Letters, May 27

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 27/05/2024 (857 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Act promptly on misinformation

Re: Division apologizes for reopening old wounds (May 24)

The Hanover School Division’s response that the release of racist study questions as a homework assignment being “a personnel issue” is yet another instance of a public institution dismissing blatant racism within its ranks. The assignment asked students to “make a list of what you think are two positive and two negative effects of residential schools.” Would we ask this question of sexual assault survivors? We do if they are survivors of residential schools, apparently. (for those of you who are not aware, sexual assault was prevalent in the residential schools — and yes, there is evidence).

My point is that this instance is not a personnel issue, it is a school board issue. It is a principal, a school board and a group of teachers who either refuse to learn about the harms of the residential schools or is to lazy to adopt the new curriculum. Perhaps the school board is also too lazy to remove the textbooks that preach this racist, counterfactual nonsense.

The present danger is that some teachers are believing this nonsense and teaching it to students which perpetuates the lies that have been spread about residential schools.

Is anyone going to visit that class to correct these myths and misinformation? Is anyone removing the textbooks and removing the old teaching resources that perpetuate this racist nonsense? Is anyone punishing the school board for not abiding by the new curriculum and requiring its teachers to do so?

I would like to see a significant, serious and immediate response from the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development on this issue. We must act promptly and collectively stop the spread of dangerous, counterfactual misinformation—especially at our public schools.

Lori Wilkinson

Winnipeg

Convention centre troubles

The developing story of what is and will be happening at Naawi-Oodena at the old Kapyong Barracks is very exciting.

Kudos to Treaty One Development Corp. for their progress on that work. The construction of a new hotel and conference centre should help bring more conference business to Winnipeg. That is good for Winnipeg and Manitoba. However, that project goes to show the ever-growing problem in downtown Winnipeg at our white-elephant RBC Winnipeg Convention Centre.

The cost to expand the WCC was $180,000,000 in 2015. Since then Winnipeg, Manitoba and Canada (the 3 owners of the WCC) have paid tens of millions in interest and operating costs not covered by revenue. For the past 3-4 years the site immediately north of the WCC has been sitting vacant awaiting construction of the Sutton Place Hotel which was supposed to be open by now. The Sutton Place Hotel is to be connected by skywalk to the WCC and is essential to generating new conference business for Winnipeg. It is impossible for the WCC sales team to generate significant business without enough hotel rooms to host a national or international conference.

Sadly, the only conference hotel now available for use by the WCC is the Delta Hotel. A review of the schedule of conferences slated for the WCC for the remainder of 2024 shows not one international conference and only a small handful of national ones. Events like The Tattoo Show, the Boat Show, etc. do nothing for our economy.

While Mayor Scott Gillingham is relishing the cheers from the crowd at the Naawi-Oodena announcement, the vacant site at the WCC sits empty except for about 40 concrete piles in the ground and with one of the two construction cranes laying on the ground. He should focus on getting the developer to move that project forward, not on building more infrastructure on the edges of Winnipeg.

The developer has said that hotel will be open in late 2025. I believe that like I believe Arlington Bridge will be open by then.

Laurie Etkin

Winnipeg

Free exchange of ideas imperative

Re: Difficult but vital discussions about what university should mean (May 24)

I am sure that Dr. Newman was a terrific student but that is not the point. Newman used his position of power as the valedictorian to give a one-sided controversial political speech. There are many other platforms he could have used to express his views. He ought to have known that this was not the time nor place for such speech. Newman deprived many graduates of something they will never get back.

He also made the allegation that Israel is committing genocide but there is no truth or evidence behind this claim. Even the anti-Israeli leaning International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling did not find Israel is committing genocide and only stated Israel “should take steps to prevent genocide.” To be fair, the history of the Middle East is so complex that it is very hard to understand, which is one of the reasons many have easily distorted the facts and truth and why there is so much misinformation surrounding Israel, Jews and the Palestinians.

I beg people to take the time to read credible sources about the Middle East like Paul Johnson’s books on Civilizations of the Holy Land, A History of the Jews and Modern Times: A History of the World from the 1920s to the 1980s as well as other reputable sources in order to try to understand the history of the Middle East and its history and real facts.

Our society must allow for the freedom of ideas to be exchanged in settings that allow for real debate. There are always two sides to any conflict or issue and it is imperative to encourage the free exchange of ideas. It would be a good idea for the University of Manitoba and other institutions to arrange for real debate on these issues in order to encourage a true exchange of ideas for both sides to learn from each other. This is one way to try to end the hate and division in our society.

Michelle Pollock

Winnipeg

The point of a safe supply

Re: Safe supply an oxymoron (Letters, May 24)

There is a lot of disinformation regarding safe supply, this was demonstrated in the letter to the editor by Pamela Matthews. If you look into how safe supply was rolled out in B.C. then you would know that a very small number of people who used drugs were able to access safe supply. Out of those who were able to access this, the dosage often was not prescribed to meet the level of tolerance of the individual, causing them still to use from the illicit supply.

This is where scaremongering of ‘diversion’ began as people who were given inadequate prescriptions often still turned to street supply to meet their needs.

If you operate under the assumption that a person who uses drugs will ‘keep shooting literally until they are unconscious or dead’ this is simply untrue, many people who use drugs do so and still live normal lives.

Many people who die from the toxic drug crisis are recreational users and would not fit the criteria for a substance use disorder diagnoses. Regardless of whether their use is disordered or not, no one deserves to die because simply because they use drugs.

Safe supply is simply meant to address this without replacing the need for treatment and recovery.

Kelsey Trumbla

Winnipeg