Local News
What impact have the shootings in Toronto and the war with Iran had on Winnipeggers?
By BERNIE BELLAN (Posted March 11) I suppose that many of you have been wondering where I’ve been the past couple of months. After all, I’ve barely been writing any articles – although I have been working behind the scenes, editing articles contributed to the Jewish Post by other writers.
But, I had been rather content to lay back and enjoy the sun in Mexico – where I’ve been the past six weeks, without bothering to write anything.
Then, on Monday, March 9, I received an email from someone in Toronto asking me whether I’d be interested in interviewing three members of Toronto’s Jewish community with an eye toward writing something about how recent attacks on Toronto synagogues had impacted that community.
I replied that I was somewhat interested in doing that, but I wanted to situate any story I might write in a larger context, i.e., how has Winnipeg’s Jewish community itself been impacted by what happened in Toronto – when three different synagogues had been shot at in the space of five days, beginning in late February with a shooting at a Reform synagogue and culminating with two attacks on two other synagogues on March 8. (As of the time of writing there have been no arrests reported in any of the incidents.)
The person in Toronto who sent me the email asking whether I’d be writing about what happened in Toronto did follow up with quotes from two of the individuals whom she had asked whether I’d be interested in interviewing. (I had asked her to do the legwork on conducting any interviews since I wasn’t sure how pertinent what the interviewees might have to say would be to this story).
Here is what one of the interviewees, Sylvan Adams, President of the World Jewish Congress Israel Chapter, had to say, in reaction to the shootings at the three synagogues: “The nearly daily shooting this week at the synagogues in Toronto is part of a pattern of violence against the Canadian Jewish community. This is entirely alarming and must be stopped, rather than the weak statements we’ve been hearing for far too long from our Prime Ministers, beginning with Trudeau, who never failed to equate Islamophobia after every antisemitic incident. More recently, we’ve heard empty words from Prime Minister Carney, who is simply going through the motions. This would not happen if attacks were against ANY other community. Moreover, these acts of violence should concern far more than the Jewish community alone. When Jewish houses of worship and other institutions come under attack, it is a warning sign for every democratic society. History has shown that what starts with the Jews never finishes with the Jews. These violent antisocial acts are an attack on our way of life. It is part of the war between western civilization and medieval barbarism.”
Whoo boy! Why don’t you come out and say what you really think about the Liberal government, Sylvan?
Now, as if that weren’t harsh enough – in terms of attacking the federal government for not doing enough to protect Canadian Jews, I received an email from an organization called Tafsik, about which this paper had reported when they held an event in Winnipeg last winter. The email was headlined: “The Police REFUSE To Protect The Jewish Community, So Who Should?”
It goes on to say that “For months, we have been told to rely on police and politicians. Yet the results speak for themselves. Police statements multiply; political promises abound. But Jewish institutions and synagogues remain exposed, Jewish businesses are attacked, Jewish schools shot at and Jewish families are left wondering who is actually responsible for their protection.”
What are the solutions Tafsik recommends: “There are roughly 100 synagogues in Toronto and Thornhill area. A practical and financially feasible security model could involve deploying approximately 35 off-duty police officers rotating between institutions on unpredictable schedules. Such a system would ensure a constant professional presence while preventing potential attackers from predicting which locations are protected at any given time.
“The cost would be approximately:
~$100 per hour per off-duty officer
~$2,400 per officer per day
~35 officers rotating year-round
Total annual cost: approximately $30.6 million.”
But, if that seems a little too expensive, Tafsik also recommends a second possibility: “Demand your advocacy organization, CIJA, to lobby the government to permit licensed Jewish security organizations, such as Magen Herut and Shomrim, to obtain firearm carrying permits for trained personnel. Allowing properly vetted and licensed guards to operate in this capacity could significantly reduce costs compared to relying on police officers for security, while still improving protection for Jewish institutions and businesses.”
Great – now we’ll have armed Jewish security guards protecting Jewish institutions. The problem is how does an armed security guard or even a policeman stop someone with a high-powered rife, who can fire from hundreds of metres away, from shooting at a synagogue? All the synagogues fired at had security cameras. Still no arrests though. Doesn’t that tell you that whoever wants to take a shot at a synagogue is taking careful steps to make sure they’re not caught on camera?
The person in Toronto who asked me whether I’d be interested in writing about the Toronto situation sent me one more quote though, this time from a Holocaust survivor by the name of Sol Nayman:
“My wife Queenie and I went to Shul on Shabbat morning. And we can’t go through the main door – we were told to take the side door. We didn’t know what was happening – we saw some boarding up, so we thought maybe there was an accident. And then during davening one of the members of our security team told us what had happened Friday night.
“It’s horrible. Just horrible, horrible, horrible. What we’ve been through, and we don’t know when it will end.
“It’s been all over the news. I’ve had call and emails from friends in Israel, and Scotland.
“And you know, it’s not the first time. I try to remind our people that Zachor appears in the Torah by over 200 times. So we remember. We remember Pharaoh. We remember Amalek. We remember Haman. We remember Hitler… and the Khomeinis and the others.
“But at the end of the day, we will be the ones who survive. And this year, I’ll be on the March of the Living, which will be, combined with other trips to Poland, my 11th journey. And, having turned a young 90, I will hope to keep on going as long as long as I can!”
I like that spirit of defiance, but when it comes to the allusions to past cases where individuals wanted to wipe out the Jews – well, I can understand the emotional reaction but hey, let’s keep it in perspective: A gunshot through a synagogue door or window doesn’t mean someone wants to wipe out the Jews.
Okay – tensions are high in Toronto. That much is clear from everything you’ve read thus far. But, what about Winnipeg? I’ve been wondering.
Are members of the Jewish community in Winnipeg as much on edge as Jews in Toronto apparently are?
On Monday, the federal government announced that it was providing an additional $10 million to enhance security for Jewish institutions across Canada: “The federal government is earmarking $10 million to help Jewish communities bolster security at their gathering places after two Toronto-area synagogues were struck with gunfire.
“The money dispensed through the federal Canada Community Security Program is meant to help protect Jewish places of worship, schools, child care centres, overnight camps and other institutions.
“The program offers organizations at risk of hate-motivated crimes money for security equipment and hardware, such as protective barriers and window and door reinforcements.”
The Saturday, March 7 Free Press also reported that “Winnipeg police said they are increasing patrols around synagogues and Jewish community spaces in an effort to provide ‘reassurance’ to the local community.
“ ‘We haven’t received any similar types of associated threats, WPS Const. Dani McKinnon said Saturday. We’ve taken these types of precautions many times before, because we do have a large community we want to support. And this type of message resonates across Canada.’
But, haven’t we heard quite a few times before that the WPS is heightening patrols around Jewish institutions – especially since October 7, 2023? Does that mean they decrease patrols at some point – perhaps when things seem to be a little calmer?
The article went on to quote vice-president of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs in Manitoba and Saskatchewan Gustavo Zentner, who said Saturday “Canada’s leaders ‘must be absolutely clear that it is outrageous for Canadian communities to face violence because of events happening abroad.’
“ ‘No more ‘thoughts and prayers’ — we need to see urgent action,” Zentner told the Free Press. ‘All levels of government must move immediately to address the escalating security demands of communities targeted by this wave of violence. Resources should flow quickly and distributed directly to communities most at risk.’
What more “resources” woulld want to see Gustavo did not say. But the Jewish Federation did hire a new community security director, William Sagel, earlier this year. In an article written about Sagel, Myron Love quoted Sagel as saying he wanted to emulate the model of security adopted by the Toronto and Montreal Jewish communities. suggesting that the Jewish community in Winnipeg “can learn from the national network and security networks already established in Montreal and Toronto to provide security and peace of mind for community members.” (I’m not so sure how that observation jives with what just happened in Toronto though.)
In the same Free Press article of March 7, Federation CEO Jeff Lieberman added his own two cents, observing that “Attacks like those in Toronto are deeply troubling.
“ ‘Incidents like these are meant to intimidate the Jewish community and make people feel unsafe in their places of worship. Canadians should be alarmed that synagogues in this country are once again being targeted with gunfire.
“ ‘We are in regular contact with our security partners and with the Winnipeg Police Service. While we do not comment on specific security measures, the safety of our community remains our highest priority, and we are continually refining our policies, procedures, and infrastructure. We appreciate WPS increasing patrols and their ongoing efforts to help protect synagogues and Jewish community institutions across our city.’ “
But, there was another question that loomed in my mind: How are average Winnipeg Jews reacting in terms of their day to day behaviour?
To answer that question I sent inquiries to representatives of a number of different organizations, including the Jewish Federation, CIJA, Shaarey Zedek and Etz Chaim congregations, and the Chabad-Lubavitch.
I asked each of them what they’ve been hearing from members of the Jewish community? Are people more frightened now – especially with what happened in Toronto – along with what’s going on in the Middle East? Has synagogue attendance been affected in any perceivable manner? I wondered. Perhaps it’s even gone up – as synagogue goers want to show solidarity with other members of the community?
We did receive a response from a spokesperson for the Jewish Federation in answer to my question: What is the mood among Jewish Winnipeggers at the moment:
” From what we’re seeing across the community, people are certainly aware of what’s happening elsewhere and there is concern – understandably so. But we are not seeing people withdraw from Jewish life or avoid community spaces.
“In fact, attendance at programs and services has remained strong. As you noted with the Purim celebration at Chabad, people continue to show up. In some cases, people are attending out of a sense of determination to not to let those who seek to intimidate us, or deter Jewish life, dictate whether or how we gather.
“At the same time, there is a heightened sense of vigilance. Many organizations are improving their procedures and security measures, and our Community Security Director, William Sagel, is working with them to refine policies, strengthen infrastructure, and coordinate with security and law enforcement (where appropriate).
“So the mood we’re seeing is both awareness and resolve. People appreciate that security is being taken seriously and understand the precautions, but they are not allowing incidents elsewhere to deter them from showing up and participating in Jewish life here in Winnipeg.
Rabbi Avrohom Altein of Chabad also responded to my questions, writing in an email: “Generally, we have had growing numbers of people for events. Purim – we had 230 people at our Purim Seudah and many at each Megillah Reading. We do have security at large events and the police stopped by today to say that they will do regular checking.
“But the world is open today, so news of what happens elsewhere does affect people all over.
“We try to encourage Jews to support each other and strengthen their connection to Mitzvos because that is our true identity. When we try to hide who we are, we lose respect from others. And when we are proud and strong as Jews and support each other, we are safer and earn Hashem’s protection and brochos.”
I responded to Rabbi Altein that I had attended a number of Chabad events in Puerto Vallarta. One of them was called “Shabbat 400” – where 400 Jews gathered together one Friday evening. That event was organized by local Chabad Rabbi Shneur Hecht – along with his dynamic wife, Mushkie.
During the event Rabbi Hecht told attendees that it had been very difficult to find a venue willing to host an event of that size – because of security concerns. There was security at the event – and it went off without a hitch, but it was an indication that the threat of violence against Jews is of worldwide concern. (Ironically, only a week later, violence did break out in Puerto Vallarta, but that had nothing to do with Jews – it was the Jalisco cartel reacting to the killing of their leader, El Mencho.)
The local Chabad does have a couple of police stationed outside when events are occurring there, but what struck me was that the name “Chabad” is displayed prominently outside the building, which is located on a main thoroughfare in Puerto Vallarta. I would have thought the sign would be somewhat more discreet. It does present a juicy target for anyone who wants to send a message by attacking Jews.
We also spoke with Rabbi Carnie Rose, spiritual leader of Shaarey Zedek Congregation. We asked him what the mood was among Shaarey Zedek members – in light of the recent triple shootings in Toronto and what is, at the time of writing, the war raging in the Middle East.
During the interview Rabbi Rose highlighted the Jewish community’s dual experience of concern over resurgent antisemitism and war, balanced by strong interfaith support and enhanced security measures. The community’s determination not to be intimidated by threats of violence reflects resilience, he suggested, while proactive engagement through, for example, school outreach and tangible safety steps, such as increased police collaboration fosters hope for “a better tomorrow,” he said.
Rabbi Rose suggested that congregation members are “concerned and worried,” but not surprised. They view large centres like Toronto as distant, but acknowledged the gravity of antisemitism, noting that it has become less muted recently. Rabbi Rose expressed sadness but not shock, stating, “There are folks out there who don’t like us, and they’re gonna take their… shots.”
Despite antisemitism, Rabbi Rose indicated that he was “profoundly heartened” by support that the congregation has received from varied – and disparate elements of the community. He cited as examples: “Older ladies” visiting the synagogue to show support; members of the Islamic community offering to “make a circle around the synagogue to protect people”; and schools requesting talks on Judaism to address questions like “why do people not like the Jewish people?”
Insofar as how congregants have been reacting to the war with Iran, Rabbi Rose observed that there are people both in and outside the Jewish community who are unhappy with the war, but the community stood in solidarity with monarchists at a recent rally (with Jewish flags). Rabbi Rose himself said that he believes Israel should not withdraw prematurely from the fighting, as “gains would dissipate quickly.”
We asked Rabbi Rose whether there have been enhanced security measures taken at the synagogue recently. He noted an increased police presence, saying that visible security has intensified, including police patrol cars greeting attendees after a large funeral (unprecedented in Rabbi Rose’s eight to nine months in the role, he observed).
He added that there has been a large police presence at events with 250+ people, citing as examples a public school teacher training session on antisemitism that included a synagogue tour and mini-Judaism course, also recent Purim gatherings.
Rabbi Rose described collaboration with Winnipeg Police Service as “excellent, and he expressed a “deep debt of gratitude.”
Local News
Thoughts on Sid Green
By GRANT MITCHELL (Grant Mitchell is a well-known lawyer in Winnipeg whose father, Leon Mitchell, was Sid Green’s law partner for many years.
Following are remarks Grant delivered at the meal of remembrance which was held following Sid Green’s funeral on June 9:
Sid was a Gold medallist in law in the class of 1955.
He knew that my Dad, Leon Mitchell, was in sole practice in the Confederation Building. Leon was 13 years older than Sid but graduated just the year before. Leon had been the business agent for the Civic Employees Union of the City of Winnipeg before and during law school, and his union connections gave him a client base to start a practice.
After obtaining his call to the Bar, Sid attended Leon’s office and informed him, “You need me.”
Leon was taken aback. He was physically disabled from a major bout of Guillen-Barre syndrome, but felt fully capable of practising solo. He told Sid he didn’t need anyone.
Sid told Leon, “You don’t understand. I don’t mean you need me to advise clients, I mean I can do the physical side for you, attending court and hearings and other functions that require mobility.”
With that understanding, they became Mitchell & Green, and later Mitchell, Green and Minuk when Sam Minuk joined the firm. They were the only labour firm in Winnipeg at that time that acted exclusively on the Union side.
In around 1960, a Mitchell & Green client did not have the money to pay for his legal fees and offered the partially constructed cottage he was building at Big Whiteshell Lake to the firm as payment, with the excess to be refunded to the client. Sid and Leon became co-owners of that cottage. For years it had no plumbing and an incomplete ceiling. When Leon died in 1987, Sid got the cottage.
When Sid went into politics, Leon supported the move, and in fact delivered the nomination speech for Sid to be leader of the NDP when he ran against Russ Paulley and then Ed Schreyer.
When Sid was made a Cabinet Minister in the Schreyer government in 1969, Leon also left practice to go into public service, as Chair of the Municipal Board, Chair of the Mental Review Board and Commissioner in the Churchill Forest Industries inquiry. Sam Minuk became a Provincial Judge. It was the end of Mitchell Green and Minuk. That practice was the foundation of what has become the Myers firm.
Sid and Leon’s paths would cross again when Leon was mediator of the Northern Flood Agreement and Sid was the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro.
They had been professional partners with profound mutual respect, but they were also personal friends and remained so for the rest of Leon’s life.
Leon had a huge admiration for people he thought were unusually intelligent. Sid was at or near the top of that list.
At the funeral, I spoke of Sid’s relationship with my father, Leon Mitchell.
I will just add that during their years at the Confederation Building and then in the Crown Trust Building, they hired an articling student named Bill Rachman, who made Sid and Leon nervous about everything he did. When the articling period ended, Sid told Leon that notwithstanding their reservations about Bill’s ethics and practicing skills, Bill would be far more financially successful than either Sid or Leon. Leon agreed. They were correct.
When Sid returned to private practice after his time in government, the unions and he had a falling out and he found himself acting against unions rather than on their behalf
Sid’s philosophy on unions was that protective labour laws produced weak unions, who would not represent their members’ interests effectively. He felt that Wagner Act type labour legislation, now universal in North America, was a tragic compromise by unions. He believed that the recognition strike and the wildcat strike were fundamental weapons for successful trade unions, and that certification of unions, the duty to bargain in good faith and mandatory grievance arbitration were the poor cousins of the recognition and wildcat strikes. This was opposite to the position of the union movement at that time, which lobbied strenuously for union-friendly legislation in the form of greater and greater regulation of the union employer relationship.
In fact, Sid said that the only labour laws that unions should need were to protect the right to picket, and to take away a court’s power to order a person to work. These 2 provisions are found in sections 56 and 57 of the King’s Bench Act to this day, more than 50 years later, and still known to people of my generation as the “Sid Green amendments”. No injunction to enforce a personal services contract. No injunction to restrict assembly on a public thoroughfare to communicate accurate information, that is, a picket sign.
Sid supplemented professors at the law school, Robson Hall, by delivering several lectures in each term about the fundamentals of labour law. I taught that course for 22 years and I had Sid come for a guest lecture, as he had done in the labour law class when I was a student.
He had a powerful and persuasive way of making his points. For example, he felt that a legislated duty to bargain in good faith was a mistake – let the parties fight it out, and let the stronger survive. If employers don’t bargain genuinely, the response is to hold a strike, not run to the labour board.
“If I offer $1, $2, $3, $5, $10 then I’m bargaining in good faith. If I offer $10, $10, $10, $10, then I’m bargaining in bad faith. But it’s still $10!”
He didn’t like certification and preferred the recognition strike. Settle disputes through battle, not argument. Conflict rather than compromise. He particularly objected to certifying unions by card count as opposed to secret ballot vote. A card signer had no meaningful way of revoking their support for the union if they changed their mind after the union applied for certification.
Sid said, “If I buy a vacuum cleaner from a door to door salesman, under the CPA I have a month to change my mind and get my money back. But if I sign a union card, the next day may be too late to change my mind. Which is more important, having a union take over my bargaining rights, or buying a vacuum cleaner?”
Apart from representing employees against unions, Sid also built a practice of representing lawyers who faced disciplinary action from the Law Society. When he ran to be a bencher, he received more votes than any other candidate, even though he was not affiliated with any of the larger law firms. As a bencher, he would send out a “Report from a Bencher” after each Bencher meeting, giving his analysis on the decisions the Society was making, often critical of the majority.
In so many ways, he believed in a “survival of the fittest” approach to human differences. He did not care for protectionist legislation like Human Rights laws. He particularly objected to affirmative action or any other form of “reverse discrimination”.
In one case I had with him, he was acting for Nabila Malik, an economist in the Cabinet secretariat who had been laid off. I was acting for the employer. He called me to tell me that he wished to amend his statement of claim. “I want to add a paragraph to the claim to say that in letting my client go, the government violated its own affirmative action policy because the policy said that there should be more women in senior civil service positions and yet my client, a woman, was let go when many men in senior civil service positions had remained employed.
“Do you object to my amendment?” “No.”
“You don’t think I believe in that affirmative action bullshit do you?” “I don’t know.”
“I DON’T!” But I say, ‘If you are going to preach bullshit, you have to practice bullshit.’”
Sid took up hockey when he was 50. As a young man, he had been a good athlete, quarterbacking the law school football team. It was a late stage of life to learn to skate and join a new sport but Sid approached it with the same gusto he applied to everything else. When he awoke after cardiac surgery a few years later, his first question was, “Will I still be able to play hockey?” You don’t have to be great at something to love it, as I well know. And Sid loved to play hockey, indoors or out.
An employer client of mine had one of its managers vilified in the union newsletter – the “Golden Turkey Award”. My client said, “We want a lawyer for the manager, and we want that lawyer be one with the kind of reputation that when the other side sees who is threatening to sue them, they will involuntarily cringe uncontrollably.” I gave them 2 names, with Sid’s being the second one. “Sid Green, that name sounds familiar. Who is he?” “Oh, he was once the Minister of Labour in the NDP government, but after he left politics, the unions treated him as a pariah, and now he fights them regularly.” “That’s the guy we want.” Sid took the case. He got a settlement offer so generous that the manager desperately wanted to accept it: full page retraction, apology, substantial payment. He may have been a turkey, but he was not foolish. Sid said it was not enough. He got more, before yielding to the client’s wish to settle. And oh, yeah, there were no more golden turkeys awarded.
Sid loved to litigate. He would rather fight than settle. His adversaries knew that, and as a result, he achieved great settlements. Sid’s rejection of an offer was never a bluff.
He had a fundamental belief in democracy, that the rules should be made by people who were elected, not appointed. If he had the choice, he would prefer to be a law maker rather than a lawyer or judge. He also felt that if a matter was worth taking on, it was worth taking all the way. I doubt that any private lawyer has been involved in more appeals.
Others know more about Sid’s career as a politician than I do. He did love to tell one story about his time in government. In 1975, Bob “Junior” Wilson had just been elected in a Wolseley by-election, narrowly defeating Sid’s friend, D’Arcy McCaffrey. In his first appearance in the Legislative Assembly, Wilson stood up to make his maiden speech. The protocol had long been that when a member speaks for the first time, they give a benign speech about how honoured they are to serve their constituents and how they look forward to working with everyone in the house. Instead, Wilson launched into an attack on the governing Schreyer government, accusing them of every misdeed known to politics, and demanding that they immediately resign and call a general election. It fell to Sid to respond on behalf of the NDP majority.
“The Honourable Member has ignored the usual protocol for new members. I don’t mind that. I have no particular affinity for protocols. I think members should say what they genuinely feel. So I commend the Member for being so frank. I have some difficulty with his message, however. He says that we should resign and cease to govern. But that would be undemocratic. A majority of Manitobans have elected us to run the Province. That is our duty. He may not like it, but the fact is that we are his government. But if he feels badly about that, he should imagine how I feel. He is my member!!”
I’ll close by saying that in Sid’s pre-politics practising days, there were many colourful lawyers that made being a lawyer a fascinating profession. By the time he returned to practice, there were only a few of the wild ones left. The profession needed a gadfly like Sid to make practice fun. The reason he got so many votes from the profession is that Manitoba lawyers recognized that in Sid there was a fearlessness mixed with skill, humour, joy and a profound understanding of the policy reasoning behind the letter of the law. There was no one like him, and I doubt that there will be one. I will miss him.
Local News
Sid Green – famed lawyer, one of the first Jewish provincial cabinet ministers, and first director of BB Camp – passes at age 96
By BERNIE BELLAN Sid Green, whose name was well known in so many different circles in Manitoba, passed away on Sunday, June 7, at the age of 96.
Green was perhaps best known as one of three Jewish Members of the Legislature who became cabinet ministers in the first ever NDP government in Manitoba, which came to power in 1969 under the leadership of Ed Schreyer. (The other two Jewish members who became cabinet ministers were the late Saul Cherniack and the late Saul Miller.)
Green, who had first been elected as an MLA in 1966 representing the riding of Inkster, led a challenge to then-NDP leader Russ Paulley in 1968, which eventually led to Paulley resigning as leader. The subsequent leadership race saw Green, who was only 39 at the time, facing off against a 32-year-old Ed Schreyer.
Although Green and Schreyer were later to part ways over a number of issues – especially over the issue of aid to private schools, Green and Schreyer were actually good friends.
In fact, Ed Schreyer, who is now 90, spoke at Green’s funeral, which was held Tuesday, June 9, at the Chesed Shel Emes (with interment following at the Hebrew Sick Benefit Cemetery).
Schreyer told some humourous stories about his and Sid’s competition for the NDP leadership back in 1969. Although the two were rivals they agreed occasionally to share expenses along the way as they toured various Manitoba locations, including one night in a hotel in Flin Flon (or it may have been somewhere else; I wasn’t taking notes at the funeral.) Regardless, they agreed to share a room that night but, as Schreyer recalled, it had to have “two beds.”
Another time during that race, when they were somewhere in western Manitoba, they both received a call from someone in a place on the eastern shore of Lake Manitoba. (Again, I don’t remember which location Schreyer said it was.) The caller said they both had to get there soon because there was going to be a crowd of several hundred people gathered for some other event – and it would have been a perfect time to do some politicking.
But, as they pointed out to the caller, that location was 250 kilometres away and they couldn’t possibly drive there on time – so they both agreed to hire a float plane to fly them there. Unfortunately, that was a very windy day, Schreyer noted, and the plane wasn’t able to land close enough to shore for the both of them to wade in. Instead they decided to jump off the plane’s pontoon – landing up to their armpits in water. They bravely went to meet the assembled crowd – in their soaking wet suits.
Green had a long career as an MLA, being elected to the Manitoba Legislature four times: in 1966, 1969, 1973, and 1977. Eventually he broke completely with the NDP and, along with fellow NDP MLA Ben Hanuschak, started a new party, called the Manitoba Progressive Party, in 1981, which failed abysmally.
I remember well how captivating a speaker Sid Green was when he was campaigning in 1981. One story that he told several times to different audiences went along these lines: After the NDP first formed government in 1969 – much to the surprise of almost everyone back then, Green was often called upon to speak at different venues because he was such a powerful orator.
One time he was somewhere in rural Manitoba and before he was called up to the podium to deliver his remarks, the person who was introducing Green said to the audience: “Ladies and gentlemen, I’d like to introduce to you the ‘Green Minister.'”
Not missing a beat, Sid took to the podium and said something along the following lines to the audience: “My first appointment to Cabinet was as Minister of Energy, Mines, and Natural Resources. Well, I little knew about energy, even less about mines, and nothing at all about natural resources. So the title “the Green Minister” is an apt one.”
In his early years, Sid Green was a very active member of the YMHA on Albert Street, serving as president of the house council for several years. A dedicated athlete, Green competed in basketball and volleyball at the Y. At the age 50 he took up ice hockey – and was known for his fierce competitiveness. He was to serve on the board of directors of the YMHA for many years, right up until its closing in 1997.
Green was also the quarterback for the University of Manitoba law school football team during the early 1950s – and led them to two school championships. In a 2019 interview I conducted with Green about his early years at the YMHA, he noted that he was the only 5’6″ 150 pound quarterback in the inter-faculty league.
In 1954 Green became the first director of BB Camp, which had just moved to Town Island from Sandy Hook.
In 1955, Green graduated from the U of M law school, winning the gold medal in law that year.
He went on to become one of Manitoba’s most successful labour lawyers, subsequently pairing withfamed labour lawyer, Leon Mitchell, later to be joined by Sam Minuk (who was to become a provincial court judge) in what became the firm of Mitchell, Green & Minuk.
During his time as a lawyer, Green often represented employers – which might seem a little surprising for someone who such a staunch NDPer. But Green was staunchly opposed to entrenching laws such as anti-scab legislation or secret ballot voting to unionize. He thought it important to represent any client, including employers engaged in disputes with unions, no matter how much he might have disagreed with that client’s position, and because he was so skilful in arguing a case, he was much sought after by employers to represent them in labour disputes.
He was so respected as a lawyer, moreover, that he was often asked to represent other lawyers in cases before the courts.
Green was also very pro-Israel and extremely proud of his Jewish roots. Although not a religious man, during his many years at the Y – first on Albert Street, then later on Hargrave, Green was involved in developing many Jewish cultural programs.
In days to come we will have much more about the life of Sid Green. In the meantime, if you want to watch a video interview I did with Sid about his experiences at the Y on Albert Street, you can go to Sid Green reminisces.
Sid Green was predeceased by his wife Shleema in 2009 and is survived by his five children: Arthur, MIndy, Cathy, Sharon, and Marty, as well as 15 grandchildren.
For more about Sid Green’s career, read Grant Mitchell’s eulogy, which was delivered at the Meal of Remembrance following Sid Green’s funeral on June 9: Grant Mitchell on Sid Green
Local News
The Jewish Post Ltd.’s brand new website
Click here to be taken to our new website featuring foods you can find on Facebook Marketplace
