Foreign Affairs Committee on Jan. 29th, 2015

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

The largest number of victims are fellow Muslims who may not share their view of Islam. That's why it is so tremendously important that there be strong Arab participation in the coalition. I think you have to give President Obama credit for building a very expansive coalition in this regard. It's not easy but he has done it. That's why the support of the Emirates, of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain is tremendously important.

[The Co-Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

Thank you, Minister.

Ms. Michaud, you have five minutes.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you very much.

I want to thank both of you for appearing before us this morning.

Minister Nicholson, I heard you say earlier that all Canadians support this mission. I suggest you listen and really talk to Canadians. In my riding of Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, and elsewhere in Quebec, many citizens have questions and concerns. I am hearing a different story. The government does not have unilateral support—far from it.

To be honest toward Canadians, you must answer certain questions. I have not yet heard you say anything about the costs incurred so far for this mission. I understand that you cannot tell us how much the mission could cost because, so far, I have not heard you define a single criterion of success, either. I have not heard you clarify when we might withdraw from Iraq. For all I know, we could be there forever.

I don't expect you to inform us of all the costs involved, but I am asking you to be as transparent as the U.S. and Australian governments are toward their citizens. The same goes for the United Kingdom, where people have an idea of costs to date.

My first question is the following. How much money has been spent up to now, since the beginning of the mission? If you are unable to answer this, your department has a serious problem with managing public funds.

What is the government's definition of success for the overall mission in Iraq? General Lawson talked to us about certain elements to illustrate the mission's progress, but I have still not heard a definition of what your government would consider a successful mission in Iraq.

I would like you to elaborate on these two questions, please.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

First of all, with respect to your opening comments I should be very clear. I believe Canadians overwhelmingly support the fight against ISIL and what we are doing. I appreciate some Canadians do not support this and I know the New Democratic Party does not support this and the Liberals have a different view than we have with respect to this. Everybody's entitled to their own opinion. I'm of the opinion that we are on the right track in opposing ISIL and confronting them, but that being said, we all can have different opinions on that.

The question of costs is certainly a moving target as this mission evolves. We have fixed costs, as you know, with respect to, for instance, our CF-18s, the costs of employing our men and women in uniform, equipment that we've already allocated, and we have a process in Parliament through supplementary estimates so that when costs become finalized or when they become clarified, we present them. I can assure you we will continue to do that.

With respect to the second part of your question, I can tell you we are in an advise and assist role. This is what we are doing. Any mischaracterization of that as some sort of a combat role is not correct, as you heard from the Chief of the Defence Staff. We are there to assist them. You asked whether we'd be there.... You said, “Are we there for eternity?” We have been very clear. As a government we said we have a six-month mission and we have come before Parliament and had Parliament either endorse or not endorse what we are doing. This mission goes till approximately the seventh of April, which is I think the six-month mission date, and we have been very clear up to this point that we'd like to have the support of Parliament, and I'm hoping this time the NDP will have a look at this.

You ask, “How do we measure success?” It's the kinds of things we've been talking about. When you push back ISIL, I believe that's part of the success.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Minister, as you refuse to directly answer my questions, I ask that you let me use the short time I have left to discuss another topic, and I hope to obtain much clearer answers.

At the summit that was held in London last week, Secretary of State John Kerry announced a number of training initiatives, some of which are intended for Syrian opposition forces—moderate forces, in this case.

Does the Canadian government plan on participating in the training projects announced last week by Secretary of State Kerry?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Our focus is on the mission that was approved by the government and confirmed by Parliament. Our focus is on Iraq, specifically with respect to the air fight that we are conducting out of Kuwait and with the mission of our special forces.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I met with John Kerry on Saturday morning, and he did not ask for Canada's support in that area.

[The Co-Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

That's time. Thank you very much.

Mr. Bezan.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank Ministers Nicholson and Baird for being with us. To the Chief of the Defence Staff, General Lawson, it's good seeing you. Please take back to all members of the Canadian Armed Forces how proud we are of them, and that this committee and Parliament support them in every way, shape, and form for the great work they're doing, not just in Iraq but around the world and here at home.

It's interesting listening to the opposition and Liberals saying they support the mission. They don't support the mission. You can't have it both ways. You can't doublespeak. You guys voted against the motion. You didn't support the mission. Marc may have said at one point in time that he did support it and he had to change his position. They are not behind our troops in Iraq, either special operations or the air task force.

When you talked about how this has changed, Minister, I think you used the term “evolutionary process”. The evolution has been that we've gained territory back, and that the training we've done, the advising we've done, and the military planning we've provided have resulted in Iraqi security forces, the Kurdish peshmerga, gaining territory and liberating villages and people.

Can we talk about how that has specifically been a positive and that we're going to continue to do that in our efforts to stop ISIL, get them back on their haunches, and ensure that they cannot bring their terror to the rest of the world or spread it throughout Iraq?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

In answer to the preamble to your question, about taking back and expressing the pride that you and most Canadians, I believe, have in this country with respect to the efforts of their armed forces in that part of the world, that's one of the easiest things you could ever have asked me to do. Like you and so many millions of Canadians, I have nothing but the greatest admiration for and pride in what our armed forces do.

I have to tell you that this gets reinforced everywhere I go. A year ago August, I was in Afghanistan. The first thing that struck me when I started talking with the Afghan defence minister and others was how appreciative they were of Canada's armed forces. I've been to Kuwait a couple of times. There, when we talk about the different issues, they always start off by telling me to take back with me how pleased they are that Canada has been so loyal and supportive of the efforts made on their behalf. This is recognized throughout the world. We've had this discussion in Europe; wherever you go, you get that from Canadians. So Canadians can and do take wonderful pride in their armed forces. This is matched throughout the world, the admiration for Canada.

You talked about success. This is not an easy operation; you know that and you understand that. But when we have a look and we get updated on this, we see that they are making progress on the ground. This is part of what the Iraqis are doing, and they have to do that. They appreciate the training and the assistance they get from the special forces from Canada. They appreciate getting assistance to be able to push back, to reclaim their territory, and that's exactly what is taking place. We want to support that.

Our air strikes are a huge part of that. They're a huge part of containing ISIL, pushing them underground, stopping their advances, and quite frankly, I'm sure, demoralizing them. Every time they stick their heads up, they're being targeted by air strikes. This is a measure of the success we are having in this. It's all our hope—it's the hope, I believe, of everyone—because the terrorist threat in Iraq, again, is not just a threat to that region and to Iraq. It's a terrible threat, but it's a direct threat to Canada and its allies. They have made that very clear, as we have seen in this country. We have a great stake in this and we're going to continue.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

I have a final question, before we adjourn.

Operation Impact, of course, was empowered by Parliament through a motion. Does the directive, through Operation Impact, reflect the spirit as well as the context of the motion that was passed by Parliament?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

There's no question about that. One of the things that was pointed out is how quickly we deployed, how quickly we got involved with this. We have a mission up until the first week of April approved by Parliament, but Canadians can rest assured that our Canadian Armed Forces mobilized immediately to get our special forces and our fighters, along with the support they needed, into Kuwait.

As I've said many times, nobody has a better record of stepping up to the plate than Canada does. Again, it's another ground for being so proud of the work they do.

[The Co-Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Bezan.

To the foreign affairs committee, just before we adjourn we were going to have some committee business. We don't need to take care of that today; that's been dealt with. We'll get back to it on Tuesday, okay?

[The Co-Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

For now, thank you, Minister Baird. Thank you, Minister Nicholson. Thank you, colleagues.

This joint meeting of the standing committees of National Defence and Foreign Affairs is adjourned.