NDP – Page 2

Liberals sweep into power

Justin Trudeau schmoozes after a speech to the Richmond Chamber of Commerce in July. (photo from Justin Trudeau’s Office)

As Justin Trudeau’s Liberal party swept to a majority victory Monday night, it was British Columbia that finally made a difference. Without the 17 seats the Liberals took here, Trudeau would have won, but with a minority mandate – albeit a big one.

The Liberals swamped Vancouver and its suburbs, winning some seats that few, if any, observers anticipated they were even competitive in, particularly in the eastern suburbs. The North Shore was a Liberal sweep. In Vancouver South, the Conservatives lost their only foothold in the city as incumbent Wai Young lost to Liberal Harjit Sajjan.

Liberals Joyce Murray (Vancouver Quadra) and Hedy Fry (Vancouver Centre), the only two Liberals elected from British Columbia in 2011, trounced their respective opponents. Murray more than doubled the votes of her nearest competitor, a Conservative, and Fry almost tripled the vote of the second-place New Democrat.

The new riding of Vancouver Granville, slicing through the centre of the city north to south, is a microcosm of what appears to have happened locally and nationally. Several organizations had formed to encourage Canadians who opposed Harper’s Conservatives to vote strategically for the candidate most likely in their riding to defeat the Conservative. In Granville, Leadnow, probably the most prominent of the anti-Harper organizations, urged voters in the riding to back New Democrat Mira Oreck. This drew a backlash from Liberals, who said their candidate was either tied or ahead of the New Democrat in the available public opinion polls and the Vancouver Sun noted the friendship between Oreck and the head of Leadnow. In the end, so-called “change voters” seem to have looked at the national polling trends – which, by the end of the campaign, showed the Liberals slightly ahead of the Conservatives and NDP support dissipating – and turned red. In the end, Liberal Jody Wilson-Raybould took nearly 44% of the vote, with Oreck and Tory candidate Erinn Broshko effectively tied at 26%, Oreck edging out the Tory by 38 votes for second place; Green candidate Michael Barkusky took about three percent. Oreck and Barkusky are members of the Jewish community.

There were no clearly evident trends in ridings across the country with concentrations of Jewish voters. In the Montreal riding of Mount Royal, held until the election by retiring Liberal Irwin Cotler, Anthony Housefather, the Liberal candidate and mayor of the suburb of Cote-Saint-Luc, beat Conservative Robert Libman by a comfortable margin. Both Housefather and Libman are Jewish.

In Thornhill, the Toronto-area riding with the country’s largest concentration of Jewish voters, Conservative incumbent Peter Kent trounced Liberal Nancy Coldham. In Eglinton-Lawrence, incumbent Conservative finance minister Joe Oliver, the most senior Jewish official in Ottawa, lost by a significant margin to Liberal Marco Mendicino. In York Centre, another Toronto riding with large numbers of Jewish voters, Tory Mark Adler was narrowly defeated by Liberal Michael Levitt. Adler is known nationally mostly for his foibles, such as calling out to advisers of Prime Minister Stephen Harper at the Western Wall in Jerusalem to be included in a photo opportunity and, several weeks ago, for seeming to exploit his family’s history in the Holocaust for political gain.

In 2011, post-election surveys indicated that Jewish voters supported the Conservative party by large margins. Though such indicators are not yet available for this week’s election, it appears that Jewish voters are far from being a monolithic bloc.

Mulcair talks about choices

New Democratic Party of Canada leader Tom Mulcair. (photo from Tom Mulcair’s office)

“I think the values of the community that you’re writing for are very similar to the social values of the NDP historically, and I think that’s a strong connection that we have,” New Democratic Party of Canada leader Tom Mulcair told the Independent in a phone interview last week.

He added that his wife Catherine’s “family connection means that I’m the only person in this race who has a deep understanding of the Jewish community and of its history, and I’ll always be a strong stalwart based on that understanding.”

Even before the election campaign started, Mulcair always has been clear in his support for Israel.

“My position is very comfortable within the NDP,” he said, “because the party’s position has, for a long time, been in favor of a two-state solution. Essentially, we believe we have to be working with partners in the Middle East, in particular, in Israel and Palestine, within a framework of respect for UN resolutions and international law, that’s important. And, we always talk about working towards peace in the region, starting from a base where it has to be mutually agreed borders and, frankly, everyone free from attack of any kind: peace and security, in other words, within established and negotiated borders.”

He defended his strict enforcement of this view, which has included the dismissal of candidates who hold alternate opinions.

“I’ve tightened the reins in making sure people respect our position, and I think that that’s the key thing,” said Mulcair, adding that the NDP is “still the only party political party in Ottawa to have ever had a Jewish leader, in David Lewis [federally] and, of course, in Ontario, Stephen, Lewis’ son. And I’ve had a chance to visit Israel a couple of times and look forward to going back. I daresay that I’m the only leader in this campaign … who can count family in Israel, as well.”

“I think that free trade with a democracy is a good thing. We also backed the trade agreement with Jordan because we know that it’s also a very strong voice for stability and peace in a very tough region with a lot of problems.”

With respect to the expansion of the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement earlier this year, Mulcair said, “I think that free trade with a democracy is a good thing. We also backed the trade agreement with Jordan because we know that it’s also a very strong voice for stability and peace in a very tough region with a lot of problems.

“As you know, the NDP takes a pretty strong view that free-trade agreements have to represent dealings with countries that have values similar to ours, and that’s why in both cases we had no problem with it.”

The NDP also has no problem with the P5+1 (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States and Germany) nuclear deal with Iran.

“I think that the P5+1 deal shows that diplomacy can achieve real results even after decades of hostility,” said Mulcair, who described himself as “very clear-eyed about the Iranians,” noting that the antisemitism there “is at a level rarely seen in the world today.”

He said, “I don’t have any illusions about what I’m dealing with … no Israeli government can ignore the threat of a nuclear Iran…. At the same time … as long as it is enforced rigorously, the deal shows the possibility of making sure that Iran’s nuclear ambitions are hemmed in.”

About security closer to home, and specifically Bill C-51, Mulcair said, “I think that it’s a question of approach and priorities. Don’t forget Mr. [Stephen] Harper’s approach is always about stark, false choices. He would have you believe, for example, that a government has to choose between the economy and the environment. Of course, that’s a false choice; you have to do both. He would have you believe that you either keep your communities safe or you respect your rights or freedoms. Well, the prime minister’s job is to do both: respect Canadians’ rights and freedoms, and keep communities safe. So, C-51 is a breach with that.”

Offering an example from the party’s history in balancing security and freedoms, Mulcair noted, “The NDP, you might recall, is the party that had the courage politically to stand up in 1970 against the imposition of the War Measures Act that put hundreds of Canadians in jail without trial, without accusation, and the NDP had the courage to stand up against that.

“When Mr. Harper came in with Bill C-51, I was told that I was being foolhardy to oppose it, that the vast majority of Canadians were in favor of it. Well, you know what? I don’t take that as the starting point in these issues. I am more than willing to stand up to Stephen Harper when he’s compromising Canadians’ rights and freedoms, and we did that. We did that with an articulate stance that explained to Canadians why it was a mistake, and you know what? At the end of that process, most Canadians agreed with us, so I’m proud of that.

“There are things that can be done here in Canada to help fight some of the situation there,” he said, referring to the conflict in Syria, as well as others in the region. “There are a couple of concrete things that I think Canada can and should be doing.

“First of all, Canada is the only country in NATO not to have signed the Arms Trade Treaty. Well, that’s something that’s easy to fix, and that can help stop the flow of arms to some of those conflicts right now.

“Deradicalization is entirely absent from Bill C-51 and that is, again, a mistake. Most of our partners in the world who are dealing with these issues realize that the flow of foreign fighters into those regions is one of the biggest problems and, instead of coming to grips with that, Mr. Harper completely ignores the problem.”

“There’s also an important element of deradicalization. And, again, Mr. Harper just doesn’t know how to get this right. For example, he doesn’t talk about going into houses of worship, as you hear President [Barack] Obama talk about. What Mr. Harper will talk about, specifically, are mosques. Now, of course, in that case, he’s finger-pointing a single community. That’s a mistake. Deradicalization is entirely absent from Bill C-51 and that is, again, a mistake. Most of our partners in the world who are dealing with these issues realize that the flow of foreign fighters into those regions is one of the biggest problems and, instead of coming to grips with that, Mr. Harper completely ignores the problem.”

Other problems that Harper has ignored, or about which he has been mistaken, according to Mulcair, concern the budget and jobs. The NDP’s approach to these issues, including its focus on the middle-class, has drawn some criticism that the NDP has strayed from its roots – a point with which Mulcair disagrees.

“We’ve been really clear all along, especially under my leadership, that Canada wants a government that knows how to deal with the big issues of the day in the interest of the population,” he said. “When we [the NDP] were in power in Saskatchewan, we ran 17 consecutive balanced budgets because we had taken over a province that was bankrupt after years of Liberal rule…. After those balanced budgets, we were able to bring in free, universal, public medical care – that was an NDP priority.

“This time around, I’m talking about the importance of bringing in quality, affordable, maximum-$15-a-day child care, and we’re going to do that on the basis of a balanced budget. There are some who would say, well, that’s not a very social-democratic thing, but if you look at the history of the NDP, we have a history of being very prudent public administrators. We know that we have that burden on us – that we’re always going to have to be the ones who have to be the most prudent because, if we’re not, people will judge us more harshly than the others.

“Some of the other parties are taking a different approach,” he continued. “Mr. Harper talked a good game but ran up $150 billion in new debt while he was in power. Mr. [Justin] Trudeau is promising to spend at least $10 billion a year more than what he takes in and, in the fourth year, he’s going to start cutting with, quote, everything will be on the table, in terms of cuts – that was the exact quote from Mr. [John] McCallum when he was asked how he was going to be able to cut $6.5 billion in the fourth year of his budget. So, that’s where the Liberals are, that’s where the Conservatives are.”

“Economically, we’re talking about balanced budgets, but we also want to create opportunities for good-paying jobs. There were 400,000 manufacturing jobs lost on Mr. Harper’s watch, and he wants to kill off tens of thousands more with this recent trade deal.”

Mulcair said the NDP are prudent administrators in other areas, as well. “I have a strong personal track record as a former environment minister as a strong enforcer of environmental legislation and I’m strong on principle on those things,” he said. “Economically, we’re talking about balanced budgets, but we also want to create opportunities for good-paying jobs. There were 400,000 manufacturing jobs lost on Mr. Harper’s watch, and he wants to kill off tens of thousands more with this recent trade deal,” meaning the Trans-Pacific Partnership. On Oct. 5, the 12 countries involved, including Canada, reached an agreement, which still has to be ratified by each country’s parliament.

“On the environment, on the economic issues, on social issues, we’re very different from the other two parties who, more often than not, are of one mind,” Mulcair said, giving three examples.

“Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Harper agreed with tens of billions of dollars of tax reductions for Canada’s richest corporations – we disagree, we’re going to start making them pay their fair share.

“We disagree with the Keystone XL Pipeline. We think that you don’t export your natural resources raw. Mr. Harper and Mr. Trudeau are of one mind, they think that it’s a good idea to send 40,000 Canadian jobs to the U.S. – we disagree.

“We’ve had a different approach on C-51. Mr. Trudeau was afraid of Mr. Harper. He said at the University of British Columbia that he was too afraid of Mr. Harper to stand up for what he thought was the right thing to do in that case. Well, I think that that’s sad, and I think that Mr. Trudeau has shown a lack of leadership and, frankly, a lack of experience.”

While the NDP would increase the corporate tax rate, its platform includes “supporting innovation and investment in companies.” When asked if this was not just a different way of subsidizing business, Mulcair responded, “No. For example, the Conservatives have continued to subsidize companies in the oil patch. We will remove subsidies. What we will do is bring back certain innovation tax credits because we know that the manufacturing sector is, and can be, a hub for innovation and technological jobs in the future that will be knowledge-based.

“We’ll also propose a small-business tax cut, so we’ll bring their taxes down from 11[%] to nine, which we think is a smart way of stimulating the creation of jobs by job creators because small- and medium-sized businesses in Canada create more new jobs. We don’t shy away from saying that government can play an active role in creating the conditions for the private sector to create jobs.”

“This is the first time in Canadian history that we actually have a choice. For 148 years, we’ve been told we have no choice but to alternate. When we get tired of the Liberals and the sponsorship scandal, we’re supposed to go back to the Conservatives. We get tired of the Conservatives and the Senate scandal, we’re supposed to go back. This time, the first time, there is a choice.”

Looking ahead to the last days of the campaign, Mulcair said, “This is the first time in Canadian history that we actually have a choice. For 148 years, we’ve been told we have no choice but to alternate.” For example, “When we get tired of the Liberals and the sponsorship scandal, we’re supposed to go back to the Conservatives. We get tired of the Conservatives and the Senate scandal, we’re supposed to go back. This time, the first time, there is a choice.

“For the first time in Canadian history, the NDP is forming the Official Opposition, we’re seen as a government-in-waiting. We’re doing great across the country but we’ve got very strong support in certain regions that are going to allow us to form a government, and we know that.

“B.C. is a good example of a province where we’re doing super well,” he said. “I just had an event there yesterday morning that showed me that the energy and the strength of the team and the campaign that we’re running are resonating … so we’re going keep that going.”

The Independent has interviewed Liberal leader Justin Trudeau (July 31), Minister of National Defence and Minister for Multiculturalism Jason Kenney (Sept. 18) and Green party leader Elizabeth May (Oct. 9). The federal election is on Oct. 19.

NDP drops candidate

Three federal NDP candidates are under intense scrutiny – and one has resigned – for controversial comments each made about Israel.

Hans Marotte, the NDP candidate in Quebec’s Saint-Jean riding; Morgan Wheeldon, who was, until stepping aside Aug. 9, running in the Nova Scotia riding of Kings-Hants; and David McLaren, running in Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound, were among the NDP candidates featured, alongside past comments they made, on a Conservative Party of Canada’s attack website titled “Meet the NDP.”

Marotte, a lawyer and well-known former separatist, is flagged on the site for a statement he made in his 1990 book Un Pays à Faire (A Country to Make): “When a Palestinian comes to ask me to sign his declaration of support for the intifada, and tells me how happy he is to have my name on his list, I see how important it is that we not close in on ourselves.”

photo - Until he stepped aside, Morgan Wheeldon was running in the Nova Scotia riding of Kings-Hants — Until he stepped aside, Morgan Wheeldon was running in the Nova Scotia riding of Kings-Hants. *(photo from Facebook via cjnews.com)*

Wheeldon, whose website has been wiped of all content, is featured on the Conservative site for a comment in an August 2014 Facebook post, made in the context of a discussion about British MP George Galloway, who had been physically attacked in London allegedly for his anti-Israel views.

The quote reads: “One could argue that Israel’s intention was always to ethnically cleanse the region – there are direct quotations proving this to be the case. Guess we just swept that under the rug. A minority of Palestinians are bombing buses in response to what appears to be a calculated effort to commit a war crime.”

McLaren, meanwhile, is quoted as saying it isn’t principled to take sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict because it is like picking a side in “a telephone booth packed with dynamite.”

In a statement to the Canadian Jewish News, the NDP’s senior campaign adviser, Brad Lavigne, said the party’s “position on the conflict in the Middle East is clear, as [leader] Tom Mulcair expressed clearly in [the recently televised Maclean’s] debate. Mr. Wheeldon’s comments are not in line with that policy, and he is no longer our candidate. We were made aware of some information that had not previously been disclosed. When we approached Mr. Wheeldon with this information, he submitted his resignation.”

The NDP did not offer a comment on Marotte’s or McLaren’s statements.

Wheeldon himself told the CJN via Twitter that his Facebook statement “referred to how information sources affect framing of the conflict. I also attacked terrorism and said neither side was solely at fault, but pointed out the alternate perspective. I said ‘one could argue.…’ I’ve been called an antisemite, and it’s pretty upsetting for me and my family.”

Michael Mostyn, CEO of B’nai Brith Canada, said that it was appropriate for Wheeldon to offer his resignation following his “libelous smears against the Jewish state.”

“Israel is a democracy where all its citizens enjoy rights and freedoms unimaginable anywhere else in the Middle East,” said Mostyn. “Mr. Wheeldon should use some of his newfound free time to advocate against actual ethnic cleansing taking place on a daily basis in the terrorist Islamic State, which continues to massacre Christians, Yazidis, gays and other minorities.”

Mostyn also noted that B’nai Brith is trying to track down a copy of Marotte’s book, and reach out to him to verify the accuracy of the quote and whether his opinion has changed over the 25 years since he wrote the book.

He added that “the quote in question displays a certain naiveté about the fact that one does not sign a petition to support an intifada, jihad or any other extremist act of violence. Seeking to promote a pluralistic society in Canada does not translate to supporting calls for violence against innocent civilians.”

Joe Oliver, the Tory MP for the Toronto riding of Eglinton-Lawrence, also condemned the remarks.

“These radical anti-Israeli comments are just another example of the NDP’s troubling lack of support for a democratic friend and ally,” Oliver said. “They stand in stark contrast to Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s unwavering support for Israel’s security and right to defend itself against international terrorism. Reckless comments on matters of international relations make it abundantly clear how inexperienced and risky the NDP would be for Canada’s future and its standing in the world.”

– For more national Jewish news, visit cjnews.com.

Hoping to run for NDP

Jewish community member Mira Oreck, director of public engagement for the Broadbent Institute, has announced that she will seek the federal NDP nomination in the riding of Vancouver Granville. She spoke with the Jewish Independent about that decision. For more information, readers can visit miraoreck.ca.

JI: Why have you chosen to seek a nomination for the NDP?

Mira Oreck (photo from Mira Oreck)

MO: I am seeking the NDP nomination in Vancouver Granville because I believe in Tom Mulcair, his vision for Canada and the impressive group of leaders he has assembled to turn that vision into reality. In particular, I am compelled by his commitment to address climate change, to create affordable and accessible childcare for $15 per day and the solutions he has put forward to address the growing rate of income inequality in Canada.

JI: Why now in your career path are you seeking this nomination?

MO: I spent a number of years living in New York City and watching from afar as the direction of our country began to change. Science and evidence-based policy were being ignored. The judicial system was under attack. The core of our democracy was being challenged. I moved back to Vancouver because I could no longer watch that happen to Canada. I’m seeking the NDP nomination because I believe Canadians are ready for a change, that Mulcair is the leader with the clearest values and most ready to govern, and I want to be part of that change.

JI: Foreign policy, in particular towards Israel, is a main issue for many in the Jewish community. What are your thoughts on the Canada-Israel relationship and how would you want that to change (or not) if you were to become an NDP MP?

MO: I grew up in this riding, in the heart of the Jewish community, and a deep relationship with Israel has always been part of my world. I have visited Israel over a half-dozen times and spent a year living in Jerusalem studying at

Hebrew University. In this sense, I relate to the Jewish community’s concerns, both in terms of domestic policy issues and foreign policy, with respect to Israel in particular.

I am proud to run for a political party that supports the state of Israel and, importantly, is working towards a two-state solution. As Canadians, we were once known for listening and hearing the various sides of a conflict. I know many people on every side of this conflict – and the vast majority, even the most frustrated among them, want trust-building efforts that can lead to solutions for Israelis and Palestinians. I believe we, as Canadians, have a responsibility to be bridge-builders. I trust that the NDP under Tom Mulcair would be just that.

JI: When is the nomination vote taking place; who else is running? What would make you a better candidate for the Jewish community, or in general?

MO: The nomination meeting date has not yet been set but will likely be the final week of July. There is another candidate in the race and the vote will be among current NDP members in Vancouver Granville.

It would be an honor to serve as a member of Parliament for a riding with a large concentration of Jewish community members, many of whom I grew up with. As a former director of Canadian Jewish Congress, Pacific Region, I am acutely aware of the issues facing the community and have a track record of advocating for them. I know that, for many people in the community, issues of affordable child care, investments in public transit, an increase in the minimum wage and addressing climate change are at the core of their beliefs.

I know that members of the community are members of all political parties, and strongly support and encourage political engagement. I have been thrilled by the support I have received from members of the Jewish community who have joined the NDP to support me in this nomination race.

JI: If there is anything else you’d like to add, please do.

MO: The importance of civic and political engagement is a direct result of my family’s work within the Jewish community and my experience in USY and at summer camp. Recently, I have been inspired by a younger generation of leadership in Israel who believe in the political system making change. Watching them seek and hold office and shape their own country has shown me the importance of diving in!

Canadian political support of Israel notable

As the conflict rages in Israel and Gaza, so it does, in a different way, worldwide. As is always the case when Israel is involved in a conflict, the rage level escalates swiftly among commentators, social media, street activists, politicians and diplomats. While both sides are engaging in heated and contentious “debate” – we should take nothing away from Zionists’ ability to engage in slapfests on social media – something darker is emerging.

Protests in France and Germany have been especially grisly. In Paris, one synagogue was firebombed while, at another, Jews were forced to barricade themselves inside the shul as a mob attacked with bats and chairs. Jewish-run businesses were ransacked in a Paris suburb. In Germany, overt neo-Nazis are marching daily, some chanting, “Gas the Jews.” “Anti-Israel” rallies worldwide are rife with anti-Jewish imagery and messaging. Individual Jews have been assaulted around the world. One man in Australia, badly beaten, told media that the antisemitic onslaught he experienced after going public was worse than the assault itself.

There are certainly examples of anti-Jewish prejudice amid the public discourse in Canada, though we have seen nothing near to what is happening elsewhere. In fact, the brightest spot in the whole sad global discourse around the conflict comes from right here in Canada. For the better part of a decade, the Conservative government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been an unequivocal voice of reason and support for Israel’s right – obligation, he said – to defend its citizens from terrorism. Our foreign policy has been steadfast in defending our closest ally in the region, and the only democracy there, amid a cacophony of vitriol and hatred.

Significantly, what was a few years ago considered a surprising and unusually unambiguous position has become the dominant Canadian political consensus. Liberal leader Justin Trudeau has issued a statement echoing the Conservatives’ strong support for Israel.

More remarkable has been Thomas Mulcair’s extraordinary success at turning his New Democratic Party from what was once a nest of Canada’s most vocal anti-Israel zealots into a moderate party in line with the other two mainstream parties. He has done this in the face of a small but venomous clutch of extreme Israel-haters. A writer on the website Rabble recently referred to “Mulcair’s abhorrence of Palestinian rights.” (We have been known to employ some extravagant semantics in this space, but for a really eccentric level of rhetoric almost unknown since the fall of the Berlin Wall, head over to Rabble for a nostalgic walk down memory lane.)

Mulcair’s accomplishment, of course, is derided by Israel’s enemies as proof that the craven Zionists have finally got their talons into the last of the major parties’ platforms. In reality, it is an acknowledgement that Canada’s body politic has recognized, alas, that morality and pragmatism demand that we stand with our allies and against those who seek to slaughter them. There is nothing novel in this – what was novel was the years when we went off the rails trying to play an “honest broker” role between a democratic, peace-seeking, pluralist Israel and the genocidal terrorists determined to destroy the country and kill its citizens.

There is a place for extreme views in a democracy – in extreme, fringe parties. Which may explain why Green party leader Elizabeth May is right now taking up an anti-Israel cudgel just as the rest of the civilized political spectrum is affirming the only position mainstream, moderate parties can justify.

There are tactical reasons, too. Israel-bashers insist that Harper’s Israel policy (and now that of the Liberals and NDP) is a sop to win Jewish votes, which suggests they are as bad at math as they are telling terrorists from allies. The “Jewish vote” in Canada is miniscule and shrinking, while the number of new Canadians coming from places where hatred of Israel is something akin to a birthright is growing.

While the three main parties are doing the right thing, the Greens seem ready to welcome those who have been left out in the cold by a consensus that our country should stand with democracies when they are under assault from terrorists. It may be a political strategy for a tiny party seeking a foothold, but it doesn’t seem like a moral one.