Local News
Jewish Federation holds mayoralty election forum in front of packed audience at Berney Theatre, October 3rd
By BERNIE BELLAN On Monday, October 3 the Jewish Federation of Winnipeg sponsored an election forum in which six of the leading mayoralty candidates were invited to participate.
As was explained by moderator Jason Gisser, the rules were that each candidate would be invited to give an introductory statement, after which he would pose a series of eight questions to the candidates.
Each candidate would be given one and a half minutes to respond to the question. Once all the candidates had responded to the question, Jason would invite two of the six candidates to add a further 20 seconds to what they had said initially.
While the format was conducive to what turned out to be a relatively genteel event, the fact that the candidates were not allowed to enter into any sort of exchanges with each other no doubt removed any opportunity for a livelier debate. Also, five other candidates for mayor were not even invited to participate.
What follows is my impression of the evening. I want to make clear that I do not support any particular candidate and have not made up my mind how I will vote. Reports that I have read to date either tend to focus on individual candidates or, when they do report on a particular election forum, are relatively truncated. Instead, as is my usual style in reporting on a fairly lengthy event, I like to offer the reader snippets of what occurred so as to give more of a flavour of what went on – without intending it to be a comprehensive repetition of what was said.
Looming over the entire evening, it must be noted, however, given the news story that the CBC had recently broken which raised questions about Glen Murray’s behaviour while he was the executive director of the Pembina Institute, was the possibility that one or another of the candidates would want to launch into some sort of attack on Murray, who is the clear front-runner according to the most recent poll.
The fact is that the only reference to that news story came at the very end of the evening when Robert-Falcon Ouellette made an obvious allusion to the story – when he told of his experience having served in the Canadian Armed Forces for 27 years. During that time, he noted, there was a strong emphasis placed on maintaining the utmost respect for moral behaviour within the armed forces.
Ouelllette went on to say that “No matter what you do at the end of the day, you need a moral leader who will stand up for what is right in our city, that there are certain actions which are unacceptable in our city and there are times as a leader you must say the truth and speak that truth.”
“And so I speak it here today and I hope people understand what it is I’m talking about because it’s certainly unacceptable for us to be here on this stage all together.” (Interestingly, the CBC story that quoted Ouellette had the spelling of that last word as “altogether.” I would suggest that would impart quite a different meaning to what he meant.)
But, that remark came late in the evening, when the candidates were invited to give closing remarks for two minutes each, and – after moderator Jason Gisser had finished posing questions to the candidates.
Prior to that time though each of the candidates certainly came across as articulate and passionate. Perhaps the one candidate who decided to try to separate herself from the pack most distinctly was Jennie Motkaluk, who took a more strident approach when, for instance, she referred at different times to “critical race theory” and “woke” attitudes. She also brought a few smiles from the other candidates when she said she really likes “growth and money.”
The first two questions that Jason Gisser posed, however, might have seemed somewhat parochial to any non-Jews in the audience (and probably a good many Jews as well). The first had to do with anti-Semitism and what each of the candidates would do to combat it if they were mayor. Would they be willing to attend a planned mayors’ conference on combating anti-Semitism? they were asked. Not surprisingly, none of the candidates came out with a position defending antisemitism.
The second question – and one that evidently caught some of the candidates off guard, was whether they would want the city to adopt the “IHRA” definition of anti-Semitism. It was clear that not all the candidates were up to speed on what the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism is. I’m not quite sure what bringing it up had to do with a mayoralty contest in Winnipeg. It reminded me of the effort some years back – not just in Winnipeg, but throughout the world, to declare cities “nuclear free zones” – an interesting proposal, no doubt, but what relevance does it have to urban issues?
The next question though was very much one that has elicited a huge amount of discussion during this election: What would the candidates propose to do about poverty and homelessness?
Glen Murray said that he had practical experience combating homelessness – even prior to serving as mayor of this city, when he helped to foster a neighbourhood housing project in the Spence neighbourhood where, he said, 300 houses were built.
Shaun Loney demonstrated an especially keen knowledge of this file, citing his own background as what he described as a “social entrepreneur,” placing a strong emphasis on creating jobs. “I would add add 1,000 social enterprise jobs to Winnipeg,” he said.
As far as housing is concerned, Loney said he would create a “$100 million land trust.”
“It’s not a money problem,” he added; “it’s a system problem.”
Robert-Falcon Ouellette was somewhat dismissive of candidates’ promises to alleviate homelessness and poverty, asking whether “any of the politicians here are going to do anything but check off all the right boxes? Politicians are great at discussing things,” Ouellette suggested, but when it comes to actually doing things –well, that’s a different matter.
Later he added this observation: “Seventy-five percent of homeless people are aboriginal. They don’t need a home; they need a friend.”
Kevin Klein related his own experience growing up in poverty. His mother was actually killed by his abusive father when he was a kid, he told the audience and “I’ve lived under the poverty line a good part of my life,” he said.
As for politicians not ever doing anything but discuss things, Klein said that he personally brought forward a motion at City Hall to create “Homes for Heroes” – a project that saw a small number of homes allocated to war veterans in Winnipeg.
Scott Gillingham said that he was proud to have been involved in the effort to create a certain amount of “modular housing” for people living below the poverty line. He also said that City Council is implementing a “poverty reduction plan” that he was involved in crafting.
As for Jenny Motkaluk – she said that “the solution for poverty is a really nice job.”
“I want to bring 16,000 high paying jobs” to Winnipeg, she added.
As for homelessness, Motkaluk said “there are 780 derelict houses in this city. I want to auction them off.”
Shaun Loney added that “we need to realize that governments and not-for-profits need to work together.”
Jason Gisser asked each of the candidates to describe their “bold vision” for the future.
Jenny Motkaluk said that “the single biggest impediment to growth and investment in this city is our political leaders.”
Glen Murray said “We need to spend money on things that will make this city more beautiful.” He noted that when he was mayor three of the projects that were built during his time in office included: Waterfront Drive, the Esplanade Riel, and the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. (He observed as well that the CMHR was a great example of all three levels of government working together.)
In contrast, he noted that the single largest project undertaken by the city since his time in office was “$200 million spent of refurbishing the Post Office.”
Shaun Loney pointed to the deterioration of Winnipeg’s “green canopy”, saying that there are 30 different organizations devoted to protecting and expanding the number of trees in the city. He said he would like to consolidate all those efforts and work hard to protect our imperiled urban canopy.
Robert-Falcon Ouellette proposed the creation of an “urban national park” within Winnipeg to add green space to the city.
Kevin Klein said that his bold vision is to make Winnipeg “safe”, noting that “We can’t attract more people here if they don’t feel safe. People won’t ride the bus if they don’t feel safe.”
The next question was about infrastructure.
Jenny Motkaluk said “We’re going to end the corruption” associated with infrastructure projects.
Glen Murray said “We need more value planning to determine whether a project will return in value what it cost to build.” He cited Waterfront Drive as a project that has paid back many times over what it cost the city to create the infrastructure for that development.
Kevin Klein did comment later though that residents of Waterfront Drive are now having to deal with a huge upsurge in break-ins.
Shaun Loney said that rather than think about expanding infrastructure we ought “to focus on the infrastructure we’ve already built.”
Robert-Falcon Ouellette cited the example of Quebec City and its transit system as something Winnipeg could emulate, saying that in that city “People really enjoy taking the bus.”
In response to that suggestion, Kevin Klein said that currently “Seven thousand people a day in Winnipeg don’t even pay for the bus.”
Scott Gillingham proposed extending the Peguis Trail and widening Kenaston Boulevard.
Jason Gisser asked about public safety and what each of the candidates would do to make Winnipeg safer.
Scott Gillingham said that as mayor he would sit on the police board. He also said that he would split up police calls so that police don’t respond to every call for service, with other personnel used in situations that would be better served by another type of emergency responder.
Shaun Loney called for a return to community based policing – with “more cops walking the beat,” adding that “people are going to continue to commit crimes unless they get the intervention they need.” He also observed that we need to “address homelessness” before we can make inroads in enhancing public safety.
After the final question was answered the candidates were allowed one final opportunity to sum up their platforms. As noted, it was then that Robert-Falcon Ouellette was the only candidate even to obliquely refer to the controversy that had recently surfaced about Glen Murray.
And, while five of the six candidates hung around afterwards to schmooze with audience members, Glen Murray took off immediately after the forum was over. I offer that not as an editorial comment – merely an observation.
Local News
Further to the Simkin Centre’s financial situation
By BERNIE BELLAN A while back I published an article about the deficit situation at the Simkin Centre. (You can read it at “Simkin Centre deficit situation.“) I was prompted to write that particular article after reading a piece written by Free Press Faith writer John Longhurst in the August 5 issue of the Free Press about the dire situation personal care homes in Winnipeg are in when it comes to trying to provide their residents with decent food.
Yet, Longhurst made one very serious mistake in his article when he 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.”
In fact, the WRHA has given annual increases to personal care homes, but its allocations are not broken down by categories, such as food or salaries. As a spokesperson for the WRHA explained to me in an email: “PCHs receive per diem global operating funding based on the number of licensed beds they operate. This funding model is designed to support the full range of operating costs associated with resident care, including staffing, food services, utilities, building operations, and other day-to-day expenses.”
Now, one can make a perfectly valid argument that the level of funding from the WRHA has not kept up with inflation, especially inflation in food costs, but the Simkin Centre is in an even more precarious position because of the skyrocketing cost of kosher food.
“In recent years,” according to an article on the internet, “the cost of kosher food has increased significantly, often outpacing general food inflation due to unique supply chain pressures and specialized production requirements.”
Yet, when I asked Laurie Cerqueti how much maintaining a kosher facility has cost the Simkin Centre, as I noted in my previous article about the deficit situation at Simkin, she responded: “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.”
One reader, however, after having read my article about the deficit situation at Simkin, had this to say: “In John Longhurst’s article on Aug 5, 2025 in the Free Press, Laurie (Cerqueti) was quoted as saying that the annual kosher meal costs at Simkin were $6070 per resident. At Bethania nursing home in 2023, the non-kosher meal costs in 2023 were quoted as $4056 per resident per year. Even allowing for a 15% increase for inflation over 2 years, the non-kosher food costs there would be $4664.40 or 24% lower than Simkin’s annual current kosher food costs. If Simkin served non-kosher food to 150 of its 200 residents and kosher food to half of its Jewish residents who wish to keep kosher, by my calculation it would save approximately $200,000/year. If all of Simkin’s Jewish residents wished to keep kosher, the annual savings would be slightly less at $141,000.”
But – let’s be honest: Even though many Jewish nursing homes in the US have adopted exactly that model of food service – where kosher food is available to those residents who would want it, otherwise the food served would be nonkosher, it appears that keeping Simkin kosher – even though 45% of its residents aren’t even Jewish – is a “sacred cow” (pun intended.)
So, if Simkin must remain kosher – even though maintaining it as a kosher facility is only adding to its accumulated deficit situation – which currently stands at $779,426 as of March 31, 2025,I wondered whether there were some other ways Simkin could address its deficit while still remaining kosher.
In response to my asking her how Simkin proposes to deal with its deficit situation, Laurie Cerqueti wrote: “There are other homes in worse financial position than us. There are 2 homes I am aware of that are in the process of handing over the keys to the WRHA as they are no longer financially sustainable.”
I wondered though, whether the Simkin Centre Foundation, which is managed by the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba might not be able to help the Simkin Centre reduce its deficit. According to the Jewish Foundation’s 2024 annual report, The Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation, which is managed by the Jewish Foundation, had a total value of $11,017,635.
The Jewish Foundation did distribute $565,078 to the Simkin Centre in 2024, but even so, I wondered whether it might be able to distribute more.
According to John Diamond, CEO of the Jewish Foundation, however, the bylaws of the Foundation dictate that no more than 5% of the value of a particular fund be distributed in any one year. There is one distinguishing characteristic about the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation, in that a portion of their fund is “encroachable.” The encroachable capital is not owned by JFM. It is held in trust by JFM but is beneficially owned by Simkin, similar to a “bank deposit”. While held by the JFM, these funds are included in the calculation of Simkin’s annual distribution.
I asked John Diamond whether any consideration had been given to increasing the distribution that the Jewish Foundation could make to the Simkin Centre above the 5% limit that would normally apply to a particular fund under the Foundation’s management.
Here is what John wrote in response: “The Simkin does have an encroachable fund. That means that at their request, they can encroach on the capital of that fund only (with restrictions). This encroachment is not an increased distribution; rather, it represents a return of capital that also negatively affects the endowment’s future distributions.
”It is strongly recommended that encroachable funds not be used for operating expenses. If you encroach and spend the capital, the organization will receive fewer distribution dollars in the next year and every year as the capital base erodes. Therefore, the intent of encroachable funds is for capital projects, not recurring expenses.”
I asked Laurie Cerqueti whether there might be some consideration given to asking for an “encroachment” into the capital within the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation?
She responded: “We are not in a position where we are needing to dip into the encroachable part of our endowment fund. Both of our Boards (the Simkin Centre board and the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation board) are aware of our financial situation and we are all working together to move forward in a sustainable way.”
At the same time though, I wondered where donations to the Simkin Centre end up? Do they all end up in the Simkin Centre Foundation, for instance, I asked Laurie Cerqueti on December 15.
Her response back then was: “All donations go through our Foundation.”
I was somewhat surprised to read that answer, so I asked a follow-up question for clarification: “Do all donations made to the Simkin Centre end up in the Simkin Centre Foundation at the Jewish Foundation?”
The response this time was: “No they do not.”
So, I asked: “So, how do you decide which donations end up at the Foundation? Is there a formula?”
Laurie’s response was: “We have a mechanism in place for this and it is an internal matter.”
Finally, I asked how then, the Simkin Centre was financing its accumulated deficit? Was it through a “line of credit with a bank?” I wondered.
To date, I have yet to receive a response to that question. I admit that I am puzzled that a personal care home which has a sizeable foundation supporting it would not want to dip into the capital of that foundation when it is facing a financial predicament. Yes, I can see wanting the value of the foundation to grow – but that’s for the future. I don’t know whether I’d call a $779,425 deficit a crisis; that’s for others to determine, but it seems pretty serious to me.
One area that I didn’t even touch upon in this article, though – and it’s something I’ve written about time and time again, is the quality of the food at the Simkin Centre.
To end this, I’ll refer to a quote Laurie Cerqueti gave to John Longhurst when he wrote his article about the problems personal care homes in Winnipeg are facing: “When it comes to her food budget, ‘we can’t keep making the same number of bricks with less straw.’ “
Local News
Exclusive: Security Enhancement Fund to be announced by Province in coming days
By NOAH STRAUSS The province is set to announce a new program called the Security Enhancement Fund, which
will provide funding to religious and faith groups to improve security at institutions such as
synagogues and mosques. In an exclusive interview, Minister of Justice Matt Wiebe outlined the
plan and detailed what the province has already done to help protect Jewish Manitobans.
“What we want to do is to be able to provide the community with the kind of tools that they need
to stay safe and to ensure that everyone in the community feels safe,” said Wiebe.
The fund will provide a missing link between government and religious communities, and
communities will now be able to make their own choices without money being a big restraint.
Essentially, the power will be in the hands of community leaders and not government officials.
The minister noted that the new partnerships will provide the province a better understanding of
the needs of every community. Rather than the province making the choices, they are
essentially giving a voice to each community. The grants, totalling $1 million, will provide funds to enhance security at facilities like synagogues.
The Jewish Post reached out to Dr. Rena Secter Elbaze, executive director of Congregation
Shaarey Zedek. “It’s important that the government show us that they’re taking security seriously and stepping up to the plate to make this offer. We will absolutely be applying for grant money,” she said. Elbaze also wants to know whether or not the government will cover the costs of things the synagogue has already spent money on. She noted that the province has, in the past, made grants available to have security guards present.
When speaking about what the Justice Ministry has already done to protect Jewish Manitobans,
Wiebe brought up the new special prosecutor that is focusing on hate crimes. Wiebe said the
special prosecutor works closely with the Winnipeg Police Service “to support investigations and
prosecute hate crimes. Wiebe also went on to say how the Department of Education has been helping to fight antisemitism. “The creation of the Holocaust education curriculum is an important step in the right direction,” he said. When asked about Oliver Didtger Ederhof, the individual charged with 14 counts of mischief including vandalism of Shaarey Zedek, Wiebe said decisions like bail and police undertakings are decisions that are in part made by the federal government through the criminal code and policies. “We’re going to continue to advocate for stricter bail reform at the federal level…. I’ve been very clear, we issued clarified directives around bail to our Crown prosecutors.”
The full announcement from the province is expected in the coming days.
Local News
March of the Living 2023 participants form Taste of Hope project to help honour the memory of Holocaust survivor Alex Buckman
By BERNIE BELLAN The March of the Living is an annual two-week international educational program that brings thousands of students and adults to Poland and Israel to study the Holocaust, Jewish history, and the rise of the State of Israel. Founded in 1988, it features a 3-kilometer silent walk from Auschwitz to Birkenau on Yom HaShoah (Holocaust Remembrance Day).
Attendees on the march are accompanied by adults, some of whom themselves have been Holocaust survivors.
Following the week in Poland, participants travel to Israel to observe Yom HaZikaron (Israel’s Memorial Day) and celebrate Yom HaAtzmaut (Israel’s Independence Day), marking a journey from darkness to life.
For many years the coordinator of the march in Winnipeg was Roberta Malam, working on behalf of the Jewish Federation of Winnipeg. More recently Abby Flackman filled that role, and now the person in charge is Lindsey Kerr.
Since its inception 37 years ago the March of the Living has become a rite of passage for many young Winnipeg Jews who have been able to participate as an organized group from Winnipeg and combine visits to the death camp at Auschwitz-Birkenau in Poland with the subsequent trip to Israel.
Then – the Covid pandemic hit – in 2020, and the March of the Living was put on hold for two years – in 2020 and 2021.
In 2022, the March of the Living resumed, but there was no organized contingent from Winnipeg participating. (There may have been some Winnipeggers who did go on the march that year, but if there were any they would have been part of a general Canadian group since there was no Winnipeg coordinator that year.)
In 2023, however, once again a very large contingent of young Canadian Jews – 51 altogether, of whom approximately two-thirds were from Winnipeg, went on that year’s March of the Living. That particular march was memorable for many reasons, including the fact it was the last full march since 2019 and was to remain the last march to have an organized Winnipeg contingent in the past six years as the years 2024 and 2025 were interrupted by the war in Gaza. (There were smaller marches held in 2024 and 2025, but again there was no organized contingent from Winnipeg.)
Recently, we were contacted by one of the participants of that 2023 march, Ethan Levene, who asked us whether we’d be interested in running what turned out be a very poignant story about one particular aspect of that 2023 March of the Living.
Here is what Ethan wrote:
“In April 2023, the Coast to Coast Canadian delegation of March of the Living was privileged to travel with Holocaust survivor Alex Buckman (z”l). March of the Living is a Holocaust education trip that allows participants to visit and bear witness to the sites of the Holocaust. Unfortunately, while sharing his story in Poland, Alex passed away. However, the impact he left on us students was immeasurable.
“While speaking to us in Warsaw, Alex told us the story of his Aunt Becky’s gâteau à l’orange (orange cake). While in Ravensbruck concentration camp, his aunt managed to write down this recipe. After his parents’ murder, his Aunt Becky went on to raise Alex after surviving. In addition to sharing his story, Alex tasked us with baking the cake with family and friends.
“Out of this, a group of alumni from our trip have created this project: ‘A Taste of Hope.’ On February 1st, university students from over 5 universities across Canada will come together to bake the gâteau à l’orange and hear Alex’s story. Proceeds from the event and this fundraising page will support the World Federation of Jewish Holocaust Survivors and Descendants. Alex was heavily involved with this organization, whose mission is to both create community for Holocaust survivors and their descendants and educate about the Holocaust to help fight against antisemitism and all forms of bigotry and hate.
“Here is information from our fundraising page for the event – ‘A Taste of Hope’: Fundraising for A Taste of Hope.
Ethan added that “it’s completely student led, all by alumni from our 2023 trip attending university at these various locations across Canada; Winnipeg, London, Kingston, Montreal.”
He also added: “Follow us on instagram@tastehope.“
Here is a link to a CBC story about Alex Buckman: Alex Buckman story
In a subsequent email Ethan gave the names of Winnipeggers who are involved in A Taste of Hope: Ethan Levene (studies at McGill), Zahra Slutchuk, Alex Stoller (studies at Queens), Coby Samphir, Izzy Silver (studies at Waterloo).
He also added names of others who are involved in the project: Jessie Ages, Anneke Goodwin, Lilah Silver, Ella Pertman, Ellie Vogel, and Talia Cherun.
To find out more about March of the Living in Winnipeg go to: March of the Living