House of Commons Hansard #115 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was liability.

Topics

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Alexa McDonough Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, nevertheless, the American rhetoric toward several other countries is escalating and people are deeply worried. The British government has already signalled clearly its opposition to expansion of the war outside of Afghanistan.

When will Canada do the same in unequivocal terms? Will Canada tell the U.S. president that solid evidence before the United Nations, not escalating rhetoric through the media, would be needed before Canada would even consider any possibility of military engagement in some other country?

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Saint-Maurice
Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the NDP should have listened to me. I just said a few seconds ago that we said that it should not be expanded. Of course her supplementary question was ready, but she had already received the answer.

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Yesterday the Minister of National Defence acknowledged that the Sea Kings, which Canada sent to Afghanistan, cannot protect themselves against enemy missiles or radar or laser tracking. He said that was okay because “they are not going directly into battle”.

Osama bin Laden blew up the USS Cole . He flew murderous planes into the Pentagon and the twin towers. Those targets were not directly in battle. What kind of dream world is the Prime Minister living in that he sends into a battle zone against terrorists Sea Kings that are more poorly equipped now than they were 10 years ago?

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Saint-Maurice
Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the helicopters are equipped with the instruments needed for the tasks with which they are confronted. The leader of the fifth party in the corner is trying to scare people, while brave soldiers are getting on these helicopters. They know they are in a dangerous position. They need the support of the opposition, not scaring the families like the leader of Conservative Party is doing at this time.

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Elsie Wayne Saint John, NB

Mr. Speaker, it is not a national secret that the Sea King helicopters should have been replaced some time ago. Everyone in the House of Commons knows that, as well as that they require preventive maintenance and major overhauls to keep them flying.

On September 21, 1998, the minister of defence told the House that the upgrades to the Sea King communications systems were “under way”. Could the Prime Minister now confirm that the upgrades have now been completed and is he prepared to say that reports published by Jane's Defence Weekly , the international military journal, to the contrary are absolutely false?

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Haliburton—Victoria—Brock
Ontario

Liberal

John O'Reilly Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, let me make it very plain that the Sea Kings we have employed in Operation Apollo are appropriately equipped to defend themselves against any probable threats in the current situation.

Anti-Terrorism Legislation
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Vic Toews Provencher, MB

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are surprised to learn that those convicted of acts of mass murder under the anti-terrorist legislation are eligible for parole in 25 years. Why does the government have so little regard for human life that mass murderers are free to kill as often as they choose without being denied parole eligibility? Why are mass murderers eligible for a discount on justice?

Anti-Terrorism Legislation
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Cardigan
P.E.I.

Liberal

Lawrence MacAulay Solicitor General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, I am sure my hon. colleague is not indicating to the public that these individuals would be released into society. The fact of the matter is they are eligible for parole. If they have a life sentence, life is life.

Anti-Terrorism Legislation
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Vic Toews Provencher, MB

Mr. Speaker, the question is why that is true. Bill C-36 also fails to criminalize membership in proven terrorist organizations. Even though a court has in fact found that an organization's goal is to promote terrorism, there is no prohibition against joining that organization.

Could the minister explain why Canadians should tolerate membership in organizations whose only purpose is to destroy freedom and democracy in our country?

Anti-Terrorism Legislation
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Edmonton West
Alberta

Liberal

Anne McLellan Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, as I have said before, what is important here is the conduct. What is important are the actions carried out by these individuals. That is why we have taken the approach of defining that conduct as facilitation, participation, a wide range of different kinds of conduct that strike at the very heart of that which we want to get at, which is terrorist activity. It is conduct that we must make sure is dealt with and is an offence and is criminalized.

Terrorism
Oral Question Period

November 20th, 2001 / 2:30 p.m.

Bloc

Francine Lalonde Mercier, QC

Mr. Speaker, the American President recently signed an order authorizing the creation of special military tribunals.

The Bloc Quebecois has supported the anti-terrorism measures, but supporting the creation of military tribunals for non-American terrorists who flout the American constitution is out of the question.

Is the Prime Minister prepared to stand up in this House and tell us that he too rejects the idea of these special military tribunals?

Terrorism
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Ottawa South
Ontario

Liberal

John Manley Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, first of all, we need more information on the American proposal. We know that international conventions have provisions for the creation of tribunals based on the principle of military law, but at this point in time we do not know exactly what the U.S. is proposing.

Terrorism
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Bloc

Francine Lalonde Mercier, QC

Mr. Speaker, we are basing our conclusions on the press release and the statements by the President himself.

Eighty countries lost citizens on September 11, and the entire international community felt the impact of these attacks. It is the entire international community, via the United Nations, which should judge the terrorists.

Does the Prime Minister intend to promote the idea of a special international criminal tribunal mandated to judge the perpetrators of these terrorist attacks?

Terrorism
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Ottawa South
Ontario

Liberal

John Manley Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, we have discussed this question in connection with the creation of the international criminal court.

What we have here is, in fact, a criminal act committed in the United States. First of all, even taking international conventions into consideration, the U.S. has first right to judge it.

For the moment, this is a totally hypothetical question because those accused of this crime have not been apprehended.

Immigration
Oral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Paul Forseth New Westminster—Coquitlam—Burnaby, BC

Mr. Speaker, Hassan Almrei was arrested in Mississauga in a raid on October 19. CSIS believed that he was a member of an international network of extremism for Osama bin Laden.

Yesterday the federal court ruled that there was reasonable grounds for links to terrorism. Will the minister ensure that her system swiftly deports such an individual?