For the past six or so months, Liberal MP Anthony Housefather has been an accidental maverick in his own party. It’s an unenviable position – lonely, polarizing, controversial – and one that, by his own telling, he didn’t seek to occupy. Indeed, Mr. Housefather didn’t have much of a reputation for dissidence before, with the exception of matters of English language rights in Quebec. But the events of Oct. 7, and more specifically his government’s shifting position on Israel, changed things. Speaking on The Line podcast back in March, he accused his own government of “changing foreign policy on the fly.”
“The lack of support that has been shown to Israel since November by the Canadian government, to me, is disappointing,” he said. “Jewish Canadians feel truly betrayed.”
Ostensibly he includes himself in that description, but he hasn’t felt so betrayed as to leave caucus entirely, opting instead to try to effect change from the inside.
It’s a dilemma that members of minority groups often grapple with when engaging with organizations, workplaces or communities that don’t necessarily reflect their values: Do they try to shift the culture from within, or does their presence effectively legitimize an institution that might be hostile or oppressive?
Should women join the Canadian Armed Forces to try to combat its culture of misogyny, or should they sit out unless or until they see structural change? Should an Indigenous person serve as governor-general, or would it be de facto condoning a colonial institution? (Mary Simon, of course, answered that question.) Should Mr. Housefather continue to sit in caucus, or should the Liberals’ inertia on the antisemitism file, as well as the party’s descent into complete incoherence on foreign policy as it relates to Israel, push him out the door?
A few months ago, Mr. Housefather reasoned that it was more important that he continue to offer a voice at the table. He wasn’t shy about the fact that he considered leaving caucus after his government voted for an amended NDP motion on Israel – a move that he called “deeply hurtful.” The original motion called on Canada to recognize a Palestinian state, which would have gone against Canada’s well-established policy on Israel. But instead of simply voting it down, the government worked with the NDP in a last-ditch effort to amend the motion to something more palatable.
Mr. Housefather took some time to contemplate his future with the party, but he eventually decided to stay. He told CBC News that he heard from Canadians across the country who were worried about what would happen to the party if the “centrist voices” were to leave. He also said that he had a direct conversation with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who promised that he would work with Deborah Lyons, Canada’s Special Envoy on Preserving Holocaust Remembrance and Combatting Antisemitism, in a new leadership role fighting antisemitism.
So what has happened since then?
Nothing. No new job for Mr. Housefather. More attacks on Jewish schools, businesses and communities. No action from the federal government. And most noteworthy, in my view: one of Mr. Housefather’s caucus colleagues, Brampton, Ont., MP Shafqat Ali, told CBC News last week that he didn’t think Mr. Housefather was the right person for a leadership role fighting antisemitism.
“I think his appointment won’t be helpful in addressing antisemitism or Islamophobia [note: the role as originally described would only concern antisemitism] because he lacks in judgment and has contributed more in dividing Canadians in the last eight months,” Mr. Ali said. He then offered the names of a couple of other Jewish MPs he thought would do a “better job.”
Mr. Ali’s remarks were extraordinary not simply because of the gall it takes for someone outside the Jewish community to declare who would best serve their interests, or for how offensive and derogatory it is to essentially offer up a list of well-behaved Jews worthy of promotion. But they were also extraordinary because, in a caucus as controlled and well-disciplined as Mr. Trudeau’s, this MP still feels comfortable enough to opine on the character of his colleague, and to rank him among his fellow Jews. Just as remarkable is the lack of public response from the government: no defence of Mr. Housefather, no repudiation of Mr. Ali, and no assurances that the government is indeed going ahead with new measures to fight antisemitism.
These are all clear signs for Mr. Housefather. A voice at the table is only valuable if it is listened to; his is being publicly disparaged by a colleague to radio silence from his bosses. Mr. Housefather might have felt, months ago, that he was representing Canadian Jews by staying in caucus. The best way to represent them now, however, would be to leave.