Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Bloc Quebecois, I am pleased to discuss the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, whose future is currently being decided in New York. The NPT is the most important international treaty on arms control.
Last fall, the Bloc Quebecois had the opportunity to state its position on the issue of nuclear disarmament, when the joint committee conducted its review of Canada's defence policy. The emergence of new confirmed and unconfirmed nuclear powers makes the issue of nuclear disarmament more complex than ever.
This is why the Bloc Quebecois strongly supports the indefinite and unconditional extension of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. We hope that its very wide membership will be extended even more. While more than 160 nations have ratified the treaty so far, some countries which could conceivably develop such mass destruction weapons refuse to sign the treaty, thus jeopardizing the current foundations of international peace. It is important to ensure the continuity of the treaty and to improve its efficiency.
It is possible to convince countries to do without nuclear weapons. In the past, at least four countries, namely Canada, South Africa, Brazil, and Argentina, made efforts to that end. Would it not be more efficient, and a lot more attractive for the world, to work on a multilateral agreement to eliminate such weapons, as was recently done for chemical weapons?
While the Secretary of State, Asia-Pacific, was raving about the NPT and Canada, which was one of the first two signatories to that treaty, I could not help but wonder about this government's inconsistency in the conduct of its foreign affairs.
It is a well known fact that the Canadian government is now only interested in its own commercial interests, at the expense of human rights, democracy, as well as international security.
Indeed, how can the government explain the fact that it is about to authorize and to finance, to the tune of $2 billion, the sale of CANDU nuclear reactors to China? The Bloc Quebecois feels that the government should at least demand that China comply with the NPT, rather than violate the moratorium on testing agreed to by other nuclear nations.
The sale of these reactors could undermine the international community's efforts to end nuclear proliferation.
The Canadian government's behaviour is not any better, nor any more consistent, as regards the sale of CF-5 fighter bombers to Turkey. We know that Turkey is pursuing a military offensive in northern Iraq, against Kurds. We repeatedly, but vainly, asked the government to stop negotiating that sale with Turkey.
I think you will all agree that this government is not very consistent in the conduct of its foreign affairs.
The fact that it now supports the indefinite and unconditional extension of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty gives us some hope. But we urge the government to show more consistency. For example, Canada could adopt a much stricter policy on co-operation in the nuclear sector. As written, the present non-proliferation policy allows nuclear exports to non-treaty countries, as long as these countries promise not to use any material to produce nuclear weapons. There must be a stricter policy in this area, if Canada wants to be consistent with its interpretation of the nuclear threat and the outbreak of military conflicts all over the world.
Canada could also innovate by suggesting strategies consistent with its interest in international peace. In this regard, for example, concrete measures could be taken. One, concerning the export of fissile materials on which Canada has a say, notably because of its radioactive material resources and its nuclear technology expertise.
Two, Canada should submit to the international court a judicial analysis establishing the illegality of nuclear arms.
