Evidence of meeting #23 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 abdelrazik.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:50 p.m.
NDP
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
He's been asked day after day in the House of Commons. He has said he will not be providing that document.
Maybe I'll just leave it at that. I'm not likely to do that unless I have a motion.
4:50 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Okay. I'm just asking you as the chair to simply facilitate a witness coming before committee.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
That's part of what we're doing here right now. We're trying. We've asked for a legal opinion on what we can do. We've asked the minister if he's going to provide the travel documents. The minister has said no.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
No, but he has been asked. He's given a fairly clear indication in question period in the House.
4:50 p.m.
NDP
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
I will, and I don't need unanimous consent to do so because we're on topic; it's relevant. I thought it was a very straightforward thing. I didn't know it required a motion to ask a chair to write to a minister to facilitate a committee.... Maybe I should get Mr. Walsh's opinion on that--but I won't do that to him.
I move the motion to have the chair write to the Minister of Foreign Affairs to ask him to provide the necessary travel documents to Abousfian Abdelrazik, a Canadian citizen who is stranded in Sudan since 2003. It's so moved.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Jim Abbott Conservative Kootenay—Columbia, BC
I would like to speak to the motion very briefly. This is like going down the furrow for the 65th time. It gets a little deep.
I don't think I need to recite everything, except to state the obvious, which is that the whole purpose of this action, the whole purpose of this motion, is to have Mr. Abdelrazik come back. Whether he can offer something of significance or value to the committee is probably something that we could sit here and debate for an extended period of time. The whole point of the motion, the whole point of Mr. Dewar's action, is to attempt to force the minister and the government to do something they're not inclined to do. It's that simple. As a consequence, obviously, the members of the governing party will be voting against this motion.
June 1st, 2009 / 4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Glen Pearson Liberal London North Centre, ON
Just speaking to the motion, I have real trouble with it because we're not getting answers as to why he's not being brought back. Every avenue is being exhausted, and I understand that. I understand the frustrations. I understand the government side.
From our side, I think we have a responsibility to exhaust every option that's out there. We might very well ask the minister to comply with this request and he might very well say no. However, this is an important issue to us, and I think Mr. Dewar has brought up something that's urgent to all of us here. I think we have a responsibility to put this forward in a motion and put it to a vote. I'm fully in support of that motion.
A Canadian is stuck somewhere else; he is a Canadian citizen, and all these options are being exhausted. We're sitting here at a pretty major committee within Parliament and we can't seem to come up with any solution as to what to do about a person trapped there because somebody has said there's a reason and therefore he can't come. I didn't get elected to come here thinking that was possible. I guess it is, and legally maybe it is.
I think it should be put to a vote. I think we should have the ability to either support or negate Mr. Dewar's motion.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Francine Lalonde Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
As regards Mr. Dewar's motion, I would have liked to see the committee vote. I would like to get back to Mr. Abbott's argument. I put questions countless times to the government and the Minister of Foreign Affairs on this matter, and as a response, it has always raised the famous list. Yet we have been informed that this list does not prevent Canada from bringing Mr. Abdelrazik back to the country, in fact, it is the opposite. I believe that the government's honour would be restored if it were to agree to reopening the subject.
You may tell me to save my breath because you will not change your mind. However, I would like to know who was around during the Maher Arar affair. I, for one, was here from the beginning to the end of that affair. There were so-called certainties surrounding the terrorist acts he allegedly committed. In one way, the charge against Abdelrazik is less serious than the one that Maher Arar faced. I insist on this, knowing that you are people of goodwill. Perhaps you even share my point of view. Try nonetheless to convince those people, on your side.
In a way, it could save Canada's reputation, which, because of the Maher Arar affair, has taken a beating. Add the Abdelrazik affair and it will be worse. There is no certainty in the case against him. A UN official pointed out to us that the famous list does not in any way prevent bringing him back to question him either before committee or in other interrogative proceedings, so long as they are appropriate. It would be beneficial for the government to do so. It is not only on the eve of an election... I may be unable to convince you, but I would like to.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Madame Lalonde, I'm not certain it's fair to say there is equivalency between Maher Arar and Abdelrazik.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
There is no equivalency, so I'm not certain that the comparison is one that's correct.
The other thing I still battle with in my own mind, without prejudicing this whole exercise, is whether we really want to hear from Abdelrazik. Is that really what we want? Is that really what the opposition want? Is it that we want to hear from him or is it that we want to get him to Canada?
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
It seems to me that the predominant reason the committee is going through this exercise is to get him out of Sudan to Canada. If it's that we want to hear him, we can facilitate that. We can facilitate it through video conferencing. We've done it in Afghanistan, we've done it in any.... But that's not what the opposition is asking for, even right now.