Afghanistan Committee on Feb. 14th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Okay.

Madam Damoff, please—

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Madam Findlay, do you have a point of order?

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Yes, I've been trying to make it for about 10 minutes, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

I'm so sorry. Go ahead, Ms. Findlay.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

I appreciate that it's difficult when some of us are in person and some by Zoom.

We voted as a committee on how this committee would proceed. Yes, of course the chair has some discretion, but we all agreed to this in routine motions at the very beginning of this committee. As Mr. Chong has said, there is a reason why, representative of our numbers in the House, some parties have more people on this committee than others and certain members are given more time than others to ask questions.

I've been on a lot of these committees in different forms, and when a second hour begins, you start again. That's always the way it's been. If the timing is such that not everyone gets time in the first round, that's just the way it is. It doesn't carry over to the next round. Sometimes Conservatives are left behind, sometimes Liberals, sometimes NDP and sometimes Bloc. That's just the way it goes, and that is the way, with respect, Mr. Chair, I think we should proceed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you.

I'll go to Madam Damoff and then Madam Kwan.

Please go ahead.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

First I want to apologize to our witnesses who are being very patient waiting through this.

My understanding is that you are starting again so that each party gets six minutes. Is that not correct, Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

We're going to leave it there today, and I can talk to you offline at some point in time.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Okay, but the routine motions are quite clear. You gave the time to Mr. Chong, but it was unfair to the Liberals, the NDP and the Bloc because then no one got time.

We can talk about the number of members in the House, but everybody got six minutes on the first round.

In every other committee I've been on since I was elected, the chair would then split the remaining time between all the parties when we need to cut it short, which you were trying to do.

I'm a little confused why this has become so contentious when it's been like this since I got elected in 2015, and people have always been quite respectful when the chair makes those decisions around time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you, Madam Damoff.

I've been very fair and generous with the time, but I'm going to go to Madam Kwan.

You have something to add.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Suffice to say, Mr. Chair, that I think the clerk has indicated to the committee that both procedures are correct. I think we should just leave it at that and move on. We have panellists. The more we talk about this, the less time we have to hear from them and to question them. I'd like for us to move on, please.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you kindly. I'm shortly going to call the meeting back to order.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Madam Zahid, if you have a point of order, then you can speak. I can't deny the point of order.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

I would like to read the routine motion so that everyone is clear and we don't have this issue again at our next meeting. The routine motions reads:

That witnesses be given five minutes to make their opening statement; that whenever possible, witnesses provide the committee with their opening statement 72 hours in advance; that at the discretion of the Chair, during the questioning of witnesses, there be allocated six minutes for the first questioner of each party as follows for the first round: Conservative Party Liberal Party Bloc Québécois New Democratic Party For the second and subsequent rounds of questioning, the order and time for questioning be as follows: Conservative Party, five minutes Liberal Party, five minutes Bloc Québécois, two and a half minutes New Democratic Party, two and a half minutes Conservative Party, five minutes Liberal Party, five minutes.

We had our first round. Based on the routine motion, members can split the time they have for their own party. This routine motion doesn't state that each member will have time. It is based on the party and based on the seats.

We had our first round. We were left with less time. We would not have been able to complete our second round, so usually—this is what I have seen since 2015—that time is allocated to all the parties based on their original time so that it is fair to everyone.

I totally understand that now when we start the second panel we will start with our first round, but in the first panel, Mr. Chong got five additional minutes, so that's not fair to the other parties. They didn't get their time. I just want to put it on the record so that we don't come up with this issue again next time.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you.

Mr. Sidhu, did you want to say something?

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Yes. I agree with my colleague, Chair. In every committee that I've been on, it's always proportionate to representation, and at the discretion of the chair.

I suggest we move on. I'm looking forward to hearing what witnesses have to say, but I hope this clarifies everything for the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you very much.

I'm going to call the meeting back to order and start with the second panel.

Madam Clerk, are all the witnesses here? Thank you.

I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of the new witnesses.

Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. When you are ready to speak, you can click on the microphone icon to activate your microphone.

I remind everyone that all comments should be addressed through the chair.

Members and witnesses may speak in the official language of their choice. Interpretation services are available for this meeting. You have the choice at the bottom of your screen of floor, English or French. Please choose whichever choice you want.

If interpretation is lost, please inform me immediately, and we will ensure that interpretation is properly restored before resuming the proceedings.

When speaking, please speak slowly and clearly. When you are not speaking, your microphone should be on mute.

On behalf of the committee members, I would like to welcome our witnesses and express our appreciation for all of you being with us today.

Please note that the witnesses have five minutes each for their opening remarks; that is per organization.

As individuals, we have with us, retired Major-General David Fraser. Also with us is retired Major-General Dean Milner.

From Veterans Transition Network we have Mr. Oliver Thorne, and also people to assist the Veterans Transition Network.

I welcome all of you. I will start with opening remarks from retired Major-General Fraser.

Please, go ahead for five minutes.

[Major-General, Retired) David Fraser (Major General (Retired), Afghan Strategic Evacuation Team, As an Individual]

Mr. Chair, ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much for the opportunity to talk to you this evening.

I am retired Major-General Fraser. I spent 32 years in the Canadian Armed Forces and participated in numerous missions, including as commander, regional command south under the U.S.-led coalition Operation Enduring Freedom, and the NATO coalition ISAF in 2006.

Before I go on, can everyone hear me? Am I coming across? I would hate to do this twice.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Excellent.

[MGen (Ret'd) David Fraser]

Throughout my experience, operating in any mission was difficult because of a number of factors. The security threat is always paramount; however, it is compounded by language and culture. Afghanistan was one of the most complex missions Canada has ever engaged in. Nowhere were we more dependent on interpreters and cultural advisers than we were in Afghanistan.

I only have to remind you about what is going on in Ukraine today in terms of the need we have to be able to communicate and the need for interpreters.

Afghanistan is a complex society with many different ethnic groups and tribes. Add to that the regional players, none of whom have English as their first language. Canada went into Afghanistan to fight an insurgency and rebuild a nation to meet Afghan desires. Doing so necessitated the use of interpreters to communicate both what the Afghans wanted and what we could do for them. Dialogue was key over what most people saw on their TV screens, which was an inordinate amount of combat. This combat was, tragically, the desire of the Taliban who wanted to overthrow the democratically elected Afghan leadership.

I want to emphasize that over and above having the language challenge, which we had at my level right down to the soldier level, was trying to understand a culture, which took up most of our time. As commander of a nine-nation coalition, I needed an interpreter, but more importantly I needed cultural advisers who could tell me more than just which words were being spoken.

Commanders at all levels and soldiers on the ground needed to be nuanced in the culture, which is very different from what we have here in Canada. Offending somebody was easily done, and the damage took a long time to repair. Without these interpreters and cultural advisers, Canada simply could not have done what we did. We did much, but that is not the purpose of the commentary today.

Canada's contribution, which was significant, could not have been effective without these people. While we started with interpreters, the groups of affected Afghans goes beyond this group. We provided opportunities that you and I take for granted in this nation: education, freedom of elections, and freedom of who can access them. Women, LGBTQ people and ethnic groups, to name just a few, gained new liberties and freedoms. We assisted Afghans to build a more inclusive society. Twenty years after the international community involved itself, the Taliban cannot do what they did in 1999, which is making it harder for them to turn the clock back. This is a result of our work with Afghans. We provided them with hope; we created a moral contract with them about what it means to be free, and in their hour of need, we as Canadians need to stand by them.

In July, two other generals, Dean Milner and Denis Thompson saw the potential for what could happen. We penned a letter to the implicated ministers asking them to create a pipeline to evacuate vulnerable Afghans. I hope that you've had time to talk to Major-General Denis Thompson, in addition to Dean and me, because he has a lot to say on this subject.

Tragically, our assessment in that letter came true, and today there is a humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan as the Taliban regime has taken it over. As a consequence of these actions, we need to provide a pathway out of that country for these adversely affected people and their families.

When we started, we were tracking just over 100 interpreters. Once we got going and once we joined forces with Aman Lara, which means “sheltered path” in Pashto, as well as journalists for human rights, building markets, the Afghan interpreters and the Veterans Transition Network, our numbers grew.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Mr. Fraser—

[MGen (Ret'd) David Fraser]

Please, Mr. Chair, if I could, I would like to continue. I've listened to you people talk for this long, and I will ask if you can just allow me as a witness to provide you the information that this committee has asked me and my fellow people to give you so that we can inform Canadians about a humanitarian crisis that this country is not picking up and lifting its weight on.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Mr. Fraser, you had five minutes. We did not take your time. You will have time to say things when you are asked questions, and you can submit in writing.

Mr. Fraser, thank you very much for your time. I'm going to go to our next witness, Mr. Milner, for five minutes.

Go ahead, please.

We can't hear you, Mr. Milner. It seems that there is some technical difficulty.