Winnipeg Free Press

Winnipeg Free Press (Newspaper) - November 21, 2025, Winnipeg, Manitoba THINK TANK COMMENT EDITOR: RUSSELL WANGERSKY 204-697-7269 ● RUSSELL.WANGERSKY@WINNIPEGFREEPRESS.COM A7 FRIDAY NOVEMBER 21, 2025 Ideas, Issues, Insights School resources officers a valuable safety option T HE recent Manitoba throne speech placed crime and public safety at the heart of the provincial agenda. It declared: “No matter where you live in Manitoba you should feel safe — at home, at your neighbourhood park, downtown.” But this aspiration runs up against an undeniable reality: Winnipeg continues to face some of the highest violent-crime rates of any major Canadian city. The Winnipeg Police Service report released in May 2025 found that the total crime severity index from 2018–2024 was significantly higher in Winnipeg than the Canadian average, and the violent crime index even more so. In 2024, assaults against peace officers reached a recent historic high, increasing for the third year in a row. Youth crimes are particularly concerning. This summer, youth only 13 and 14 years old were arrested for machete attacks at Polo Park and for an armed robbery involving a firearm at the Unicity Walmart. Statistics back up these anecdot- al horrors. The Winnipeg Police Service’s Annual Statistical Report for 2023 indicates youth crime trended upward for the second consecutive year — increasing by 23.1 per cent over 2022 and 14.3 per cent above the five-year average. Violent youth crimes were an alarming 43.4 per cent higher than the five-year average, though early data suggests the incidence of violent youth crime declined in 2024. Crime is complex and has no single cause. As WPS Chief Gene Bowers rightly said when releas- ing the most recent report: “Community safety is at the core of everything we do, but it is not simply possible for us to improve the safety and well-be- ing of our community on our own.” As Free Press columnist Dan Lett has underscored in recent columns, the issue is far more complicated than political slogans suggest. Crime is not driven solely by bail decisions or court backlogs — although those matter. It is rooted in poverty, addictions, childhood trau- ma, under-resourced schools, unstable housing and frayed social supports. Winnipeg’s challenges sit precisely at these intersections. Lett argues there are no easy answers, and he is right. Sustainable progress requires strategies that are not only tough on crime, but also smart, fair and grounded in com- munity trust, especially in communities that have experienced generations of marginalization. This is why the tradition of community-engaged policing remains important. Winnipeg has been fortunate to have leaders like former chief Devon Clunis, who emphasizes in his memoir One that po- licing is not merely enforcement, but a partnership with families, schools and neighbourhoods. His message was consistent: safety is built on relationships, not simply arrests. Officers who know young people — and are known by them — help prevent crises before they happen. That was certainly Clunis’ experience as a school resource officer, which he writes “was the best part of my career.” For five years, in the 52 schools he served, he spoke at assemblies, met with students and par- ents, listened, explained and offered guidance. “It served the deepest part of my purpose in policing,” he concludes. The Winnipeg School Division, however, ended its school resources officer program in 2021, primar- ily for budgetary reasons, not because evidence showed it was failing. Across Canada, the strongest evidence comes from places like Calgary and Edmonton, where resource officer programs were not abolished, but re-imagined. Their updated models emphasize: officers chosen for mentorship and youth-work ability, not simply policing experience; strong training in trauma, equity, cultural safety and ado- lescent development; clear limits on involvement in routine school discipline; transparency, community oversight and annual public reporting; and relation- ship-building as the core of the job. When resource officers operate in this way — as bridges, not enforcers — they support schools un- der pressure, help de-escalate tensions and create positive early contact between police and youth who may otherwise encounter officers in moments of crisis. The value of the officers was demonstrated in Brandon, in June. Unlike the Winnipeg School Division, Brandon maintains a program that em- phasizes proactive planning between educators and police. That planning was put to the test on June 10 when someone entered Neelin High School wearing a disguise, armed with a sword. A student con- tacted Const. Moshe Linov directly; he responded within three minutes and the attacker was subdued. “We build relationships with students and staff, and it’s a trust relationship,” Linov said. “Any call, any text, I will respond — and I did respond.” Winnipeg should learn from Brandon. The absence of resource officers leaves schools, especially in high-needs neighbourhoods, without a structured mechanism for building trust be- tween young people and police. It is not realistic to expect principals, teachers and counsellors alone to manage the mix of safety concerns, gang-re- cruitment pressures, social-media-driven conflicts and mental-health crises that students bring into classrooms. A properly structured, transparent, culturally safe and relationship-driven program could offer early intervention, build bridges in communities and relieve pressure on schools stretched beyond their limits. The throne speech signalled that crime and public safety are top priorities for Manitoba. The next challenge is designing solutions that go beyond enforcement and address the deeper conditions that shape youth behaviour. A re-imagined resource officer program will not solve Winnipeg’s crime challenge on its own — but it could be one useful piece of a wider, more balanced strategy Thomas S. Axworthy is public policy chair at Massey College. Restorative justice and safer communities THERE are currently a number of public and polit- ical discussions across the country regarding com- munity safety and how the criminal justice system through its bail and sentencing processes addresses those who come into conflict with the law. These discussions often focus on the extreme case with tragic outcomes without having the full context of the difficult decisions and legal options that the lawyers and the judge hearing the case must consider when reaching an outcome in any criminal matter. Because of the nature of the case, discussions are also often fraught with emotion, both personally and politically. It isn’t always easy to separate emo- tion from the case in question or to look at our laws through a neutral lens. The neutral lens has been missing from many of these public conversations, which taints the under- standing of approaches and resources available to support those who are in conflict with the law and who do choose to accept responsibility for their actions. Restorative justice approaches may include a number of different methods to allow offenders, victims and communities affected by criminal be- haviour to be meaningfully involved in addressing and repairing the harm that was experienced by finding a resolution that promotes both the healing of those involved and public safety, overall. In Manitoba, these approaches are most often done through restorative justice programs which are supported under the Restorative Justice Act. Participation in these programs can occur at both the pre-charge stage before an individual appears in a criminal court, and at the post-charge stage as a diversion from the court system. Restorative programs aim to repair the harm caused through accountability, rather than seeking to punish the offender. The process provides opportunities for the victims, offenders and communities affected by a crime to communicate about the circumstances and the impact of the offence, and to speak to their respective needs. These are facilitated programs and may be individually tailored to each communi- ty, according to their own needs and makeup. Restorative justice programs often operate col- laboratively with Victim Services and communities to deliver diversion programming outside of the usual court process. Restorative justice programs are not a “break” which allow for an offender to escape their just punishment. They are tailored to address the unique factors that led the offender to commit the offence. They also provide for far greater input from the victims of the offence, sometimes even the community where it is appropriate. Similarly, there are specific Indigenous justice programs delivering restorative justice program- ming in Manitoba within the criminal justice system, ensuring culturally appropriate and com- munity centred approaches. It should be under- stood, however, that traditional Indigenous legal systems, which existed long before the introduction of the European colonial justice system, already sought to maintain a stable and predictable social environment for Indigenous communities based on customary laws and concepts of Indigenous justice, often specific to individual nations. Restorative justice programs are often thought of as only available and applicable to those coming into conflict with the law for the first time, with less serious offences, in the context of diverting those matters out of the courts; however, restor- ative justice approaches can be applied broadly and at all stages of criminal proceedings. Indigenous justice principles and restorative justice principles can not only work alongside and within the current justice system, but they can also enhance many of the goals of our justice system by reducing recidivism, making offenders more ac- countable for any harm done and creating stronger, as well as safer, communities and community ties. Repairing relationships, addressing harm, en- couraging accountability and supporting reintegra- tion for those who are prepared and willing to do so, in a manner that supports and includes Indige- nous justice approaches, could have a significant impact not only on the future path of reconciliation within the western criminal justice system, but also on the safety of communities across Manitoba. Restorative Justice Week is nationally recog- nized each year in the third week of November. The purpose of this week is to raise awareness on restorative justice and allow for an opportunity to highlight and acknowledge the work done through a restorative justice approach. The theme for this year’s Restorative Justice Week is: “Celebrating progress. Shaping the future.” Right now, as conversations surrounding safer communities continue, the future is indeed being reshaped. It is time to look more closely at the good work currently done through restorative justice programming, and to ask how restorative justice and Indigenous justice principles applied more broadly and consistently through the criminal jus- tice system could shape the future. Sandra Bracken is deputy executive director of Legal Aid Manitoba. Municipal board needs oversight IF you’ve only paid passing attention to what has become a multi-year fight over a federally funded housing project next to the Granite Curling Club, then you’d be forgiven for believing the Granite Curling Club is at grave risk. To catch you up, the City of Winnipeg identified a plot of city-owned land next to the city-owned Granite Curling Club for a mixed-income and mixed-use hous- ing project through the federal Housing Accelerator Fund. The tenant on the property, the Granite Club, without any formal consultation with its membership, opposed the rezon- ing application because some of its 80 parking stalls would be lost and in their mind that would jeopardize the future of the club. Public hearings took place and the application was ultimately approved. This should be the end of the story. It wasn’t, and what happened next should worry Manitobans. The previous provincial government, to the protests of municipalities, gave the Municipal Board increased powers to hear certain development appeals in Winnipeg. In this case, the appointed board consisted of people from Gimli, Winnipeg Beach and Winnipeg. This panel overturned the decision of city councillors and determined that the city cannot develop their own land unless their tenant, the Granite Club, is “satis- fied” with future parking plans. This is worth repeating. The City of Winnipeg cannot move forward with a fully funded housing proj- ect on its own land, to respond to what is widely agreed to be the most pressing crisis in our city, unless its tenant agrees on the parking plan. This decision puts the project at risk, as the Granite’s board secretary is quot- ed as saying that they will accept no loss in parking. The curling club was offered ongoing revenue (more than the developer itself would receive), dedicated parking spots and access to capital funding to ensure the club’s longevity. Any landlord would agree this is a more than generous offer to a tenant. As a club member, I can tell you that we have never been presented with any of these options. We have only been told repeatedly that the club is facing an existential threat. A sensible solution already exists, as Canada Life offers their surface parking lot across the street, for free, during non- business-hours when most people curl. This lot is both nicer and closer to the Granite Club’s entrance. This should be of significant concern to citizens and municipal governments alike for the simple reason that the way this decision was made is undemocratic. Consider that it takes only three unelected panel members and a round of signatures in opposition to halt any development project, and that citizens and municipalities have no say in who is on the panel. The Municipal Board pours cold water on development at a time when the feder- al government is poised to invest many billions of dollars into housing and other nation-building projects. The Manitoba government is hoping for a generational investment to expand the Port of Churchill, but the City of Winnipeg is unable to even move forward with a funded, city-approved, 111-unit housing project on city land. This type of veto power injects uncer- tainty into any capital project at a time when developers are feeling already uncertain by threats coming from the United States. Where do we go from here? To start, the Granite Curling Club board should stand down from their position and ac- cept the generous offers that have been presented to them. This offer is good for the club, it’s good for Winnipeg. It’s also a good option for the homeless individuals currently camp- ing in the lot where this development would take place. Beyond that, the Manitoba government should seriously rethink the role of the Municipal Board in city business. It is encouraging that the minister’s of- fice has committed to a review, but with billions of dollars of federal infrastruc- ture funding on the line we’d encourage them to move faster. A three-person unelected panel shouldn’t be able to hold Manitoba back. Daniel Leonard is a member of Granite Members for Affordable Housing. SANDRA BRACKEN DANIEL LEONARD MATT GOERZEN / BRANDON SUN FILES Const. Moshe Linov of the Brandon Police Service was inducted into the Order of the Buffalo Hunt following his actions to defuse a violent incident on June 10 at Neelin High School. THOMAS S. AXWORTHY ;