Local News
Professor Bryan Schwartz weighs in on issue of campus antisemitism
By BERNIE BELLAN The emergence of antisemitism on university campuses on Canada since the Hamas massacre of October 7 has shocked and saddened much of the Jewish community.
Whether it’s ongoing rallies and demonstrations against Israel, Jewish students being bullied and threatened, or – perhaps what has come to be one of the most insidious forms of Jew hatred – the vehement denunciations of Israel by academics who refuse to countenance opposing views, university campuses in both the United States and Canada have become hostile environments for Jews, both students and teachers.
On Thursday, November 30, Professor Bryan Schwartz of the University of Manitoba Law School, engaged in a dialogue with Dr. Ruth Ashrafi, Regional Director Manitoba, B’nai Brith Canada about the subject of campus antisemitism. The setting was the Berney Theatre at an event organized by Winnipeg Friends of Israel and B’nai Brith Canada, which drew a very large crowd, made up of a good mix of younger and older members of the community, along with many individuals from outside the community as well.
Prof. Schwartz is certainly good for some choice quotes, but much of his analysis of what is happening to Jews as a group certainly leaned toward being heavily pessimistic and, when it came to offering advice how to combat campus antisemitism well, frankly, he didn’t have much to suggest in the way of concrete advice beyond extolling the merits of a free exchange of ideas.
In fact, Prof. Schwartz repeated the expression “Jews don’t count” several times during the evening, explaining what he meant by saying that is “there aren’t a lot of Jews to count.” If it’s simply a matter of Jews being outnumbered, however, then there isn’t much that can be said to counter the torrent of antisemitism that’s been unleashed. But, as I note in my Short takes column in this edition, a professor at Columbia University by the name of Shai Davidai has achieved a high degree of recognition as the result of a Youtube video that was posted of him denouncing the administration of Columbia University for enabling antisemitism on that campus.
Frankly, Prof. Haskell Greenfield, who’s head of the Judaic Studies program at the University of Manitoba, has also been urging a much stronger stand be taken against university administrators who wring their hands and resist denouncing antisemitism on their campuses – and that includes the president of the University of Manitoba, even more so the president of the University of Winnipeg – which has a shocking number of so-called “expert” academics for whom an open exchange of ideas is anathema.
With reference to what it’s like being a university professor who is willing to stand up for Israel, Prof. Schwartz admitted,: “It’s pretty lonely where I am.” The much easier route to follow, Prof. Schwartz suggested, is for academics who want to further their career ambitions to join in on the piling on of Israel.
“What’s easy is going along to get along,” he said. “It’s a safe environment to follow the official doctrine.”
In introducing Prof. Schwartz, Dr. Ashrafi noted that he has just authored a recently-published book titled, “Reenlightening Canada” which, although it was written prior to October 7, sheds a great deal of light on the dire situation in which so many Jews, especially students on university campuses, now find themselves.
In his opening remarks, however, Prof. Schwartz set the tone for what proved to be a deeply depressing outlook on what the future holds, not only for Jewish students on campuses, but for Jews everywhere
“The arc of history is not trending toward Jewish survival,” he suggested. Later in the evening he added this: “I can’t think of another civilization that’s facing extinction as we are.”
“A university is supposed to be a place where you excel based on your excellence,” Prof. Schwartz said. “That was the only criterion in which Jews have been able to survive.”
Now, however, the ideology at universities has become dominated by what he described as “DEI”: Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion.
What’s been happening, Prof. Schwartz explained, is that campuses have been applying litmus tests for would-be academics based on how well they score on the criteria of DEI. Later in the evening, he repeated his condemnation of the sweeping trend toward DEI on university campuses, noting that there are entire bureaucracies at universities “largely hostile to Israel,” populated by DEI officers. He opined, “The Woke industrial complex is a big business. DEI is a big business.”
Dr. Ashrafi spoke of a book by someone by the name of David Batthil, who is a British comedian. A couple of years ago Batthil wrote something called “Jews Don’t Count: How Identity Politics Failed One Particular Identity.”
As Batthil points out in his book, and as Dr. Ashrafi explained to the audience, “Jews are white (strike one), privileged (strike two), and part of the structure of white hegemony” (strike”(strike three) – to use the stereotypical description of Jews now so popular with “Woke” academia.
Since October 7 we’ve now seen how it’s become fashionable for so many members of academe to engage in those tropes. It’s as if the events of the past two months have unleashed pent-up feelings of hatred toward Jews that were bubbling under the surface, but which many might have been embarrassed to admit prior.
Returning to Prof. Schwartz’s dire warning that Jews are on the wane, he recited some figures to back up that contention.
“There is a worldwide shortage of Jews,” he observed. “Jews make up 2 percent of the world’s population.’ (I did some fact checking: There are 14 million Jews in the world. There are 2.38 billion Christians and 1.8 billion Muslims.) “The myth is we’re so powerful…What difference does it make to the people in power?… It’s very career enhancing to criticize Israel.”
Dr. Ashrafi asked Prof. Schwartz about Jews finding themselves in quandaries wondering now about the financial support so many have given to universities – and what should they do going forward ?
Prof. Schwartz used an interesting analogy – that seemed to perplex most of the audience, when he responded that many Jews are now having a “Colonel Nicholson moment.”
He explained that Colonel Nicholson was a character in the movie, “Bridge Over the River Kwai” (played by Alec Guinness) who, upon realizing that he had been aiding and abetting the Japanese enemy by helping to construct a bridge that was intended solely to prolong the Japanese war effort, asked himself: “What have I done?”
That is what many Jewish donors to academic institutions must now be asking themselves, Prof. Schwartz observed. (Again, I refer to Prof. Shai Davidai of Columbia University, who offers a clear prescription for how Jewish donors to academic institutions should respond to what is happening on campuses everywhere. He suggests that you not call or write to your alma mater or favoured institution saying you’re not going to be making a donation; rather, he says, “Wait until they call you, then say no.” However, I’m writing this in the same issue where Myron Love profiles the University of Manitoba’s Jewish Vice-President, Donor Relations. There is some irony there.)
Prof. Schwartz offered an imaginary description of a Jewish student applying for advancement at a typical university these days. When asked about their background and the student says, “I went to Jewish school, to Jewish summer camp, and to Israel, and my parents are well-to-do – it’s not going to do a lot for you when it comes to passing the DEI litmus test.”
Instead of donating to universities, Prof. Schwartz suggested, “Jewish donors should expend some of their energy and goodwill making sure the next generation of Jews will survive,” by insuring that anyone who wants to send their kids to a Jewish school will be able to do so regardless of their income.
He also recommended looking to the concept of “free universities,” where no tuition would be charged. Instead, they would be supported by donations, but where a free exchange of ideas would be guaranteed, not hampered by notions of political correctness
Prof. Schwartz turned to the subject of religion, suggesting that “the Jewish religion is a lot more tolerant than the ‘Woke’ religion.”
“There were many flawed characters in the Bible,” he observed, pointing to King David as an example.
“The Talmud is a record of debates,” he added, whereas “Woke religion is a substitute for many forms of religiosity.”
As for the Jews who have been joining the pro-Hamas crowd, Prof. Schwartz offered this pithy comment: “What good is an anti-Israel demonstration without a ‘show Jew’?”
At that point, Dr. Ashrafi said she wanted to entertain questions from the audience. I happened to be sitting right near where Adriana Glickmann of B’nai Brith was holding the mobile mic, so I motioned for Adriana to hand me the mic. (I’m usually too shy to ask questions – well, maybe not.)
I asked Prof. Schwartz about a story that had just appeared in that day’s Free Press – about a University of Manitoba nursing student who had been suspended for one year from the program, allegedly over anti-Semitic posts on her Instagram account.
I said that I was shocked that university administrators actually took steps to sanction a student over anti-Semitic posts and I wondered whether perhaps the U of M Faculty of Nursing administration had shown other administrators at universities here how to respond to anti-Semitic behaviour?
Prof. Schwartz responded that he wasn’t able to comment about that particular case because he didn’t have all the “facts,” saying “I have to learn more…Merely having a non-conforming view is not sufficient” grounds for punishment, he suggested.
He added though, that “if we had an atmosphere of free discussion, then the Jewish cause would do quite well.”
Someone asked Prof. Schwartz if he could distinguish between free speech and hate speech?
He responded: “In practice, free speech means you have the freedom to denounce Israel.”
He did go on to offer a scholarly review of how the Supreme Court has approached the subject of “hate speech,” suggesting that the court takes a very narrow view of what might constitute hate speech, saying that it has to constitute “hate toward an identifiable group.”
Another questioner wondered “why aren’t there reasonable limits being placed on spewing antisemitism?”
Prof. Schwartz suggested that “being a university president doesn’t prevent you from speaking up.” He added though, that “Jewish faculty are afraid to speak up. You want to be an academic and not get pilloried. What’s easy is going along to get along. It’s a safe environment to follow the official doctrine.” (That certainly doesn’t apply to Prof. Haskell Greenfield, who has been actively pressing the administration at the U of M to do much more to protect Jewish students and faculty on campus by, for instance, clamping down on pro-Palestinian demonstrations that have been organized by groups that have no standing at that campus.)
Prof. Schwartz added: “The President of the U of W can say something about events where there’s no balance,” such as that marathon hatefest toward “genocidal, colonial, imperalist Israel” conducted by seven U of W professors on Friday, November 24.
On the other hand, Prof. Schwartz observed, anyone who dares to take a stand in favour of a balanced presentation has to be thinking: “What’s in it for me?”
Similarly, “if you want to get your grant money” you many come to the realization that “Jews aren’t actually powerful” and viciously attacking Israel isn’t going to hurt you monetarily.
Dr. Ashrafi observed that she’s seen “students kicked off Zoom conferences because they voiced support for Israel.” Nevertheless, she added: “We are resilient. We do not give up. We hold people to account. That’s what we do at B’nai Brith.”
Prof. Schwartz concluded with this assessment: “We’re not going to win the censorship debate where we’re arguing about censoring this, censoring that. The only hope is that in an atmosphere of free discussion the truth will prevail.”
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