About lobbying: The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA)

Monday, 6  March 2017

Advocates or Dhimmis?

According to the Press Release issued by CIJA, on March 1, 2017, on the day before, February 28, CIJA “held its inaugural Lobby Day at Queen’s Park. More than one hundred volunteers from Ontario’s Jewish community-including community leaders and representatives from an array  of social services agencies met with Premier Wynne, Opposition leader Patrick Brown, representatives of NDP leader Andrea Horwath, and more than half of the Members of Ontario’s Legislative Assembly to talk about affordable housing, fighting discrimination and enhancing community security”.

Again according to the Press Release, in response to the event, CIJA issued the following two statements:

"Yesterday`s Lobby Day was a remarkable success providing our constituents…..to raise issues of serious concern to our community. We met with more than half of the members of the Ontario Legislative Assembly (“MLAs”), reinforcing the strong relationship that exists between Ontario’s legislators and Ontario’s Jewish community.” So said Berl Nadler, Chair CJIA Toronto.

“This Lobby Day was a fantastic opportunity to mobilize leaders from across the Jewish community to discuss concerns about antisemitism and other forms of prejudice and advance a number of our priorities including ending genetic discrimination, enhancing community security, and raising awareness of poverty and the need for affordable housing. We demonstrated that our communal voice is strong and effective.” So said, Sara Lefton, Vice President, CIJA Toronto

Advocates or Dhimmis?

When, my family and I arrived in Canada, we thought we had left the world of dhimmis and dhimmitude back in my native land, never to encounter again

Yet, when I read this press release, the first thing that came to mind was the similarity of the tone of the foregoing statements-save  for the comments about the Jewish community’s the relationship  with the MLAs and the strength and effectiveness of the communal voice- with those periodically  issued by the Jewish community of Istanbul in their dealings with the successive governing political establishments; a community whose members privately consider themselves individual and collective dhimmis.

The Nadler and Lefton statements

Let’s  take a closer look the Nadler and Lefton statements

Nadler queried and refuted

Nadler’s statement that qualifies the event as” a remarkable success” raises more questions. What was remarkable about it t? In what way was it a success? What made the success remarkable?

Based on the remainder of her statement; the answers to these questions are:

1. Providing constituents with an important opportunity to meet directly with our elected officials and raise issues of serious concern to us.
2. [Meeting] with more than half of the MLAs reinforcing the strong relationship that exists between the MLAs and Ontario’s Jewish community.

The first answer begs two additional sets of questions:

a) Is CIJA’s arrangement of such an opportunity a unique or an extraordinary one or does most large religious or ethnic minorities do the same for their members? If so, what is the big deal?

b) “The opportunity to raise issues of serious concerns to us.” What are these issues? For how long have these issues been raised? If anything, what did the Wynne government, the opposition parties and the MLAs do to address these issues in the past? Were the issues addressed effectively? If so, which ones? What issues have yet to be addressed? Why have they not been addressed to date? 

One that was recently addressed was the so-called BDS issue.

The government first refused to use its majority to pass Bill 202: Standing Up Against Anti-Semitism in Ontario Act. Then, it passed a hypocritical, cowardly, meaningless and ultimately useless anti-BDS motion.

The second answer further begs the following additional two questions: How did the event reinforce the relationship between the MLA`s and the Ontario Jewish community? How could the relationship be possibly a strong one when close to 50% of the MLAs did not bother to show up or to vote in favour of the anti-BDS motion?

Lefton’s unwarranted exaggerations

Lefton’s characterisation of the meeting as a “fantastic opportunity” is over the top. The reader is not informed as to exactly what was discussed under the rubric of antisemitism and other forms of prejudice nor  are the specific  nature and forms of  the other prejudice that were identified.

She further informs us that they informed their interlocutors of some, but by no means all, of our priorities, including genetic discrimination, raising awareness of poverty, and the other social problems mentioned above.

In conclusion Lefton alleges :”We demonstrated that our collective communal voice is strong and effective”, but fails to provide a single accomplishment, a single promise, undertaking or commitment secured from the governing party or from     any one else during the meetings to substantiate the point.

Then again, Lefton was the one who declared the passing of anti-BDS motion a success, or was it a victory?

From where I sit, the whole event seems like one designed by the government to provide Premier Wynne with a photo opportunity when she ought to be wearing a paper bag over her head.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating

Now that the circus is over, I invite CIJA to adopt the old adage that Tikkun Olam starts at home” and to demonstrate that the assertions of Nadler and Lefton claims are not to mere puffery.

Towards this end, without waiting for the next Lobby Day, I would like CIJA, to prove that there is a strong relationship between the MLAs and the Jewish community and that the communal voice is strong and effective.

The challenge and test: Successful performance of one of the following four tasks

Task 1:

Convince the government to formally adopt and implement the Ottawa Protocol

Task 2:

Convince the government to enact legislation to address anti-Semitism on university campuses similar to the bills introduced to that effect by the States of: South Carolina, (Bill H.3643); Virginia (HB2261) and Tennessee.

Task 3:

1. Direct the Ontario universities’ top governing councils by Order-in-Council or by other legally enforceable instrument(s) to

a)  promulgate a Statement of Respect that reads: ``Anti-Semitism, anti-Semitic forms of anti-Zionism and other forms of discrimination have no place at the University of….;

 b) put in place an effective mechanism to enforce the Principles of Respect, and to enforce them, and

c)  specify the penalties for the breach of the Principles.

2. Stipulate the adverse consequences for failing to abide by the Direction. 

Task 4:

To demonstrate at least two substantive accomplishments for the specific benefit of the Jewish community, other than increased police protection.

Failing a successful outcome in any one of the foregoing tasks, it will be fair to conclude that the Jewish Federations of Canada-UIA got the wrong advocacy agent and it is time to reform the agent.