The Honourable Bob Rae, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations in New York and this year’s guest speaker at the Paul Buteux Memorial Lecture, opened the conference to an audience of over 400 at the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. He lamented the failure of the UN to recognize, address and prevent the terrors we see today. Ambassador Rae began his speech by quoting Blaise Pascal, who, 400 years ago, declared that justice without force is powerless, but force without justice is tyranny. This statement is as relevant today as it was then. Regardless of the UN’s struggles, the Ambassador invited the audience to recognize that the organization was not designed to solve every conflict and every injustice. Since its creation, we have seen gains in human rights around the world. There are no more empires, and we have developed vaccines. However, what was beginning to look like a rule of law 80 years ago, is again becoming a rule of force. Ambassador Rae is clear-eyed about the challenges the UN faces.

The second day of the conference, held at UM’s Fort Garry Campus, began with a panel entitled ‘UN Peacekeeping,’ featuring current and retired service members who participated in various UN missions. Both Canadian and Peruvian military shared their experiences in various UN-led operations and peacekeeping missions, including MINUSMA (Mali), UNMIS (Sudan), MINUSTAH (Haiti), and United Nations-African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID). Panellists spoke on the varying degrees of successes and failures of mission mandates and the reasoning behind them. The uniqueness of this panel came from a combination of factual and informative accounts paired with very personal stories about what happened on the ground during these missions.

The second panel, entitled ‘the UN of the Present and Future,’ showcased academics from UM speaking to issues of Indigenous participation and recognition at the UN, UN reform, and the UN’s complexities when addressing and prosecuting acts of genocide. From the obstacles created by the veto wielded by five states (the Permanent Members) to the failure to prevent and recognize acts of mass atrocities and aggression, the UN is far from perfect. But even with its imperfections, it is the only multilateral organization to effectively and legally create lasting change in the world. The Charter, therefore, should be viewed as a living instrument that can be interpreted contemporarily to deal with evolving international complexities. The day concluded with a keynote address from the Honourable Dr. Lloyd Axworthy, Canada’s Former Minister of Foreign Affairs. Dr. Axworthy underscored sentiments preached by Mr. Rae and the panellists about the importance of cooperation among states and Canada’s important role in creating a more peaceful world.

This year’s PSSC was attended by numerous local and international guests, including staff and students from UM, University of North Dakota, West Point Military Academy, multiple high schools as well as the general public. As a student-run conference, the PSSC enables a new generation of future political leaders, activists and academics to engage in essential topics of today’s ever-changing world. In addition to the invaluable insights attendees gain from speakers, one of the greatest learning opportunities that stem from events like these lies in their foundation. The process of organizing this conference enabled student volunteers to enhance various skills ranging from media, communications and detailed planning, to leadership, time management and, perhaps most importantly, teamwork. Such skills can be brought into students’ future workplace and volunteer opportunities. Overall, the conference provided a thoughtful exploration of how the UN has evolved, adapted, and prevailed despite events ranging from great power quarrels to civil wars and even genocide. The UN remains at the cornerstone of solving issues pertaining to international peace and security, fostering dialogue and providing aid. The UN advances dialogue between states that possess varying systems of governance, opposing religions and distinctive social and cultural views. Differences will always be a challenge, but finding common ground despite dissimilarities is the mandate of the UN. In a similar fashion, the PSSC attempts to do the same.

Listen to the 2025 Paul Buteux Memorial Lecture with Hon. Bob Rae on YouTube

Watch the 2025 PSSC keynote with Hon. Dr. Lloyd Axworthy on YouTube

“The case of the silica sand project approval is precisely the type of major, consequential, highly contentious, longer-term decision which should not (be) considered to be made during the transition period,” said Paul Thomas, professor emeritus of political studies at the University of Manitoba.

“Such an action would represent the far end of a continuum of inappropriate behaviour.”

Read more

The win also added a new chapter to Manitoba’s history books with it’s first First Nations leader as Premier with Wab Kinew.

Here is some of the coverage on election night and the day after with contributions from some of the University’s political experts. 

Christopher Adams, adjunct professor of political science with CBC:  Dougald Lamont concedes to NDP in St. Boniface, steps down as Manitoba Liberal leader

Royce Koop, professor of political studies with CityNews: Expert predicts NDP victory in final hours of Manitoba election

Niigaan Sinclair, Indigenous Studies professor with Your Morning: Manitoba NDP wins majority government

Royce Koop, professor of political studies with  The Globe and Mail: NDP wins Manitoba election as Wab Kinew set to become first First Nations provincial premier in Canada

Réal Carrière, an assistant professor at University of Manitoba who specializes in Indigenous politics spoke with Reuters and was shared in the Daily Mail UK:  Kinew to be Manitoba’s only First Nations premier as province elects NDP government

Christopher Adams, adjunct professor of political science with CBC Manitoba Radio One: Wab Kinew says his party will be there to help you when you need it but you need to take the first steps

Manitoba voters have elected the NDP’s Wab Kinew as premier. His election is both a break with recent Manitoba political history and a continuation of the long history of Indigenous involvement in electoral politics in Manitoba.

Kinew is Manitoba’s first First Nations premier, though not its first Indigenous leader. That mantle goes to Louis Riel if we consider the legislative assembly of Assiniboia that named the Métis leader president in 1869 to be a legitimate precursor to the province of Manitoba.

A 2019 Act passed by the Manitoba legislature did just that when it named Riel Manitoba’s first premier.

The title of first Indigenous premier might also go to John Norquay, Manitoba’s elected premier from 1878 to 1887. An ally of the federal Conservative party from the mid-1870s onwards, Norquay was born in 1841 the Red River settlement. He spoke French, English, Cree, Annishinaabemowin and Bungee, a dialect associated with Manitoba’s Interlake region and its Métis history.

In his new biography of Norquay, historian Gerald Friesen portrays a thoughtful leader who was a loyal kinsman to his relations, and led hunting parties and negotiations with the federal government.

Settler colonial order

Since 1887, Manitoba has been presided over by non-Indigenous people. Apart from outgoing Conservative Premier Heather Stefanson, all of them have been men.

This tells us a great deal about the settler colonial order that unfolded in Manitoba in the wake of the Manitoba Act of 1870 (which included the qualification that women could not vote), the dispersal and dispossession of Métis people, the Indian Act of 1876, the development of a reserve system and the creation of a federal system of Indian residential schools in the middle of the 1880s.

Laws emerged in these years that barred Indigenous people from holding office or voting. They were in force for part of the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century.

In 1886, Manitoba’s government disqualified “Indians or persons of Indian blood receiving an annuity from the Crown” from the right to vote or hold office. The vote was not restored to status Indians who received treaty annuities until 1952, some 36 years after Manitoba became the first province to grant women the right to vote on the same terms as men.

It was not until 1981 that Manitoba elected a First Nations member of the provincial legislature, Elijah Harper, in the northern riding of Rupertsland.

Indigenous people who were not excluded by law from voting or holding office — most notably Métis — often discovered that informal barriers, including violence, were an effective check on their participation in electoral politics.

Change in Manitoba

Kinew is Manitoba’s first First Nations premier. He is an Annishinaabeg, a citizen of Onigaming First Nation in the Treaty Three region of northwestern Ontario and the son of a residential school survivor.

This represents a significant change, but one that has been in the works for some time. The 2019 provincial election returned the most racially diverse legislative assembly in the province’s history, including seven Indigenous members, three Black members and the first openly non-binary member, Uzoma Asagwara.

In government, Kinew will sit alongside seasoned and talented Indigenous legislators, most of them women. This includes Amanda Lathlin (The Pas), Bernadette Smith (Point Douglas) and Nahanni Fontaine.

Fontaine has represented the Winnipeg riding of St. John’s since 2016, and most recently served as House leader, critic for families and spokesperson for Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women, Girls, and Two-Spirited People.

The election of Kinew’s NDP in 2023 represents a powerful rejection of the racial politics of recent Conservative governments led by Stefanson and her predecessor, Brian Pallister.

Annishinaabeg scholar and journalist Niigaan Sinclair argues that Pallister’s views on Indigenous people, who make up about 30 per cent of the province’s population, marked the end of his political career in 2021.

The hope that Pallister’s replacement would offer a kinder and gentler version of conservative politics never materialized.

The Stefanson campaign’s decision to make a platform out of their refusal to support the search of the Prairie Green Landfill for the remains of three First Nations women — Morgan Harris, Marcedes Myran and Mashkode Bizhiki’ikwe, or Buffalo Woman — became a symbol of her government’s callous disregard of Indigenous lives.

Timbits and hockey

The 2023 election also represents a return to a social democratic politics familiar to Manitobans.

In a campaign managed by NDP veteran Brian Topp, Manitobans saw a genial, blue-suited Kinew offering Timbits and talking hockey. On the campaign trail, Kinew emphasized his party’s commitment to addressing a health-care system in shambles and distanced himself from calls to redirect resources away from the police and incarceration.

The campaign had little to say specifically about what might usually be defined as Indigenous issues. When former NDP premier Gary Doer publicly endorsed Kinew, it signalled a connection between this new government and the one that governed Manitoba from 1999 to 2016.

When Kinew took the microphone at the Orange Shirt Day Survivors Walk and Pow Wow in Winnipeg’s downtown hockey arena three days before the election, he was in an orange Blue Bombers shirt. Kinew urged Indigenous people to retain their languages and cultures and prove that the architects of residential schools failed.

Kinew is not Manitoba’s first Indigenous premier, but he is the first since 1897. He is the first premier who identifies as Annishinaabeg, whose family history includes residential schools, and whose direct ancestors would have been banned from voting until mid-century.

Kinew’s election is both a break in history and a continuation of important elements of Manitoba’s past. This includes long and complicated histories of Indigenous people in electoral politics and of social democratic provincial governments that have faced serious challenges in addressing poverty and delivering health care.

The high-octane anti-Indigenous racism represented by the Conservative governments of Stefanson and Pallister appears to be no longer sustainable in Manitoba.

Daughters of the Vote is a program by Equal Voice that began in 2017 to mark the 100^th anniversary of some women obtaining the right to vote in Canada. In 2021, the event was moved online due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In a typical year, 338 delegates (one from each federal riding in Canada) are selected to participate in this political summit in Ottawa, which this year included myself as well as three University of Manitoba students. As the delegate representing Winnipeg North, I had the opportunity to give a statement in the House of Commons, something that only 35 delegates were selected for.

In my statement I discussed the under-representation of Indigenous women in the House of Commons, and how Indigenous women are more often discussed as statistics of colonial violence than for our successes. We truly need Canadians to recognize the significance of the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (MMIWG) movement, and how the Calls for Justice are not being acknowledged by politicians.

It is also clear that Indigenous women need a seat at the table when nothing is changing without our voices in these settler colonial institutions. I believe that the most effective way to address the inclusion of Indigenous women as legal and political professionals in a dominant-male ideology, is to invite Indigenous women to join these movements and fields without creating an environment of tokenism.

Tokenism needs to be avoided, because it puts significant social pressure on Indigenous women to be “that diverse woman.” Instead, we should be making sure that there are multiple Indigenous women included in the political and legal fields, so they do not feel the effects of imposter syndrome while representing the “underdog’s voice” in this society. By giving Indigenous women the means to participate in this narrative, it is encouraging for others because they see someone using their voice to represent Indigenous women —  and also invites them to become more involved and represent the community.

This is how I decided to get involved in politics. I remember taking “Introduction to Canadian Government” for my minor in political studies at UM and learning about party politics, and the clear tokenism of Jody Wilson-Raybould. It was in this class that I knew I wanted to be involved in law or politics, because I wanted to see a Canada where the voices of Indigenous women are heard and acknowledged not as tokens but as equals and respected politicians and judges.

So, I am calling on Indigenous women to run for government — whether it is student government, Indigenous governments, municipal, provincial or federal governments. I want to see the representation, and I want Indigenous people to be common in these roles instead of tokens. I also want Indigenous students to know that they should not be afraid to speak out on important issues in their communities ­— their voices matter.

Throughout Daughters of the Vote, I aimed to represent my riding and province by speaking about Indigenous representation, tokenism within settler colonial institutions, and with my fellow delegates, the issue of MMWIG. I want these issues to get traction, and I want them to change.

Julia Hutlet [BA/20] is proudly Métis from St. Andrews and Letalier, Manitoba. While at UM, she developed essential leadership skills from the Indigenous Circle of Empowerment (ICE) program which she used to serve as a Manitoba 150 Youth Ambassador, bringing awareness to the Manitoba Métis community and the importance of the Red River Settlement, on the 150^th anniversary of Manitoba joining Confederation. She is now pursuing a law degree at the University of British Columbia’s Peter A. Allard School of Law.

First: Do not overreact.

Second: Hargreaves challenges the audience to question aspects of the report if they don’t like it.

“Is it addressing a legitimate concern that might be best answered in another way? And what is that other way?” he said.

Third: Hargreaves asked the educators how they might improve Manitoba education within the context of high poverty and increasing challenges.

“If you were going to do something different, and not only get more support for what you’re already doing, what would that different thing be? How would you articulate it? And what support would you need to do that?” Hargreaves said.

As a leading authority on educational administration, Hargreaves has worked with educators and politicians in some five regions through periods of system-wide educational reform, including Ontario and Nova Scotia, whose reviews were conducted by Avis Glaze, the lead consultant in Manitoba’s K-12 review. As part of the Joan Irvine Lecture Series, Hargreaves shared his insights and experiences during a lecture on Feb. 3 at the Faculty of Education.

In a wide-ranging presentation, Hargreaves touched on six major ideas.

First of all, he emphasized that poverty matters, citing the statistic that on average, 80 per cent of student achievement is explained by factors outside the school.

‘Poverty is real’

“Poverty is real. Economic inequalities are real. Teachers cannot change everything themselves, but we must do everything in our power in relation to that trend to move it up the margins wherever we can by a few percent,” Hargreaves said.

Secondly, Hargreaves talked about social mobility, defining the term as opportunities to move, preferably upwards in life—economically and occupationally in relation to one’s parents.

“Some people think that social mobility is an alternative to equity … social mobility is not an alternative to equity, it is the consequence of equity,” Hargreaves said, extending equity to inclusion in his third point.

“Equity is inclusion and inclusion is equity,” he said. “And that if you what to achieve in school, then you have to see yourself in the school … And in some profound and fundamental way.”

The fourth point Hargreaves made is that there is no achievement without well-being, and there is no well-being without achievement.

He described the challenge here being one of division—where education professionals concerned with well-being and those concerned with achievement rarely work together.

“We have to understand that you can’t feel well if you’re failing all of the time. And you can’t achieve if you’re not eating or sleeping, if you live in fear, if you don’t have anybody to care for you, if you have post-traumatic stress …” he said, adding this relates to the fifth point, which is that the answer to most problems is collaboration.

A powerful solution

For example, Hargreaves noted that a question facing Manitoba educators might be: How many districts will exist in the future. The answer should stem from an educational problem and not an economic issue, he said.

“A powerful solution is not to have districts be autonomous … But actually, to get them to work together, and not just to share ideas, but to be collectively responsible for each other’s equity,” Hargreaves said.

Finally, all high-performing education systems commit strong public investments into education, Hargreaves said, pointing to highly successful systems around the world, weighing their faults and benefits.

“Three things are really clear: One, is that strong public investments and public belief in education for almost everybody’s child,” Hargreaves said. “Second, a strong teaching profession is one that is well-paid, and has high status. And third is to find ways to get that teaching profession to work together collaboratively by providing the time and the supports like learning support teachers or mental health professionals within the school, so that the whole school can support the whole child.”

Watch the Hargreaves lecture:

Most expressed resignation and stated, with a sigh, that: “X is at least better than the alternatives,” or “I don’t want X to win, so am voting for Y.” I too fell into that ditch of despair, but then remembered a strategy from my anarcho-syndicalist days of my early 20s.

I now feel much better about how I voted, but before revealing my choice and a recommendation for the construction of future ballots, let me share the source of my pre-vote despondency from the perspective of an economist.

It is really time we insisted that party platforms reflect some modicum of economic literacy and coherency, at least at the first-year university level.

Let’s consider some of the prominent positions of the national parties that irked me and have repercussions for Canadians’ financial well-being now and in the future.

What is striking about many of the policy positions of the federal parties is their timidity. Take climate change. The three left-of-centre parties would continue the current Liberal program, which currently adds about four cents per litre at the gas pumps, and would lead to an additional 11 cents by 2022.

While I support a carbon tax, this modest increase applied to only some provinces, won’t change driver behaviour or industrial use of fossil fuels. The increases must be greater, progressive and locked in.

Conservative mishmash

The Conservatives reject the carbon tax as ineffective in meeting the challenge of climate change, which at these levels it is, but they proposed a vague penalty system on big polluters presumably to fund investment in green technology, home improvements and investment standards. It’s a mishmash of a cap-and-trade system that has proven elsewhere to be ineffective and a bureaucratic nightmare.

Maybe it’s time we accepted that energy corridors and fossil fuel exports will be a declining feature of Canada’s economic future. The Liberals clung to the fantasy that the Trans Mountain pipeline will proceed, and the Conservatives dreamed of an energy corridor. But these projects will be “Bloq-ed” on provincial self-interest as well as environmental and Indigenous opposition.

This election was an opportunity to either put forward a vision of a post-oil economy or present a strategy for how the federal government can navigate the competing interests that stymie resource development in Canada.

Balanced budget pledges

All party leaders also promised a balanced budgets in a set number of years, while planning billions in spending increases ranging from modest tweaks in the senior’s tax credit (Conservatives), adjustments to student loans (Liberals), a national pharmacare program (all but the Conservatives) and a basic income (Green Party).

These election promises came at voters like mosquitoes on a summer day and I am sure most, like me, became numb.

How can we improve this dismal situation?

This is the first election where the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) had a mandate to prepare estimates of election spending proposals over the next 10 years. However, the PBO only estimated the costs of proposals submitted, and nowhere could anyone locate a consolidated estimate of the total spending package for each party.

If each platform were independently and fully costed three weeks before the election, voters would see more responsible promises by the parties, who would need to justify their total spending plans.

Promising a balanced budget is also a meaningless gesture. A household with $50,000 annual income may balance its budget through frugality, while a household with an annual income of $250,000 may chronically run out of money. Rather than promising a balanced budget, we need politicians to debate the desirable size of government relative to the national income or GDP.

One useful measure is the tax-to-GDP ratio and on this front, Canada does not too badly at 32.7 per cent. Countries that include the United States, Australia and Mexico have lower ratios. Unsurprisingly, countries like France and Sweden have public spending at 46 per cent and 44 per cent of GDP.

France’s spending in particular is triggering warnings from auditors.

What about the size of government?

So, a second task for the PBO in an election is to monitor how election promises affect the size of government.

The minor tinkering of tax credits and adjusting exemptions won’t have much impact, but a national pharmacare program or a universal basic income could greatly expand the scope of government. Voters need independent information to support an informed choice.

Failing to find any sensible discussion of Canada’s economic issues, I did vote, but not for any candidate on the ballot.

I elected to write in “none of the above” and spoiled my ballot. But think for a moment. If “none of the above” officially appeared on the ballot and those votes were counted along with votes for candidates, two benefits might accrue.

First, it may encourage voting by those whose election ennui keeps them at home, and therefore could raise the turnout rate from the current 66 per cent toward the almost 80 per cent who voted in 1958.

Second, it shrinks the degree of support for all candidates, reminding everyone that a group of voters exists who want someone to vote for, not against.

This article from Gregory C. Mason, assistant professor of economics at UM, was originally published on The Conversation.

“The University of Manitoba welcomes the opportunity to continue working with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government and our local representatives MP Terry Duguid and Minister Jim Carr to move forward on shared priorities such as Arctic research, climate change, Reconciliation and human rights,” said David Barnard, UM president and vice-chancellor.

“Thank you to all who ran and to all who voted for participating meaningfully in supporting Canadian democracy. I look forward to engaging with all our local MPs in the coming months to share how Manitoba’s research university supports the success of this province, Canada and the world.”

In addition to research and research partnerships, federally-supported infrastructure on university campuses is essential to attracting and retaining the best researchers and students to Canada. The university, community and province have all benefitted immensely from federal infrastructure investments made at UM.

“The meaningful and impactful work happening here in the heart of our nation presents immense opportunity for federal partnership,” said Barnard.

Bannatyne Campus (Notre Dame Electoral Division), 710 William Avenue

More details on advance voting can be found online here.

Information on voter eligibility, identification requirements and other details regarding Election Day are available here.

Today’s speech outlined the government’s agenda for the coming year, focusing on becoming Canada’s most improved province. The full speech can be found online.

University of Manitoba President and Vice-Chancellor David T. Barnard welcomed the opportunity to hear the government’s priorities for the coming year.

“As the province’s largest post-secondary institution and its only research-intensive university, the University of Manitoba plays a critical role in the advancement of provincial priorities. We look forward to continuing to work in partnership with the provincial government to ensure a prosperous future for Manitoba and Manitobans,” said Barnard.

Included in the speech were statements emphasizing the importance of working with the private sector and industries in order to advance the province’s economic potential. The government also expressed its commitment to increasing women’s participation in the fields of science, engineering, technology and math.

In the speech, the government expressed commitment to an enhanced promotional effort towards scholarships and bursaries and improvements towards student access through a streamlined portal.

This year marked the 20^th anniversary of the Provincial Nominee Program, which has attracted skilled workers and business investors from all over the world. The government emphasized that they look forward to welcoming international students through the new International Student Entrepreneur Pathway and Graduate Internship Pathway.

The University of Manitoba generates $1.8 billion towards the provincial economy, attracts more than 180,000 visitors to the province annually, and supports more than 20,000 Manitoba jobs.