Winnipeg Free Press

Winnipeg Free Press (Newspaper) - February 1, 2025, Winnipeg, Manitoba THINK TANK COMMENT EDITOR: RUSSELL WANGERSKY 204-697-7269 ● RUSSELL.WANGERSKY@WINNIPEGFREEPRESS.COM A9 SATURDAY FEBRUARY 1, 2025 Ideas, Issues, Insights Light on traitors, but long on solid advice K NOW what a damp squib sounds like? It’s the release of a seven-volume, 900-page, 500-day study of foreign interference in Canada’s 2019 and 2021 elections. The “great foreign interference scandal” turned out to be not-so-great, hardly a scandal, and with- out much actual foreign interference. Justice Marie-Josée Hogue’s public inquiry into foreign interference found “no evidence that the overall result of any election has been swung by a foreign actor.” She did not “see any evidence” of government legislation, regulation, or policy be- ing “adopted or abandoned as a result of a foreign state’s interference.” What about the shocking revelations dominating headlines over the past year that some “semi-wit- ting or witting” parliamentarians colluded with foreign governments such as China and India to interfere in our democratic processes? Nope. Hogue concluded there was “no evidence that there are ‘traitors’ in our Parliament who are con- spiring with foreign states against Canada.” No need to name names because there are no names to be named. For concerned Canadians who thought other- wise, the justice admonished us all, writing, “… the extent to which foreign interference has suc- ceeded in permeating our democratic processes and institutions should not be overblown.” There you have it. Nothing to see here. Relax. Except we shouldn’t. We dodged a bullet, noth- ing more. If the inquiry report failed to confirm actual foreign interference, it did not fail to point out the systematic and systemic failings of the federal government’s national security and intelligence apparatus. From the highest and most secret recesses of the shadow world of intelligence gath- ering and dissemination, to the highest and most public world of Parliament itself. Both failed us. Public servants and politicians. If no one behaved badly, an awful lot performed poorly. To wit, her assessment of the govern- ment. They “reacted slowly”; “information has not flowed properly”; “confusion about roles and accountabilities”; “co-ordination of efforts has been a challenge”; and — understatement of the year — were “bad at effectively communicating” to the public. But all’s good now, she says. “I am satisfied that the government now appreciates the foreign in- terference threat that Canada faces and is serious about responding to it.” They better be. They were frog-marched to this independent public inquiry by a disturbed public, resisting every step of the way. Avoiding accountability is a reflex action for all bureaucracies and politicians. If the inquiry report did not assign personal accountability to anyone for this shemozzle, criticisms of national security and intelligence governance highlight a broader systemic accountability. Eight of the 51 recommendations seek to improve this gover- nance. But that means 85 per cent of her recommenda- tions were about something else. That something else is disinformation, misinformation, public communications, political parties and Parliament itself. The insidiousness of foreign interference in our democracy is no simple Cold War, Spy vs. Spy caricature. It cannot be combated that way. Bringing the issue out of the cold into public glare — in the right way — is what the inquiry report basically recommends. Given that it was media reports from a free press that first lit the fuse ultimately exploding the country’s complacency around this issue, this is neither surprising nor unwarranted. Read this gem from page 75: “After the media leaks in 2023, intelligence sharing protocols become much stricter.” It took public exposure on government to force action. But it was Parliament itself, in the form of the multi-party National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians that threw the bomb about traitors sitting in Parliament. Trouble is, it turned out to be a dud. Hogue appears to be at a loss as to what to do about it. In gentle understatement, she writes about “inaccuracies” in the intelligence they received or how it was described to them. Rather than take MPs to task over their overwrought conclusions, she allows, “The situation is perhaps not as clear-cut, nor as extreme, as the fears pro- voked by the committee report would suggest.” Honest gaslighting, basically. Her six recommendations covering Parliamen- tarians amount to an ‘over to you’ solution. It’s up to them, she concludes, to get briefed and trained about what constitutes foreign interference and how to recognize it. Of what to do about it, she says nothing. It is clear the foreign interference weak spot remains our politicians and political parties. In this matter of public trust, they are accountable only to themselves. Voters are no wiser today as to what actually occurred with our MPs, senators, and parties. What we are wiser about is that foreign interfer- ence in our democracy remains real and constant. If not the big reveal Canadians expected, this report makes it harder for any of us to ignore the threat we face. David McLaughlin is a former clerk of the executive council and cabinet secretary in the Manitoba government. NDP government gets failing grade on teachers CHESTERTON’S Fence principle warns against destroying a fence before examining why it was built in the first place. In October, the Manitoba government disregarded this principle by elimi- nating all core subject requirements for teacher certification without proper consideration. Pre-service K-8 teachers were required to take two courses each of English/French, math, sci- ence and history/geography and all teachers were required to have a teachable major from a list of subjects taught in schools. The Kinew govern- ment’s stealthy change demolished these require- ments, ushering in the most sweeping changes to teacher certification since the late ’90s. Throughout the process, the narrative pushed by the government and outspoken proponents has proven to be false, self-serving, misleading and lacking crucial details. Internal documents obtained by Free Press reporter Maggie Macintosh reveal serious flaws with the process. Only a small group of insiders was consulted and the slides shared with them contain inaccuracies and a biased narrative. For example, assertions that Nova Scotia will eliminate subject requirements for teacher certi- fication are false. Quebec, Canada’s top-perform- ing province, with the strictest requirements, is conspicuously absent from the analysis, as is Ontario’s math certification test for teachers. Despite the flawed process, the documents show there was not broad support for the sweep- ing changes. Rather, some of those consulted preferred to maintain the status quo and others advocated for increasing subject requirements. In June, the education department’s recommenda- tion was to reduce, not eliminate, subject require- ments and to maintain teachable majors for high school teachers. Mysteriously, by October, the proposed mod- erate model was abandoned. The government ignored the recommendation, took the approach of “how low can we go,” and made the radical decision to eliminate all teacher subject require- ments. This is an egregious way to make policy deci- sions. Playing limbo with standards for teachers is no way to run an education system. The backlash was swift. Subject-area experts, parents and concerned citizens signed petitions and criticized the government’s decision. Some education professors defended the decision in the Free Press, claiming it was research-based. Tracy Schmidt, then acting minister of education, parroted these claims. Alongside six colleagues, with expertise in math, research methods and education, we fact-checked the claims against research articles provided by one education professor and found none supported them — some even contradicted them. We sent our publicly available report to all provincial MLAs. The government has yet to respond. Further attempts to reassure the public ensued, with proponents spreading the false narrative that K-8 pre-service teachers are being forced to take advanced courses like calculus. This ignores the specialized math courses thoughtfully devel- oped by math departments for them. Additionally, the public was misinformed that education faculties will teach prospective teachers core subjects. Pedagogy courses are not substitutes for math, English, history or science courses and it is unreasonable to assume that education professors are qualified to teach those subjects in depth. If you wanted to understand how the periodic table works, would you ask a chemistry professor or an education professor? Instead of dismissing subject-area experts, the government and education faculties should value their expertise to teach those disciplines. The claim that the changes align Manitoba with other provinces is also false. Manitoba now has the weakest teacher preparation requirements in Canada. Some have argued that the certification requirements failed to produce higher student scores, so they should be removed. By that logic, we may as well eliminate seatbelt laws because accidents still happen. If anything, this under- scores the need to strengthen subject require- ments. After all, you can’t teach what you don’t know. Obviously, a minimum requirement for effective teaching is having a solid understanding of the subjects you teach. The government claims it wants to remove barriers to enter the teaching profession, but lowering standards comes at a dreadful cost to Manitoba students. Children from disadvan- taged backgrounds, whose parents cannot afford tutoring to compensate for teachers with limited subject knowledge, will be most affected. Returning to Chesterton’s Fence: why were subject requirements introduced? Unlike the Kinew government’s approach, they stemmed from extensive consultation and a 1996 govern- ment-commissioned report by Bernard Shapiro, who stressed the importance of content knowl- edge. He recommended certifying teachers based on their subject expertise, calling it “unconscio- nable” and “an affront to the professionalism of teachers” that school boards can appoint a teach- er to any position without regard for their area of expertise. The subject requirements were a good- faith compromise to address his recommenda- tions and our government has made a grave error in dismantling them. The process was dishonest and irresponsible. Kinew’s policy will put undertrained teachers in the classroom and leave them to flounder. He must reverse this. Restore core subject require- ments and give our teachers and students the support they need. Darja Barr holds a PhD in math education and is a senior instructor in the department of mathematics at the University of Manitoba. Narad Rampersad is a professor and chair and Anna Stokke is a professor and recipient of a 3M National teaching award, both in the department of mathematics and statistics, University of Winnipeg. Manitoba’s wetlands at work FEB. 2, 2025 will mark World Wetlands Day, a global celebration of one of nature’s most remarkable gifts. Wetlands are vital ecosys- tems that are essential for the survival of migratory species, like waterfowl, but also for countless plants, animals and insects. Wetlands are important for people, too. They support farming and ranching by keeping water on the landscape in times of drought. They are home to the pollinators which make the agriculture upon which the world depends possible. They remove contaminants from water and help keep lakes and rivers clean. They absorb the ferocity of storms and floods, helping to protect communities and key infrastructure. And they offer endless opportunities for the enjoyment of nature. World Wetlands Day offers us an opportu- nity to reflect on just how impactful these ecological powerhouses are to our daily lives. Across the province, wetlands large and small are making a difference for Man- itobans. From large, pristine watersheds to small marshes on farms, ranches and in communi- ties, wetlands are at work every day filtering the water we drink, sustaining the food that we eat and mitigating the impacts of severe weather, all while supporting the biodiversi- ty that is so critical to our survival. Despite all the value they bring to us, wetlands are vanishing at an alarming rate. Today, only half of the world’s wetlands re- main and their loss creates major challenges for the environment, for communities and for people. The stakes in wetland loss are high — more than 40 per cent of all plant and animal life on Earth depends on wetlands to survive. More than one billion people world- wide rely on wetlands for their livelihoods. The loss of freshwater and saltwater coastal wetlands threatens towns and cities across Canada and around the world, re- ducing their protection from storm surges, flooding and coastal erosion. Responding to the challenge of wetland loss will require collaboration. Everyone has a role to play. Ducks Unlimited Canada’s wetland con- servation journey began in Winnipeg some 87 years ago with a community of waterfowl hunters who feared their enjoyment of na- ture may be compromised by wetland loss. Today, these hunters have been joined in common cause by Indigenous peoples, farmers, ranchers, businesses and commu- nities who all share an understanding of the value of wetlands and who are committed to their conservation and restoration to support species, economies, people and communities. Collaboration drives innovation and together landowners and conservationists in Manitoba have found many new ways to conserve nature while also supporting local economies. Today there are a wide variety of volun- tary, partnership-based arrangements that bring both economic gains and ecological benefits through wetland conservation. The outcomes of these partnerships are more profitable farms and ranches, cleaner water, healthier communities and abundant plants and animals for all to enjoy. This year, the theme for World Wetlands Day is “Protecting wetlands for our common future.” It is a call to action for unity and partnership in slowing and even reversing wetland loss. Manitoba has been an innovator and trend- setter in partnerships for wetland conser- vation and continues to show the world new and compelling ways to balance the needs of communities with the needs of plants and animals. On Feb. 2, perhaps try to find time to visit a wetland and consider all the value it brings to you and your community. You might even lace up your skates and post your experi- ence to Small Ponds, Big Goals with Ducks Unlimited Canada. Wetlands are at work across Manitoba and they are essential for our shared future. You can support local conservation by adopting sustainable practices, learning more about wetlands or contributing to wetland conser- vation. By working together, we can ensure that these incredible ecosystems thrive for generations to come. Michael Nadler is the chief executive officer of Ducks Unlimited Canada. JUSTIN TANG / THE CANADIAN PRESS FILES Justice Marie-Josée Hogue, commissioner of the foreign interference commission, speaks after releasing the inquiry’s final report in Ottawa on Jan. 28. MICHAEL NADLER DARJA BARR, NARAD RAMPERSAD AND ANNA STOKKE DAVID MCLAUGHLIN The stakes in wetland loss are high — more than 40 per cent of all plant and animal life on Earth depends on wetlands to survive. ;