Debates of Feb. 18th, 2016

Opposition Motion—Israel

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberty Party recently announced its intention to whip a vote on a very sensitive moral issue that is going to be coming before the House in the next few months. The member talked about the importance of this issue. I wonder if he could clarify. Based on what he has said, will the entire Liberal caucus be voting in favour of the motion?

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, that is a question for the Prime Minister to answer, not for me.

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time today with the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.

I stand in this House today and give my support to the motion that was put forward by my colleague from Parry Sound—Muskoka.

Canada and Israel have enjoyed a long-standing relationship and years of economic and diplomatic relations, including the recently expanded free trade agreement between our countries.

As a former mayor of the City of Surrey, I led two successful trade delegations to Israel, and I have spent time on the West Bank. These missions sought to bolster the relationship and the understanding between our two countries. I was proud to be a delegate from Canada advocating for increased ties between our two countries.

It is also because of my experience with these trade delegations that I stand before the House today and frankly state that the international boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement is actually a vehicle for spreading anti-Semitism and for advocating for the elimination of the Jewish state. Supporting this movement is unacceptable and unsupportable.

My colleagues in this House must recognize and affirm the State of Israel's right to exist and defend itself. Many of my colleagues have stood here this morning and made those statements. I applaud them and thank them for taking that stand. We must rally behind one of our closest allies, do what we can to ensure its success, and not support its demise.

Let me outline what the BDS movement means for Israel, because it is vitally important to understand what is at issue here.

By targeting businesses, universities, and civil society institutions, BDS tries to bring the conflict of the Middle East to Canada. Canadian organizations should never be used as a vehicle for social exclusion or the demonization of Canadians based on their national origin. That is exactly what the BDS movement is doing to Canadians and Israelis.

This goes even further. The BDS movement actually undermines peace. It does nothing to bring the two sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict together or to improve the quality of life for Palestinian citizens. In fact, it does quite the opposite. It jeopardizes the livelihood of thousands of Palestinians employed by Israeli companies.

There are many examples of this already: companies and factories that have moved from the West Bank, and Palestinians who have lost their livelihood. This does not promote peace, this does not better the lives of Palestinians or Israelis, and this does not help Canadians at home, because there is important work going on in Israel, in the West Bank, by all members of society.

When I was in Israel and met with a group of Palestinian business people, the message was very clear. They wanted trade and they wanted to encourage companies to locate on the West Bank. Meanwhile, the BDS movement does nothing to promote trade or create jobs for the Palestinian people. In fact, it does quite the opposite.

This boycott manifests itself in many ways, from pressuring consumers not to buy Israeli products to calling for universities to cut ties with Israeli academia and researchers, and even calls to ban Israeli athletes from international sporting competitions.

Let me give a few examples of the important work that the BDS movement is actively trying to cripple.

In the city of Surrey we have Simon Fraser University, which has ties to the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Israel. We also have a number of research initiatives under way. I am going to highlight two of the main initiatives, to demonstrate the impact of not having the co-operation between Canada and our counterparts in Israel.

Many of you have probably heard Captain Trevor Greene's story. He was a Canadian soldier who was with the Armed Forces in Afghanistan. He was sitting one evening with a group of elders, and out of respect, he took his helmet off and put it on the ground, and he was struck in the back of the head with an axe. His story is really a remarkable one because, while he did survive, he and his family were told that he would never walk again and that he would live his remaining days lying in a bed, unresponsive.

A young neuroscientist, Dr. Ryan D'Arcy, put together a team to work with Captain Greene, and over a number of years they worked to rewire his brain. They worked together. With Dr. D'Arcy, who was one of the individuals who accompanied me on both trade missions to Israel, we partnered with an Israeli company called ReWalk, which produces exoskeletons. Through that work, we had a team come to Canada and fit Trevor with an exoskeleton. I am really proud to say that, about six months ago, he was able to walk in the exoskeleton and get his life back.

This life-changing research continues, and it has changed the course of spinal cord research. Without this important initiative and innovative work being done in Israel today, Captain Greene's story would not be possible.

Briefly, I would say that, in the project we are doing right now between the universities, doctors in Surrey and the Ben-Gurion research team in Israel have been putting together leading researchers who are studying the correlation between diabetes and Alzheimer's, two diseases that affect too many Canadians. This is important work that will change the course of how we deal with populations that have high rates of diabetes. One such is the South Asian population. This important research will also help us better understand Alzheimer's and take us one step closer to battling a disease that affects so many people around the world. We have heard much in recent years about the expected increase of both of those diseases. With partnerships between the universities and the research, we are helping combat these epidemics—again another game changer.

These are but a few examples of the work that is going on and the innovation and technology breakthroughs between the strong partnerships of our two nations. Keeping this groundbreaking research in mind, can members imagine, if the BDS movement were successful and we actually cut ties, how many people would be impacted not only in Canada but around the world?

The basis on which BDS is found with groups pushing an anti-Semitic agenda is unacceptable, and it goes against everything that we as Canadians stand for. Let me be clear. This motion is not against free speech or free ideas. This motion simply condemns the actions that have had huge detrimental impacts, both here at home and abroad, and that are totally unacceptable.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, for some time now, we have been concerned about the extremely unfortunate rise in acts of anti-Semitism in Hungary in particular. This is nothing new. However, the previous Conservative government put Hungary on the safe country list.

Could my colleague explain the Conservative position on this?

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would say that any time there are groups of people who have ideals in anti-Semitic actions they are to be condemned. It is unacceptable. It is not part of who we are as people, as in any country around the world, and it is wrong. It has been wrong, it will be wrong, and will continue to be wrong.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the hon. member to perhaps explain what signal we are sending to Canadians by adopting the motion that has been put forward.

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the message that we are sending is that we are taking a leadership role. We have heard not only from the Conservatives, but from the Liberal side of the House as well, that we are in support of the tenets that make us Canadian. When we look at individuals who have basically stated that they have no right to exist, that is absolutely unacceptable. We are all human beings. We all occupy this world. We need to come together and support one another. That is exactly what we would be doing through this motion.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member on an excellent speech. I particularly liked how she talked about, specifically, the benefits for her riding.

We support Israel as a matter of principle, of course, but there are also many benefits to our country, through trade, through integration of academic institutions, and others.

I wonder if the member would speak a bit more, specifically, about the benefits to her riding, and also the benefits to Canada in general, of a strong relationship between Canada and Israel.

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we have had a very robust relationship with Israel. In terms of the trade delegations that I headed up as the former mayor and also as the CEO of the Health Tech Innovation Foundation, that technology has helped on many fronts, many people in Canada, right across this country. The innovation that has come from Israel and highlighting the exoskeleton from ReWalk is an absolute game-changer for people with spinal cord injury. That is a sample.

We have ongoing relationships with Israel. We have the technology that we have imported and that we are using in our health authorities.

I would say that we continue to strengthen, we continue to work, and we continue to support our friends in Israel.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, members of the House know, as I mentioned before, that my grandmother was a Holocaust survivor, and so I am particularly honoured to be speaking strongly today against contemporary discrimination against the Jewish people.

I am very proud to be a Zionist. A Zionist was defined originally as someone who supported the re-establishment, and now as someone who supports the development and protection, of the Jewish nation called Israel. There is for me an important connection between remembering the lessons of the Holocaust and supporting the modern Jewish State of Israel.

Zionism began at the end of the 19th century, but support for Zionism was not a slam dunk even within the Jewish community. Some liberal-minded Jews perceived the tension between the call for a separate Jewish state on the one hand and the demand for full Jewish equality within existing European states on the other. They saw the call for a separate Jewish homeland as contrary to their project of seeking integration and assimilation.

However, the terrible experience of European Jews during the Second World War demonstrated for most Jews, and most non-Jews alike, the need for a Jewish homeland. As much as Jews everywhere continued to seek full acceptance in nations where they lived outside of Israel, the opportunity to go to an ethnic and religious homeland provided them and provides them with vital security. If and when things go badly, Jews always have somewhere to go. This was not the case at the time of the Holocaust.

My grandmother was part of a mixed family. They were only able to obtain one visa, so her father, the full-blood Jew in the family, left for South America. My grandmother and her mother had to stay behind without him. We all know the tragic case of the St. Louis, a boat carrying Jewish refugees from Germany, which Mackenzie King refused to allow into Canada.

Noting this experience, Jews have rightly reasoned that as much as they can hope for goodwill from other nations where they live, they cannot always depend on it. Israel not only has a right to exist, its existence is necessary. Without it, Jews will not have the security that comes with knowing that, if worst come to worst, they always have somewhere to go.

Despite some dark moments, Canada and Israel have had a strong partnership. Certainly, we have much in common. Of course, we disagree on some things. It is a misconception that those of us who are Zionists always agree with policies of the Israeli government. As the member for Calgary Heritage has said, of course, like any country, Israel may be subjected to fair criticism, and like any free country, Israel subjects itself to such criticism with healthy, necessary, democratic debate. That self-criticism is part of what makes Israel a great nation: vibrant, open debate about politics between people of different philosophies and from widely varying religious traditions.

In Israel, the only liberal democracy in the Middle East, all citizens are able to run for government, to attend university, to hold any job, to sit on the supreme court, or represent their country on the international stage, just as Canadians are. Israelis, just like Canadians, can aspire to any goal and are free to work to achieve it. Frankly, Israel's Muslim population enjoy more economic, political, and religious freedom than do Muslim populations in many neighbouring Muslim-majority states.

Canada and Israel have much in common. We are vibrant democracies, we value multiculturalism, we protect the rights of all citizens, and we enjoy robust democratic debate in two official languages: for us it is in English and French, and for them it is Hebrew and Arabic. With these traits in common, it is natural for Canada and Israel to have a very strong bond.

Like Israel, Canada has spoken out in the past about global anti-Semitism, and we must do so again. Let us be clear: anti-Semitism and racism almost never identify themselves as such, but a movement that calls for boycott, divestment, and sanctions, not on the basis of actions, views, or words of the individuals facing the boycott but on the basis of national origin alone, is clearly an example of anti-Semitic racism. We have an obligation to speak out, not only in support of a friend, but to take a principled stand on something that runs counter to our deeply held values of diversity and inclusion.

We are fortunate to live in a country where we do not face discrimination on the basis of things like religion, sex, age, or ethnic or national origin. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms entrenches the fact that everyone is equal under Canadian law. This section of the charter reflects our deepest held values. People should not face discrimination on the basis of religion or of ethnic or national origin.

The boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement, or BDS, advocates for actions that run entirely contrary to these Canadian values. They advocate discrimination against individuals and businesses on the basis of national origin. BDS openly calls for discrimination against and boycotts of Israeli individuals, artists, companies, organizations, academics, universities, research institutions, hospitals, and technology and development projects, again, simply because they are Israelis. BDS advocates for discrimination against those who happen to be Israelis, and also against Canadians who hold dual Canadian-Israeli citizenship. BDS seeks to discriminate against individuals for no reason other than the passport that they hold.

George Santayana said that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Boycotts against Jews have occurred throughout history, based on lies, misinformation, and prejudicial assumptions. We are now seeing boycotts against the world's only Jewish state, and against all citizens of that Jewish state. Is it plausible that this is really simply about a political statement, or is it not obvious that this is something much darker than political disagreement?

BDS does not advocate peace between Israeli Jews and Palestinians. On this side of the House we support negotiations between the Israeli and Palestinian leaders, and we support a two-state solution. However, instead of trying to bring people together and support meaningful collaboration, BDS seeks to silence dialogue and once again single out Jews and Israelis for ill treatment. These actions do not contribute to peace, they only drive people further apart.

Now this motion is one that I would have hoped would receive unanimous support from the House, and frankly, I am perplexed that some members are opposing it. The best that we hear from those who are disinclined to support the motion is reference to freedom of speech. It certainly does not restrict anyone's freedoms for this House to express its support for our collective values of tolerance and inclusion, and to express our opposition to discrimination on the basis of national origin.

In 2010, Maclean's magazine ran a cover story calling Quebec Canada's “most corrupt province”. This House responded by unanimously passing a motion which expressed “its profound sadness at the prejudice displayed and the stereotypes employed by Maclean's magazine to denigrate the Quebec nation, its history and its institutions.”

Earlier, in 2006, The Globe and Mail published a story about the shooting at Montreal's Dawson College, in which the author suggested that the province's history of linguistic strife contributed to the incident. Following that, the House unanimously passed a motion, “That, in the opinion of the House, an apology be given to the people of Quebec for the offensive remarks of Ms. Jan Wong in a Globe and Mail article regarding the recent Dawson College tragedy.”

In these instances, members of all parties did not have a problem understanding that the House can express its opinion without limiting free and robust debate. As we must always ask in these cases, why treat Israel differently?

The collaboration between Canada and Israel benefits all of us. Just this past week, my daughter Gianna and I assembled our new SodaStream machine. SodaStream has a plant in Israel, which provides good well-paying jobs to both Israelis and Palestinians. Let us stand today against racism and anti-Semitism. Let us stand in support of tolerance and inclusion, and also in support of delicious fizzy drinks.

[Celina Caesar-Chavannes, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I want to say that we are not here debating whether we recognize the legitimacy of the State of Israel, something in which we all truly believe.

The member spoke about healthy, necessary, and democratic debate that exists in Israel and Canada. I ask the member to define what “any and all attempts” means, and if this part of the motion impedes healthy, necessary, and democratic debate in the promotion of peace.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the motion is quite clear, and the rules of the House with respect to motions are quite clear in this sense as well. We are not legislating as part of this debate today. We are not making any kind of change that would limit people's ability to speak freely. We, as a party, are asking the House to express strongly its opinion on an issue concerning our collective values.

As I have illustrated, the House has not had a problem doing this before. In two cases, the House has unanimously expressed its disagreement with some of Canada's most prominent publications, in one case The Globe and Mail and in another case Maclean's magazine. If the House, in those instances, did not have a problem expressing its opinion, without limiting freedom of speech, on issues that are important to our collective values as a nation, then let us be consistent and do it in this case as well. If the House is not willing to pass this motion unanimously, I would have to again ask, what makes Israel different?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there is really not much point engaging Conservatives on this issue, because they take the crisis of trying to find peace between Israel and Palestine and habitually use it as a wedge issue.

We are being asked in the House to use the power of Parliament to condemn individuals for their right to dissent from the Conservative world view. That was made clear when the Conservatives attacked the leader of the New Democratic Party for failing to condemn a demonstration outside his office.

This morning I read the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the right to picket outside MPs' offices. That is a fundamental right. Therefore, when my colleagues in the Conservative Party ask us to condemn individuals for their right to dissent, I am absolutely shocked and appalled that the Liberal Party, the party of Pierre Elliott Trudeau, would go along with them, because they are playing into the Conservatives' continual attempt to wedge and divide Canadians.

I want to ask my colleagues how we can stand and say we are going to support academic freedom when we would use the House of Commons to condemn individual students for participating in debates about foreign policies in another country. What kind of Parliament will we be if we become some kind of monkey house for Conservative ideology? If we are not willing to stand up for the right to dissent, the right to protest, the right to engage in discussion about what is good policy in another country, then the House is a much shabbier place as a result of these really distasteful wedge issues.

I am looking at the Liberal Party and wondering if it is going to go along with the Conservatives one more time, just like it did on Bill C-51. It should show some backbone and stand up to this kind of game playing.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, quite frankly, it is disappointing to hear the hon. member say he is not interested in engaging in this conversation with those of us over here. Of course, we have a very different world view, but I respect the member and think he should respect us and see the value, at the very least, of having this conversation. This is not about a wedge issue. Conservatives want members in other parties to support this motion. Frankly, I think this should be a consensus issue. If there are those who wish to vote against it, they have to account for that decision.

It is very inconsistent, though, for members of the New Democratic Party, because I remember in 2010 the leader of the New Democratic Party, in particular, taking great umbrage with a cover of Maclean's magazine about Quebec. The House subsequently passed a unanimous motion expressing its opinion about that cover. The member should explain why it is okay for the House to express its opinion on issues like that, but somehow, when it comes to Israel, the House should not express its opinion.

When we see things that go directly against our collective values, we have to take a strong position. The House should not limit freedom of speech but should express strongly its opposition to this racist—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Resuming debate, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

[Pam Goldsmith-Jones, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question. A Washington Institute article written by a Palestinian man dedicated to peace and reconciliation between him and his Israeli neighbours said that BDS does nothing to help the cause of peace. I am interested to know why the opposition party has not focused—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

We are now in fact resuming debate.

[Pam Goldsmith-Jones, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be sharing my time with the hon. member for Mississauga Centre.

Let me reiterate that we believe that all members of the House should support the motion. The Government of Canada unequivocally opposes the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement.

Democracy and freedom of expression are important Canadian values that we uphold and defend. Nevertheless, activities such as the BDS movement, and the harsh rhetoric and tactics that often accompany it, operate against freedom of speech. As has been made evident in today's debate, the BDS movement targets Canadian companies and threatens their legitimate commercial co-operation with Israel and Israeli companies. This threatens prosperity and runs counterproductive to the pursuit of a lasting peace in the Middle East.

It is not only Canadian and Israeli businesses that suffer. Palestinian businesses are also made to suffer. As was noted previously, the imposition of restrictions on cultural and academic exchanges only exacerbates tension in the region, instead of enhancing the personal linkages that are our best hope for paving the road to a just and lasting settlement.

Canada has been a close ally and strong friend of Israel since 1948. We know our relationship is both broad and deep, and it encompasses political, economic, cultural, and security co-operation, as well as deep ties between our people and communities.

Canada is also an important partner of the Palestinian Authority. Our development and humanitarian assistance to Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza address the immediate needs of the Palestinian people. This helps to lay the groundwork for the viable, democratic, and secure Palestinian state that will one day exist alongside a democratic and secure Israeli state.

To that end, Canada supports U.S. led efforts to enhance co-operation between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, through the deployment of Canadian Armed Forces on a daily basis, and toward dialogue and toward functioning well together. Canada looks forward to supporting the direct negotiations that will be required to achieve this two-state solution. We hope to soon see an environment that will allow all parties to return to the negotiating table.

The BDS movement is detrimental to the peace process. A lasting peace requires direct negotiation between the two parties. It is our sincere hope that we will move well beyond condemnation and toward creating a way to return to the negotiating table. Efforts that target and punish one side do not advance this cause. Efforts to attack trade and business links further harm prospects for peace by attempting to punish all elements of Israeli society.

The peace process requires the continual development of close personal links, not efforts to divide. It requires a strong economy, not one weakened by sanctions and boycotts, and a genuine dialogue, not discrimination and isolation.

Canada and Israel have been close partners since Israel became independent. Canada will continue to be one of Israel's staunch allies. There is no doubt that Canada takes this operation very seriously.

As we have already heard, our two countries are working closely together in a number of areas, and that includes opposing the BDS campaign. Canada continues to be concerned about initiatives seeking to target and isolate Israel, and this boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement is no exception.

The Government of Canada has long had a policy to oppose any boycott based on race, nationality, or ethnic origin.

What is more, Canada opposes any initiative that seeks to attack Israel on the international stage. For example, Canada defends Israel against any unfair treatment at the United Nations and in other international forums.

My colleague spoke to this earlier. However, I would like to reiterate that as a member state of the Union Nations, Israel has the right to full and equal participation. Furthermore, Canada stands in solidarity with Israel through our commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East and by opposing unilateral actions that seek to undermine the peace process, including unilateral actions taken by either side.

I would also like to highlight that Canada's trade relations with Israel continue to grow. Our two countries continue to collaborate on issues related to trade, investment, science, technology, and innovation.

Canada recently concluded negotiations to bring the Canada-Israel free trade agreement into force. This modernized agreement has been adapted to meet our needs in the 21st century and reinforces our close co-operation with Israel on all matters related to trade. We look forward to working with Israel to bring this agreement into force.

Trade is strong between Israel and Palestine as well. Forbes magazine reports that BDS sanctions harmed Palestinians disproportionately, due to the trade surplus that flows from Israel to Palestine and the good jobs that ensue.

To conclude, I would like once again to emphasize Canada's strong relationship with Israel, as well as our support for the Palestinian Authority. We continue to work towards a lasting negotiated settlement to achieve a two-state solution. Our opposition to the BDS movement is not about taking sides in the conflict. It is about supporting dialogue over exclusion.

The BDS movement is not leading to a constructive solution to the conflict. It exacerbates and it inflates. This is why we call on the House of Commons to support the motion put forward today and condemn the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member for West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country on her speech. My question has to do with a comment made by one of her colleagues, Irwin Cotler, who was a member of the Liberal government. He condemned some United Nations bodies for their treatment of the State of Israel. He said that only three times in 50 years has a state been singled out, and all three times, that state was Israel.

Given what Canada can and should do, will the government commit to stop the United Nations from ostracizing the State of Israel in the international arena?

[Pam Goldsmith-Jones, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is very important to recognize, first of all, Mr. Cotler's leadership. Everyone in the country has learned and grown together as a result. I thank the hon. member for mentioning that.

With regard to the international arena, our government is completely committed to a two-state solution. We are completely committed to recognizing our strong ties with Israel and our support for the Palestinian Authority, as well.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have to say I am disappointed to hear from my friend, the hon. parliamentary secretary, that the Liberal government proposes to vote for this motion.

It is not necessary to support the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement to recognize that this motion seeks to label all of those who support that effort as engaging in the “demonization” of Israel, and labelling them as anti-Semitic.

Surely the hon. parliamentary secretary does not believe the United Church of Canada is motivated by hatred of the State of Israel?

[Pam Goldsmith-Jones, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, of course the wording of the motion crafted by the opposition is intended to do exactly what she explains. I personally would be concerned about that. However, overall, BDS does not need to be supported. It needs to be pointed out. I think we should join together in doing that.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. However, the text of the motion does not ask us whether we support BDS. The motion calls on us to condemn all attempts to promote the BDS movement, even peaceful and democratic attempts. It calls on us to condemn freedom of speech and freedom of opinion. For example, the United Church of Canada voted in favour of boycotting products from the occupied territories. Would my colleague condemn the United Church of Canada for its position?

[Pam Goldsmith-Jones, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I was married in the United Church 32 years ago, so that is certainly not our intent.

I would refer to the comments I made. A lasting peace requires direct negotiation between the two parties. It is our hope that we move well beyond condemnation and toward creating a way to return to the negotiating table.

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Consular Affairs)]

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to speak to the motion and share my thoughts with the House on this important matter.

We all have a constructive role to play in advancing a peaceful resolution to advocate on behalf of civilians on all sides of the conflict by actively pursing a two-state solution.

It is important to respect the right of Israel to exist and the right of Palestinians to have their own independent nation. We can help achieve this by encouraging engagement, dialogue, and respect for all.

I want to be clear. In order to create a hospitable environment for dialogue, we must actively fight against hate, racism, anti-Semitism, and Islamophobia in all of their forms. Our challenge is that we must also ensure we encourage constructive and meaningful conversation.

I do not believe a boycott is a constructive approach. I did not enter politics to promote boycott but to encourage engagement and dialogue between parties for the purpose of reaching long-lasting peace. The question we need to ask ourselves is this. Instead of finding ways to score political points, how can we advance the interests of peace in the region?

Some BDS advocates believe its an important non-violent approach to raising awareness about the situation over the last years in the region and the lack of progress. As mentioned previously in the House, we must be careful not to paint everyone with one brush. Many BDS advocates are human rights champions who want to see progress on this issue. We should be intolerant toward hate, but find ways to tolerate passionate disagreements.

Yet, we must recognize that some BDS advocates may have anti-Semitic motives. Some are blinded by their passion. I firmly believe that double standards should and must be called out in every instance. For example, criticizing the government of Israel for certain behaviour while excusing it when committed by others is unacceptable. Equally, we should be able to criticize the Israeli government for similar actions that we criticize other governments for.

It is in the mutual interests of Israelis and Palestinians to show progress and to give hope to those who are frustrated by the situation. The Conservatives have failed at offering any constructive approach other than bluster and anti-rhetoric. They want to divide Canadians instead of rallying support for dialogue and engagement.

Let me repeat. I strongly believe in engagement not boycott. I also understand that many students and activists are seeking an opportunity in good faith to find alternative methods to express their concerns and voice their opinions.

While I want to promote a healthy dialogue, I am hesitant to infringe on anyone's right to free speech. We need to encourage an open and safe atmosphere on university campuses. They are sacred places of learning and debate and not places where students should feel threatened because of their background or political beliefs. As always, I encourage us to be sensitive toward each other and listen to what our colleagues say without making them feel uncomfortable or threatened. The goal should not be to create a threatening environment but a co-operative space where even those who disagree can find common ground to advance what we all want to see, which is long-lasting peace and mutual respect and co-operation.

Canada as I said has a crucial role to play. We must remain committed to a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, including the creation of a Palestinian state living side-by-side and in peace with Israel.

This has never been an easy matter to discuss. Emotions run high, especially when considering the innocent lives at stake and so many complicated disputes. However, that is precisely why we must resist the urge to use inflamed rhetoric and instead offer thoughtful, objective, and effective alternatives. If we cannot do this in Canada, it is hard to imagine it happening anywhere else in the world.