Local News
Winnipeg South MP Jim Carr answers questions about his positions on Israel and antisemitism

By BERNIE BELLAN On July 23 I spoke with Jim Carr, Member of Parliament for Winnipeg South Centre and Minister without Portfolio in the Federal Cabinet (also special representative to the prairies). I began our conversation with an explanation why I was asking to speak with Minister Carr at this particular moment:
“There are two different angles to me wanting to interview you, Jim. One is Canada’s position re Israel and the Palestinians. The other is the summit on anti-Semitism.
“The first question that I have for you is prompted by a phone call I had from the representative of a national Jewish organization who thought you have been unduly quiet when it comes to giving any kind of a point of view on Canada’s position vis-à-vis Israel and the Palestinians, especially as it relates to the recent war. What do you have to say to that?”
Carr: “My position is the government’s position, Bernie. I’m a member of the Cabinet. We speak with one voice. The advocacy that I offer is with my colleagues as a member of the government, but the public expression of Canada’s point of view is the same view that would be expressed by all members of government. We continue to be steadfast allies of the State of Israel and we believe in Israel’s capacity and Israel’s ability to defend itself.
“We work toward a two-state solution and that does not represent a change in Canadian foreign policy vis-à-vis the Middle East. That’s what Canadian foreign policy has been for a long time now and across different governments.
“It’s one I share, so the government’s position as would have been expressed by the Prime Minister or by Minister Garneau (Minister for Foreign Affairs) is also my position.
“I would add something else. Every position I take as a member of the government is informed by who I am as a person, as an individual, and the values and the perspective how I see the world – the larger world, my own community, and that is very much molded by my Jewish upbringing, my Jewish values, my Jewish culture. So, not only on questions of Israel and the Middle East, but also on questions of social policy, of inclusion, on diversity – all those ways of looking at public policy are informed by the fact that I’m Jewish – and proudly so, and have been personally the object of anti-Semitism in my lifetime.
“I understand the anxiety felt in our community, so I think it’s very important that I make that point that the views of the government are views that I share – and all of my views are informed by being Jewish.”
JP&N: “Following up on that then, how would you respond to the suggestion that, while other members of your caucus – and the government, referring to the Cabinet, were fairly outspoken in defense of Israel – you were quiet?”
Carr: “I wrote a letter to the Jewish Federation that detailed my own experience with anti-Semitism, with my own steadfast support of the State of Israel. I’ve never made a secret of that.
“You also know that I am a founding member of the Arab-Jewish Dialogue in Winnipeg and that I share with that group a belief that a two-state solution is the path we ought to be on.
“Canada has a long history of diplomacy in the region. My goodness, it dates all the way back to peacekeeping and Lester Pearson. We have experience, we have diplomatic credentials. Minister Garneau has already visited the region.
“We are available to those who are interested in knowing about how my Jewish values inform all kinds of issues, but it’s important to say, Bernie, that the government’s expressions of policy are ones that I share because I’m a member of government. That’s the way our system works and that’s the way I feel comfortable expressing the government’s point of view.
“The time for personal expressions of policy is within caucus or Cabinet, but I’m very comfortable with how the Prime Minister himself – just two days ago, was very articulate on the subject of anti-Semitism and our support for Israel.”
JP&N: The Minister of Citizenship of Immigration (Marco Mendicino) has come out quite forcefully in defense of Israel. Do you see that as being in any way in conflict with the government’s position?”
Carr: “No. I’d be very surprised if anything he would have said would have been offside the government’s position. He and I and others are very in tune with the thinking in our Jewish community. Let’s also remember that there are very many opinions within your community – and you have reported on that yourself.
“Again, there is a very important point to make: When it becomes the official policy of a government, a minister – that would be me, when it comes to values and respecting points of view, much of my world view is formed by the fact I have been raised in a Jewish home, in a Jewish community, have been very close to the State of Israel – and continue to be, but also understand that peace and a two-state solution is the value we’re trying to achieve.”
JP&N: “Turning then to Irwin Cotler’s Summit on Antisemitism, which was followed by one on Islamophobia – interesting juxtaposition there – one following on the heels of another, do you see anything substantive coming out of these various summits?”
Carr: “I do. I see an anti-racism strategy – and it comes at a moment when the country is so sensitive to crimes of hatred and the moment is a very tender one for communities across the country, and I understand the sensitivity that’s being felt in the Jewish community and in the Muslim community now because of these horrible acts of hatred and the response to them has to be coordinated. It has to be rooted in the security of these communities.
“You will know that we announced a further $6 million investment that will apply in our own community to places of worship so that security and infrastructure can be bolstered – which is very important because people are insecure, especially I think young people. I am, because of the role I played in recruiting Argentinean Jews to Winnipeg – that is a particularly important story for me: many Jews coming to Canada, looking for the freedom to live their lives as Jews now have to contend with this latest outbreak of intolerance and hatred, which is utterly unacceptable.
“As for the Government of Canada – on the security front, on education, on coordinated action, on internet hatred – it’s all coming together now. I think it’s a moment now where all Canadians understand, whether their particular group has been the object of hatred or they observe it as Canadians who care, know it’s time for coordinated action and we’re seeing it now.”
JP&N: “Referring specifically to the internet, which is the source of so much of the hatred that we’re seeing – I watched the presentation of the inter-parliamentary conference on anti-Semitism, where (Montreal MP) Anthony Housefather and (US Congresswoman) Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and several other representatives from parliaments around the world participated. It seemed there was a frustration they all felt reining in social media. I don’t know that any government has found a particularly effective approach to trying to legislate that. Do you see anything that can be done that’s realistically feasible and that can rein in the kind of hatred that’s so pervasive on the internet? They (parliamentary representatives) talked about the “Whack a Mole” problem where you clamp down on one area of the internet and another one springs up. Do you see any way of controlling that?”
Carr: “There is a balance in a free society – you know that as well as anybody. We have to safeguard for people to speak freely, but it has limits that are defined in law. The Charter speaks to them. There are pieces of legislation that speak to them, and the balance is something that one is always searching to find, but I think you would find that there is a consensus among many Canadians that when you are inciting people to take the law into their own hands and to stimulate violence against an identifiable group and for hatred against these groups to be perpetrated is a value that Canadians abhor and to find that balance between freedom of speech and the necessary safeguards to make sure that doesn’t become far more dangerous that we have seen playing out on the internet is where the discussion is joined.”
JP&N: “Okay, this has been interesting. I have to note though that your Conservative challenger in the next election is, once again, going to be Joyce Bateman (for the third time).
“Since I know both of you I have to say that I have nothing negative to say about either one of you. I find you both to be capable, likable individuals. I just find it interesting that the Conservatives are going back to a candidate who’s lost twice to you. But what’s your situation going to be? Are you going to be campaigning full out?”
Carr: “Yes, as full out as the moment will allow, and that will depend on where we’re at when the writ is issued, but I never underestimate an opponent and it’s a huge mistake for any candidate to do that. Joyce Bateman will run hard, she’ll run – I’m sure, an ethical campaign. I have no reason to think she won’t. We’ll run on our platform, on what we’ve accomplished, on what we hope to do for the people of Winnipeg South Centre in the next mandate.
“I’m in that school of politicians, Bernie, where you never take anything for granted, you take your opponent seriously, and you treat them with respect.”
JP&N: “ I have to ask you though about the Green Party MP (Jenica Atwin) who defected to the Liberals. To me there was an element of hypocrisy in the Liberals accepting someone who had been so critical of Israel when you just said yourself that the Liberal Party position is fully supportive of the State of Israel. I know she walked back some of her comments, but it would seem to me to sort of reflect a willingness of the Liberals to try and be all things to all people all the time. How would you respond to that?”
Carr: “When you’re a member of caucus you have your conversations in caucus meetings that are privileged and when you walk out of caucus you talk about policy that caucus and the government formulated. That’s the way it works and that’s the way you maintain discipline in any caucus. If, over time, a member of caucus believes that their view of policy or their view of the world is sufficiently offside with what the caucus’s position is, then they have to have a long conversation with themselves. If you have difficulty aligning yourself with the view of the caucus, then you have to determine whether you want to be a member of that caucus.”
JP&N: “I would be remiss if I didn’t ask the question that has been top of mind for so many people – which is about your health. What can you tell our readers about your state of health?”
Carr: “I continue to receive treatments. They’re going very well. My energy level is good. I’m optimistic. I have been working hard – in a very odd environment – like everybody else, with a computer on the second floor of my house for the last 18 months. I’m looking forward to the campaign. I feel energized by it. I have been, since the day when I made my (blood cancer) diagnosis public which, by the way, was the day after I knew about it, surrounded by goodwill and all kinds of wonderful expressions of support. I’m very grateful for that. I feel ready for the campaign ahead. It’s an honour and a privilege to represent the people of Winnipeg South Centre I and look forward very much to representing them again.”
Local News
The Simkin Centre received over $500,000 in charitable contributions in 2025 – so why is its CEO complaining that “it cannot make the same number of bricks with less straw?”
By BERNIE BELLAN (This story was originally posted on January 14) I’ve been writing about the Simkin Centre’s aacumulated deficit situation ($779,000 according to its most recent financial report) for some time.
On January 14 I published an article on this website, in which I tried to find out why a personal care home that has an endowment fund valued at over $11 million is running such a huge deficit.
Following is that article, followed by a lengthy email exchange I had with Don Aronovitch, who is a longtime director of the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation. My purpose in writing the original article, along with the update, is I’m attempting to ascertain why the Simkin Centre simply doesn’t use more of the charitable donations it receives each year to address its financial situation rather than investing then under the management of the Jewish Foundation:
Here is the article first posted on January 14: 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.’ “
(Updated January 24): Since posting my original story January 14 I have been engaging in an email correspondence with Don Aronovitch, who is a longtime director of the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation.
On Jan. 19 I received this email from Don:
Hi Bernie,
Your burning question seems to be “Do all donations to the Simkin Centre end up going to the SC Foundation.”
In our attempts to explain the subtle workings of the Simkin Centre PCH, the Simkin Centre Foundation & the role of the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba, we somehow have failed to answer your question. I trust that the following will do the job.
All donations to the Simkin Centre (PCH & Foundation) go to the SC Foundation as a ‘custodian’ for the PCH.
Then, at the direction of the PCH, the monies, in part or in whole, are transferred to the PCH either immediately or subsequently. Further, again at the PCH’s direction, a portion may be transferred to the Foundation’s Encroachable Building Reserve Fund at the JFM.
Regards,
Don Aronovitch
I responded to Don:
But how are the monies that are transferred to the PCH treated on the financial statement?
Is everything simply rolled in as part of “Contributions from the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation?”
On Jan. 22 Don responded:
Bernie,
I said previously and I repeat that the Simkin Centre has many sharp minds and therefore, it is eminently able to effect asset management strategies appropriate to the Simkin Centre’s ‘Big Picture’ which they understand fully. Having said that, please note that:
Other than the Simkin Stroll which brings in about $100k and goes directly into the Home’s operations to support the program being promoted, the annual contributions to the Simkin Centre are relatively nominal.
The suggestion that there may be a sub rosa plan to ‘starve‘ the PCH by stashing money in the Building Reserve Fund at the JFM is absurd, totally absurd!!
Don
I responded to Don:
Don,
According to the Simkin Centre Foundation’s filing with the CRA it received $205,797 in charitable donations in 2025 plus another $387,000 from other registered charities.
Would you describe those contributions as “relatively nominal?”
But – there is no way of knowing what portion of those donations was given back to the Simkin Centre for immediate use and what portion was invested by the Jewish Foundation.
Can you tell me why not? (Laurie says that is an “internal matter.” Why?)
By the way, I never wrote there was any plan to stash “money in the Building Reserve Fund at the JFM.”
I was simply asking what is the point of building up an endowment for future use when the Simkin Centre’s needs are immediate, viz., its accumulated deficit of $779,000.
Also, have you or any other members of the board had meals for a full week at the Simkin Centre? I have spoken to many residents during my time volunteering there who told me they find the quality of the food to be very poor.
Why I’m so persistent on this point Don is that Laurie Cerqueti has been making the case – quite often – that the amount of funding the Simkin Centre receives from the WRHA is far from adequate.
But, if it’s actually the case that the Simkin Centre receives a substantial amount in charitable donations each year, but chooses to invest a good chunk of those donations rather than spend them, then it’s hardly a valid criticism to make of the WRHA that it’s funding is inadequate.
Why is it so gosh darn difficult to come up with the amount Simkin has been receiving in charitable donations?
Could it be that it’s because a lot of people would be dismayed to learn the reason is that money is being invested rather than being spent?
-Bernie
Don responded:
Bernie,
I add the following to this, my last contribution to the thread below.
First, let’s stick with individual donors as those were the references you started with. Starting with the 2025 figure of $206,000 total, deduct $105,000 (from the Simkin Stroll) and also deduct the healthy 5 figure donation (from a longtime Simkin supporter). We then have approximately $60,000 from 20/30 individuals and YES, it is what I would call “relatively nominal”.
As an fyi, I am in Palm Springs and in the past several days, I have asked 4 individuals what would be their spending expectations of a charity to which they donated $25,000. The responses were almost identical and they can be summarized as “We only support organizations where we value their mission and trust their management. In trusting their management, we believe that they know best if our money should be used for current operations, for future operations or for both.“
Don
Does it make sense to say, as Don does, that when considering the amount of charitable dollars the Simkin Centre receives, one ought to deduct the proceeds from the Simkin Stroll and a “healthy 5 figure donation?” I don’t see the logic in that.
And, I’m still wondering: How much of the more than $500,000 in charitable donations the Simkin Centre received in 2025 came back to the Simkin Centre to fund its immediate needs and how much was invested?
Local News
New community security director well-suited for the challenge
By MYRON LOVE Despite his still-young age, William Sagel, our community’s newly appointed director of security, brings a wealth of experience to his new role.
“I have always been drawn to protecting others,” observes the personable Sagel. “It may reflect the difficult time growing up, being bullied throughout elementary school. I was small for my age, and I usually found myself breaking up fights.”
His early years, he recounts, were spent growing up in Nice, on the famed Riviera, where his father worked in construction management. At the age of 10, the family moved back to Montreal.
Back in Montreal, Sagel continued his studies, graduating from high school and CEGEP, then enlisting in the armed forces.
Following his army service, he began his career with the Dutch Diplomatic Security Service. While working abroad, a banking executive encouraged him to return to school and earn a university degree.
“I chose to come back to Montreal,” he says. “That is where my family is.”
Armed with a degree in political science, he embarked on a career in security consulting.
In 2023, after years of working in Canada, William began training security forces in Mali. “I was responsible for the training department. We had around 400 security personnel, providing them the tools and skills to be more effective at what they do,” he explains.
Sagel arrived in Winnipeg on December 1 to assume his new position.
“The major focus in our security program is to build resilience and empower the community,” he explains. “Developing a plan to be able to respond properly to future crises. We establish a baseline, where you are now and where you hope to be in five years’ time.”
He notes that our Jewish community 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 plan to work on raising security standards,” he says. “With the rise in antisemitic incidents over the years and after October 7, we need to do more to mitigate threats. We must raise awareness through education and empower community members through training.”
He speaks about encouraging more people to contribute their time to strengthening our community in any way they can, especially through volunteering. He encourages anyone who is willing to participate to reach out to him directly.
“Over the next few months,” he reports, “I will be working with institutions to put programs in place that will build resilience. The goal is to provide long-term security not only for ourselves but also for future generations.”
When asked about the hostile environment for Jewish students on university campuses, he says that he has had positive discussions with both the Winnipeg Police Service and the University of Manitoba’s director of security, who are committed to providing a more conducive learning environment for students.
As to his impressions of his new Jewish community, he has only positive things to say. “I came here alone, but everyone has been super friendly and welcoming,” he comments. “A lot of people have reached out to me. I have had a lot of dinner invitations, but unfortunately have been very busy trying to get organized and settled.”
“I am looking forward to the next few months of exploring Manitoba, its parks and museums, and seeing what the city has to offer.”
Local News
Calvin Gutkin: more than just a family doc
By GERRY POSNER It staggers me often when I look at the careers of various people. Calvin Gutkin’s story is more than staggering. From West Kildonan to the pinnacle of family doctors in Canada, here’s a guy who has made a huge difference for many people. You wouldn’t know it to talk to him, but truth will out.
Calvin’s life began at 215 Rupertsland Avenue. Son of the late Danny and Dorothy Gutkin, Calvin, who recently became an octogenarian, was a graduate of West Kildonan Collegiate (home to so many illustrious Winnipeggers).
Even from his earliest school years, you had to know Gutkin would go far. At age 13, he won an oratorical contest sponsored by the Winnipeg Optimist Club. He then competed as the youngest of 200 entrants in the International Optimist Clubs Oratorical Competition for boys 13-16 and won the Bronze Medal.
That speaking ability continued at the University of Manitoba. During his third year of medical school, he became the first ever medical student to be selected as a member of of the University of Manitoba’s inter- university debating team, which consisted of three law school students and Calvin. Not surprisingly, they defeated the teams from the other western Canadian universities and won the debating competition in which they were entered.
Even though he then had offers to pursue a law career, Calvin continued with his medical education. He received his MD from the University of Manitoba in 1969 and then did his post- grad training at the Toronto Western Hospital/University of Toronto. In 1974, he earned his certification in Family Medicine (CCFP), awarded by the College of Family Physicians of Canada.
In 1982, he successfully achieved a second certification, this time in Emergency Medicine- this time becoming a CCFP again but with the added letters “EM”.
In 1984, Gutkin was awarded a fellowship in the College of Physicians of Canada. That was barely the beginning. Why do I say that? you might ask. Reflect on this list of positions Calvin has held over a period of years and you can get a glimmer of what he’s all about.
From 1973-1985 he both worked and taught at Toronto Western Hospital
Throughout that time, he was an Assistant Professor in the University of Toronto Department of Family and Community Medicine, as well as Director and Head of the U of T’s Emergency Medicine Residency Programme
From 1985- 1995 he was Chief of Emergency, Deputy Chief of Family Medicine and Occupational Health Physician at the Credit Valley Hospital in Mississauga
From 1991-1995 he was Chief of the Medical Staff and Chair of the Medical advisory Committee at Credit Valley.
From 996-2012 he was Executive Director and CEO of the College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC) as well as its Research and Education Foundation.
One has to appreciate just what this last title means. In essence, Cal Gutkin was the head honcho for over 35,000 family physicians across Canada for 17 years. No small job I say. During his tenure at the helm, he was in large part responsible for the evolution of the College’s annual scientific assembly into the Family Medicine Forum – the largest annual medical conference in Canada. He was also responsible for the establishment of the National Physician Survey, the launch of the Triple C Competency Based Curriculum for training family medicine residents and the introduction of the Patient’s Medical Home, an innovative new team-based model for family practice. To put his contributions to Family Medicine in a context that sports fans might relate to, you could say Gutkin was the MVP (Most Valuable Physician) in his specialty.
Along the way, Gutkin found time to be a physician for the Canadian Special Olympics, the Toronto Argonauts, and the Toronto Youth Athletic Club – which helps wayward boys. Moreover, he was a National Board Director of the Michelle Jean Foundation and currently serves on the board of the Writers’ collective of Canada, a charity that reaches out to disadvantaged individuals and populations.
In 2012, Gutkin was recognized by the Government of Canada when he was awarded the Queen Elizabeth 11 Diamond Jubilee Medal for his outstanding service to family medicine in Canada and abroad. In 2015, he received another honour, the W. Victor Johnston Award, named for the very first executive director of CFPC. This award recognizes Canadian or international family physicians who have made an outstanding leadership contributions to family medicine or abroad. He was, not so surprisingly, the first Jewish boy from the north end of Winnipeg to reach this lofty status.
Dr. Cal Gutkin has remained active as a board director at CarePoint Health – a new patient-centred team- based primary care centre in Mississauga – as well as on the Mississauga Health Team, which is the Ontario government’s model responsible for the oversight and integration of health care services in each community.
With all of these awards and honours accorded Gutkin, what really hit home for me was the fact that, in 2013, the CFPC created a special award, called the Calvin L. Gutkin Family Medicine Ambassador Award. This award, presented annually, recognizes a dynamic leader in Canadian Family Medicine who, by virtue of his or her vision, innovation and relationship building, has positively impacted the role of family physicians and the care provided by them for the people of Canada. You usually have to die before you get a medal or award named after you, but happily, Gutkin is an exception here. I would suggest that Rupertsland Avenue has never had such an esteemed alumnus.
Gutkin still traces his career and the many awards that it has brought to him as being in large part attributable to his growing up years in Winnipeg with a strong and nurturing support system from his parents and his younger sister Cheryl, whom Calvin says has now been married to three life partners: Dickie Dee, Salisbury House, and Earl Barish. He was also blessed with a network of great life-long Winnipeg friends with whom he grew up up, including Dane Hershberg, now in Toronto, along with David Stuart, Howard Malchy, and Lawrie Halparin, all now in Vancouver.
Most of all, Calvin is quick to point out that much of his good fortune was because of a happy and long marriage of nearly 50 years to his wife, the former Mary Waddell, who sadly passed in April 2025. Plus, he has three wonderful daughters: Michelle, Maia and Leah; their life partners, Cory, Andy and Matt; and four magnificent grandkids- Maddie, Declan, Jane and William.
I wondered aloud as to what Gutkin had to say about the state of family medicine today. In fact, he has a lot to say and The Jewish Post could devote a whole page to just that topic. But what Calvin Gutkin emphasized to me was that if you want to have a healthy population, it is essential to have access to a family physician and good primary/first line care. Cal states emphatically that “if our governments and health care systems hope to create better health outcomes, the best place to focus their resources is in primary care and family practice.”
