Okay, I withdraw.

Another quote from the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs:

“It has now been almost 24 hours since” the member “was asked to retract her statement, and yet the post remains up.

“It is clear” the member “shows no remorse for her heinous remarks.

“We are calling on” the NDP leader “to show leadership and remove” the member “from her caucus.”

Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs:

The “Ontario NDP leader ... called for” the member “to retract her *egregious* & harmful statement.

“It remains online. She did not retract it. This apology—buried in the comments—is far too little, and far too late.”

The member “must be removed.”

Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center:

“We are outraged by this statement from” the member “and her refusal to acknowledge the atrocities committed by the terror group Hamas against Israeli civilians....

“Not for the first time, she has caused hurt and harm to the Jewish community and brought shame to Ontarians, including her constituents in Hamilton Centre. It’s long past time for the @OntarioNDP to take decisive action and remove her from its caucus, once and for all.”

B’nai Brith Canada on October 10:

The member “has never properly apologized to the Jewish community for her prior offensive statements. Now, as our community faces an onslaught of barbaric terrorism, your comments are void of even one word of condemnation against Hamas.

“You do not deserve to sit in the opposition’s caucus in Ontario ... we call for her immediate removal from the @OntarioNDP.”

Andrea Freedman, CEO of the Jewish Federation of Ottawa: “It is appalling that that particular MPP is choosing to blame the victims in all of this. Hamas is a terrorist entity, labelled a terrorist entity by our government. They conducted a massacre of civilians. They went into people’s homes, murdered and slaughtered entire families. They took babies captive, they took senior citizens, ill people, captive back to the Gaza Strip. This MPP should be ashamed, and she should be censured by her party.”

Hershl D. Berman, 40-year member of the NDP, former federal and provincial NDP candidate:

“This week” the member “caused great harm to the Jewish community in Ontario. While Hamas was attacking our friends and family she posted remarks on her ‘X’ page that were inappropriate and deeply hurtful. She was asked to withdraw them but she did not, and her subsequent statements were inadequate and unacceptable.

“This is the latest incident in a pattern of anti-Semitic behaviour that predates her election to the Ontario NDP caucus. Her actions demonstrate that she is neither fit to speak for the New Democratic Party nor to hold elected office.”

The public sentiment is clear and the member’s actions indeed reflect upon all of us. As we have observed recently with the unfortunate decision of Speaker Rota to honour a former Nazi in the House of Commons, the actions of individual members of Parliament can challenge the dignity of the House as a whole and always must be taken seriously.

Speaker Rota chose to resign as a result of his error and noted poignantly in his resignation that “the work of the House is above any of us.” The Premier has called for the member for Hamilton Centre to resign, and I agree that that would also be appropriate in this instance, but this is a decision obviously for the member and for another day and is not what this motion is about today.

What remains before us is an apology to this House for bringing it into disrepute and the deletion of the offensive statement so it is clear she has truly retracted it. If that is too great a burden for the member for Hamilton Centre, then in my view, she will have confirmed to the House that she in fact stands by her shameful position and ought not to be recognized further in this place.

Madam Speaker, as I said earlier in my comments, when the statement was first put on X, people moved very quickly to condemn the statement. As I said, in fact, the leader of the NDP herself said this in a press release on October 11, 2023: The MPP’s “statement yesterday did not unequivocally decry the violence against Israelis by Hamas and it caused harm to Jewish people who are feeling pain and fear right now. It did not reflect our party’s positions on the war and was sent without approval.” It goes on to say, “At the same time, I have made it clear that all members of our caucus condemn Hamas’s terror attacks, and we stand in support of the federal NDP’s position in calling for an end to further bloodshed.”

That was the NDP leader’s position on October 11 when she was clear and unequivocal that the member’s statement was wrong, when she asked the member to apologize and she asked the member to retract that statement. We can debate the sincerity of the apology, and I know that’s in part what this is about today. The member then failed to go that extra step. Not only was the apology, in my estimation, a half-hearted apology at best, the member then doubled down and left the statement there, a statement that the NDP leader herself claims is hurtful, a statement that we have heard from countless people, including former NDP candidates, is hurtful and brings the member and this House into disrepute. The statement remains.

In fact, the member has gone even further and has pinned the statement to her X feed. What does that mean? That means that that statement is pinned, and every time somebody goes to that feed, they need not look for it; it’s there permanently pasted to the top of her page. Madam Speaker, I think that speaks volumes of the intentions of the member for Hamilton Centre.

There can be no doubt, as I said at the early part of my words, sometimes we are all passionate about things that we believe in. All of us are. The place would be a very boring House if we were not passionate. Sometimes, we are forced to make apologies. In fact, one of my worst days in politics was an apology to the House for something I did wrong. In fact, the member for Hamilton West–Ancaster–Dundas is fond of sometimes screaming that and reminding me across the floor of that. I consider that one of my worst days in politics, but I did what was right for the institution and ultimately for myself, Madam Speaker. I made a mistake; I apologized.

In instance after instance, members who have made mistakes have gotten in their place out of respect for the institution and the dignity of the House and have apologized. As I said earlier on in my speech, we moved very quickly when the former member for Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston, Mr. Hillier, made comments unbecoming of a member of the House, horrific comments attacking a federal Muslim cabinet minister. This House moved very quickly to bring forward a motion of censure to that member.

And yes, that member never came back into this place after that censure. He never came back—he never apologized, he never fulfilled the motion that we brought forward—and frankly, Madam Speaker, I think this House is better because of that. I think this House spoke very clearly at that time that we will not tolerate that, and I thought that was a good day for Parliament, if a bad day for the member.

Ultimately, that is what this motion before us would have us do. It would have us recognize that in this place we are held to a higher standard; that in this place, while we can debate our positions on certain things—and we should debate. You’ve heard me say it many, many times that we should be fierce in how we debate, that we should be serious in how we debate, but at all times we have to remember that it is the institution and the people we represent.

Now, why is this so important? Well, we heard speeches yesterday that, I think, were—when I heard the Solicitor General speak and the Minister of the Environment speak yesterday about the very real impact that this was having on their family, their friends and on themselves, one could not help but feel not only touched but somehow a desire to participate in the debate to show some form of understanding and some form of respect.

In this instance, Madam Speaker, I again refer back to what happened on that day. There can be no discussion about what happened. A terrorist group, Hamas, a terrorist—we are all members of provincial Parliament. Parliament has decided, the government of Canada has decided—which I support, and presumably all members should support—that they are a terrorist organization. A terrorist organization broke through borders, helicoptered or flew or parachuted in, crossed the borders, started at a music festival and slaughtered people—slaughtered them. They went into villages. Terrorists did this: They went into villages and slaughtered people.

The horrific images of babies and families wiped out, the images of citizens—not soldiers—in shelters, trying to avoid conflict and grenades being thrown in to kill all of them, that was perpetrated by terrorists. The images of captives being dragged back across the border, kidnapped, held as hostages, paraded through the streets of Gaza, bloodied, it was perpetrated by terrorists.

This is not about how people might feel about the existence of the Israeli state, because frankly, those who deny the Israeli state has not only the right to exist—that in itself is anti-Semitic and discriminatory, obviously. But this was perpetrated by terrorists—the most horrific actions against the Israeli and Jewish people since the Holocaust. There should be no doubt in anybody’s mind about where we stand on that incident on that day. There is no confusion on this. This is not a debate about Middle East politics; this is a debate about a terrorist action that has killed and injured thousands of people in the most brutal of ways. I think it’s six Canadians who have been killed in this action.

We cannot debate whether that is appropriate or not, and we should be unified—Madam Speaker, I would suggest to you—in condemning that. We should be unified in condemning that. There is not one member of this House who should justify that in any way. And when a member does that, they bring themselves and, more importantly, the institution into disrepute, Madam Speaker. As I said, we refer back to what happened in Ottawa. We refer back to what happened in Ottawa: an instance where a Speaker brought in a former Nazi. This incident, rightfully so, made its way around the globe—around the globe. For people who don’t think that what we do here can have an impact, I suggest to them that they are wrong.

I think the member for Hamilton Centre is fully aware of the impact that her statement would have, and that is why the statement is still online, that is why the statement has been pinned and that is why the member is unwilling to apologize, because it is meant to be hurtful. It is meant to make the statement that she is trying to make. It is a statement that her own leader has suggested is inappropriate and should not have been allowed to stay.

Yesterday the leader of the NDP said that, somehow, we’re trying to make a political point, that this is playing politics. We weren’t playing politics when we sanctioned the member for Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston. We spoke in a unified voice. Presumably, if I take the leader of the NDP at her word, on October 11, the leader of the NDP wasn’t playing politics when she demanded a retraction and an apology from her own member. I took the Leader of the Opposition at her word, that she understood the seriousness of what the member for Hamilton Centre was doing.

Now, it is up to the Leader of the Opposition to explain to this House, to the Jewish community, to the people of the province why she has changed her mind, why she is not doing what this House must do on behalf of all of the people of the province. This House is now seized with the motion to censure a member, to seek an apology, to retract a hurtful statement—acknowledged by the Leader of the Opposition—because the Leader of the Opposition refuses to do the basic things that a leader must do.

The leader must first and foremost respect the institution of Parliament. We all take an oath when we are sworn in here. We all understand that we are representatives of the people and that long after we are gone, this place will still be here. And while we debate fiercely, we rent the seats here for a short period of time and somebody else replaces us after. It is Parliament that always must be held in the highest esteem. When one of our members fails that test, it is important that we all work together to ensure the dignity of this House.

Madam Speaker, I won’t belabour it. I will leave it at that.

In closing, I will just say that I hope the member will do the right thing eventually. I hope the member will truly apologize. I hope the member will take down the statement. I hope the member will reconsider her pinning of the statement on her X feed. And I hope she will consider the voices of the people who have told her that this is harming them.

We have had other instances in this House, other members on the opposition benches who have done similar hateful things. I’d like to think that they have learned from that mistake. In one instance, I think there has been some growth and a better understanding of the issues. But we cannot, Madam Speaker, as a Parliament allow this to stand, and that this has gone on with the member for this long is now forcing us to act quickly in this House.

We will be seized with this until we come to a conclusion on this, Madam Speaker, because it is that important. That is the importance of maintaining the dignity of this Parliament above all else. With that, Madam Speaker, I will yield the floor to the member for Durham, and I thank you very much for your attention.