Afghanistan Committee on March 25th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much. I appreciate your coming today.

I would encourage you, if you would like to add more to your questions--if you feel you would have, could have, should have said a little extra--please feel free to submit a written answer. I know Mr. Harris had some good questions on literacy and some of CIDA's work and we would look forward to receiving that information.

Just for my own benefit, I went to the website of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime. We did give $25 million to that, and if I could get a little more information for the committee on the work they do, and specifically what Canada has contributed to this before--is it part of a bigger package and there were portions that went to this particular area--we would certainly appreciate that.

We will suspend, and I would encourage you all to stay for committee business. The first five or ten minutes will be public and we'll deal with Mr. Hawn's motion, and then we'll go in camera for some business as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We'll call this meeting back to order. I know it's Thursday and others have events and commitments for a little later on, so we will move right into committee business.

We are going back to the motion that Mr. Hawn brought forward.

Mr. Hawn, I will give you the opportunity to very quickly speak to that motion.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

I will, Mr. Chair. Thank you for that.

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

On a point of order, do we go in camera for this?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We will go in camera later, when we deal with different budgets for witnesses and other things.

Mr. Hawn.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We've been through this before, of course. I want to bring it back to clarify, because it got a little off track. Do you want me to read the motion again?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

I think it's before them.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Everybody has it.

The purpose behind the motion is that we think we should be spending the majority of our efforts on the Canadian withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2011--leading up to it, what happens then, what happens after, Canada's continuing efforts, and so on.

We recognize that there is not agreement on that, but the motion stands. We've all seen the motion a number of times now, so I'll leave it to our colleagues across the way to address.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Wilfert, I see you have an amendment to this.

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Yes. I think we're all familiar with my amendment, Mr. Chairman. It speaks for itself. The words “begin without delay to” are to be deleted and replaced with the words “on condition that it first complete its study on the transfer of Afghan detainees”.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

I do not accept that as a friendly amendment. They're free to propose it, but in our view that would gut the purpose of the motion. We've been around this, so we don't need to belabour that.

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Chairman, as a point of clarification, notwithstanding my amendment, we are also clear that as we had today an update on the Afghan mission, we have indicated that because of other considerations obviously there may be another briefing. We understand that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Wilfert, you've made a condition in there. How long do you foresee this going? Is this something to kill Mr. Hawn's motion by simply saying that this will be a two-year study on detainees? Do you see this going until Christmas, or summer?

I know at one point your amendment was only to drop the words “begin without delay” so that the motion would read “that the committee investigate and study Canada's preparation”. It seems to me that again you've added something else into it.

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

No, that was there before. We've agreed to that, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

So then--

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

In answer to your direct question, Mr. Chairman, I'm quite happy to have the detainee issue wrapped up as expeditiously as possible. We've asked, of course, for a public inquiry. We haven't received that. I've been on the record indicating I'm very happy to look at what Mr. Hawn has proposed in terms of post-2011. I think that it's very important.

But we have some very significant issues on this side that we want dealt with. Hopefully there will be a resolution on this soon. As to how long it will take, Mr. Chairman, I'm not a clairvoyant. But I can tell you that I did indicate and prefaced my remarks by saying that we are not opposed to a briefing or so from officials. I think we talked about that in light of developments we may take later on.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Hawn is asking for a vote, but Mr. Harris is on the speakers list.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

We have a conundrum here. Mr. Hawn wants to begin this study without delay and his motion also says it's of immediate concern and primary importance.

Well, I can tell Mr. Hawn and the whole committee that as far as I'm concerned, as long as the government continues to prevent this committee from pursuing the study it's determined to undertake into Afghan detainees--which it had to do because the government refuses to hold a public inquiry--then we have to pursue it.

We had 2,500 documents tabled in the House today--still censored. We have an ongoing challenge in the House, which I hope will be resolved very soon by the Speaker, which may allow us to undertake the study. But if we get into that, there is no telling how long it's going to take or how quickly we can resolve it.

So I don't want to have a motion that somebody can wave around at any given time that says, “Hey, look, we've agreed this is of immediate concern and primary importance and we've agreed to study this.” But I do agree with Mr. Wilfert that we can, throughout the course of the next while, give consideration, as we have today, to the ongoing situation in Afghanistan.

We can leave it to the chair to interpret what the result of that motion is--

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Yes, I think as long as that's--

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

--with, I suppose, the opportunity of this committee, with the majority sitting on this side, to overrule you if we think you're doing the wrong thing.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

It sounds good. We do.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

And if you take that as a friendly overruling from time to time without treating it as a motion of non-confidence, then we'll be happy to carry on under your direction.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

I think we have an agreement, an understanding. Yes, we do.

Are we ready for the vote? Ms. Gallant, do you want to speak to it?

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

No. I think we can do it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

All right.

(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

Are we ready to entertain the vote on the amended motion?

Mr. Hawn.