Debates of March 24th, 1999

Shipbuilding Industry

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, in 1991-92 the current Prime Minister and the current industry minister were in opposition chastising the then Conservative government over the lack of an industrial strategy for a shipbuilding policy. After six years in government, the industry minister has failed on all counts to deliver an industrial strategy for a shipbuilding policy. What is worse, he absolutely refuses to meet with the marine workers federation and other interested groups to develop a strategy.

Will the Minister of Industry commit today to meet with the marine workers federation to sit down and discuss their concerns over the future of shipbuilding?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that there have been over the last couple of years, in fact as recently as 1998, additional improvements to the measures that are available to assist shipbuilders. The Export Development Corporation has enhanced the benefits which it provides. In addition, we continue to have favourable tariff rules as well as rapid depreciation for ships that are built in Canada under the Income Tax Act.

However, in response to a request from the shipowners' association, it was my intention to meet with them—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Compton—Stanstead.

Building Contracts

[David Price, Progressive Conservative, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has intervened in a situation involving one of his former properties and a person with a police record who did not reveal this when asked. He later met with, and provided support to, an individual who misused close to $1 million and is now under criminal investigation.

It is not a matter of determining whether the Prime Minister is a good MP, but rather whether there has been a misuse of taxpayers' money. I challenge the Prime Minister to give the auditor general the chance to clarify this matter.

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General of Canada is free to investigate anything he wishes. My department will be completely at his disposal if he so desires.

I can assure you, however, that this is absolutely unnecessary, because this matter, like the others, has been stringently subjected to extremely clear processes, that are transparent, wide open, and discussed in the House.

Presence In The Gallery

[The Speaker]

I draw the attention of hon. members to the presence in our gallery of the Hon. Zhang Zuoji, Minister of Labour and Social Security of the People's Republic of China.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

Points Of Order

[Jay Hill, Reform, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, during question period, in reply to a question from my colleague from Edmonton North, the Prime Minister referred to me by riding and he referred to my involvement in the transitional jobs fund request.

Since this request involved absolutely no conflict of interest on my part, and I have the relevant documents with me, I would be pleased to table them today.

[The Speaker]

Does the hon. member have the consent of the House to table the documents?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

Government Response To Petitions

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to five petitions.

Business Of The House

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, there have been consultations among all parties represented in the House, and I believe that if you were to seek it you would find unanimous consent for the following motion, which has been circulated to my colleagues opposite. Therefore, I move:

That for each of the following items of business, at the specified times, all questions necessary for the disposal of specified stages shall be deemed to have been put and divisions requested and deferred to the end of consideration of Government Orders on Tuesday, April 13, 1999:

1. Second reading stage of Bill C-67, when debate concludes or at the end of the time provided for Government Orders on March 24, 1999, whichever is earlier;

2. Motion M-360, when debate concludes or after 45 minutes of debate, whichever is earlier.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Does the Government House Leader have the unanimous consent of the House to propose this motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker]

The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

(Motion agreed to)

Kosovo

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, thank you for recognizing me and let me at the outset indicate that I will be making a joint statement today with my colleague, the Minister of National Defence. Because the situation in Kosovo has such a shared responsibility we thought it would be appropriate for both of us to take the time available to give the House a full explanation of where we stand.

I believe it is proper to begin with an expression of some sadness and disappointment concerning the events that are taking place, as we speak, in Kosovo. We all regret the need to have to use force, but at the same time I want to make it clear that Canada is very determined to play a proper role in ensuring that we can help to right the wrongs that have taken place so tragically in that area over the last year or two.

The international community has been faced with a deteriorating situation where the government of that area has been denying the most basic rights to its people, using force to quell any form of dissidence, sending tanks and artillery to destroy villages, murdering innocent people and forcing thousands upon thousands of people from their homes.

For 10 years now, the world has witnessed the tragedy unfolding in the Balkans: first in Slovenia, then in Croatia and then in Bosnia. In the last year the same extreme violence against civilians from a targeted ethnic group has appeared in Kosovo.

The international community has spared no effort to encourage the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to find a peaceful arrangement with its Albanian Kosovar population.

As members of the House know, there have been many diplomatic missions sent to Belgrade. The security council, acting under chapter VII, adopted crucial resolutions identifying the threat to peace and security in the region. Council resolutions 1199 and 1203, and the following October agreements between the federal republic and NATO and the Organization for Security and Cooperation, imposed a clear legal obligation on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to respect a ceasefire, to protect civilians and to limit deployment of security forces in Kosovo.

We also participated, along with many other nations, in a verification mission created to monitor the ceasefire and to build confidence in that area.

Following that, the parties were convened at a negotiation conference in Rambouillet and were asked to give up their maximalist positions and accept an honourable compromise for peace.

The Kosovars at that conference demonstrated a degree of courage and vision by signing on to the agreement. It was only the President of Yugoslavia who refused to depart from his intransigent position.

Over the past year, I want to underline to the House that Canada has made every effort to push for active engagement of the security council on this issue. I have instructed Canadian diplomats to urge the council to act in accordance with its mandate. As council president in February, our ambassador chaired many sessions dealing with the situation and crisis in Kosovo.

We have supported the peace negotiations and we have been an active participant in the OSCE efforts, at one point having close to 68 Canadians as part of the verification mission.

In addition, in March and June 1998 I announced measures to prompt the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to resolve the Kosovo issue by imposing a degree of economic sanctions. We suspended EDC credits. We denied landing rights to airplanes. We had discussions on bilateral agreements on certain economic programs. We placed a ban on investments in Serbia and a freeze on the assets of the Serbian and FRY governments in Canada.

I also want to point out that the Minister for International Cooperation was very active in providing humanitarian efforts. Close to over $3.8 million have been given to UNICEF, to the High Commissioner of Refugees, the Red Cross, CARE Canada and the World Food Program to help the humanitarian suffering in that particular area.

Diplomacy and civil effort have been given every possible effort and every chance to succeed, but to no avail. The looming humanitarian disaster caused by President Milosevic's unwillingness to come to any kind of accommodation to protect his own people leaves us with very few options. Every day the situation has grown worse and more and more civilians suffer.

It has been estimated that, as I speak today, over 450,000 Kosovars have been displaced from their homes. Since last week it is estimated that in that week alone 25,000 people were displaced. We have no way of counting the number of people who have been forced to experience the worst indignities, in some cases the loss of their lives, their precious possessions and their homes.

As long as it remains unresolved, as long as we do not find the willingness to come to a solution, the conflict in Kosovo threatens to precipitate a humanitarian disaster and destabilize the entire region.

The time has come to act and Canada is ready to play its part. As the Minister of National Defence said in question period today, already there are CF-18s of the Canadian Armed Forces participating in air actions. He will explain in much more detail the exact nature of our commitments in the military area.

I want to explain to the House that NATO's foremost objective is to avert a humanitarian crisis by enforcing compliance by the federal republic with the obligations which it has undertaken to respect, including respect for a ceasefire an end to violence against civilians, full observance of the limits of force and police action in that area and trying to bring again to the table Milosevic and his government to come together to finally sign an effective peace agreement that will provide full protection to civilians in that area.

I also want to point out that while we have had to take this action, we do so knowing the full consequence that it carries. We debated this in the House of Commons three weeks ago when all members had an opportunity to participate.

I also want to say that we have acted to ensure the safety of Canadians.

All members of the verification mission of the OSE, including the 68 Canadians I mentioned, have now safely left the area, as well as the Canadian staff at the embassy in Belgrade. We have advised Canadians to defer all travel to the area and we have given proper advisory notice to any Canadians contained within that country.

Humanitarian considerations are the main impulse for our action. We cannot stand by while an entire population is displaced, people are killed, villages are burned and people are denied their rights because of their ethnic background.

We remain very concerned about potential atrocities. Those responsible for any action against civilians should be aware that they will be held accountable.

I want everybody in the House to understand that one of the primary objectives of Canada in pursuing things like the international accord, supporting the work of the tribunal in The Hague, is to make sure that someday, somewhere and somehow Mr. Milosevic and his cohorts will be held accountable for their actions. Make no mistake about that.

Canada wants a world where rights are respected, where peaceful solutions to regional conflicts are negotiated, where war criminals do not act with impunity, a world free of land mines. We want to consolidate a multilateral international system, which was created to make the world a better place, and institutions such as the United Nations, the OSCE and NATO.

Our actions today in Kosovo are guided by these humanitarian concerns, a clear defence of these goals and real representation of the interest of Canadians to make sure that the rule of law and the safety of civilians are preserved and protected around the world.

I close my remarks by saying that all our prayers go with the brave members of our armed forces who are now carrying out Canada's mission in this regard.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Does the Chair understand that the statement by ministers will be considered one statement given by two ministers? Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, today our Canadian forces are taking part in NATO air operations over the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

We have said all along, as the Minister of Foreign Affairs has reiterated today, that we wanted a negotiated settlement to end the crisis in Kosovo, to end the human tragedy. Unfortunately efforts to achieve a peaceful political solution have failed to this point.

Continued Serbian aggression presents a challenge, to NATO's resolve, and the time has come for military action. We are not taking this step lightly but, as the Prime Minister said last night, inaction in the face of oppression only invites further aggression.

The aim of NATO's military action is clear: to prevent further violence by the Yugoslav security forces in Kosovo and to avert a large scale humanitarian disaster. To this end, Canadian forces are working alongside and in partnership with the forces of our NATO allies.

Make no mistake. NATO has assembled a powerful force, one that is fully capable of meeting its military objectives.

Canada has roughly 130 Canadian forces personnel and 6 CF-18 fighter aircraft stationed in Aviano, Italy. All our CF-18s are equipped with air to air missiles and precision guided munitions for a ground attack role.

Our air task force is well equipped and well prepared. Our people have been well trained for the role that they are taking on right now and in the days ahead. Our CF-18s have been in Aviano since June of last year. We also have Canadians with the NATO airborne early warning group in Germany. They are also taking part in the air operations over Kosovo.

This operation is not without risk. The Yugoslav military possesses a sophisticated air defence system, but we are satisfied that the NATO commanders have taken every step to reduce that risk as much as possible. There are escort aircraft, for example, when our jet fighters are out on missions.

I have confidence in our people. They have the equipment, the training, the professionalism and, I said earlier, the dedication to the cause and to their service to Canada. They have what is required to make a significant contribution to the alliance's efforts.

I am sure that all Canadians will join with us in the House in extending our support and encouragement to our CF members involved in this operation. Also, our support and thoughts are with their families in Canada. We wish them a safe return.

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Foreign Affairs has given a detailed overview of the situation in Kosovo. We have been provided with an explanation of Canadian policy toward the conflict.

We have seen much evidence over the last few weeks and months about the issue. I do not believe I need to repeat most of that. Indeed we agree that there is an international crisis in Kosovo. As I said earlier today, we support our involvement in that crisis.

As well, the tragedy of Yugoslavia and Kosovo as it has unfolded lends itself to our stopping a moment and looking at the crisis that war creates. The many comments that have been made and the reasons for intervention allow us to support this, but I do not think it should be a blind support. I want to state very clearly that I believe I am as patriotic as anyone in this country. I am here because I believe in this country. I think, though, that we need to stop for a moment and ask a few other questions about our intervention in Kosovo and what it might mean.

Let me very briefly address those points. As the days and the bombings unfold, we will probably have to evaluate just how long this sort of action can be sustained. The first question is what if Mr. Milosevic does not give in to this bombing. Obviously the reason for the bombing is that he will see the light and say he will come to the table and stop what he has been doing in Kosovo. That will be good for us and for the Serbian people, and that will certainly be good for the Kosovars.

We should remember, however, that the Serbs have a long history of war and of fighting anything they disagree with. They are not Iraqis. They are quite different in how they might respond. History tells us that. We have to ask what will happen if, at the week's end, bombings have not brought the reaction we want. What will happen next?

My second question concerns the degree to which Canada will be involved in further NATO missions in Kosovo. The House has never freely debated what would happen if we had to send in ground troops in an escalation of this event. We have already made a commitment to provide 700 or more troops to a NATO led peace monitoring mission in Kosovo should that become necessary, and we hope of course that it does.

Will this engagement go further than that? If it does go further than that and we are asked to send combat forces on a ground invasion, will we come back to this House to discuss that issue? I believe it is our job here to ask that question and to receive assurances that it will happen. I am concerned for the safety of our men and women in the Canadian forces, as all of us are. We need to ask ourselves if the armed forces are equipped to handle a sustained attack in a situation like that. No one doubts the courage of our men and women in uniform, but we do have to question whether they are prepared for what they might face in that invasion.

We also have to ask about the role of parliament in this whole issue. This is the House of Commons. This is the place where elected representatives should take this issue very seriously. We are talking about the sons and daughters of many of our constituents. The Commons must be consulted before this country undertakes any further serious foreign affairs action in this event.

I do not believe that the debates on Kosovo that took place in November and February dealt with a future escalation. It is not satisfactory to simply have a statement and to have the sort of debate that we have had.

As we and our NATO allies attack Yugoslavia, we are now at war. Some might call it peace enforcement. Others assert that it is simply forceful diplomacy. Let us not mince words. We are at war, and while we find that word distasteful, I believe that is the word we need to use. This is the reality of the international system. Military force is required to deter and punish aggression or to alleviate human suffering. The rhetoric of soft power cannot hide these simple facts.

I want to express my hope for a speedy resolution to this crisis and to extend all of our prayers to the men and women of the Canadian forces. May they all return safely.

[René Laurin, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak about NATO's imminent intervention in the former Yugoslavia.

Yesterday, the secretary general of the Atlantic alliance, Javier Solana, gave the go-ahead for NATO bombing, after one last attempt by American envoy Richard Holbrooke to negotiate an agreement with Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic. The Serbian leader has categorically refused to sign the Rambouillet accord, which would have resulted in a ceasefire in Kosovo.

This peace accord was negotiated in a suburb of Paris under the supervision of the contact group for the former Yugoslavia, a group made up of the United States, Russia, France, the United Kingdom, Italy and Germany. Only the Kosovar separatists signed. The accord would have given them substantial autonomy for a three year transition. The peace plan also would have allowed the deployment of 26,000 NATO troops in Kosovo to ensure enforcement. This is the main stumbling block for Serbian President Milosevic. Even faced with imminent allied air strikes, he repeated on Serbian television only a few hours ago his firm opposition to what he considers to be occupation of Serbian territory by foreign military forces.

It must be kept in mind that from the onset of the conflict between the Yugoslav forces and the Albanian separatists more than a year ago now some 2,000 people have been killed and more than 200,000 people made refugees. For 10 months the international community has tried every possible approach to end the war and repression in Kosovo. Kosovo has not respected UN security council resolutions 1199 and 1203, or last October's agreements between the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe, NATO and the former Yugoslavia. Belgrade has not complied with its obligations to limit the deployment of its forces in Kosovo, protect the population and bring about a ceasefire.

It must be kept in mind that Yugoslavia has, moreover, been involved in bloody conflict for 10 years. There was Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Slovenia, and now Kosovo. Faced with this intolerable situation in which defenceless civilian populations are being fired at by the ex-Yugoslav army, the international community cannot remain indifferent. The international community will lose all credibility if it does not act immediately. Otherwise, it will find itself encouraging the various abuses being committed by the Serbian government.

In order to protect the civilian population of Kosovo, it seems that the armed solution is the last plausible option. It is unfortunate that it has to be contemplated and supported, but the situation as it stands renders it necessary.

That said, we understand and support Canada's desire to act with NATO forces to help the civilians of Kosovo. However, the minister did not tell us what would happen should the forces of the former Yugoslavia, with President Milosevic at their head, refuse to give in to NATO.

Indeed, what will happen if the NATO air strikes do not make Yugoslavia bend? What will happen if the conflict drags on? What are the long term objectives of the alliance and Canada in this conflict?

The Minister of Foreign Affairs' speech did not provide answers to this question. However, the hostilities with the former Yugoslavia are real. While we know when the adventure begins, who can claim to know when and how it will all end? Obviously, this is all the more true if the Serbs feel they have nothing to lose.

In closing, the people of Quebec and Canada are entitled to know whether Canada will become more involved in this conflict should it continue. What will Canada contribute in terms of humanitarian aid to the thousands of civilians who are in need and obliged to leave their homes?

In this regard, I invite the minister and his government to inform this House of the latest developments in the former Yugoslavia and to hold here a debate on possible changes in the nature of Canada's involvement in the former Yugoslavia.

[Svend Robinson, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Mr. Speaker, last October members of the House debated the serious humanitarian crisis that was unfolding in Kosovo. At that time my colleague, the member for Halifax West, the New Democrat defence critic, and I rose in the House to say that there are times when the global community must respond to serious human rights violations, not just with words but with action. I profoundly regret to say that we have now reached that point of humanitarian tragedy.

It is clear that diplomatic attempts at a negotiated settlement to the Kosova crisis have failed. The Serbian government has refused to sign a peace agreement that would provide Kosovo with autonomy within the Yugoslav federation, a plebiscite in three years on the future status of Kosovars and the presence of a NATO peacekeeping force in Kosovo. The Albanian Kosovars have signed and accepted this settlement.

The present situation in Kosovo is indeed unacceptable. We see villages in flames and refugees fleeing in terror. Serbian offences against the Albanian Kosovars continue as we speak. More than 40,000 Serb security forces are poised in and around Kosovo, with additional units on the way. In January the bodies of almost 40 ethnic Albanians were found at the scene of fighting at Raca in southern Kosovo in what appears to have been a mass execution.

The last time this type of ethnic violence erupted in the region was in Bosnia in the early 1990s. It took three years and 200,000 deaths and too many warnings before the west finally took action in August 1995. It was not unfortunately the United Nations at that time, it was NATO.

I visited Vukovar in Croatia and saw firsthand the terrible effects of Serb aggression against Croatia and its people there. I have often wondered since then if the international community had acted sooner in these conflicts a great number of civilian casualties could indeed have been prevented.

Since the horrors of World War II, the international community has spent many years trying to develop covenants and treaties that focus on respect for international human rights. Yet too often, while we have these human rights norms, the international community has failed miserably in enforcing them. It has only been recently that we have begun the difficult process of developing mechanisms to enforce international human rights. I note that the creation of the international criminal court, a creation in which Canada played an important role, is a step in the right direction to ensuring that dictators and tyrants will face prosecution for the crimes they commit while in office. Yet the Yugoslav government, the Milosevic government, has shamefully refused to allow Judge Louise Arbour to enter Kosovo to investigate crimes against humanity there.

On the subject of crimes against humanity, I note today how pleased my colleagues in the New Democratic Party and I are at the decision of the House of Lords to allow for the extradition of former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet to Spain to stand trial for crimes against humanity. We urge the Government of Canada to seek his extradition as well. I know there is a case of a Canadian nun who is seeking that extradition and others, and we appeal to our government to take that action.

The possible NATO air strikes against the Serbian government are unprecedented. It will be the first time since the alliance was founded 50 years ago next month that NATO has prepared to go into action collectively against a sovereign state. Certainly we in the New Democratic Party have not reached the decision to support this military action without much anguish and much soul searching. Our party has a long and honourable tradition of opposing NATO's military structure and doctrine, of calling for Canadian withdrawal from NATO and of strengthening the United Nations and regional security mechanisms. This is particularly the case when NATO continues to cling to a neanderthal cold war doctrine of first use of nuclear weapons.

The type of political will that has led to the decision for military action in Serbia has certainly been lacking in other parts of the world. We need only look at the humanitarian crisis in Africa, stretching from the Horn to Angola, to see these kinds of inconsistencies.

The minister in his statement to the House said: “We cannot stand by while an entire population is displaced, people are killed, villages are burned and looted, and a population is denied its basic rights because it does not belong to the `right' ethnic group and we remain very concerned about potential atrocities”.

Precisely those conditions apply in the NATO ally of Turkey with respect to the Kurdish minority and yet the Government of Canada and the world stand by. Similar conditions apply in East Timor and elsewhere. To those who say there is a double standard, I say they are right and certainly we opposed Washington's unilateral bombing of Khartoum, of Afghanistan and of Iraq. To point out these inconsistencies and to suggest that NATO is not the most desirable international institution to enforce human security is at the end not enough. We are left with the humanitarian crisis in Kosovo and the question of what Canada's response and what the global community's response should be.

Slobodan Milosevic has systematically refused to engage in dialogue and compromise. He has continued his reign of terror in Kosovo against ethnic Albanians.

The New Democratic Party supports military action against selected Serbian military targets to address the humanitarian crisis facing Albanian Kosovars. Certainly there are significant risks in taking this military action, risks to the lives of Canadian service people and to the lives of civilians in Yugoslavia and in Kosovo itself.

I certainly want at this time to indicate on behalf of my New Democrat colleagues that our thoughts are with Canadian forces personnel stationed in Italy and their families in Canada, particularly those who are in the air at this time in the four CF-18s. They deserve the support of all members of the House. As well we want to take this opportunity to salute the 63 brave Canadians who took part in the OSCE Kosovo verification mission and did their part to ensure compliance with UN resolutions for peace in the region.

Certainly any military action has to be taken with the greatest possible care for the lives of civilians and of those in the armed forces. We must do everything in our power to bring about, even at this late stage, a peaceful settlement with Milosevic.

I recognize there are those who approach international security challenges from a pacifist position of opposing the use of force in all circumstances. A former leader of my party, J. S. Woodsworth, took that position. These are strong, deeply held views and they must be respected.

As well, I understand and frankly I share many of the concerns of groups like the Canadian Peace Alliance, Veterans Against Nuclear Arms and End the Arms Race which oppose the use of force in this situation.

They have raised legitimate questions, legitimate concerns that such strikes would be a violation of state sovereignty and that the UN security council should be the only body to authorize such use of force. We in the New Democratic Party have recognized that without reform of the veto powers, of the permanent members of the security council, the UN is too often paralysed in an action.

Concerns have been raised as well that the state of humanitarian objectives cannot be reached by military means. There are valid concerns of escalating the conflict in a region that is already historically a powder keg, that this may draw in Albania and Montenegro. What next? Will Milosevic simply use this as a means of consolidating his support for standing up to the international community?

We in the New Democratic Party accept that the use of military force as a last resort is sometimes necessary in grave humanitarian crises when all efforts at diplomatic settlement have failed, and we believe this meets that test.

As Canada is prepared to back up our concern for human security with military action, we must be equally prepared to provide the necessary financial and personnel resources for humanitarian relief as a result of the conflict. This action will certainly create a large refugee crisis, and Canada should play a very generous and constructive role in addressing the needs of the refugees.

The minister underlined in his comments earlier the truth that Canada wants a world in which human rights are respected. May this be a turning point for the international community to accept that our present international institutions are incapable, sadly, of ensuring those human rights for all. We must all come together and reform these institutions to put peace and respect for human rights at the forefront of relationships between people and relationships between nations.

[David Price, Progressive Conservative, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada and I want to see an end to the humanitarian tragedy taking place in Yugoslavia in Kosovo.

I also want to make it clear that we support our soldiers, sailors and air crew who have now been placed in harm's way and also those of our allies.

Canada and the NATO alliance made up of sovereign states have just gone to war with a sovereign state, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, over a civil war with the ethnic Albanians of Kosovo.

We have done this without a declaration of war and without the support of the United Nations. The minister quotes security council resolutions 1199 and 1203, but they do not specifically give NATO the right to use military force against Yugoslavia. He might want to brush up on his international law and his long lost text of realpolitik. We as a country and an alliance may have broken the codes of international law.

In Bosnia in 1995 NATO was directed by the United Nations to keep the peace and to intervene in a bloody civil war, but NATO is now engaged in an offensive military operation outside its own territory. We are quickly subscribing to the view of NATO as a global policeman. Let there be no mistake. We have just launched an air attack with our allies on a sovereign state.

The Canadian government has said by its actions that the United Nations and the soft power are not up to the task of ensuring global peace and security. We have just heard the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Soft Power, state that the use of force is the ultimate guarantee of peace and security. I hope this act of violence will not tarnish his Nobel peace prize, the one he wants so bad.

Let us leave the minister of war or foreign affairs for the moment and the fact that we may be violating international law. A minister of the crown just stood in the House and made a statement as the attack is going on. After the first weapons have impacted on our opponent's territory, the saddest thing for Canadians and the parliamentary process is that this country has slipped into war without briefing its people through parliament and through meaningful debate.

It is very sad indeed to see what little regard the government has for the principles of parliamentary democracy and the House. It obviously did not support the Somalia inquiry recommendations for a vigilant parliament and that is very upsetting to Canadians.

In conclusion, parliamentarians deserve honest and open answers from this government of self-proclaimed transparency and accountability, from its ministers, and we must hear from the chief of defence staff and his commanders immediately. Let us have a chance to ask the real questions that need to be asked on behalf of Canadians.

I also want to thank the Minister of National Defence for at least keeping the defence critics up to date on the military action that was taking place.