MPP Jama moves forward representing Hamilton-Centre as an independent, vowed to sue Premier Ford for libel, fight censure in the legislature

On Tuesday Nov. 14, Hamilton Centre MPP Sarah Jama opened her independent office, resuming in person hours and case work for the first time since her recent removal from the New Democratic Party caucus.

During her speech at the opening of the office, Jama outlined her goals moving forward as an independent and her plans to address her current censure in the provincial legislature. 

Jama’s removal from the NDP party on Oct. 23 came two weeks after she released a statement on Oct. 10 calling for a ceasefire by Israel in Gaza. She also called for Canada to call for a ceasefire, for Israel to stop restricting water, food and humanitarian aid from entering Gaza and for an “end to all occupation of Palestinian land.” 

Ontario NDP leader Marit Stiles stated that Jama’s removal was due to some of the actions she undertook following her statements on the Israel-Hamas conflict having “contributed to an unsafe work environment for staff.” 

On the same day as her removal from the NDP, the Ontario legislature passed the Ford government's motion to censure Jama. As a result, Jama cannot be recognized by the Speaker to partake in discussion in the parliament. At her speech at the opening of her independent office, she stated that the Ford government would cease her censure if she removed her initial statements and apologize and that she would not concede to these demands.

While speaking, Jama also revealed that she did not learn of her removal from the NDP from party leader Stiles directly, but through a general email that was sent out to all party members informing them of her removal. 

I found out at the same time everyone else did, as I was rolling into my seat.

Sarah Jama, MPP, Hamilton Centre

Jama addressed questions regarding her ability to represent her Hamilton Centre constituents as a result of being barred from speaking in parliament, in which she made clear that she is currently pursuing legal action against her censure. 

“I have no intention of sitting there censured. I'll be doing everything I can to prove that it was an illegal censure,” said Jama.

I have no intention of sitting there censured. I'll be doing everything I can to prove that it was an illegal censure.

Sarah Jama, MPP, Hamilton Centre

Furthermore, Jama affirmed that she would be pursuing legal action against Premier Ford for libel, in response to his accusations of antisemitism against her. 

Jama emphasized that moving forward from her party removal and censure, she is focusing on representing the people of Hamilton Centre and working for the issues which she has always been committed to. Jama stated that she is presently concerned with addressing the rising cost of living, accessibility for disabled individuals especially in the midst of the recent transit strike and childhood poverty in Hamilton. 

My priority is to focus on Hamilton Centre and the people here who need support.

Sarah Jama, MPP, Hamilton Centre

Jama stated her independent office is now open to the public from 9am to 4pm every day other than Wednesday for her constituents to come in and voice their concerns.

After extended consultation, the McMaster Student Union has worked alongside the Student Representative Assembly to address concerns and represent students affected by the Israel-Hamas conflict

In the council room in Gilmore Hall on Nov. 12, McMaster’s Student Representative Assembly met for meeting 23J. Representatives met to discuss a motion put forward in support of students at McMaster University affected by the violence in the Middle East, as well as routine reports from the various faculty caucuses.

The statement, co-written by MSU president Jovan Popovic and vice-president Adam F. El-Kadi looks to address the ongoing Israel/Hamas conflict. In a memo to SRA members ahead of the meeting, El-Kadi wrote that he and the president had taken the time to meet with multiple student groups and individuals who have reached out to create a statement that accurately represented students.

“[This motion] was the result of multiple rounds of consultation with student groups from various backgrounds and outlooks. We have actively sought input from our diverse student body, in advance of offering a resolution to define the sentiment of student government at McMaster University,” said El-Kadi.

[This motion] was the result of multiple rounds of consultation with student groups from various backgrounds and outlooks. We have actively sought input from our diverse student body, in advance of offering a resolution to define the sentiment of student government at McMaster University.

Adam F. El-Kadi, Vice-President (Administration), McMaster Students Union

The statement's draft was read before the SRA and noted a rise in both anti-Palestinian and anti-Israeli racism at McMaster, in Hamilton, and internationally. The statement also claimed that commentary on social media has resulted in a number of reported threats towards Palestinian and Israeli students at McMaster.

The statement further made reference to the casualties of the conflict and echoed comments made by the United Nations condemning the actions of both the Israeli and Hamas government, ultimately calling for a ceasefire in Gaza.

During the meeting, Popovic and El-Kadi resolved to promote peaceful events at McMaster via the MSU Clubs Department and requested that the university accommodate students affected by the conflict by way of leniencies towards deadlines and course work.

Popovic and El-Kadi also joined nations around the world condemning the violence perpetrated by both belligerents in the conflict and called for a ceasefire in Gaza to allow for humanitarian aid.

Popovic and El-Kadi pledged to make a financial contribution of $15,000 split evenly between the Palestinian Children's’ Relief Fund, Hamilton’s Anti-Racism Resource Centre, Hamilton Jewish Family Services and the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement on behalf of the students union.

In his address to the SRA after the motion was presented, Popovic discussed the time that had been put into crafting the statement, consulting with many student organizations on campus and taking their priorities into consideration.

“Everyone was taken into account and everyone has points in this motion that can be attributed directly to their advocacy and contributions.” said Popovic.

Everyone was taken into account and everyone has points in this motion that can be attributed directly to their advocacy and contributions.

Jovan Popovic, President, McMaster Students Union

Representatives at the meeting were then given time to draft and put forward amendments to the statement, including changes to language and facts being presented with updated sources.

The amended statement was put to vote and passed at 9:04pm, with 21 voting in favor and 5 abstaining. The statement was released in an Instagram post by the MSU on Wednesday and the full statement was posted to the MSU website.

Other topics discussed at the meeting included the change in management of McMaster's TwelvEighty, the Grind and the Union Market. All three will now return to self-operation under the MSU which promises better food, better prices and better portions. Popovic addressed actions being taken with regards to Generative AI use by students, saying that the new regulations are restrictive and some of the tools the university is set to use to detect AI use may harm students unfairly flagged by unreliable detection software.

Lauren Grammer
The Silhouette

Simple labels are easy to use but are often purposely misinforming. The label of apartheid that has been put on the state of Israel is a misinformed term. As the sole Jewish and democratic state in the Middle East, Israel has always been a lightning rod for controversy. The complex issues impacting Israel including Arab rights and so called ‘apartheid wall’ have therefore been cast under the shadow of apartheid. The annual Israel Apartheid Week (IAW) that occurs at McMaster and around the world is therefore deeply disturbing as ill-informed activists simplify complex issues using a term that is purposely inflammatory.

Apartheid is an official policy of racial segregation involving political, legal, and economic discrimination. Apartheid is most commonly associated with South Africa. From 1948 to 1994, black South Africans were legally persecuted and segregated from the white population. There was an official mandate identifying blacks as second-class citizens who could not vote, hold political office and had to reside in certain locations. The people involved in IAW at McMaster try to compare the so-called Israel apartheid with the South African apartheid.

How can Israel be an apartheid state if it operates on a system in which all citizens and minorities have full rights? This means that every Jew and Arab living in Israel has the same exact freedoms. Arabs have the right to vote, the right to health care, the right to move about freely within the country and much more. Also Israeli Arabs can be seen in government, on Israeli national sports teams and even in international beauty contests representing Israel. No black South African ever had the kind of rights and freedoms that Israeli Arabs do. In fact, Arabs with Israeli citizenship are actually entitled to more rights than any Arab living in the Arab world, as Israel is the only democratic state in the Middle East. It seems that those using the term apartheid at McMaster year after year forget this fact. On this principle alone, Israel is not an apartheid state as there is no legal policy separating Jewish Israelis and Arab Israelis.

Despite the aforementioned rights and freedoms McMaster IAW still continues. Many have pointed to the so called ‘apartheid wall’ as the quintessential example of apartheid in Israel. When Arabs want to come into Israel they are subjected to security checks due to the building of the security wall that separates the West Bank and Gaza Strip from Israel. This wall was built in reaction to the abundant amount of terrorism that occurred in Israel from 2000-2005 called the Second Intifada. Since the wall has been built terrorism has gone down by 90 per cent. This wall may separate Israel from its bordering regions, however it is no different than the wall being built between the US and Mexico to stop illegal immigration. The US-Mexico security fence is not an apartheid measure and neither is the one that separates Israel from its neighbors. Therefore, the only way for McMaster’s IAW advocates to use the security wall as an argument for apartheid, which they have, as seen on McMaster’s Israel Apartheid Week 2012 Facebook page, is to suggest that the US-Mexico wall is also an act of apartheid.

The purpose of this article was not to devalue some of the points that are being brought to light due to Israel Apartheid Week because many of these issues are real and worthy of discussion. However if one wants to be taken seriously, activists must stop using apartheid as a convenient catch-all for the plight of the Arabs in Israel. When using the term “apartheid” to describe the situation in Israel, one is not using the word correctly and sounds, at best, ill-informed. Comparing the two is simply a plea for media attention, as the situation in Israel is completely different than what occurred in South Africa. A more effective way to utilize an entire week is to set aside the rhetoric and focus on the real issues that are affecting the Palestinian people.

 

Subscribe to our Mailing List

© 2024 The Silhouette. All Rights Reserved. McMaster University's Student Newspaper.
magnifiercrossmenu