (We attached a screenshot of that August 2019 memo in case the CRA would take the position that there had never been any decision to await the results of JNF Canada’s appeals process.)
It took six full days for a media representative of the CRA to respond. In a typically Kafakaesque manner the CRA media representative simply entirely avoided dealing with the question about the memo, writing instead:
“The confidentiality provisions of the Act prevent the CRA from commenting on specific cases; however, we can provide you with the following general information.
“As mentioned in our response of August 30, 2024, we can confirm that the charitable status of the Jewish National Fund of Canada Inc. / Fonds National Juif du Canada Inc. (the Organization) was revoked effective August 10, 2024, in accordance with the Act.
“The CRA’s decision to revoke an organization’s charitable status is not taken lightly. Every organization facing revocation has the right to seek recourse.
“For more information about revocations, please visit: Revoking registered status – Canada.ca.
“The courts provide Canadians with an independent review of disputed issues, and court decisions serve to clarify the law or resolve disputes between the CRA and taxpayers. The CRA does not comment on the specific details of court cases to respect the confidentiality provisions of the Acts we administer. Publicly available information on this case may be obtained from the courts.”
However, as we noted in a previous article on our website, the CRA did release 358 pages of documents to us pertaining to its decision to revoke JNF Canada’s charitable status, following its decision to revoke. As Jonathan Rothman, writing on the CJN website, noted: “The communications branch of the CRA recently provided 358 pages of its correspondence with JNF Canada. Officials said that due to confidentiality restrictions in the Income Tax Act, the CRA can release this material only after revoking a charity’s status. ”
So, it is somewhat specious for the media spokesperson to claim that “The CRA does not comment on the specific details of court cases to respect the confidentiality provisions of the Acts we administer” when, in fact, the CRA was quite willing to release 358 pages of documents explaining why it had suddenly revoked JNF Canada’s charitable status in August 2024. The question remains: What changed from the time that memo was circulated in August 2019 among CRA administrators and August 2024, when JNF Canada’s charitable status was revoked, without any prior notice given to JNF Canada that was about to happen?
The appeals process continues to take its course
It is somewhat confusing to follow the appeals process which JNF Canada undertook. One was an appeal through the Federal Court and another was an appeal through the Federal Court of Canada.
As Ellin Bessner explained in a November 10, 2024 article which appeared on the CJN website,
in November 2024 the Federal Court turned down JNF Canada’s request that the CRA’s decision to revoke its charitable status be reversed. Bessner wrote that “Jewish National Fund of Canada has lost its first major legal battle to stop the tax department’s revocation of its charitable status, which came into effect three months ago.
“Late in the afternoon of Friday, Nov. 8, a Federal Court judge dismissed JNF Canada’s application for a judicial review—and the judge also dismissed a request for an injunction to force the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to remove the official revocation notice that was printed in the Canada Gazette on Aug. 10.”
But, as Lance Davis noted in his June 6 email to me, “the November decision was not on the merits of our case. It was simply that the Federal Court was not the correct court to rule on our case and so the motion was dismissed and we were advised to take our case to the Federal Court of Appeal.”
However, early in June, JNF Canada lost its appeal to the Federal Court of Canada to have its charitable status restored.
Again though, as Davis explained to me, “This recent ruling was again only on jurisdiction. We appealed the Federal Court’s first decision that it did not have jurisdiction. The reason our lawyers chose this route was we truly believed the Federal Court was the correct place to start our judicial review. Time is of the essence as we do not want to operate as a non-profit indefinitely. Both CRA and JNF agreed that since the FCA was hearing our case, they should rule on the merits and not on whether or not the FC had jurisdiction. They declined to rule on the merits and instead, simply upheld the FC ruling that the FCA is the correct court to hear our case.”
Letter sent to JNF Canada supporters on June 4 about the most recent court decision
However, with that most recent court decision going against JNF Canada, a letter was sent to JNF Canada supporters on June 4 by Lance Davis, and Nathan Disenhouse, President, JNF Canada. That letter noted that “This week, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed our appeal, concluding that the Federal Court did not have jurisdiction over our claim that the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA) actions deprived JNF Canada of procedural fairness.
“The merits of our case – our arguments as to why the process afforded to us lacked procedural fairness – have still not been ruled on.
“While we are, of course, disappointed by this result, and while it is not the result we had expected, we always knew it was a possibility. For this reason, we have been actively planning next steps.
“When the revocation of our charitable status was published in the Canada Gazette on August 10, 2024, we indicated that we had been blindsided. This is because in 2019 the CRA clearly and explicitly assured JNF Canada that the CRA ‘would not proceed with a revocation until JNF had exhausted their appeals process in Federal Court of Appeal or Supreme Court of Canada.’ (emphasis ours) This approach was consistent with past practice of the CRA as reflected in its policies, publications and internal communications and we relied on this assurance in our decision-making.
“It is also important to emphasize that over the past decade JNF Canada has attempted to engage without success with the CRA in the hope of finding a mutually acceptable path forward. Approximately two weeks ago, JNF Canada made a settlement offer in advance of this hearing, which was rejected without a counteroffer or any type of dialogue. We urge the CRA, under the leadership of the newly appointed Honourable Wayne Long Secretary of State, Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions, to engage with us in the hope of our arriving at a mutually satisfactory agreement.
“In looking ahead, JNF Canada will continue to challenge the CRA’s revocation of JNF’s charitable status and its decision to publish notice of the revocation when it did in 2024. We have a multi-pronged strategy in place which will ensure that all reasonable legal processes are engaged to protect JNF Canada’s rights.
“While the court ruling was surprising and disappointing, please rest assured that we remain committed to helping address the needs of Israelis during these troubling times and to pursuing justice through the judicial process.”
Davis added this, in his June 6 email to me:
“While we are disappointed with the outcome of our appeal, it is important to clarify that our main/underlying appeal is still in the court system at the Federal Court of Appeal. While we do not have a set date yet, we are expecting our case to be heard in late 2025 or early 2026.”
What has the impact of the CRA decision been on JNF Canada the past 10 months?
So, how have JNF Canada’s operations been affected since that August 2024 decision by the CRA to revoke its charitable status?
Davis wrote, in his email to
“JNF Canada has certainly experienced difficulties since we were revoked on August 10, 2024. It is evident that our revenue has diminished. For example, major gifts from charitable foundations cannot be donated to JNF Canada as these gifts can only be sent to a registered charity. However, we are pleased to share that thousands of Canadians from coast to coast have made contributions to JNF Canada without a charitable receipt. They believe in our mission and mandate so much that they forgo the benefits of a charitable receipt. To us, this demonstrates strong support from our community, and we are as motivated as ever to find a resolution.
“In the meantime, JNF is continuing to proudly operate as a non-profit and support the projects and programs we know are of deep importance to our community here in Canada. Thankfully, we have collaborated with like-minded charities. We are pleased to support three critical projects right now: the rehabilitation of Canada Park’s forests, the Ashdod Rehabilitation & Therapy Centre and the Sderot Resilience Centre. “
Manitoba/Saskatchewan division of JNF Canada carrying on
We also contacted David Greaves, Executive Director, JNF Canada, Manitoba/Saskatchewan, to ask him what impact the CRA August 2024 ruling has had on the Winnipeg office?
Greaves was upbeat in his response. He noted, for instance, that rather than laying off employees in the Winnipeg office, the number of positions there had increased from 3 1/2 to 4.
As well, Greaves observed that the Manitoba/Saskatchewan division was coming off a very successful Negev Gala – despite not being able to issue tax receipts for attendees at the Gala or donors who did not attend the Gala but still wanted to support JNF Canada, and that the office here was already planning next year’s Gala.
Finally, Greaves explained that JNF Canada was now working with a charitable organization called the Israel Magen Fund (which is also known as “Zaka”) to continue working on two projects that JNF Canada had already initiated within the past couple of years and had not been completed: the Ashdod Rehabilitation Centre and the Sderot Rehabilitation Centre.
Greaves advised that anyone wanting to donate to either of those two projects contact the Israel Magen Fund of Canada.