Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Briefly, we support a two-state solution. However, we strongly believe, based on logic, that this two-state solution can only be arrived at as a result of negotiation between the two parties—the Israelis and the Palestinians—who must come to an agreement that has popular support and legitimacy among Israelis and Palestinians.
The Prime Minister has indicated, as the parliamentary secretary said, that his government would consider recognizing a Palestinian state at the right time but not necessarily at the last step along the path. Mr. Chair, the risk in that statement is that the government is considering the recognition of a Palestinian state sooner rather than later. The committee, by adopting the motion as it was originally worded, risks encouraging the Government of Canada to do the same. The reason we are opposed to this, as I said before, is that a two-state solution cannot only be the result of a declaration of Palestinian statehood. Rather, it's the result of an agreement negotiated between the two parties.
A democracy cannot come into existence simply because of a declaration or the conduct of a single election. A democracy is the result not only of an election or the adoption of a constitutional order but also of democratic institutions and democratic checks and balances on power that are ongoing—ones that are daily and that have popular support and legitimacy. That is how democracies come about. It's a long, arduous process, as we see in history. It's the same thing with achieving statehood. It cannot simply be the result of a declaration. It must come about as a result of a difficult process of negotiation between the two parties involved in a conflict.
That is the reason, Mr. Chair, why I presented this amendment and why we cannot support the main motion if it is not amended.