Evidence of meeting #2 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was afghanistan.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
I hope we're not going to have just one meeting and then forget the issue. We definitely want some of those. I know the Liberals submitted three or four names. Certainly some of those we want to get. And the government submitted some who were unavailable.
So we're still open to names. We're just trying to plan for tomorrow at the present time.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary East, AB
In the larger context of this study we want to do of foreign policy, which would include regions, I have a question for Mr. Patry, who brought that motion up in the steering committee. Do you want a quick job done on this, or do you want to go back deeper into the study that Mr. Crête proposed?
What I'm gathering here now is that in your motion, the first one, on the U.S., you said “one day”. Do we really want to do a one-day study--and you would decide--or do we want to put it in a larger context when we're studying the regions? Then we would have more people coming in, the ones Paul is suggesting--Mr. Harder and all the others.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
I think what we really need to do is nail down who we can get tomorrow on this short timeline.
Undoubtedly, I think it's going to be part of the larger study, but we haven't really gotten to that larger study yet. If the committee believes that we should continue with this tomorrow, then the clerk can get hold of Mr. Graves tonight, and Mr. Obhrai, perhaps you can help facilitate that.
I'm going to draw your attention back to the report. Number one, your subcommittee met on Wednesday, February 4. The first item was that the committee considered issues raised in the tenth report of the standing committee dealing with the Canada in Afghanistan mission: “...adopt the report and its recommendations as a report of this Committee in this Parliament and report it to the House requesting a government response.” As you remember, we submitted that report last Parliament, in the summer. The steering committee moved--and it's open for debate here today--that we resubmit the same report.
Mr. Rae.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Bob Rae Liberal Toronto Centre, ON
I would be strongly in favour of doing that. I don't think the report got much attention because it was released in the middle of the summer, and I think we should continue to be engaged in that subject. I think it would be important to get it out into the open again. We won't add to it or take away from it; we don't need to go back over it again, but just get it out there, that's all.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary East, AB
Item number one, of course, conflicts with the next resolution that is coming out, Mr. Dewar's resolution. This item is already part of that resolution as well, so what we are doing here is picking up one portion of the resolution that Mr. Dewar put forward. He is saying the tenth report of the committee on Canada in Afghanistan, which is in the next...
Are we going to discuss this separately from the other ones or are we going to put it together with the motion that Mr.--
4:50 p.m.
The Clerk
This is the motion that we have.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
This is the motion that came out of steering committee. Mr. Dewar's motion is a separate motion.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
An hon. member
No.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
They're not exactly the same, but there may be parts of it that would be redundant with this.
Mr.--
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary East, AB
No, no, I'm just bringing this as a clarification. Then I want to continue my arguments.
Do you want to continue the argument?
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary East, AB
Mr. Chair, I know that a tremendous amount of study was done by the last committee. Various members did a huge amount of study of this, and a lot of witnesses came, a report was written, and a report was submitted to the House of Commons, although it was done only when it was closed. But it was the wish of the last committee that a report be tabled. And so, despite the fact that it wasn't finished, there was an interim report tabled, if I'm not mistaken, which they wanted, as put forward by the NDP at that time.
So we had one interim report already submitted, and then we had the final report that was submitted by you in July of last year. What you have is two similar reports on the same issue with the same idea, already submitted to the House of Commons. Not only that, but the fact remains that it's one year old, and all the transcripts and other materials are publicly available on that report.
I tend to respectfully disagree with the former critic of the Liberal Party that it has not garnered any publicity. The reason it did not garner any more publicity was the Manley report. The Manley report and the subsequent motion that came before Parliament, which was put forward by the Liberal Party and which was approved—and of course, on the record, the NDP opposed it.... All that was part of the debate that came forward. As part of that motion and the debate surrounding it, there came the special committee on Afghanistan, of which Mr. Dewar is not a member. That is part of the decision.
But the fact still remains that there is a committee ongoing. So now we have...and I'm having extreme difficulty buying the argument that this report is current, which it's not. This report was not put into Parliament. Everybody has seen this report; it's just a matter of putting it back in.
In the meantime, we seem to forget the events that are taking place, and of course the most significant event of everything here is the surge by President Obama, which changes everything that is happening in this matter and makes this report redundant.
The committee, as the master of its own destiny, is very agreeable to saying we will continue to study, to look at it and bring it up to date from what it is. They can continue doing that, to bring it up to the current date. But I am of the strong opinion that we are flogging a dead horse; that there is no value in this thing we are hearing; that we are putting things back, on and on, and rehashing some argument that was made by others at a given time, when the whole current scenario has completely changed.
Following upon this also, you have a report that is continually coming out from the special committee on Afghanistan. As I am on that committee, let me talk about it for a minute. Of course, I can see my colleagues over on the other side saying....
No, I have my time. You cannot tell me to hurry up; it's my time. I'm going to put forward my argument here.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Continue, Mr. Obhrai.
Yes, there is relevance here. He's still relevant to the report.
Continue, Mr. Obhrai.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary East, AB
Thank you. I'm talking to the issue, Mr. Chair.
As I said, he is not part of the committee, so he may feel left out, but his colleague Dawn was on that committee. This is the NDP situation, which of course opposes the whole Afghanistan mission. It was quite interesting today during....
Why are you pushing me, Mr. Chair? It's my right to speak.
4:55 p.m.
An hon. member
I do.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary East, AB
Well, no, you don't.
When the member was asking questions to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, it was quite amazing that his party said they don't want anything to do with the Afghanistan mission. They don't approve of the Afghanistan mission; they voted against it. And yet they want to keep a complete eye on it to see how it goes.
