Justice Committee on May 23rd, 2024

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Mr. Marceau, my time is limited.

[Richard Marceau]

I understand, but I just want to say—

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Mr. Robertson, what do you think of my question?

[Richard Marceau]

Please let me finish—

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

It is my time, Mr. Marceau.

Mr. Robertson, would you respond to my question?

[Richard Robertson]

I most certainly will.

B'nai Brith has been frustrated by some of what has been transpiring in some of the messaging we've heard from the federal government. We believe the federal government has put in place some strong precedents in terms of their commitment, such as the 2024 commitment to preserving Holocaust remembrance and to combatting anti-Semitism. However, now more than ever we need actuation on this.

As Mr. Marceau said in his remarks, words are small. We need action, and the Jewish community needs a strong response from all members of Parliament. Fighting anti-Semitism cannot be a partisan issue.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

We will now go to three minutes for Ms. Dabrusin, please.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

The first question I have is for anyone who can answer. Are any universities in North America, be it Canada or the United States, getting it right? Are there examples that we should be looking at with universities that have good DEI policies?

Mr. Robertson.

[Richard Robertson]

I'm happy to answer that question.

There are universities in the United States that have shown great leadership by adopting the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism. I think the better example to look at, though, is actually the United Kingdom, where the vast majority of educational institutions in the United Kingdom, including world-leading institutions like Oxford, Cambridge and Durham, have all adopted the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism. We need Canadian universities to follow the lead of these American, British and German institutions and to adopt the IHRA definition.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Okay. I don't have much time, so I'm going to ask anyone, if you have examples, to submit them to us in writing so that we have those as examples.

In this budget, we have committed to providing support to police colleges to increase training on handling hate crimes. Do any of you have suggestions as to what you would like to see in that training to make sure anti-Semitism is included?

[Deborah Lyons]

I'll mention just a few and pass to my colleagues.

First of all, we really appreciate all of the good support in the budget. It's excellent. It really was wind in our sails, particularly with regard to law enforcement, money for training and the work that CRRF is doing in terms of delivering training, but it has to be specific to anti-Semitism and it has to incorporate the IHRA definition. That is critical, and this committee should make that one of its recommendations, please. It's critical that we have that. The money to be well spent must incorporate the IHRA definition and training.

Second, as important an issue as it is, we have special prosecutors for auto theft. We have no special prosecutors for anti-Semitism or with a focus on hate crimes. I think this is a recommendation. Although I know it's provincial jurisdiction, it is necessary. I'll leave those two with you.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

If I can go to the next ones, it's going to be the same question, but just because I'm short on time, I'm also asking that if anyone has suggestions to put them in writing.

There was also funding starting this year for specialized training for crown prosecutors at the Department of Justice to raise awareness in the judiciary about the unique dynamics of hate crimes. If there are any suggestions on that, I have half a minute.

Monsieur Marceau.

[Richard Marceau]

In terms of police, a lot of police forces say that they don't really have the resources or the expertise to train their people well. I think there's a role to play for the federal government to basically have a turnkey program for prosecutors and for police forces to say, “You know what, police force? For this city, you don't have to do it. We're going to come in. We're going to train you. We're going to do it. It's a free service for you.” In that way, you also ensure that there's consistency across the country.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Thank you for that.

Mr. Fortin, you have the floor.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Since I have just a minute and a half, you will forgive me for going quickly.

There is something I would like to know. We know there is a war being fought right now on the Gaza Strip. I will not attempt to summarize the news or offer a critique, but we know that international opinion is divided. Today we are talking about anti-Semitism in Canada and the fear expressed by the Jewish community in Canada.

Ms. Lyons, in your opinion, are events in Israel and Gaza having an impact on the events we are witnessing in Canada?

[Deborah Lyons]

Unfortunately, I think the answer is yes. It does have an impact.

Again, I would say that conflicts that happen in many parts of the world—and I have been present for a number of those—need not end up in our backyard with us fighting with one another. That is not what Canadian values suggest, nor is that who Canadians are.

Finally, I would say that we have not had our brains shrunk, either by COVID or by social media. We are capable of holding two thoughts in our mind and soul at the same time. It is possible to be pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian at the same time. Canadians have that capacity.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Lyons.

Mr. Marceau, we have a few seconds left. In your opinion, should a distinction be made between criticizing the state of Israel and anti-Semitism and its consequences?

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Your time is up, Mr. Fortin, but I invite Mr. Marceau to provide a written answer.

Mr. MacGregor, you have the final one and a half minutes.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I think that good government policy, no matter what department, depends on solid data.

Mr. Robertson, I'd like to turn to you and B'nai Brith.

Your organization provides an annual audit of anti-Semitic incidents, but if your organization and you were to look at the Government of Canada and Statistics Canada and the way they collect data, are there any recommendations you would like to see in this committee's report on the quality, the quantity and the frequency? Do you have anything that you'd like to see this committee recommend?

[Richard Robertson]

For the most part, Statistics Canada's data has been similar to ours and, to me, I believe that indicates that Statistics Canada is on the right track.

What I would like to see, and what I believe would be helpful specifically when it comes to fighting anti-Semitism on campuses, is the further collection of data, both qualitative and quantitative, about Jewish experiences specifically on campuses. I think that is something that's lacking, and I think that funding to enable an organization or the federal government to do that will help us to really understand just how critical the situation is on campuses across Canada.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Mr. Marceau, I saw your hand.

[Richard Marceau]

Very quickly, Statistics Canada, yes, gets good data, but it's always a year behind. When you talk with the U.S., France and Britain, they basically can get the information if not in a weekly way, at least in a monthly way. This helps everybody, including decision-makers, and that is something that Canada should be able to do.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Thank you.

Thank you very much to our witnesses. This concludes this panel.

I want to thank all of you for coming today and for providing us specific recommendations that will help us. Again, if there is anything that you feel you have not been able to share with us, please send it to us in writing. Thank you very much.

I'll suspend for two minutes in order to allow our panellists for the second round either to be tested or to come to the front.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Everybody, welcome back to our second panel.

I am informed that the sound test is done for the witness who is appearing by video conference. I would ask the witnesses who are in the room to please take their seats. Thank you very much.

Welcome to our witnesses for the second panel. We have with us today, as an individual, Dr. James A. Diamond, Joseph and Wolf Lebovic chair of Jewish studies, University of Waterloo, by video conference. We also have Dr. Ted Rosenberg, doctor, in his own capacity. We have, from the Network of Engaged Canadian Academics, Dr. Deidre Butler, associate professor; and Dr. Cary Kogan, professor.

I will ask each of the three—the two individuals and the one organization—to speak for up to five minutes. I will raise a card when there are 30 seconds left, and I will let you know, gently, that time is up.

We will commence right now with the first person I have on my document, who is appearing with us by video conference. The sound has been tested, and all is okay.

Dr. Diamond, the floor is yours for up to five minutes. Thank you.

[Dr. James A. Diamond, Joseph & Wolf Lebovic Chair of Jewish Studies, University of Waterloo, As an Individual]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I really am honoured to address the committee. Thank you for inviting me to these very important deliberations on anti-Semitism.

I'll begin with my own personal encounter with one of these encampments at the University of Toronto. I sent you, and I hope you have, the letter that I penned to the administration of the University of Toronto. It was quite a shocking encounter I had. If you'll notice, my letter does not contain one single word about Jews, about Israel, about Gaza—nothing like that. I tried to actually pen a critique to the university about behaviour, general behaviour.

I must add that the only reason I could offer for having had that very shocking, insulting and humiliating encounter was that I was visibly Jewish. That is, I was wearing a yarmulke, or kippah, on my head. I had come from a conference between members of different faiths at the pontifical institute. The level of conversation could not have been more distinct—from the sublime to the obscene, I would say.

That's a bit about my encounter and about what's been going on there. I think what's happening is that many different causes, what people might call “progressive” causes, are being conflated with the situation in Israel and the current conflict. This is nothing new, by the way. This has gone on for decades. I'm showing my age, but I was an undergrad in 1973 at the University of Toronto. The same things were happening, except now I think you would add the toxic ingredient of social media. That's another factor that hopefully you'll take into consideration when you address problems of anti-Semitism.

What's happened now is that anti-Semitism has always operated under different guises—whether it was anti-Judaism, for instance, in its beginnings; whether it was racism, anti-race, which anti-Semitism really culminated in during the Second World War during the Holocaust; or whether it was economics. Marx himself penned a treatise on Jews and money, an obscene treatise that Jews have been suffering from ever since. It cuts across all spectrums: left, right, it doesn't matter. I wouldn't use the term “racism” here. I think it is a unique form of discrimination.

The way I see it, what's happening in the academy and what's happening with these encampments is that anti-Semitism has now taken the form of anti-Israel, anti-Zionism, and it's been legitimized that way. That's not to say that you can't critique a government. You certainly can critique Israel, but the obsessive-compulsive disorder, as you can see, that is solely focused on this particular conflict is for me inexplicable without that dimension. The dimension that distinguishes the State of Israel from all other states is its Jewish dimension. I can't explain this single-minded focus as opposed to far greater humanitarian crises—in the Sudan, for instance, happening now. By orders of magnitude, that gets nothing.

For me, as an academic, this is another form. I think the vice-chair, Mr. Fortin, asked this question at the end of the last session. It certainly is very inextricably tied. I just want the committee to be attuned to what the IHRA definition brings to the fore, that this is another guise of anti-Semitism—not all of it, not all critiques, but I think it explains a lot of what's going on.

Thank you, Madam Chair.