Published February 9, 2024

Joel Goldenberg – The Suburban LJI Reporter

For the second month in a row, anti-Israel questions from pro-Palestinians directed at Hampstead Mayor Jeremy Levi were allowed to be asked by Projet Montreal majority leader Alex Norris and Mayor Plante at the island-wide agglomeration council meeting. The barrage came from nine questioners one after the other.

The questions have been directed at Levi since he was ambushed in a crowd last December at a public event by anti-Israel activist Yves Engler about the Israel-Hamas conflict. Levi had defended Israel while also saying all loss of life is tragic. A video of the interview went viral and prompted some of the questions at the December meeting, for which Levi was not present — Councillor Jack Edery represented Hampstead then.

B’nai Brith Canada lodged a complaint with the Quebec Municipal Commission after that meeting, saying the island-wide agglomeration violated its own rules by allowing questions that were supposed to be about city-related topics and were instead about the Israel-Hamas War and the situation in Gaza. The CMQ responded that an investigation is unnecessary. They are planning to file a second complaint following the January meeting.

B’nai Brith Canada says its second complaint will fault the meeting president for allowing the succession of questioners to imply Levi supports the genocide of Palestinians. They will again cite the agglomeration rules saying that questions must relate to issues involving the island of Montreal. The organization argues that such a line of questioning would not have been allowed against members of any other community. B’nai Brith is also citing the rule that only three questions on the same subject are allowed, but that the agglomeration allowed nine questions to be asked at the January meeting.

Beaconsfield Mayor Georges Bourelle told The Suburban that, “Norris has become the sheriff at the Agglomeration Council meetings and seems to forget he is not the spokesman for the demerged municipalities such as Hampstead. His involvement in the question period was embarrassing.”

At the January meeting, a succession of kaffiyeh clad women then directed questions, some to Levi, some indirectly about the conflict.

“Are you trying to hide behind the excuse of antisemitism and the right to the defence of Israel on your social media to justify the actions of the Israeli army?” one woman asked Levi. Another woman accused Levi of ignoring the “legitimate” concerns of non-Zionist Jews, and of referring to legitimate criticism of Israel as antisemitic. A third said “some members of this council have been working overtime on social media to incite hate against Palestinians all around the world, and specifically Palestinians and pro-Palestinian groups in Montreal….When we come here to speak out against this discrimination and hateful rhetoric, they choose to play the victim.”

Norris — with Mayor Plante sitting by his side — replied that the policy of the City of Montreal is zero tolerance of “hatred of any kind. We’re also not there to police the speech of our peers. If you feel one or any of our elected peers has breached their codes of ethics, there’s an independent body that can investigate.”

Levi did not respond to the questioners, but before the question period began, he made a statement saying a violation of rights and breach of privilege took place at the December agglomeration meeting when “Mayor Plante publicly invited an individual to attend the Dec. 21 meeting to question me directly about a specific Hampstead nuisance by-law. This invitation, in violation of section 30, due to its subject matter being outside the jurisdiction of agglomeration powers, resulted in an ambush of seven individuals directing questions at my representative, Councillor Jack Edery. All questions not only exceeded the scope of section 30 but should have been deemed out of order as per section 35. I cannot overstate the significance of what happened and I urge you to ensure that such occurrences do not repeat.”

Levi added that “a more serious issue arose during those questions, unbeknownst to many — 45 countries, including Canada, have adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism. The purpose of adopting this definition is to identify and act on antisemitism, which often involves charging Jews with conspiring to harm humanity and blaming them for various issues, including the actions of the state of Israel. During the last agglomeration council meeting, an individual insinuated that I desired and was responsible for the continuation of the suffering of people affected by the conflict in Israel. Madam Chair (Lasalle Mayor Nancy Blanchet) this is antisemitic. Notably, I wasn’t even in attendance, and the same insinuation was made against my representative, who is also Jewish. This is unacceptable.” Levi pointed out that Quebec and several municipalities, and the borough of Cote-Des-Neiges-NDG have adopted the IHRA definition.

“However, Mayor Plante has refused to adopt this widely recognized definition for all of Montreal, leading to instances like the one I just described occurring without recognition. It is crucial to adopt this definition. While I have no reason to believe Mayor Plante will change her stance on this matter, I implore you, by virtue of the powers bestowed upon you, which allows you to decide all matters incidental to the proper conduct of proceedings, to implement the IHRA working definition of antisemitism for the proper conduct of these agglomeration meetings. At a time when Montreal has witnessed an unprecedented number of antisemitic hate crimes, it is imperative that those in a position to make a difference take action. By implementing my recommendation, you can send a strong message against antisemitism.”

The Hampstead Mayor said that in recent weeks, “numerous individuals, groups, organizations, and religious institutions have reached out to me in despair.

“I urge you to give this matter the utmost consideration and return to this council with a favourable response.”

Norris replied that there is freedom of expression in Canada and citizens have a right to ask questions. Plante nodded vigorously as he spoke.

Levi replied, “If I understand correctly, Councillor Norris, what we’re saying is, we recognize that there are rules, but we’re not going to follow the rules.” Norris did not respond. n

Scroll to Top