On this lovely sunny Sunday, my thoughts and emotions are wrapped up in the dangerously escalating events in Israel and Palestine. Twice this week Paul Manly tried to get an emergency debate on the crisis, only to be stymied by some procedural hijinx – not related to trying to shut Paul down – just with that result. I used my one question in Question Period this month to ask for Canada to speak more clearly against the illegal actions of the Netanyahu government—illegal annexations, illegal settlements and illegal forced evictions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPomDcjz__M

There may be no issue in our current chaos of crises – whether suppression of human rights in the People’s Republic of China, Myanmar, or Colombia, the climate emergency, COVID, or the chronic injustice of Canada to indigenous peoples –as difficult to navigate as the Israel-Palestine conflict.

It is all too easy for criticism of the State of Israel to be heard by some as race- based hatred – anti-Semitism. And sometimes those levelling the criticism are anti-Semitic. But it is quite wrong to conflate criticism of the current political leadership of Israel with anti-Semitism.

I am so grateful for the compassion and guidance of spiritual leaders like Rabbi Joshua Corber of Beit Rayim Synagogue and School in Richmond Hill, Ont. He is filled with anxiety for family members living in Israel – but that does not eliminate his understanding of shared grief.  In a story on CBC News, he said, “What I’ve told my community is that I’m holding space in my heart for suffering and the grief that’s being experienced in Israel… And I’ve been asserting to my congregation that while critique of Israel is necessary … critique of Israel in and of itself is not tantamount to antisemitism…. One can feel empathy and compassion for the grief and the suffering for Palestinians, and that does not diminish our love and support for our friends in Israel.”

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/gaza-strip-israel-canadians-violence-1.6027556

Greens must always insist on the fundamental point that Israel must be allowed peace. We must always state clearly that Israel has a right to exist and Israel has a right to defend itself.

I navigate the problem of ensuring criticism of what the Israeli government is doing from any animus toward Israel by focusing on the current government. Just as when Trump was in the White House, I held fast to the fact that I love the United States, its peoples and its lands – but not Trump.

In 1995, when Israel’s prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, the prime minister who negotiated the Oslo Accord, was assassinated by an extremist Israeli settler, it seemed that peace was assassinated with him. I love the Israel that Yitzhak Rabin exemplified. But Netanyahu is dangerous.

It seems likely to me that the recent provocations (throwing Palestinians from their homes, illegally, constantly stealing more and more Palestinian lands, so that is becomes increasingly hard to imagine what tiny bits of territory could ever constitute a safe and secure state of Palestine, even staging an attack in one of Islam’s most holy sites, the al-Asqa mosque) was deliberately provocative. To what end? Hanging on to power in a domestic political context. Netanyahu lost the last election. He cannot form government. He is facing corruption charges.  A war gives him a diversion. It strengthens his hand as the many and varied parties in Israel try to decide who will form government.

I work with the Israeli Greens and know how they oppose Netanyahu and his expansionist policies.  Green leader Stav Shaffir has championed affordable housing, pointing out how subsidizing this massive illegal settlement project of colonial expansion deprives many Israelis of access to education and affordable housing within the legal boundaries of the State of Israel (1967 borders.) It is a very expensive programme of ethnic cleansing by infrastructure.

Back in 2018, having been part of a small group of MPs that re-established the Canada-Palestinian Parliamentary Friendship Group, I helped organize the largest delegation of Canadian MPs to visit the occupied territories. Eighteen of us, from all five parties in the House, toured Bethlehem, Ramallah, Hebron, and the contested areas of Jerusalem so much in the news this last week.

What I saw confirmed my worst fear that the greatest threat to Israel is the policies of their own government. And now it is much worse. The current conflict is the very most dangerous one since 1967. And even the domestic Israeli police seem to have lost control.

I remember going to the Dome of the Rock mosque in the same area as al-Asqa – the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. We were careful to respect the place, covering our heads, taking off our shoes, speaking only in whispers. The sight of Israeli soldiers and police, with boots on, firing grenades inside the al-Asqa mosque, was physically traumatizing to watch. How those images must have rocked people in every Islamic community at the holiest of times, ending Ramadan and on the eve of Eid.

Rabbi Michael Melchior, a prominent Israeli rabbi, a former deputy foreign minister and champion of inter-religious dialogue, said, “When Israeli police trample into al-Aqsa with boots and stop one of the holiest prayers, it is one of the gravest transgressions of Islam. This you don’t do.”

https://www.theartnewspaper.com/news/prominent-israeli-rabbi-al-aqsa-mosque-is-the-heart-of-the-deadly-hostilities-nobody-really-gets-it

The actions of the settler/radical/groups-  attached to the same movement that assassinated Yitsahk Rabin – must be viewed as a threat to stability in the region, as are the actions and words of Netanyahu who, like Trump, encouraged their worst excesses. Marching through the streets calling out “Death to Arabs” is horrific.

Now as violence spreads, I am also terrified for my friends and relatives in Israel. The hatred is getting personal in many areas, but especially Lod, where clashes are occurring between Jewish and Arab citizens. The Mayor of Lod has warned he fears civil war.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/15/far-right-jewish-groups-arab-youths-claim-streets-lod-israel-loses-control

What can we do as a nation?

Canada needs to do much more. We need to denounce the illegal actions under Netanyahu and insist that Israel abide by the Geneva Convention:

“The forced transfer of the population under occupation is a grave breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which contribute to the coercive environment now prevailing in East Jerusalem. As well, these evictions breach the right to adequate housing – a core human right in international law.”

“The proper step for Israel to take is to remove the threat of eviction, have the property rights of these Palestinian families respected and legal regularized, and annul all discriminatory legislation from its laws.” From a statement issued by international UN human rights experts, https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/05/1091722

We must stop selling arms to Israel (this has been Green Party policy since 2016).

But more – we must clearly denounce what Netanyahu and his settler thugs are doing. We must protect and preserve the long held principle that Jerusalem  – the Holiest of cities – shared by the three major Theistic religions of the world – Jewish, Christian and Islam – be protected. Adherents to all three religions must be assured access to sacred shrines.  https://policymagazine.ca/o-jerusalem-sacred-to-three-faiths-capital-of-one/

And we must constantly stress the shared humanity of all. We are in COVID. The Palestinian population trapped in Gaza has already been going through hell.  But the children in Israeli families, rushed to shelters as Hamas fires rockets have every right to be safe and asleep in their own beds- just like their Palestinian neighbours.

Pray for Israel. Pray for Palestine. Pray for peace.

We will keep pressing the issue in Parliament.

Love,

Elizabeth

PS Thanks to everyone who came to the wonderful 10^th anniversary celebration.  I will share the video link next week!

And click here for details of Cate and Sylvia’s book launch, May 18^th!

https://www.tannersbooks.com/

Saanich-Gulf Islands Greens
http://www.sgigreenparty.ca/

The post Good Sunday Morning – May 16 appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands)
2021-05-13 15:08 [p.7196]

Mr. Speaker, the increasing crisis in the Middle East is a danger to the region and beyond. We are hobbled when we limit our response to “both sides must de-escalate”. Yes, they must, but true peace will never be achieved if we keep ignoring that one side is the occupier, the other is occupied.

This current crisis was provoked by actions of the Netanyahu government and other extreme elements within settler groups. Can Canada speak out clearly to defend the Palestinian people against illegal annexation, illegal settlements and illegal forced evictions?

Hon. Marc Garneau (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount)
2021-05-13 15:09 [p.7196]

Mr. Speaker, Canada remains gravely concerned by the continued expansion of settlements and by the demolitions and evictions, including the ongoing cases of Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan. These actions impact families and livelihoods, and do not serve peace or international law. Unilateral actions that prejudice the outcome of direct negotiations and further jeopardize the prospects for a two-state solution must be avoided. We will always stand ready to support efforts for a two-state solution.

The post Canada must speak out clearly to defend the Palestinian people appeared first on Elizabeth May.

My point of privilege was (I think) well delivered. I had worked hard all long weekend digging up precedents from other Speaker’s rulings and debates going back to 1963 when they invented this whole idea of recognized parties and unrecognized parties. Amazingly, Canada is the only country among those using Westminster parliamentary democracy to have this absurd rule that bigger parties have more procedural rights than smaller parties. It all stemmed from a 1963 change in the law so that parties with more than 12 MPs would receive public funding for their parliamentary work. (Funding has now risen to about $2 million/party as soon as they get 12 MPs). Rights were nowhere mentioned in the 1963 bill, but – over time- it became customary to keep MPs from smaller parties off committees and to never allow them to put forward Opposition Day motions. But no one has ever suggested we have no rights to ask a question in QP, even though the slot for smaller parties is the last question – with no supplementary questions – ever.

The YouTube video of my argument runs 13 minutes and is included here:

Elizabeth May: Blocking Greens from asking questions during QP is antidemocratic

The Speaker has not yet ruled, so I wait in hopeful anticipation.

I really wish I had the chance to put a question forward in Question Period this week. I have been trying to get up to speed on an issue of which I was dimly aware and which I am now convinced needs a lot more attention. So, lacking a question in QP, at least I can tell you about it.

One of the most extraordinary resource conflicts in Canada is playing out so far north that we hear little of it in southern Canada. A group of Inuit hunters, widely supported in their community, set up a protest camp that blocked access to the airstrip serving an iron mine on Baffin Island. The mining company, Baffinland Iron Mines Corp, calls itself a Canadian corporation, but is owned by Texas based Energy and Minerals Group and Luxembourg corporation, ArcelorMittal, the world’s largest steel maker.

After many years of technological and financial hurdles for developers, the open pit mine began operations in 2014. While initially welcomed locally, the mine now wants to double the size of its operations at Mary River from six million tonnes to 12 million. Incredibly, the company has been acting as though it had permission to proceed, even before hearings opened. It has drawn down a billion dollars in financing and, according to the Inuit protesters, has already begun construction.

The doubling of production will involve building a railway and increasing shipping with an additional quay at Milne Inlet. The ore is shipped to Europe along routes that cut through narwhal habitat. As well, the iron ore dust is contaminating the landscape and has been detected in Arctic char, a key food source for the Inuit and other animals that are part of their traditional diet – like narwhal.

The Nuluujaaq Land Guardians set up a camp in early February in peaceful protest against the mine expansion. The camp shut down the airstrip – blocking access to supplies for the mine and its 700 workers. I just cannot help but be inspired by the protest by Inuit land defenders in minus 33 degree weather. In 24 hour darkness. In an outdoor camp.

The company received a temporary injunction against the protest that ended February 10th. The hearing for a permanent injunction has been taking place in Iqaluit. The environmental assessment hearings are to resume in April. Meanwhile, the Nuluujaaq Land Guardians are calling on the federal ministers of Fisheries and Oceans, Natural Resources and Northern Affairs to step up to support their rights and for the RCMP to launch a criminal investigation into Baffinland’s actions.

In another issue pitting resource extraction against Indigenous peoples, I am trying to create some leverage for concerned Canadians to act to stop and appalling project in Namibia. Vancouver-based ReconAfrica has gained rights to frack in very sensitive areas along the border with Botswana. Threatened by the fracking is the Okavango Delta, a UNESCO world heritage site that straddles Botswana and Namibia. The SAN people of the area are protesting the violation of their rights.

In order to launch an investigation, I have written the newly created CORE – Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise – Sheri Meyerhoffer. The CORE office was supposed to have more robust powers than ultimately were established. My letter and call for an inquiry into ReconAfrica is something of a test case. I will keep you posted as we create a petition and other tools for Canadians to protest this outrageous assault on indigenous rights, biodiversity and climate. This link has a very good briefing on the issue: Open Letter: Save the Okavango Delta — HowNow Magazine

So, we enter the last week of February. My personal COVID counter, like marking the walls in an imaginary prison cell called COVID, started with Monday, March 9, 2020. That was the day we recorded the first COVID death in Canada. So we approach a full year of this. The threat that the variants will outrun the vaccines, creating a far worse third wave, is never far from my thoughts.

Be very careful. Stay safe.

Sending love and hopes for happier days – soon!

Elizabeth

PS more links for parliamentary interventions:

Elizabeth May: Can Canada meaningfully commit to obtaining the free, prior and informed consent of Indigenous peoples?
Elizabeth May: Tabling a Private Members’ Bill is not the time to make a partisan speech
Elizabeth May: How much sovereignty has Canada lost under the Canada China FIPPA?

To subscribe to Good Sunday Morning, visit the Saanich-Gulf Islands Greens:
http://www.sgigreenparty.ca/

The post appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands)
2020-11-17 12:07 [p.1979]

Mr. Speaker, it was a breath of fresh air to hear someone in this place reference the Canada-China foreign investment protection agreement, which I have reviewed. I do not think the motion before us is allowable under the terms of the Canada-China FIPA. Acting on this motion is not allowable under its terms.

Under Stephen Harper, with a vote that did not happen in Parliament but solely in cabinet, we gave away the store. In the words of Professor Gus Van Harten, who wrote a book on it, we were Sold Down the Yangtze. I do not know if we can even begin to imagine the secretive and sticky-tape restrictions on us as a country in saying that we would not allow Huawei to do anything that we would not allow a Canadian corporation to do.

I thank my colleague for raising this, and I encourage all members in this place to familiarize themselves with how we have already surrendered our sovereignty to the People’s Republic of China, by way of Stephen Harper’s signature.

Jack Harris (St. John’s East)
2020-11-17 12:08 [p.1979]

Madam Speaker, if the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands is right, and I am afraid she may well be, that this is probably one of the most outrageous actions by any government in Canada with respect to its sovereignty, it begs one question: What does the government have to say about it? Many of its representatives were here when that happened. I was here when it happened. We objected very strongly to the secrecy, to the commitment to secrecy, to the giveaway of natural resources implicit in it and to everything else.

There is a particular consequence with respect to Huawei. We may not be able to act in our national interests without significant repercussions, and that would be a terrible travesty.

The post Under Harper, Canada surrendered its sovereignty with the Canada-China FIPA appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands)
2020-11-17 13:54 [p.1994]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to put this question to my colleague, the parliamentary secretary. I had hoped to put it to our former minister of trade, the member for Abbotsford.

The discussion of the Canada-China foreign protection and promotion of investment accord comes up a bit in this debate. We really do need to have it studied in committee. By virtue of the fact that it was brought through and approved as a treaty without a piece of legislation, never debated or studied in Parliament nor in any parliamentary committee, members do not recognize that it actually cemented in place unfair rules in the People’s Republic of China vis-à-vis Canadian companies, and gives China access and punishment regimes in secret.

Would the hon. parliamentary secretary commit, as we are bound by it for 31 years, to actually studying what we are required to respect in the Canada-China FIPA?

Francesco Sorbara (Vaughan—Woodbridge)
2020-11-17 13:55 [p.1994]

Madam Speaker, most of the House would agree that her intervention is very well warranted. I very much agree in terms of the content and extent of the member’s remarks.

I will say that our government, first and foremost, will always put the interests of Canadians ahead of other countries and other states. We will continue to do that. Other governments will answer for themselves in terms of the agreements they went into. We will look at that, but our government is focused on ensuring that Canadians’ interests are ahead of anyone else. I fully support that.

The post Can Canada commit to studying our obligations under the Canada-China FIPA? appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands)
2020-11-17 12:38 [p.1984]

Madam Speaker, I want to respond, and it is difficult in debate, but the hon. member for Wellington—Halton Hills put forward a “clarification” of the Canada-China FIPA that does not fit the facts unfortunately. No other foreign investment protection agreements between Canada and other nations include a six-month, secret phase of diplomatic arm-twisting, or sitting on us until we say “uncle”, which is another way of looking at it. We do not have any other agreements that are absent any trade benefits, but are solely investment implementation and promotion sections without benefit for Canadian companies. Nor do we have anything like the Canada-China investment and promotion agreement with respect to the level of secrecy throughout the process.

Does it trouble my hon. colleague that the Conservative motion includes reference to Australia, which is able to take the steps it has taken because it does not have an investment treaty with the People’s Republic of China?

Leona Alleslev (Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill)
2020-11-17 12:39 [p.1984]

Madam Speaker, no, it does not trouble me because, regardless of where we were in the past, this is where we are today. This is what we know today and we now have an urgent need to do something.

The post Canada-China FIPA is unique in terms of secrecy appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands)
2020-06-04 14:01

I hope I will hear from the government in coming days about what we plan to do for the citizens of Canada who are in Hong Kong.

I want to thank the Prime Minister for yesterday making it clear for the first time that the Government of Canada will press Prime Minister Netanyahu not to proceed with his plans to illegally annex parts of the occupied territories of the West Bank.

I would like to ask this: What specifically is Canada doing to prevent this blow to any future prospects of peace in the region?

Hon. François-Philippe Champagne (Saint-Maurice—Champlain)
2020-06-04 14:01

Mr. Chair, both in private and in public, I and the Prime Minister have said that we are committed to the two-state solution and that we view unilateral annexation as contrary to international law.

I have spoken to the foreign minister of Israel. I have spoken to my colleagues in the Middle East. Mr. Chair, this is a long-held position of the Government of Canada throughout government, and we have made sure that we say that both publicly and privately.

The post How will Canada prevent Israel from annexing occupied territories in the West Bank? appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands) 2020-03-11 16:21

Madam Speaker, it is always difficult to look back. I know people tend to forget what happened in the 41st Parliament. The passage of the Canada-China investment treaty is one on which we really need to focus. People forget that it exists. I have heard so many members speak to the issues we have in CUSMA, now that we have gotten rid of chapter 11, the investor-state dispute settlement provisions, that allowed the U.S. government to sue us in secret. However, it was under Stephen Harper that we are now obligated, for decades, to secret tribunals, where the People’s Republic of China state-owned enterprises have the right to lean on the Canadian government in secret, first for six months, and then bring secret arbitration cases, if we do anything that hurts the expectation of profits of corporations from the People’s Republic of China. Would the member be willing to look into the implications of that, which was passed in secret, in cabinet, without a vote in Parliament?

Cathay Wagantall (Yorkton—Melville) 2020-03-11 16:22

Madam Speaker, I cannot answer that. However, if we were forming government, we would be far more careful about the way we encourage investment from China in our country going forward.

The post We can’t forget about the Canada-China investment treaty from the 41st Parliament appeared first on Elizabeth May.

It is not possible to write a cheery “Good Sunday Morning” after the multiple tragedies of this week. As a country, we are in mourning with deep pockets of grief in ever widening circles around each victim. We grieve with increasing intensity as we learn more of the individual lives cut short by the missile strike against a civilian airliner.

We know who was innocent. Every life lost on the ill-fated Ukrainian Airlines flight was innocent, from the Ukrainian flight attendants to the Canadian-Iranian newlyweds, to the brilliant graduate students heading back to Canada, to the babies.

It is harder to know who was individually guilty, but many decisions led to this tragedy.

The proximate causes start with President Trump’s reckless decision to assassinate General Qassem Soleimani. In our media, I have heard it compared with the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand that led to the First World War. That comparison struck me as false from the outset. This was no rogue element, no individual radical with a hand gun as the Bosnian separatist who killed Archduke Ferdinand in 1914. This was the President of the United States, a man with access to the most powerful and deadly of military arsenals, launching a drone to kill. Whether General Qassem Soleimani was a nice man or a deadly murderer himself is irrelevant in international law. When the West found it convenient to enlist his help in the fight against Daesh (ISIS), he was a U.S. ally. The question is not, as a disturbingly large number of Canadian commentators would have it (Conrad Black “the world is a better place without him” and John Robson “killing Soleimani was a no-brainer” among others) was he a terrible human being? The question is: did the US government have a legally defensible rationale for a deliberate murder? Was it legal under US law, a question with which the US Congress is now grappling? Was it legal under international law?

To be legal under the United Nations Charter, there would have had to be proof of an imminent threat, that the actions were necessary and proportionate. That test may still be met by evidence which – at this point – no one has seen. I am grateful, at least, that Canada has not taken an official view on the legality of the assassination.

The wide support for an extra-judicial targeted assassination of a foreign country’s official because he was “bad” is beyond dangerous. We can all think of brutal killers and dictators and dangerous people globally. Some of them lead countries with which the US is on cozy terms. But any international stability requires respect for international law.

The assassination of General Soleimani was at least reckless. What were Trump’s motivations? It is premature to insist the president did not have valid security intelligence to justify his actions. But it is also naïve to dismiss the domestic political scene – the pending impeachment and the fall election — as factors. In fact, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that Trump was influenced to assassinate Soleimani to secure support from his Republican allies in the Senate. Senator Lindsay Graham appears to have been the only, or at least one of a handful, of people briefed in advance. (Link)

Iranian reaction to the assassination in the form of very targeted missile strikes on the US base in Iraq was deemed “proportionate” and careful by most commentators. And just as Trump was tweeting out “all is well” and that no American military had been killed in that missile strike, the Iranian ground to air missile was launched – by mistake – killing all on board Ukraine International Airlines flight 752.

The Iranian regime is also brutal and anti-democratic. Nevertheless, it had been honouring the agreement with the U.S. negotiated under former President Obama’s administration. That agreement was a significant step toward security in the region. In May 2018, Trump denounced the deal and launched new economic sanctions against Iran. Many other world leaders urged the US to re-engage. France’s Emmanuel Macron has been one of the strongest advocates globally to rescue the deal after Trump’s pull out. Just months ago, in September 2019, France went so far as to be brokering direct talks with Tehran offering a $15 billion bail-out package to compensate for economic losses due to US sanctions, so long as Iran honored the deal and its nuclear inspections. (Link)

The possibility that Iran could be induced to maintain the deal was crushed following Soleimani’s assassination. Within days, Tehran announced it would fully withdraw from compliance, over the pleas of Germany, the UK and France. (Link)

Clearly, actions by Trump have been destabilizing in the region. The assassination of General Soleimani worsened the situation. And the consequences are beyond tragic.

No question that the Iranian government has committed an outrageous act. It has acknowledged responsibility for the horrific crash that killed so many people. That accident would not have happened if Trump had not launched the drone to kill Soleimani. To call it “human error” seems an understatement.

Yet, it is human error. It is human error to build up vast killing machines and think that in times of heightened fear mistakes will not happen. The people who bear the blame for this disaster are many. And they are not all in one country.

For now, I want to share my gratitude to Justin Trudeau for representing who we are as a country, in this moment of grief. I appreciate that officials from Foreign Affairs and our department of defence have taken the time to brief me and other opposition party MPs. I appreciate a personal phone call from the prime minister with one focus. Now is the time to do all we can to support those who lost loved ones. Light a candle. Attend a vigil.

Let us each do whatever we can to extend our love to those whose friends and family members died so tragically in the grip of the reckless actions of powerful men.

Love and peace,

Elizabeth

This weekly blog is published by Elizabeth’s EDA in Saanich-Gulf Islands. You can sign up for it here.

The post Good Sunday Morning – January 12 appeared first on Elizabeth May.

The post Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreements (FIPAs) and Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) appeared first on Elizabeth May.