Thank you.
I think we need to—I want to hear from the Minister of Public Safety and/or his officials about what Correctional Service Canada is doing in Afghanistan. To what extent were they asked to go and visit these prisoners, and what were the terms of reference? I'd like to know more about that. The minister has said that.
I don't think we have to go back to 2001, by any stretch. In his presentation, Mr. Ménard went far beyond what we're talking about here. We're not talking about whether we should be respecting the Geneva Convention or handing over prisoners. In my view, that is within the purview of another committee. We're asking—and that's the way I read the motion and the preamble—to take up the issue. I'd be agreeable to some wording changes to say that it's a preamble statement, and then to that end, invite the minister.
Maybe that's not clear enough, but I personally don't see any harm—In fact, I'm going to find out from the minister and the officials what they're doing in Afghanistan, to what extent they looked at these prisoners, and what they came up with. The minister has said things through the media and some things in the House, but they've been very brief. I think a very focused view of that—not the agreement, that's outside the scope of this committee.
But just what is Corrections Canada doing there? What did they see? What were they asked to see? Is this part of their overall mission there, or is it just an ancillary thing? I'd like to hear that. And what did they actually see? That's the way I read the motion, and I certainly would support that. If the wording needs to reflect that better, I'm certainly—I think if we had that, the chair would keep people on track.
There will be other committees looking at the whole question of the agreement and the Geneva Convention. That is outside the scope of this committee, in my judgment.