Sheila Malcolmson

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, March 9th, 2016]

With regard to funding for women’s shelters for the fiscal years from 2010 to 2015: (a) how much funding has the government spent on construction of new women’s shelters and new spaces in women’s shelters annually, in total, and broken down by (i) program, (ii) province; (b) how much money has the government spent on funding for renovation of existing women’s shelters annually, in total, and broken down by (i) program, (ii) province; (c) how much money has the government spent on non-capital supports for women’s shelters annually, in total, and broken down by (i) program, (ii) province; (d) when did the government stop accepting applications for the off-reserve portion of the Shelter Enhancement Program; and (e) when did the government cancel funding for the off-reserve portion of the Shelter Enhancement Program?

[Indigenous Affairs, March 9th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised that no relationship was more important to him than that with indigenous peoples. That relationship has not been respected in the case of B.C.'s Site C dam, where there are three ongoing court cases with first nations. This is a litmus test of the Prime Minister's solemn commitment. Repeated letters from first nations have been ignored by the Liberals.

Will the government please cease and desist on approval for Site C until proper consultations can occur?

[Health, March 8th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, access to safe abortion services is fundamental to a woman's right to choose. It must be equally available to all Canadian women. However, women in places like PEI do not have access to abortion services and they should.

A commitment to women's rights must be more than talk and promises; it must mean concrete action. Therefore, will the minister commit today to guaranteeing that every woman in every region of the country has access to abortion services?

[International Women's Day, March 8th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, International Women's Day can celebrate women's achievements and highlight what holds us back, but words ring hollow if there is no follow-through, no action.

Our collective work over this next year must be based on action. What can we in this chamber do to end epidemic violence against women? What can we do to get women elected to help our communities make good decisions? What can we do to lock in equal pay for work of equal value?

Taking immediate action will make this a better place, not just for women, but for our economy, our society, our soul as a nation.

I look forward to rising with members in one year's time to celebrate what we in this House have achieved, with and for Canadian women.

[Canada's Contribution to the Effort to Combat ISIL, February 24th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I believe Canada has a reputation to look after its complicity in some of these struggles and fights before anything else. I believe we would have more credibility on the international stage if we were able to give our partners around the world the assurance that we are committing to humanitarian efforts, and that we are supporting efforts for peace. We certainly have a strong tradition of standing up against genocide in many parts of the world in many historic battles. I am glad we have done that and I hope we will continue to do so.

However, we have to get the money and the weapons out of the fight, and we have to look after our veterans. If we did those three things first, we would have more credibility and we would arguably bring peace faster in this region.

[Canada's Contribution to the Effort to Combat ISIL, February 24th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, all of the suggestions that I have made and that my fellow New Democrats have made go toward the aim of decreasing the intensity of the fighting in the region, hopefully shortening the fighting in the region, and reducing the exposure of our men and women in service to danger when they are there. This is one of those examples of a stitch in time saves nine. We will never have enough weapons or enough fighters to force peace. However, if we choke-off the flow of weapons and finances, that has more to do with our banking system than it does with soldiers on the front line.

The United Nations Security Council has not invited our soldiers into the region, but has instead asked Canada, with its other NATO countries, to sign the Arms Trade Treaty. That fact is a very strong message about what the international community believes we should be doing to stop the intensity of fighting in the first place.

[Canada's Contribution to the Effort to Combat ISIL, February 24th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my colleague from the beautiful riding of Sherbrooke.

I welcome the opportunity to debate in the House about how best to engage and defeat ISIS. I thank the House and the government for this opportunity.

New Democrats are glad to see three things in this plan: first, the renewed emphasis on diplomacy; second, the renewed commitment to aid conflict affected populations in the region; and third, the ongoing commitment for refugee welcoming and settlement in our country. We can all be proud of these things.

The NDP has always stood up for peace and I am proud to be part of that heritage. I am thinking today of my grandfather, John Osler, who was a pacifist. He stayed out of the conflict for as long as he could. During the second world war he was finally compelled to serve in the navy and was proud to be part of that national commitment. He then ran for the CCF and worked in the labour movement. I am honoured to be his granddaughter and carrying on that discussion in the debate today.

The NDP has always been clear. Canada should focus on stopping the flow of arms, funds, and fighters, and we should do that work right here at home before anywhere else. We would have liked to have seen the government step up efforts in these areas.

I will speak to the first plan, stemming the flow of weapons to the region. Although the UN Security Council has passed three resolutions dealing with Iraq, none of them authorized a military mission. The UN Security Council did specifically require action on the part of all member countries to prevent the flow of foreign fighters and suppress the financing of terrorist organizations. As my colleague from Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke said, there has only ever been one terrorism financing conviction in Canada and that was in 2010, so we have work to do right here at home.

ISIL is earning between $1 million and $3 million every day in income from black market oil sales. We are never going to stop ISIL if we do not cut off that flow of money. We must seal the borders in the region against oil exports.

The Arms Trade Treaty would regulate the flow of weapons across international borders. If implemented on a global scale, it has the potential to starve the world's most brutal regimes of the money that they need to carry on their atrocious actions.

Although the Arms Trade Treaty came into effect more than a year ago, Canada, to its shame, stands alone among all NATO member countries that have failed to sign this treaty. The NDP has been pushing this issue for a long time both inside and outside the House, and we were glad to see the government campaign on and make a commitment to sign that Arms Trade Treaty.

However, for the last couple of weeks we have been asking in the House, when will the government sign the Arms Trade Treaty? The word yesterday or the day before was that the minister is seized with the issue but none of us know what that means. What does it mean to be seized? Maybe seized up and indecisive. I do not know, but we need to do this. It is embarrassing that Canada has not honoured that commitment and it would make a big difference. This is a decision we can make here at home that would affect the war against ISIS.

Again, there are other benefits to signing the Arms Trade Treaty as well. It would help us untangle the government's response to the Saudi arms trade deal.

It was reported this week that weapons being used by terrorists in Yemen originated in Canada, in Manitoba, of all places. We have work to do at home. Signing the Arms Trade Treaty would make us proud internationally and we could make a difference in the affected region.

We would love to have seen this mission, as articulated by the government, include a commitment to stem the flow of fighters by supporting de-radicalization efforts here at home.

We know that communities across this country have reached out to the federal government, both the previous Conservative government and now the Liberal government, imploring for help to protect youth from ISIS's very sophisticated recruitment techniques, yet the February 8 announcement did not include any domestic action against ISIS.

I asked this question all day Monday. Does the Liberal Party have a plan to address de-radicalization to help prevent Canadians from going overseas to fight with ISIS? I could not get any Liberal MP to tell me where that sits in their plan. I would still love to hear that it does. I would love to be surprised on this. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon said that over the longer-term, the biggest threat to terrorists is not the power of missiles, it is the politics of inclusion. I would be proud if Canada honoured that work.

There are sections of both the Liberal and Conservative motions that we can support wholeheartedly, which is that yes, we express our appreciation for and our pride in members of the Canadian Forces who serve now and who have served in the past. We must absolutely do everything we can as a country to look after our veterans and to look after our men and women in service as well as we possibly can.

The Liberals got us into Afghanistan in 2004 with no endgame plan. Just like in Afghanistan, this mission feels like an open-ended military mission with no end in sight.

The Liberals are placing Canadian Forces deeper into a conflict zone, a mission with no end date and no definition of what success looks like.

While the Prime Minister's announcement left many unanswered questions, Chief of the Defence Staff General Vance was clear. He said that there will be more risk to Canadian soldiers under this mission. He added:

You put more people on the ground in a dangerous place, and it is riskier overall.

Canadian troops will be in a conflict zone in a high threat environment and if they do come under attack, they will have to fight back. Here at home, the high number of veterans receiving disability benefits for PTSD is a reminder of the need for support services for our military.

On Sunday this past week four provinces honoured soldiers and veterans from Afghanistan, veterans who came home and committed suicide. We all have these stories in our communities. I have one at home, a family that I love very much in Ladysmith. A Globe and Mail study reports there are at least 62 soldiers who have taken their own lives following the Canadian mission in Afghanistan. That is a national tragedy.

The government promised, and I am delighted that it has, to re-open the nine veterans service offices closed by the Conservatives. It should also commit to increase mental health services.

No matter what happens with the debate in this House or what happens with the mission, the government must honour its commitments to veterans and those in service. These people are working to keep us safe and we must keep them safe as well.

Canadians voted for change and the new government will need to deliver that change. I believe Canada would have more credibility if it was looking after affairs in its own backyard, signing the Arms Trade Treaty, supporting de-radicalization efforts at home, and looking after our veterans as well as we possibly can.

I look forward to Canada cleaning up its act at home and restoring our reputation as a nation of peace and ethics.

[Canada's Contribution to the Effort to Combat ISIL, February 22nd, 2016]

Madam Speaker, two pieces of the war on ISIS that a lot of us feel would be helpful would be to stem the flow of fighters going overseas by focusing on deradicalization efforts here at home and slowing the flow of money and arms, which intensify the conflict overseas. That, for the government, means acceding to the UN Arms Trade Treaty.

Can the member please describe how those two pieces would fit into the comprehensive plan that her government describes?

[Canada's Contribution to the Effort to Combat ISIL, February 22nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, although the UN Security Council has passed three resolutions on Iraq, none of them actually authorized the military mission.

The Security Council, though, is requiring action to prevent the flow of funds to foreign fighters and to suppress the financing of armaments in terrorist organizations.

The Arms Trade Treaty would provide such a block. It would regulate the flow of weapons across international borders, and if implemented on a global scale, it has the potential to starve the world's most brutal regimes of access to money for these insurgent and terrorist fights.

The Arms Trade Treaty came into effect more than a year ago, yet Canada is the only NATO country that still has not signed and committed to its principles. The new Prime Minister has indicated that the government will sign the UN Arms Trade Treaty, which we will celebrate in this corner of the House when it happens.

I ask the minister if the government has taken that action, and if not, why the delay?

[Canada's Contribution to the Effort to Combat ISIL, February 22nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, when the Conservatives were the government and approved this mission in the first place, they did not allocate any incremental funding to support the mission and that had impact. The forces had to find resources internally, and that impacted front-line workers and the navy.

Why was this mission not properly funded in the first place when the Conservatives originally committed our country to the mission?