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
Jewish Federation holds first ever “town hall”
By BERNIE BELLAN It was a relatively small turnout – maybe 70 people were at the Shaarey Zedek Sunday morning, June 14 – but it may have been the start of a new foray by the Jewish Federation of Winnipeg into community outreach when a “town hall” was held to which members of the Jewish community had been invited to attend.
I had broached the idea of the Federation’s holding a community town hall with Federation CEO Jeff Lieberman back in the fall on an evening when he and newly installed Federation President Carrie Shenkarow had invited members of the community to come meet them for some one on one conversations.
I was disappointed that evening how few individuals showed up, so I shouldn’t have been surprised that the turnout for the town hall itself was relatively low.
But, give full marks to Lieberman and the others who were on the panel with him on June 14 for coming out to an event where they were prepared to answer any and all questions from audience members, as well as respond to questions that had been sent in by members of the community prior to the actual town hall.
Now, I should make clear that I have a particular position when it comes to attending any type of forum of the sort the Jewish Federation held, which is that any and all questions should be allowed – even if those questions might anger both the respondents to the question and audience members as well.
Toward almost the very end of the town hall I did ask a question that did elicit a somewhat negative reaction from within the audience – about the uproar over the upcoming Nakba exhibit at the Canadian Museum for Human Rights, but I’ll save what I asked and the response I got for later. Suffice to say for the time being, it seems apparent the suggestion that some Palestinians were forcibly expelled from their homes and have a right to have their story told is anathema to many in the Jewish community.
The town hall was moderated by Neil Duboff. Accompanying Duboff on the podium at the Shaarey Zedek were four other individuals, each of whom was representing a particular Jewish organization: the aforesaid Jeff Lieberman, CEO of the Jewish Federation of Winnipeg; Dr. Ruth Ashrafi, Regional Director, B’nai Brith Canada; Gustavo Zentner, CIJA Vice-President, Manitoba and Saskatchewan; and Bellle Jarniewski, Executive Director, The Jewish Heritage Centre of Western Canada. Later in the program, they were joined on the podium by Rabbi Anibal Mass of Shaarey Zedek Congregation.
Each of the panellists gave what turned out to be fairly lengthy descriptions of what it is they do in their opening remarks, lasting a total of 20 minutes.
From time to time William Sagel, who is community security director for the Jewish Federation, but was not present in person, also joined in the discussion via a remote link.
Rather than report on how each of the panellists described what they do in their respective positions, I’ll jump right into the question and answer session that ensued. However, the initial question and answer segment of the program turned out to consist of questions that had been submitted beforehand and were read out by Neil Duboff, who took turns asking different panellists to respond to different questions.
Considering that a town hall is supposed to be a forum where, after opening remarks by whoever is going to respond to questions from audience members, the floor is supposed to be opened up to members of the audience to ask questions, having Neil Duboff read questions that had been submitted beforehand contradicted what is supposed to happen at a town hall, but hey: This was a first for our community, so I’ll give them a pass this town – but guys, next time – if there is a next time, how about having a real town hall?
What follows are snippets of what turned out to be a very long event that ran well past the allotted two hours that had originally been set aside. (If answers to questions posed, either by Duboff – reading from questions that had been submitted or by actual audience members themselves, seem exceptionally short, it’s for reasons of space, not because respondents gave abbreviated answers.)
The first question Duboff asked, and which was directed at Gustavo Zentner, was: “What is CIJA’s strategy for holding public officials accountable when current laws are not being enforced?”
Zentner responded that he prefers to meet one on one with officials – on a confidential basis, but he tries “to set a paper trail of accountability.”
One particular event that had a significant impact on the relationship CIJA (as well as other community organizations, other panellists noted) has had with politicians at various levels of government was the Bondi Beach attack in Australia last December during Chanukah, when 15 people were killed and 40 wounded by two gunmen who opened fire as members of the Sydney Jewish community were gathered to celebrate Chanukah on the beach.
Zentner noted that, following that attack, he met with the premier of Manitoba as well as the leader of the opposition, to discuss how the Manitoba government could bolster security for the Jewish community here.
Zentner said that, coming out of that discussion, the Manitoba government has now created a position of prosecutor specifically to deal with hate crimes and that the government “gave specific funds for security infrastructure for the community.”
He added that “two weeks ago” the Winnipeg Chief of Police released hate crime stats for the City of Winnipeg. “We were interviewed four times in 24 hours” about what the chief had said, Zentner added.
The next question Duboff asked was addressed to Jeff Lieberman: “What does the Federation do to prevent people from attending events who aren’t invited?”
Lieberman answered: “We pre-register” attendees.
He also said he wanted to add something to Zentner’s response to the question asked about holding public officials accountable.
He referred to Premier Wab Kinew’s controversial comment at the Federal NDP convention, held this past March, when Kinew said “Let the Epstein class fight the Epstein war” – a remark that was widely regarded as a dog whistle to antisemites.
Lieberman said that “Kinew said some things that were not favourable. We met with him and around one month later we got $1 million in new funding for security.”
Duboff asked Ruth Ashrafi to comment about the upcoming Nakba exhibit at the CMHR – which is scheduled to open June 27.
Ashrafi noted that in December 2023, in response to Israel’s incursion into Gaza following the October 7 massacre, there had been a “die-in” at the CMHR and word began to circulate that the CMHR was preparing to open an exhibit about the Nakba.
In April 2024, Ashrafi said, lawyer David Matas, acting on behalf of B’nai Brith Canada, sent a letter to the CMHR, in which he voiced reasons that such an exhibit should not be mounted.
In November 2025, Ashrafi added, Jewish organizations were supposed to be informed about the Nakba exhibit, “but B’nai Brith wasn’t informed.”
She also referred to “all that other nonsense you can be a very good Jew and a non-Zionist.”
Belle Jarniewski also spoke about the Nakba exhibit, saying “consultation has not taken place on the exhibit…The problematic title suggests that the very creation and ongoing existence of the State of Israel is an ongoing catastrophe…This exhibit is putting a target on the backs of Jews across Canada…They (the CMHR) consulted with six percent of Jews across Canada – who are not Zionists…Carla Compton (the newly elected MLA for Tuxedo) said that ‘a museum is supposed to be about facts, not feelings’…The museum refused to say who is on the advisory council for the exhibit.”
Gustavo Zentner added: “The moment we were advised of the exhibit in November we asked them (the CMHR) not to make any more announcements…It is the federal government’s responsibility to take action on this problem. It doesn’t matter whether the government appointed the board.”
Duboff asked Lieberman: “What security planning is underway for community events?”
Lieberman asked Williams Sagel to respond. Sagel said there are security enhancements being implemented across a wide swath of community institutions, but he didn’t want to get into details.
Duboff asked a follow-up question: “What do you say to the suggestion that community responses to security threats are inadequate?”
Lieberman responded that “We have to be very careful what we do.”
Questions from the audience then followed. As one might expect, given the opportunity to speak, once handed the microphone, most audience members would go on and on without asking a question.
Here, in capsule form, are some of the questions asked:
“Why is there no Israeli person on the panel?”
“Why not put on a counter exhibit to the CMHR exhibit at the Convention Centre?”
“Why do we have three different organizations dealing with antisemitism?” (Actually, the questioner could have asked “Why do we have four different organizations” doing that, because the Jewish Federation, B’nai Brith, CIJA, and the recently formed Manitoba Institute to Combat Antisemitism, which is part of the Jewish Heritage Centre of Western Canada, all deal with antisemitism in one way or another.)
“How is what Belle is doing different from what Ruth and Gustavo are doing?”
Jarniewski responded: “We all collaborate all the time.”
A questioner asked what can be done about the Winnipeg Free Press which, he suggested, rarely prints an op-ed defending Israel.
Lieberman said: “It is not our mandate to take a stand against that particular business.”
A questioner asked “Why isn’t ‘Shomrim’ incorporated into the community?”
For readers unfamiliar with who “Shomrim” are, here is something generated by AI about Shomrim: “Shomrim Toronto is a dedicated volunteer organization committed to ensuring the safety and security of the Jewish communities across the Greater Toronto Area. As guardians of peace (Shalom), we bridge the gap between the community and local law enforcement through vigilant community patrols, educational programs, and direct incident response.”
In Montreal, “This is the community safety and emergency response patrol operating primarily within the Hasidic and broader Jewish communities (particularly in the Tosh and Outremont areas).”
Lieberman responded: “The organizations in Toronto an Montreal have been operated for numerous years.”
William Sagel added: “We’re training volunteers for the future.”
Then, I asked my question, followed by angry muttering from the audience. I began by suggesting that the Jewish community is far more diffuse than the panelists would have us believe and the idea that there is unanimity about the Nakba is not right. I also said that speaking at this particular “town hall” was really nothing more than speaking in an ‘echo chamber’ since none of the questions asked dared to challenge accepted wisdoms about Israel and the Nakba. I asked: “Is it not possible to acknowledge the existence of what Palestinians refer to as the Nakba?” (And, for anyone who might think what I said was absolutely outrageous, I simply suggest you do some reading about what Israeli leaders, including David Ben Gurion, Chaim Weizman, and many others, said about the necessity of expelling large portions of the Palestinian population in order to create a viable State of Israel. I deal in reality, not mythology. And yes, I know that 800,000 Jews were also forced to leave their homes in Arab lands.)
Gustavo Zentner said: “The museum has not been transparent in its dealings….The (federal) government has a responsibility to step in and handle its responsibilities for corporate governance.”
A series of questions were asked by audience members about financial aid for members of the community, either to attend Gray Academy or Jewish camps. One audience member said that more parents are now sending their kids to Gray Academy or to Jewish camps as a result of antisemitism, but there was a need for more bursaries for those kids.
Jeff Lieberman agreed that “more and more kids” have left public schools and enrolled in Gray Academy after facing antisemitism in public school. He added that Gray Academy is giving out “$1 million in bursaries” each year. Lieberman pointed out that Gray Academy Head of School Lori Binder was in the audience and he asked her to come to the front to address the question of financial aid for parents wanting to send their kids to Gray Academy.
Binder said: “No one who comes to our door will ever be denied a Jewish education,” but in response to the suggestion from one audience member that non-Jewish families are receiving financial aid to send their kids to Gray Academy, Binder was unequivocal in saying that’s not true, saying that “non-Jewish families are not receiving financial assistance at all.”
Although this has been a long article to read (if you made it this far) I’ve really only attempted to give a flavour of what happened at the town hall. By the time it was nearing an end, Neil Duboff suggested that it would be a good idea to hold another such town hall. Yes, tempers may fray at a town hall (and I’m used to being criticized for daring to say things that don’t go over well with many others), but it was a very civil discussion, albeit with not enough time for questions from actual audience members. Full credit to Jeff Lieberman for following through on my suggestion to hold a town hall. And now that there’s been one – and the organizers may have learned where they can improve things, it would be a good idea to hold another one – but please, try to include members of the community who are either disaffected – which I would suggest is the majority of the Jewish community, or even those who are stridently opposed to the positions taken by our established Jewish organizations.
Local News
Temple Shalom suffers significant flood damage – rendered unusable for rest of the summer
The following notification was recently received from Temple Shalom:
Dear members and friends of Temple Shalom,
As you all know by now, Temple Shalom suffered significant damage when part of the building flooded during the intense storm last week. I wanted to take this opportunity to provide you with a quick update on the situation at this time.
The flood primarily affected the entryway, the stairs, the lobby outside the sanctuary and the lobby downstairs. There is also a smaller amount of damage to other areas of the building, including the kitchen, the music room and the sanctuary. The damage is extensive and we have now learned that asbestos is present in the flooded area of the building and that we will need to undertake a major abatement project before the actual repairs can begin.
Steve has been managing this project and is working with our insurance company, restoration company, roofers, electricians and other trades. Flynn Roofing was able to assess and make temporary repairs to the roof, and so far, there have been no further leaks. Steve and Bernie have been working tirelessly to remove water, clean up debris and move furnishings and other material out of areas that will need repair. Cynthia has been answering phone calls and emails and making arrangements for the next steps in this process.
It is now clear that we will not be able to use the building this summer. By next week, no unauthorized individuals will be permitted in the building, and our staff will be working from home. We are still working on a location for our services this summer and will let you know the arrangements as soon as they are finalized; we are grateful to the congregations and community organizations that have already reached out to us and offered space. Currently, our Torahs are safe at Shaarey Zedek. Until the location for in-person services is confirmed, we will hold our services on Zoom (details to follow).
We are planning ways to keep our community together during this time.
Judith
President, Temple Shalom
Local News
Chesed Shel Emes is hiring
Chesed Shel Emes is looking for a daytime “Shomer Plus” – an individual who understands and appreciates the depth and significance of Shmira, who is able to assume some of the day to day tasks managing our facility, and who can take on some of the administrative work – be it graphic design, social media management, Board support, or providing back up for our 24/7 on call staff.
This is a unique position which calls for a blend of the spiritual and the practical. We are offering a part time, salaried, daytime position, with employee benefits. The successful candidate will need to be flexible, patient and have a sense of humor.
For more information contact Rena Boroditsky, executive director of Chesed Shel Emes at chesedwinnipeg@gmail.com or phone 204-582-5088
