Good morning, and let us pray.

Prières / Prayers.

Resuming the debate adjourned on October 18, 2023, on the amendment to the amendment to the motion regarding the censure of the member for Hamilton Centre.

When I was speaking on this matter earlier, I had been recounting how I had travelled to Jerusalem, how I had been staying with the Sisters of Sion in their house and how I encountered interesting people in my travels. One of those interesting people was an Irishman from the UK, and his name was Paddy. One day, Paddy and I decided we would go down to the Western Wall. The Western Wall is the last remaining wall of a great temple complex that was built in the ancient times. Much, if not all, of it was destroyed, and the Western Wall is the last remaining portion. It’s considered a very holy place, and I was privileged to go there.

When we arrived, there were thousands of people there, and Paddy and I, we immersed ourselves into the crowd. While we were there, an individual sidled up next to me. He looked very official. He had on official identification. He said, “Hello,” and I said hello back. He said to me, “Where are you from?” And I said, “I’m from Canada. Where are you from?” He said, “I’m from here, Israel.” He asked me if I was Jewish. I said, “No, I’m Catholic. What are you?” He said he was Jewish. He said, “Welcome to Israel. I hope you enjoy your stay.” And then he melted on into the crowd.

I thought that was a curious interaction. I suspected that he might be some kind of security agent who was doing surveillance and just randomly selecting people out of the crowd to make sure he was doing certain types of surveillance, but I was wrong. He was actually an immigration agent; that’s what I learned later. What he was doing is he was trying to identify people who might be interested in immigrating to Israel, and after he had that brief conversation with me, he probably determined that I probably wasn’t interested and so he went on to find another prospect. That’s how I wound up here.

Now, as a matter of fact, that didn’t just happen to me once, it happened to me other times as well in other countries. At a certain time, I actually applied for and received citizenship in the Republic of Malta, so I am actually a dual citizen. I’m a citizen of Canada, and I’m also a citizen of Malta. Malta is a member of the European Union, which means I’m a citizen of the European Union, and that gives me a great amount of liberty. I can go to a lot of places in the world. I’m welcome in a lot of places in the world. I feel safe in a lot of places in the world, and the reason I bring that up is because not everybody can say that.

Sometimes people go to places in the world and they’re not welcome. Sometimes people go to places in the world, and they are harassed, they are assaulted and they might even be killed. Nobody knows that better than Jews, and that brings me to the comments made by the member from Hamilton Centre. I read those comments. I think the comments can only be interpreted one way. The comments can only be interpreted as endorsing terrorism and endorsing terrorism specifically against Jewish people. That is the only way you can interpret those comments.

I find them offensive. Everybody should find them offensive. There are in fact Jews who sit as members in this chamber, and I ask the question, and I put it to all the members of this House: What if some other member of this House advocated terrorism against your ethnic group? How would you react? I know how I would react if somebody advocated terrorism against Catholics. How would you react if somebody advocated terrorism against your ethnic group?

Now we made it very easy for the member from Hamilton Centre to correct this error. All she had to do was retract the statement and apologize. That’s a very easy thing to do. She refused to do it. In fact, she has not retracted the statement; she’s done exactly the opposite. She has pinned the statement and highlighted it on her social media platform. That is obstinate, and I would submit that it’s not an isolated incident coming from the member from Hamilton Centre. It is actually a pattern of behaviour.

In fact, I make specific reference to the member’s comments of April 3, 2023, in this chamber. I say that the member does not have respect for this chamber or its traditions and, as our government House leader said, brings, by her comments, the reputation of the Legislature into disrepute.

Here are the statements made by the member from Hamilton Centre on April 3, 2023: “I’m not here to be preoccupied by the strange rituals or this colonial building.” That was her first statement in this House. The first opportunity the member from Hamilton Centre had to address this chamber, she immediately denigrated our traditions and our Legislature and then it went downhill from there.

I remember my first comments in this House. I spoke about my family and where I came from, how much respect I had for my teachers—and yet the member from Hamilton Centre uses her first opportunity to denigrate the Legislature.

Now, if I’ve said anything that the member from Hamilton Centre disagrees with, she will have an opportunity to contradict me. After I finish these statements, I’ll sit down, and if the member from Hamilton Centre wants to, she can take her place and refute me. I invite that member to do so. I’d like to hear what that member has to say about what I’ve said. If she wants to contradict me, if she wants to refute me, she will have a chance. I will stay in my place and I will listen to what that member has to say.

I want to take this opportunity also to address what we would do as Canadians in the event of a similar situation taking place on our soil. I began this analysis yesterday. I’ll continue with this analysis. If the terrorist group Hamas launched an attack from Canadian soil, committed atrocities in another country and then took hostages, kidnapped them and brought them back to Canada, what would we do? Would we give them shelter? No. We would not shelter terrorists who seize hostages from another country. We would hunt them down. We would bring them to justice. We would probably send them back to the country where they had committed the atrocities in order to face the consequences.

What is happening in the current situation that occurred on October 7—I’ll tell you what is happening. They took hostages out of Israel, they escaped into another place and they melted into the mainstream. That government either was unwilling or unable to do what Canada would do. That government was either unwilling or unable to hunt down the terrorists and bring them to justice.

In that situation, what would Canada do? We would not stand by idly. No, we would not. We would hunt down the terrorists. We would try to recover the hostages. And if that is the standard that we apply to ourselves, then that is the standard we must apply to others. If another country has had its citizens seized and hostaged away to another place, then that country has the right to go try and free those hostages and bring the terrorists to justice. That’s what we would do.

The motion before us is as follows: “That this House expresses its disapproval of, and dissociates itself from, continued disreputable conduct by the member for Hamilton Centre, most specifically her use of social media to make anti-Semitic and discriminatory statements related to the existence of the State of Israel and its defence against Hamas terrorists; and

“That this House demands the member desist from further conduct that is inappropriate and unbecoming of a member of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario; and

“That the Speaker is authorized to not recognize the member for Hamilton Centre in the House until the member retracts and deletes her statements on social media and makes an apology in her place in the House.”

This is an appropriate motion and, as I said earlier, this entire thing could be avoided if the member simply apologized and deleted the statements, but the member has been intractable. Therefore, it is incumbent upon us to stand and to make sure that the reputation of this Legislature and its traditions are not brought into disrepute by that member.

For all of those reasons, I will be voting in favour of this motion.

Essex.

I appreciate the comments from my colleague Mr. Leardi from—

What a challenging debate to be part of in this Legislature—that we have to actually be doing this here in this august chamber, calling for the censure of one of our colleagues. Why? “From the river to the sea”—I’m uttering those words, but not as part of a protest or my belief; I’m uttering them as a repetition of what we’ve heard so many times and from the member from Hamilton Centre. You cannot utter those words, “From the river to the sea,” unless you are an anti-Semite, because those very words require that the nation of Israel disappear and, along with it, the Jewish state. So if you use those words in protest or for any other reason, you cannot call yourself anything but an anti-Semite.

Speaker, the member for Hamilton Centre is an anti-Semite. She can deny it. Her leader can deny it. But her life mission has shown that before she got here, she was an anti-Semite, and she has continued to practise that since being elected.

Speaker, there are anti-Semites among us everywhere in this country. Anti-Semitism is a cancer out there that seems to be part of almost every community, unfortunately and shamefully.

It’s our duty, in this Legislature, to root out and rid this province, this country, this world of all forms of hate, be they anti-Semitism, be they Islamophobia, be they homophobia or any other form of hate. It is our sworn duty to rid this world and therefore all parts of it from them and any other form of hate. But we don’t make—it’s not a requirement of citizenship or a requirement of living in this country or anywhere else or any part of this country. We know that it’s out there, and we see evidence of it every day. I don’t think there’s—I will speak more on it further in my remarks, I’m sure, if I have time.

We see so much evidence of anti-Semitism all around—and it’s daily. We’ll talk about our universities and how sad it is that the leaders of tomorrow believe that the Jewish state should be eliminated. Many of the leaders of tomorrow believe that, and they’re financed by the dues of other students.

Even if you hold those views, there’s one thing that I believe absolutely: that when you are sworn in here as a member of this chamber—there are only 124 of us who are honoured to serve the people of Ontario in this way, 124 out of approximately 15 million—

Interjection.

When you are sworn in here as a member, in my opinion, even if you are an anti-Semite, as the member has demonstrated repeatedly throughout her life, you check that at the door. Once you become a member here, you have to take on a different persona. You are a representative of this historic chamber. You no longer have the right to espouse your hateful views once you take a seat in this chamber, and you have to accept that as a condition of signing that oath, that you will relinquish your right, your privilege, to act in those ways any longer. It would appear to me that that is a reasonable restriction—if you want to call it that; I don’t even want to call it a “restriction.” It’s a reasonable compromise for accepting of the will of the people that you would represent them here.

But what does the member for Hamilton Centre do, as my colleague from Essex has pointed out? She used her first statements to politicize everything she does here through her own tainted lens. This could have been a great opportunity for the member from Hamilton Centre to actually show that there’s been some growth, not some deterioration and some further rot—that there was actually further growth since she became a member here and that she understands what our grave responsibility is to serve everyone and to protect every vulnerable person. But she chose to put out that vile tweet—I still call them “tweets.” I don’t know, do you still call them “tweets” or “X” or whatever? To put that out, and she was immediately called out for it.

There, Speaker, is where the big failure comes, because her leader called for her to withdraw that and apologize. What we got from the member for Hamilton Centre was this pitiful, pathetic, fake apology that I don’t believe for one minute had a scintilla of sincerity. It was done because her leader requested it, but the request included withdrawal and taking down of the original post. And, sadly, instead of the member from Hamilton Centre removing the post, the leader has turtled and gone into hiding on that issue—retreated to her cave, her burrow, whatever you want to call it—and doesn’t want to talk about it. In fact, the leader of the NDP shamefully, disgustingly, has said that members on this side of the House—and I’ll paraphrase it because I don’t have the exact quote in front of me—are trying to take away the rights of a Muslim woman to speak on behalf of her constituents. That’s a paraphrase. How shameful. On one hand, she’s saying this is a divisive thing. Yes, what has been done is tremendously divisive, and the way to bring people together is to have a full-throated apology for that. But no, she fosters greater division by making that kind of a statement.

This is not about Muslim or Jew. This is about hatred. This is about hatred and using the platform of you, as an MPP—the platform that we have as the privilege of sitting here. We would not have it otherwise, the platform that we have to get a message out. Whether correct or incorrect, it doesn’t matter; it’s our message to get out. So using this vehicle to espouse that kind of vitriolic hatred is wrong, and the right and just thing to do for this Legislature is to stand against it.

If we don’t stand against it today, we better not try to stand against it tomorrow. You don’t get a mulligan on these kinds of things. You must act, and you must act decisively. That’s exactly what our government is doing—acting, and acting decisively. You think it’s easy? I’m not saying that to you directly, Speaker. I mean that in the broad sense. No, it’s not easy when you have—only once in my tenure here did we call a member for censure, and that was the former member for Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston. It may have happened before me. It is a very rare step that is taken; indeed, one that is gut-wrenching to have to go through—to make that choice. We are now put in a position here in this chamber, here in our Parliament, that we must call a colleague to order for words that were both written and, on a repeated basis, spoken. This is not easy but is absolutely necessary.

What it has also shown—and this is truly regrettable—is the actions of the opposition in respect to this. They also could have done the right thing. Their leader could have stuck to her guns and said, “I’m sorry, but this is a condition”—and I will say this without any fear of being wrong, although everyone is entitled to an opinion. Should a member of this Progressive Conservative caucus have made statements either in writing or in any form of communications or media in a quantifiable way similar to those against any group, our leader, Premier Ford, would give you about 30 seconds to have an absolute and unequivocal apology issued or you’d find yourself—the door would be slammed on your backside, because you wouldn’t be a member of this caucus any longer. We couldn’t do anything about whether you sit in this chamber or not, but hopefully the people of Hamilton Centre have an opportunity to make a decision at some time as well—and hopefully in any riding, if that was the case, the people would make the right decision.

We live in a vast melting pot here in Canada, here in Ontario, where people from all over the world have come here because this is a bastion of freedom, of civil rights and privileges, and a place where freedom and freedom of speech reigns. But freedom of speech, as has been quoted by people a whole lot smarter than me, has its limitations, and when it either directly or indirectly calls for violence against others, then that privilege must be not only curtailed but removed. We do have laws with regard to hate crimes and hate speech in this country, but they tend to be pretty wishy-washy when it comes to anti-Semitism.

My father, as many people know—as everybody here would know by now because I’ve said it many times—was a World War II veteran who fought overseas. While he was not the division or the battalion that liberated places like Auschwitz and Treblinka, he understood absolutely the persecution that Jews had experienced in Nazi Germany and all around the world.

They lost their homeland—the homeland that was theirs, millennia ago. As a result of the Second World War and the absolute atrocities that were committed to Jewish people, the world rightfully—the free world and the new world, if you want to call it that, the post-Second-World-War world—decided that the Jewish people must have a homeland, and Israel was created. Ever since then, they have had to fight and battle and face tremendous discrimination in all corners of the world, but certainly in their corner of the world, where they are surrounded by hostiles. And then you wonder why Israel has felt it necessary to build a strong military to protect itself, because at any time of the day, of any time of a day, of any time of the week or the year, they could be subject to aggression.

This is what happened on October 7, Speaker. A terrorist attack of the most vile in nature, most abhorrent and hideous in nature, where young children were murdered and beheaded, women were raped, adults and children were killed and kidnapped. And Israel responded in the only way that it could. You have two choices: fight or flight. They have nowhere to go to. This is their homeland. There’s nowhere to go. They have to fight for it and they have to defend themselves when they’re faced with that kind of inhuman attack from the terrorists that make up Hamas.

And you will have the argument that, well, they shouldn’t be attacking back. But Hamas is a terrorist group that doesn’t care about human life, be it Jewish or Palestinian, so they set up their headquarters in apartment buildings, in hospitals, in schools. They have missile launchers among the people. They use their citizens. You see, Gaza is ruled by Hamas. Let’s be clear. They use their citizens as human shields and find them completely dispensable from the point of view of human life. They don’t care how many Palestinians are killed; they only care how many Jews they can kill. That’s the difference. The Jews, the Israelites don’t rush into the other countries and attack, but they’re constantly in a mode of defence. But when they are attacked, they must respond. They must respond.

I tell you, Speaker, that every drop of Palestinian blood that has been spilled in these last couple of weeks, almost, is on the hands of Hamas. They, because they don’t care about the loss of life, have put their citizens in grave danger, knowingly. Their actions were a deliberate attack, designed to kill as many Israeli Jews as possible. It wasn’t a defensive move; it was designed to inflict as much damage in a short period of time on as many Jewish citizens as possible.

And I tell you, Speaker, it’s the largest loss of human life among the Jewish people at any one time since the Holocaust. And we have a member of this chamber not only defending Hamas, but applauding them. How can we possibly do anything—

Further debate?

I recognize the member from London West.

The member may continue. You have 10 seconds left on the clock.

Interjections.

This is a very sensitive topic. I’m asking for decorum in the House while we debate this issue. I do have the rules of order, and I will be following very closely. I recognize the sensitivity of this debate.

I apologize to the member and ask him to continue with his debate.

Point of order, Speaker.

When we were in COVID, I had a few speeches on various things related to COVID, and I said that we were in unprecedented times here in the Legislature. We’re still in unprecedented times. I will admit I have not followed everything that has gone on in this Legislature for the entire 53 years that I have been alive. I don’t recall, prior to last term—

Interjections.

I don’t recall a time where the Legislature has censured someone prior to last term. I’m going to read the text of the motion when Randy Hillier, the former member from Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston, was censured. The motion read, “That this House expresses its disapproval of, and disassociates itself from, continued disreputable conduct by the member for Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston, most specifically his use of social media to make racist and discriminatory statements about a federal cabinet minister,” and it goes on to describe things.

The motion we have before us today: “That this House expresses its disapproval of, and disassociates itself from, continued disreputable conduct by the member for Hamilton Centre”—the only difference in that first line is the riding—“most specifically her use of social media”—“her” instead of “his”—“to make anti-Semitic and discriminatory statements related to the existence of the State of Israel and its defence against Hamas terrorists.”

The only substantive differences between the two motions, one that the 26 returning NDP members from the last government unanimously supported—the only substantive differences: “anti-Semitism” instead of the word “racism,” “Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston” instead of “Hamilton Centre,” and “his” instead of “her.”

Last government, 26 NDP members stood up in this House and said that comments made on social media against a minority group in Canada were inappropriate, and they said they didn’t want to be associated with that. They felt that that put this Legislature in disrepute.

Interjections.

Nice try, chief whip—the chief whip who blamed the Jews for the bombing of the hospital, taking her information from Hamas. I get it from US intelligence. It was the terrorists themselves. So you should not rise on a point of order like that again.

That member is wrong. She should be censured. I hope you will do the right thing and vote to censure her.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

What we had in the last session was somebody who stood up on social media, who publicly made comments about somebody who was a Muslim. And they were horrible things to say. There was nothing good that could come from it.

The NDP—the 26 members who were in government last term who have returned all stood up in their place and said it made our Legislature look bad: “That member should not be recognized. That member does not represent what the people of Ontario want. That member should not be able to speak in their place and we should not recognize them as a member. We should take away their ability to stand up here and further discredit the Legislature of Ontario, further discredit the people of Ontario.” And they were all too happy to do it.

I will admit that member was not someone I was particularly fond of. That member was not someone that I would have said I would have shared a coffee with, because I probably would have had to spit it out at some point. I freely admit I had no problem personally saying that I didn’t want to hear from them again. But that didn’t factor into the decision on what we did. What we did as an Ontario Legislature was we said, “Your comments are not acceptable. You cannot attack a minority group in this country. You cannot disparage another group in this province.”

What we have now is a member from Hamilton Centre who historically has made comments that very much can be taken as anti-Semitic. On October 7, when a terrorist organization came into Israel, slaughtered women, children and families, dragged women out of their homes, raped them in the streets, livestreamed it on Facebook and were proud of it, the member from Hamilton Centre stood up and said, “Yes, but”—

Interjection.

And to the NDP member who wants to heckle me, it has been said before: When someone comes out and shows you who they are, believe them. And I believe you. That is totally unacceptable—totally unacceptable.

Interjection.

I withdraw the statement.

That is something that is absolutely disgusting. We can’t ever normalize terrorism. We can’t ever accept that that is a way of doing anything. What we have seen from this member repeatedly then is not just anti-Semitism—anti-Semitism is a fancy word for saying Jew hate, and that’s truly what it is, a hatred for Jews.

There was supposed to be a pro-Palestinian rally that turned into a pro-Hamas rally that turned into an anti-Israel rally: statements like—and the member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke made the statement; he referred to it as well—“From River to Sea.” That is all of Israel. When you’re at a rally in support of a group that has made Holocaust-denying comments, when you’re there with them and you’re making those statements, you’re chanting that, you’re saying Palestine should have everything from the Jordan River to the Red Sea, that Israel should not exist. That can only be taken one way. You cannot say “Yes, but.” There is no “Yes, but.” That is, “I’m advocating for the destruction of the Jewish state.” That’s what it is.

Now, it’s an easy thing to correct. All that we’re asking in this motion: “Until the member retracts and deletes her statements on social media and makes an apology in her place in the House.” Stand up and say, “I made a mistake.” Stand up and say, “I shouldn’t have done that. I’ll delete that tweet. I’ll delete that statement. I didn’t recognize that what I was doing was harmful to a whole group of people. I didn’t realize that what I was doing was something that was racist. I now know better.” That’s all that has to be said and done.

But, what has the member done? They pinned the statement on Twitter—or X, I guess it’s called now—so that every time you go to her page, every time you take a look at what she is saying, that is what you see. She has doubled down on it, tripled down on it, however you want to describe it.

The Leader of the Opposition said this is not acceptable on the day she did it and said, “I want you to take it down and apologize for it,” and the member doubled down. She didn’t take it down. She proudly put it out there and said, “This is who I am.” We’re at a point where an apology doesn’t fix it. We are at a point where that voice should not be heard.

In 2018, I introduced a private member’s bill called the terrorist sanctions act, and part of the reason I did it was because of somebody the Trudeau government was trying to bring to Canada. At the time, Justin Trudeau said that these could be powerful voices in our country. Those are the voices I do not want. I do not want someone who is willingly standing up and promoting hate. I do not want someone who is willingly standing up and saying, “I believe the destruction of an entire country and the removal of a people from that area is acceptable.” That is not a voice that should be heard anywhere in this province. That is not an ideology that should be promoted anywhere in this province, and I’m going to come back to it again.

Twenty-six members are sitting in this chamber right now, who were in this chamber in the last government, who stood up unanimously and said, “That white guy can’t be heard,” because what he said was unacceptable, and those 26 members are sitting on their hands now because one of their colleagues has done it. One of their colleagues has promoted the destruction of an entire people with her comments, and they find that acceptable; it’s not. It’s disgusting—absolutely disgusting. There are a number of people on that side that I had a great deal of respect for, that I was proud to call my friends. I don’t know that I can do that anymore.

What we’re seeing is the worst that we can see in this Legislature. Not only do we have a member who is defending terrorists, but we have members defending that member with “Yes, but.” We heard the heckling—people at home didn’t hear it because it doesn’t pick it up on the mike. We saw what was going on in here. It was disgusting.

The member from Hamilton Centre needs to stand up—I’m sorry; the member from Hamilton Centre needs to rise above. She needs to say, “I was wrong.” She needs to say, “I recognize I was wrong.” She can say, “I’m a proud Palestinian” or “I’m of proud Palestinian background, but I don’t believe that anyone should be eliminated. I don’t believe that the country of Israel should be removed”—she is not saying that she dislikes Palestine or that she is not supporting Palestine by saying that; what she’s saying is that she recognizes that it’s wrong to oppress any group, that it’s wrong to have hatred for any people. That’s all she has to do. Take down the tweet. Admit that her comments were wrong. Admit that her comments were hateful. Admit that she created a great deal of stress and anxiety for an entire group of people, not only in Ontario, but everywhere.

Our House leader talked about a mistake that was made in the federal government, when a Nazi was celebrated and the Speaker of the House ended up resigning and taking responsibility for it. The Speaker could have had his own “Yes, buts.” He could have said, “Yes, but I didn’t know this person. Yes, but my staff did the research, and they didn’t pass that information on. Yes, but there were extenuating circumstances.” He had culpable deniability on it because he did have a staff who was doing all of the background on it.

The reality is, all of us have staff who do a lot of the work for us, who get us the information we need, but we are ultimately responsible for what comes out in our name, on our letterhead—or because of things that we do.

The member from Hamilton Centre did not have staff do all of this research. The member from Hamilton Centre did not have staff who put her in a position where she made a mistake. The member from Hamilton Centre did this on her own volition.

The Speaker in Ottawa stepped down and took responsibility for that mistake. All we’re asking is that the member from Hamilton Centre take responsibility for what she has said and done.

We have freedom of choice. We have free speech. What we don’t have is freedom from the consequences of our actions and freedom from the consequences of what we say or do. There are consequences for what we say and do. And in order for us to be good legislators, in order for us to have the trust of the people of this province—the trust of the people who elected us to come here—we have to take responsibility for what we say and what we do. We have to be able to stand up and say, when we’ve made a mistake, “I’ve made a mistake.” And we have to try and correct things so that we don’t continue making those mistakes, because the people of this province put their trust in us to step forward and do what’s right.

We’re asking the member from Hamilton Centre to do what’s right: to be accountable, to recognize it’s never acceptable to support terrorism. It is never acceptable to actively speak about the destruction of a people or the removal of another country. That is not acceptable. If I had my way, I would say not only should we be censuring her, but we should be removing her from this Legislature. We will leave that to the electorate in Hamilton Centre. She’s the one who is going to have to go back to those people and justify why they should trust that she has the judgement to do the job when she has demonstrated she does not have the judgement to do this job.

Speaker, I ask everyone here, vote in favor of censure, the same way that the 26 members of the NDP censured someone in the last session.

Shut up.

I apologize to the member from Peterborough–Kawartha. I am asking the member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke to please not—

Interjection.

I apologize to the member from Peterborough–Kawartha. Please resume your debate.

Interjection.

I apologize once again to the member from Peterborough–Kawartha. Please continue.

Further debate?

It’s my honour to speak today in support of this motion, and I would like to thank the members who spoke before me. As we witness one of the most significant acts of violence in our lifetime, we cannot stand by and allow the member for Hamilton Centre to issue such irresponsible, inappropriate comments. Day after day, we have witnessed the horrific images of innocent victims of this attack: people throwing hand grenades into bomb shelters, people they don’t even know except that they’re Jewish, to kill them; decapitating babies; raping women. This is so unacceptable in our world, and in a country like Canada, it’s unimaginable. To support any type of terrorism is ridiculous. We must stand firm against this terror. We must stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel in its grief and against these Hamas terrorists who have no greater goal than inflicting as much damage to civilians as possible.

We cannot accept that a member of this chamber thinks otherwise. It is unacceptable. To make matters worse, the member for Hamilton Centre has a proven track record of anti-Semitic remarks for which this member shows no remorse at all. I find it greatly disappointing that the leader of the official opposition has failed to take decisive leadership into action towards this goal. The Leader of the Opposition has lost out on a historical opportunity to come together with our government to show solidarity with the Jewish community. She has done this by failing to remove the member for Hamilton Centre from her caucus We must remain unwavering in our commitment, ensuring there is no space in this chamber or within our province for any endorsement or empathy towards the ruthless terrorists that are accountable for this tragic loss of life.

The member’s comments about these terror attacks in the defence of Hamas terrorists are entirely unacceptable, in stark contrast to how the majority, if not all, of Ontarians feel since the killings began on October 7 of this year. We are a peaceful province, and we will not tolerate hate.

The actions of Hamas should not be heralded as a resistance movement. They have directly led to the deaths and suffering of thousands of lives in the region, including Palestinians. Make no mistake, the actions taken by Hamas had the sole intention of causing death and destruction to as many people as possible, and that includes Palestinians.

Thousands of lives, young and old, have been lost. Thousands more are injured and many are being held hostage, among them Canadians. The horror, the fear, the anger we as Ontarians have been feeling since October 7 is also being felt across our great country and worldwide. In this critical moment, it is imperative for our province and the global community to reassure our support for Israel and uphold its right to self-defence. What else can they do? As a previous member stated, there is no place for them to run to, so they have to fight. Self-defence is the only thing they can do.

The right to self-defence is a fundamental right of any sovereign state, and Israel’s right to defend itself must be respected just as much as any other state’s. The reason we must stand united in condemning these acts of terror is also that every Ontarian and every Canadian knows they will never stand alone in the face of terror.

It is vital to condemn terrorism in all forms because doing so only upholds the sanctity of human life and promotes peace, but also sends a strong message that violence has no place in any society. Whether terrorism occurs in Canada, Ontario or anywhere in the world, or Israel, we should all find common ground in stopping violence in its tracks.

I would like to acknowledge the Canadian citizens who have been killed. Currently, at least six Canadians have been killed by Hamas terrorists and hundreds are trapped in the region. They’re holding hostages and my heart bleeds at what conditions they must be in right now. Efforts are in progress to ensure the safe evacuation of our remaining Canadian citizens in the area and to locate those who are currently unaccounted for. Our thoughts and prayers must go out to all those affected and the families, so they can return to Canada safely.

I would also like to recognize those in our community who are at the front lines of protecting Ontarians during this time of crisis. Thank you to the great police forces from across the province that stood ready to protect vulnerable communities from all forms of hate.

In my riding, Waterloo Regional Police have issued the following statement. It reads: “We are aware of global threats online inciting violence in relation to the current situation in the Middle East.

“We want to assure residents in Waterloo region that we are monitoring the situation closely, in collaboration with provincial and national public safety partners, and have increased resources and patrols ... around faith-based locations and organizations.”

Isn’t that sad? That’s what we have to do in Canada because of these terrorists.

Waterloo Regional Police “will not tolerate any form of intimidation, harassment, ... hate, hate-motivated behaviour or violence” of any kind. “We remain committed to ensuring everyone is safe and feels safe in Waterloo region.”

Also, the Ontario Provincial Police in my riding and the public school board issued statements calling for peace during these uncertain times. The OPP said that “our law enforcement partners are closely monitoring ... any situation” that “could impact public safety in our communities.... While the OPP respects the right of everyone to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, everyone also has a right to a safe environment.”

Since the heinous killings began earlier this month, many people in my riding have called on and emailed my office to express their fear, their outrage, their disgust over this loss of life in Israel. They also are deeply appalled by the actions of the member for Hamilton Centre. The comments made by the member for Hamilton Centre drew a swift reaction not only at the local level, but also from politicians, citizens and organizations across the province.

Please allow me to paraphrase some of the statements that have been issued publicly. I would like to highlight these statements because they demonstrate the actions and words of one member who has caused so much pain during this time, in this immense crisis in the Jewish community in Canada and Ontario.

From the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center on October 10: “We are outraged by this statement from” the member for Hamilton Centre “and her refusal to acknowledge the atrocities committed by the” terrorist “group Hamas against Israeli” citizens.

“Not for the first time, she has caused hurt and harm to the Jewish community and brought shame to Ontarians” and shame to the NDP that sits across from you right now. And this includes the people that voted for her 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.”

From the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, on October 10: “Israeli babies beheaded”—think about that. How could you behead a baby? What is wrong with you? It just blows my mind. “Israeli young women raped, more than 100 Israeli men, women, & children kidnapped, and 900 & counting murdered at the hands of #Hamas terrorists and this is what” the member for Hamilton Centre “has to say.

“This statement is *filled* with lies that will do nothing”—

I stand in my place today to speak to government motion 39. I stand in my place this morning to speak on behalf of the residents of the town of Whitby but, in particular, the Chabad of Durham Region.

Speaker, the member for Hamilton Centre, by way of things she has done and left intentionally undone, has placed this House and its members in such disrepute that as a Parliament, we have no choice but to act to defend the dignity of this institution on behalf of our constituents.

We know that in the early morning hours of October 7, unprovoked and by surprise, the terrorist organization Hamas launched a rocket barrage and manned excursion into the State of Israel. We now know that this horrific attack has taken the lives of more than 1,400 innocent Israeli citizens and wounded thousands more. Further, Hamas continues to hold more than 200 hostages, which they forcibly abducted.

Only three days later, on October 10, the member for Hamilton Centre took to social media and posted an image of a statement on her MPP letterhead, bearing her name, her title and Ontario’s coat of arms. Rather than condemning the terrorist atrocities as most of the Western world had already done, the member chose to justify the Hamas attack on the basis of an anti-Semitic allegation that the mere existence of the State of Israel is a racist endeavour. I will paraphrase elements of the member’s statement, because quoting it at great length will only proliferate the member’s hateful rhetoric.

The member states outright that the existence of Israel is a generations-long occupation of Palestine, that Israel is an apartheid regime, and that for its entire short history, it has furthered only violence through what she calls “settler colonialism.” Further, the member ties her anti-Semitic ideological conjecture directly to the present war. At no point does the member acknowledge that the present conflict exists only because of an unprovoked terrorist attack aimed at Israeli civilians and carried out by a militant terrorist group with a core mandate to annihilate the Jewish homeland. The member’s musings at any other time would still have been offensive and unacceptable for any elected representative of the people of Ontario, but to make them in association with a violent act of unrepentant and unprovoked terrorism is repugnant and intolerable to the greatest extent of those words.

On October 7, more innocent Jewish men, women, children and infants were killed than on any day since the Holocaust. It was not enough for the member from Hamilton Centre that their families and friends would never see their loved ones again. She felt justified in spreading her belief that the victims and their surviving friends and families were in fact somehow responsible for their own tragic fate. Inexplicably, the member’s statement, whether intentional or impetuous, blames the mere existence of the State of Israel for the thousands of rockets launched at civilians and the invasion of thousands of militants who killed, raped and kidnapped with no regard for the dignity of human life.

Speaker, the member’s own leader recognized the blatant inappropriateness the very same day the statement was posted and quickly called upon the member to apologize and retract it. For unknown reasons, the member took more than 24 hours to post a half-hearted apology buried in the comment section of her own post. Additionally, her so-called apology ultimately reaffirmed her position against Israel’s right to self-defence.

At present, the member has still not deleted the original statement, which has now been seen more than 3.1 million times.

I’ll ask the member to withdraw the use of the word “lies.”

I withdraw—“to create peace & will only serve to foment hatred against #Canada’s Jewish community.

“We call for the immediate removal of” the member for Hamilton Centre from the Legislature.

When I think about this, I have a personal note. I remember I was in Munich, Germany, with my youngest son. He said, “Let’s go to Dachau concentration camp just to see what happened there.” At first, I thought, okay, I’ll do that. We went to Dachau; it was a surreal experience. It was something I’ve never experienced in my life, and I will never forget. It’s touched me deeply.

I remember going into the area where they had “bath-house” on the top, and it was a gas chamber. I watched this Jewish woman walk into this gas chamber and fall to her knees and cry. I felt so bad for this woman. I went over, and I helped her. And then at the back of it, they had a place where they fumigated all their clothes and reused them. It’s something that’s touched me my whole life. Then you walk to the back of Dachau, and the ashes from the crematorium—it’s where they just piled them in a pile and they just blew away. It’s heart-wrenching.

To think Israeli people today have a homeland and people would throw, like I said earlier, hand grenades into bomb shelters—people they don’t even know, and they’re killing them.

The part that disturbs me the most, I think, is beheading babies. How do you do that? What’s in your mind? To me, you shouldn’t be allowed to even breathe air to commit crimes like that. It’s horrible.

As a member of this Parliament, it’s our duty to protect the dignity of this Legislature on behalf of all Ontarians. What the member from Renfrew said earlier, it’s such an honour and privilege to be in this chamber. You have to leave all your other thoughts behind and serve the people of Ontario. I just totally disagree with the position that the member from Hamilton Centre has taken.

I apologize to the member. It is now time for members’ statements.

Debate deemed adjourned.

Every October, children’s aid societies across Ontario raise awareness about the important role that individuals and communities play in supporting vulnerable children, youth and families through the provincial Dress Purple Day campaign. The Dress Purple Day is about supporting Ontarians facing challenges and ensuring children, youth and families have access to the support, information and the resources they need.

Dress Purple Day is also a reminder to young people that they have the right to safety and well-being, and that goes beyond what we often think of when we use those words. It’s critical to understand that those rights extend beyond physical bodies. They have the right to be safe emotionally, spiritually and culturally.

I would like to recognize the Peel CAS, with their offices in Mississauga–Malton, for amplifying the message that it’s our collective responsibility to ensure that every child’s journey is guided by love, support and hope. Thank you, Peel CAS and all your members and volunteers, for your community service.

To all my fellow MPPs and all Ontarians, join me this year on October 27 and dress purple to show that you are part of a community that cares for children, youth and families. Let’s make sure that they all know that they have the right to the most appropriate kind of support. Let’s wear something purple to show children, youth and families that we are all here to help.

No one is alone.

Oshawa is always a happening place to be, with a long-time vibrant arts and music scene. But I want to tell you about a very special event that took place earlier this fall in downtown Oshawa. There was a lot of buzz about a first-ever downtown urban music festival called Convergence.

The Convergence festival was an event and main concert for the ages—in fact, Speaker, for all ages. Young, not-so-young, parents with strollers and seniors with rollers all converged on the downtown for music, community and a great party.

As Krista Licsi, the director of Oshawa Tourism, said, “Convergence is a celebration of the vibrant ecosystem of artists, musicians and innovators who have long been part of Oshawa’s legacy and culture.”

Speaker, I am sure you are aware of the music group the Strumbellas. Well, they came to Oshawa. But they weren’t alone. Convergence was a 10-hour mashup of emerging artists and established musical acts, acrobats and actors, makers, small shop owners and international cuisine showcasing Oshawa’s diversity—all local.

It is estimated that between 6,000 and 8,000 people converged on Oshawa’s streets for the festival and it was a rock-and-rolling success because of the backstage crew of so many volunteers. This first-ever annual festival was a partnership between the city of Oshawa, the region of Durham, Central Counties Tourism and the Greater Oshawa Chamber of Commerce, and they made it completely free to the public.

Anyone who missed it will want to make sure they come next year. Everyone is invited. Mark your calendars for September 21, 2024. It will be bigger and better, with even more to see and do. I’ve got my ‘Shwa Rock City T-shirt ready to go. I hope you will come and see how we celebrate in the City in Motion.