National Defence Committee on May 30th, 2006

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Yes. I might be corrected here, but my memory is that there are six of them there now. They initially had problems—I guess perhaps training problems and technical problems—which they seem to have overcome. They've been using them now on a very, very frequent basis. In fact, they've used them so much they have to bring most of them in now for some more thorough repair and maintenance. But now that they've been using them and finding out what their capabilities are, they've turned out to be pretty good drones.

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

I must compliment...the opportunity we had as parliamentarians to debate the extension of the mission in Afghanistan, something we didn't have as parliamentarians when the mission to deploy to Afghanistan first occurred.

You sat through the entire debate, listening to the valid concerns that were voiced on behalf of Canadians. Did you see anything or hear anything during that debate that would cause concern out of the perception that there was not public support for the mission in Afghanistan? Would there be any risk to our troops overseas about the perception that some Canadians don't support this mission?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

In everything in life there are at least two sides--there might be three sides--and there are legitimate positions on both sides. I think the key thing for the troops is the vote was successful, and in the military if you hit the target it doesn't matter whether you hit the bull's eye or just the edge, as long as you hit the target. From the military's point of view that was a hit, and they're content and quite happy to see the mission going to 2009.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

There is still a minute left. Does someone else wish to speak?

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

I have a question, Mr. Chair, and it goes to the spirit of the troops over there.

I've welcomed back most of the troops--the wounded who have come back to Edmonton--and I've certainly seen it. In your visits over there, what's your assessment, Minister, of the esprit de corps and fighting spirit of the folks?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

It's phenomenal, and I can tell you it's not only there. I've been visiting all the major bases here in Canada when Parliament's not in session. I'll talk about the army for the moment. The morale of the army is just fantastically high. In fact, the ones back here in Canada who are not lined up to go to Afghanistan want me to go and find them some action somewhere. I've told them, no, we're not going to find you any action. They're really pumped up. They're well trained and well equipped for the mission. With respect to those in Afghanistan, again, the enthusiasm was just fantastic. When I was visiting them there with the Prime Minister, how will I put it, we were just inspired by how good they are.

I've been out 12 years now, and I can tell you the standard of soldiers.... We may have trouble recruiting them, but when they're in, they're really good. The level of education, what they know, what they've been asked to do is just fantastic. If I switch to the air force and the navy, it's the same. As you just said, you visited an air base. Our military is tops in the world. Wherever they go, they're always respected for their professionalism.

I can't do any more than say that they're great.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

We're just right at 4:30. I'm afraid that in the rotation we've developed, the NDP doesn't come back up for quite a while, but if we finished five-minute rounds with the Bloc, then that would give a fairly fair division of our time.

Is that all right, Mr. Minister? Do you have five more minutes?

Mr. Bouchard, go ahead.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Minister, on November 15, 2005, you spoke in the House of Commons, and you asked a number of questions. One in particular attracted my attention. It was a question about an exit strategy in the event that the mission turned sour. As you are now the minister, I ask you the question. Is there an exit strategy and what is it, or, at the very least, under what circumstances should we consider withdrawing our troops from Afghanistan?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

We're committed to February 2009 and we certainly will see it through to February 2009. There's not any circumstance I can imagine that would divert us from that. All of NATO is committed to that period and beyond.

In 2009, or as we approach 2009, because somewhere in 2008 we have to make those decisions, as I said, based on our running assessment of what we're achieving over there, the government would decide whether to maintain a commitment at the current level, increase it, decrease it, or basically withdraw.

From my point of view, when we tell NATO we're going to be there until February 2009, that's like a contract. We've made a promise to a bunch of nations. For instance in our area, the British and the Dutch are there because we're there, and that's three nations with the Romanians working together in that area to try to bring security there. So we're there at least until February 2009. I don't have clairvoyance to know what's going on beyond 2009, but that's a decision point for us and it's a clear decision point.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Go ahead.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

I would now like to go on to the topic of anti-personnel mines. These mines are still preventing millions of farmers from working their land. Of course, there are children who play outside. Many deadly accidents occur, and every year, between 15,000 and 20,000 people are injured by these mines.

Have mines been used by our allies, and by which ones exactly?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

I'm going to answer my part for Canada, and then I'll ask the admiral here if he knows what the allies are doing.

We are not using any mines at all. From the Canadian point of view, we're not using any mines at all. I have no idea if the Afghanis or other forces are.

Do you know of anybody using mines on our side?

[RAdm Dan Murphy]

I don't know of anyone using mines on our side.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

I didn't want to give you the wrong answer, but my impression is that nobody in NATO—the U.S. or anybody—is using mines; that would just add to the problem we have. The Soviets were in there for so many years sowing minefields that it would just add to the problems.

But I certainly can speak for Canada: not one, not from us.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

You have a minute left.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Minister, I want to start by thanking you for having answered all of my questions.

The terrorist forces appear to be supplied by various sources. You said that they are using outdated and rudimentary weapons. We see that the Talibans are hurting our mission, they are even somewhat successful, since some of our soldiers have unfortunately died.

What is Canada doing to control the sources that are supplying the terrorist forces? What means are being used to prevent them from being constantly supplied by one source or another?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

It's part of a bigger problem than just Canada's. As I said, the Taliban and other bandit groups have access to all these old Soviet weapons, many of which have been accumulated and destroyed. But particularly in our area, the Pashtun tribe spreads across into Pakistan, and the Taliban, not exclusively but essentially, comes out of the Pashtun.

These tribal people move back and forth across the mountains. The Pakistan military has been trying to do the best they can. They have 80,000 soldiers in the mountains in the territories opposite Afghanistan trying to stop the flow back and forth. They haven't been totally successful; there is a flow back and forth.

In fact, sometimes when the activity increases in our area, it's because the Pakistanis have actually succeeded in closing the routes, and therefore the Taliban have to stay in. What they do in the winter time is move back into Pakistan to rest. One of our big challenges is to coordinate the efforts between Pakistan and Afghanistan to try to cut the flow of the Taliban and cut the flow of weapons. That's the bigger picture.

Because we as Canadians have a more limited responsibility, we don't get into that. That would be a larger NATO task.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Well, thank you, Mr. Minister. I appreciate your time and your comments.

You made a commitment, you and the people who are with you, to fill us in on a couple of points you weren't able to. I would appreciate your getting that information to the clerk for distribution.

We'll take a five-minute recess while the minister leaves.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Do we have a quorum? We do. Let's move forward.

We have a motion that's been brought to us. The mover is not at the meeting right at the moment. I understand from the clerk that this meets requirements to be dealt with at this meeting and we will deal with it.

Mr. Khan moves the motion and we've all had a copy of it circulated in both official languages. Is there any discussion on the motion?

Ms. Black.

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

I appreciate the spirit of the motion. However, I have a little problem with some of the language, and that is, I don't believe that we were forced to debate and I would like to amend the motion to say that we had only six hours of debate before voting on the extension of the said mission.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

All right. Have we got that recorded?

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

So it's “Whereas the House of Commons, with only six hours of debate, voted on the extension of said mission,” and then just the way it was written before.

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

Dawn, would it make more sense just to delete from “whereas” up to “be it moved”? It starts “Whereas the House of Commons was” and so on up to “of only one hour”. Just delete that whole part and then you've got, I think, the intent of your amendment.

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Sorry, you'd have to....