NDP motion regarding Palestinian statehood passes after major Liberal alterations

A motion from the federal New Democrats initially calling on Canada to recognize the 'State of Palestine' passed amid widespread acrimony on Monday, after the Liberals drastically altered its wording to see the government simply work towards that aim as part of a two-state solution.

A motion from the federal New Democrats initially calling on Canada to recognize the "State of Palestine" passed amid widespread acrimony on Monday, after the Liberals drastically altered its wording to see the government simply work towards that aim as part of a two-state solution.

After appearing destined to fail when the governing Liberals vowed Monday to not let the opposition sway its foreign policy, Government House Leader Steven MacKinnon shocked MPs on both sides of the aisle when he rose in the final minutes of debate to advance a nearly 500-word motion that rephrased considerable portions of the NDP motion.

After generating considerable international attention and division among MPs during a nearly day-long debate, the non-binding but symbolic NDP motion ultimately passed 204 to 117.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and almost all Liberal MPs voted in favour, alongside NDP, Bloc Quebecois and Green MPs. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre and his party voted against the proposal.

While nearly every element of the motion was altered, arguably the biggest change came in the final line. 

That line originally asked the House to call on the government to "officially recognize the State of Palestine," but was rewritten to say: "work with international partners to actively pursue the goal of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, including towards the establishment of the State of Palestine as part of a negotiated two-state solution."

"We have forced the government to move in a certain direction," said NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, speaking to reporters just ahead of the vote, claiming victory while facing questions about why his party didn't write the motion differently to begin with if Monday's outcome was what they intended.