Norman E. Doyle

[Division No. 373, April 13th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, members of the Conservative Party vote yes to this motion.

[Division No. 371, April 13th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the members of my party will vote yea on this motion.

[Division No. 368, April 13th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, members of the Conservative Party vote yes to this motion.

[Coastal Fisheries Protection Act, April 13th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, members of the Conservative Party vote yes to this motion.

[Kosovo, April 13th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, on Friday, April 2 Canada was not accepting refugees from Kosovo. On Saturday, April 3 we were accepting 5,000 refugees. Then on Friday, April 9 we were only accepting refugees with special needs. On Sunday, April 11 the minister said that she was granting ministerial permits to refugees with special needs. At the same time our ambassador was saying that what we were talking about was not temporary protection, it was immigration.

Would the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration tell us if we are talking about immigration or are we talking about treating these people as refugees?

[Kosovo, April 12th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the hon. member on his presentation. It was a very good one and very well thought out as well.

I want to make a comment and ask him a question. It is regrettable that we did not get the chance to debate this matter before our air force was committed to military action. The bottom line now is that we are embroiled in a military conflict overseas. I am sure he is aware that many military experts feel that this will inevitably lead to the involvement of ground troops. Polling seems to indicate that a majority of the Canadian public currently support the government's position on this particular issue.

I wonder if the hon. member would comment on whether in his opinion that government support will hold if we get into an all out war in the hills and mountains of Kosovo, a war that would inevitably lead to casualties on both sides.

[Refugees, April 12th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, last week the minister of immigration stated that the federal government would cover all the costs of airlifting the 5,000 Kosovo refugees who were supposed to come to Canada. That cost was put at roughly $100 million.

Would the minister be a little more clear? Now that the airlift has been cancelled, would the minister of immigration commit that $100 million to the various relief agencies so they can assist people living in very desperate conditions in these refugee camps?

[Kosovo, April 12th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, yes, we are very much aware that the military is already in harm's way, but the possibility of casualties will be so much greater if we send in ground troops.

The official position of our party is that we will support sending in ground troops to Yugoslavia if that is the only means by which peace and stability can be achieved in that particular area.

However, many more military casualties will occur if we do send in ground troops. Many military experts feel that it will inevitably lead to casualties. While opinion polls now support the government in its efforts so far, I am just wondering if the opinion and support of the Canadian people will hold once ground troops go in and they see the inevitable casualties.

We on this side of the House support the involvement of ground troops, if that is the only way to achieve peace and stability, but we also feel strongly that such an action should not only be debated in the House of Commons but voted on as well. That is what we support.

[Kosovo, April 12th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Kings—Hants.

As immigration critic for the PC party, it is incumbent upon me to make a few remarks on the human tragedy that is Kosovo. I am very pleased that this debate is taking place. I must say that sitting here for the last 17 hours, since 10 o'clock Monday morning, I am beginning to learn a little bit about what is a very complicated issue.

I want to say as well that I question the usefulness of conducting such an important debate at three and four o'clock in the morning when most reasonable people are asleep, instead of at a time when they can conveniently hear what we have to say. But such is the way of politics.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to make a few remarks on this very important issue. Every day on television we see a tide of Kosovar Albanians trudging to refuge outside their homeland leaving behind their burning villages and their friends and relatives who have been spirited away or even executed by Serbian security forces. Over the past number of years we have seen similar scenes in Croatia and Bosnia, but the sheer speed and magnitude of the current exodus has riveted the world's attention.

There are two aspects to the crisis which I want to address, the refugee situation and the military situation. With regard to the Kosovo refugees, I am pleased that Canada was willing to accept and make preparations to take in 5,000 of these very unfortunate people. As a nation whose involvement there is driven by humanitarian concerns, we could not do less. The minister indicated that the government was willing to set aside approximately $100 million for that purpose.

Now that the United Nations has expressed a preference for those refugees to stay in their region, I do hope that the majority of these funds can be redirected to relief efforts on the ground in Europe. However, today in question period the minister did not answer my question as the availability of these funds. Rather, the Minister of International Affairs spoke of the $22 million her department had spent so far.

The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration also stated, in answer to another question, that our proposed airlift of 5,000 refugees would not be necessary because the situation on the border had stabilized. However, we hear that the Yugoslavs have shelled Albania and refugees continue to pour out of Kosovo.

I also have concerns about the fact that we appear to have been caught off guard with respect to our position on the Kosovar refugees. On Friday, April 2 our position was that we would not be accepting refugees from Kosovo. The following day we were ready to accept 5,000. On April 9 we were only accepting refugees with special needs under ministerial permit. Yesterday our special envoy in Kosovo said we are talking about immigration, not temporary protection. It is rather confusing.

The point I am trying to make is that we should have known the likely result of military intervention and that the refugee exodus would likely accelerate. We appear to have been caught off guard as far as the refugees are concerned. If the basis for our military intervention was humanitarian, then surely government planners should have seen that there was a role for our refugee and immigration officials as well.

The minister has indicated that she will be issuing ministerial permits for refugees with special needs. One has to ask what that mean in practical terms. Are we talking about people with special medical needs? Are we talking about the adoption of orphans and the reunification of families? Are we talking about potential new immigrants who will need language training and a host of other settlement services?

Have arrangements been made with the provincial and municipal governments delivering health and various social services in Canada? Will some of that $100 million be used to fund any extraordinary costs incurred by these local agencies and governments?

These are all very legitimate questions and Canadians have a right to expect clear answers.

We pride ourselves on being a compassionate nation, but in order to do a good job we need to approach these issues in an organized way. Compassion without the necessary ways and means only raises expectations unfairly. Surely these people have already suffered enough.

The other situation about which I am concerned is our military position in all of this. It is regrettable that we did not get to debate this matter before the air force was committed to go in and fight. The bottom line is that we are now embroiled in a military conflict overseas.

Many military experts, who we hear talking on TV about this particular issue, feel that this will inevitably lead to the involvement of ground troops. While polling would seem to indicate that a majority of the Canadian public currently support the government's position, one has to ask if that opinion would hold if we get into an all out war in the hills and mountains of Kosovo, a war that would inevitably lead to casualties on all sides.

As one Canadian, I have grave concerns about the way we seem to have gotten into a conflict without a long term view of the consequences. I need not remind the House that this region of Europe tied down many Nazi divisions during World War II in a grinding war of attrition with terrible atrocities committed on all sides. We have already seen earlier examples of ethnic cleansing in Croatia and Bosnia, with enough blame and blood to go around for all. I therefore have to ask the question: Are we up for this, both psychologically and militarily? There is no doubt that during World War II we were involved in a total war.

I have every confidence in the professionalism of our armed forces, but I fear the government has presided over our military being reduced in numbers and is sadly lacking in equipment to do the job.

We cannot play at war. NATO is now committed and has very little choice but to follow through on its commitments. In the Vietnam war we saw what it was like to fight a war wherein the daily targets were decided in the White House and not in the Pentagon. The result was a war that dragged on for years.

No matter if we call this a conflict or a war, we had best be clear about our objectives and have the will to do what is necessary. We cannot forget that the Yugoslav leadership will be ruthless in its use of military and paramilitary forces. We must not send our soldiers and our airmen into harm's way with one arm tied behind their back.

It is sad that Canada, once a leader in world affairs and champion of the United Nations peacekeeping, is now caught up in this conflict. However, now that the dye is cast we had best get serious about our humanitarian and military roles in Kosovo.

The Canadian people are a good people. They deserve better leadership in this crisis than what we have seen so far. It is time for the government to hold parliamentary debates on these matters before our troops are put in harm's way. It is time for the government to make clear our objectives and our ways and means of carrying out our various roles in the escalating conflict and humanitarian disaster.

In short, we should discuss our duty, define our duty and fulfill that duty with all of the determination and pride that has served us so well in the past.

[Homelessness, March 24th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, it is hard to fix the homeless problem when government is unwilling to dedicate resources to it. Since 1993 the Liberals have cut funding for affordable housing, they have relinquished their responsibility for social housing to the provinces and now they are phasing out funding for most housing programs completely. The new minister says she has no idea how to fix the homeless problem. Let me help her out.

Will this government show some leadership and re-establish a lead role in social housing?