The people of Spruce Woods deserve better

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 22/08/2025 (226 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

On Wednesday night, The Brandon Sun, Brandon University and Westman Communications hosted a debate between the three candidates in the Spruce Woods byelection. Over the course of 85 minutes, the audience in attendance (and those who have subsequently viewed a recording of the event on WCGtv) were able to see a lot of what’s wrong with Manitoba politics these days.

The byelection is a contest between New Democrat Ray Berthelette, Progressive Conservative Colleen Robbins and Liberal Stephen Reid, and they were each present for the debate. I was a panellist for the debate, along with Brandon University political science professor Dr. Kelly Saunders and Brandon Sun political reporter Alex Lambert.

Yesterday’s editorial in this newspaper (“Not an easy choice for Spruce Woods voters”) expressed the view of many who attended the event or have watched a recording of it. It reminded readers that not everyone has what it takes to be a successful campaigner, let alone an effective elected representative.

In particular, the editorial argued that neither Robbins nor Berthelette appear to satisfy the standard Spruce Woods voters should expect of their MLA.

I agree on both points. Not everybody is cut out to be a candidate, let alone an MLA. Many do not possess the right combination of intellect, energy, work ethic, communications skill and/or moral compass necessary to do the job in a way that benefits the people they seek to represent.

That’s not some form of elitism, nor is it particularly unfair. It is simply not in the public interest to have unqualified people making important decisions that impact the lives of citizens.

Whether Berthelette, Robbins or Reid are qualified to represent the people of Spruce Woods is ultimately up to voters living in that riding to decide. With that fact in mind, I encourage each of you to watch the debate on WCGtv and arrive at your own conclusions.

Having said all of that, an issue arose early in the debate that deserves further discussion. Dr. Saunders asked Robbins about a number of social media posts that the Tory candidate had posted on Twitter (now known as X) in the past, including one regarding residential schools.

Robbins has already apologized for the posts, and did so again at the debate, but I asked the three candidates a followup question that raised an equally serious issue.

I asked them if they had deleted social media accounts or posts before or during the byelection. Berthelette said he had deleted a post regarding the Clinton family, while Reid said he had deleted a post where he felt he had been “sucked” into a debate with an NDP supporter. Robbins has deleted her X account entirely, which means that all of her posts on that platform over the past several years are gone.

None of the candidates seem to have understood the point I was making when I asked the question and, rather than hectoring them about it at the time, I decided I would write about it instead.

Social media is a window into the character of a candidate, in that the comments they post often reveal the person’s intellect, values, ideology, biases and prejudices. In their totality, the comments give us a far more accurate, unfiltered understanding of “what makes them tick” than campaign brochures and scripted talking points.

There is only one reason for a candidate to “scrub” their social media accounts, by either deleting posts or accounts entirely. It is in order to destroy material that, if discovered, could make them look bad to voters and/or be used in attacks by their opponents. In other words, it could hurt their hopes of being elected.

Deleting that material deliberately deprives voters of a complete, accurate understanding of the person who is seeking their vote. It can — and likely often does — harm the electoral process by withholding critical, relevant information from voters that could impact the choice they each make in the voting booth.

The fact that none of the three Spruce Woods candidates seem to comprehend the seriousness of the issue is troubling. So too is the fact that the Progressive Conservative Party allowed Robbins to run as that party’s candidate despite a history of offensive social media comments.

Instead of finding a better candidate without the social media baggage, her Twitter account was deleted. Problem solved, or so they thought.

All of that leads to this question: If candidates are willing to destroy and/or withhold information in order to improve their odds of being elected, what would they be willing to delete or withhold from the public in order to stay elected?

Given the pervasive role of social media in politics and society, it’s a question we should all be concerned about.