Debates of Oct. 15th, 2001

Kofi Annan

[Sarkis Assadourian, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to join me today in congratulating UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan who was awarded the Nobel peace prize last week.

The UN is at the forefront of the international struggle for peace, security and freedom. This award recognizes the personal and professional commitment of Kofi Annan to the shared values of human dignity and global security.

The world is facing many challenges right now that will test the fabric of our global society. This award recognizes the achievements of the United Nations in facilitating resolutions to conflicts around the world and striving toward a better quality of life for all.

I congratulate the international community for persevering in the struggle of ever changing issues that confront us. I congratulate Kofi Annan and all Canadians whose work with the UN all over the world makes such a difference for all mankind.

Citizenship Week

[Inky Mark, Canadian Alliance, Dauphin—Swan River, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to acknowledge that October 15 through October 21 is Citizenship Week in Canada. The theme this year is “Canada: We All Belong”.

This year the theme has particular importance. The terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11 has brought with them a fear for those of Arab descent. I was shocked and dismayed to read of a 15 year old boy in Ottawa who was severely beaten shortly after the attack, simply because he was Arab.

I heard the stories of Muslim women who were fearful of leaving their homes and letting their children play in their own yards because they had been harassed.

Canada is a tolerant nation and tolerance of all races needs to be maintained and promoted at every turn. I hope people throughout Canada will take the time during Citizenship Week to get to know their neighbours' cultures and customs. Knowledge is a great tool in dispelling the fears of what we know little about.

Arctic Winter Games

[Nancy Karetak-Lindell, Liberal, Nunavut, NU]

Mr. Speaker, this coming Friday the city of Iqaluit will celebrate the grand opening of the Arctic winter games complex. The building of this important complex in Iqaluit is a direct result of co-operation between the city of Iqaluit and the territorial and federal government.

A very significant aspect of the completion of this important complex is the contribution of volunteers. The invaluable donation of material and hard work from volunteers made all the difference.

The Arctic winter games will take place in Iqaluit in March 2002. This new complex will be at the heart of many of the activities at that time. However the arena and the youth centre will be at the heart of Iqaluit for years to come.

I look forward to the grand opening on Friday and touring the facility. I am proud of the contribution of the Government of Canada and extend congratulations to all involved.

Veterans Affairs

[Roy H. Bailey, Canadian Alliance, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased the claim by Canada's merchant navy vets has been largely resolved. However I believe that this file cannot be closed without addressing the concerns of some 300 merchant navy vets or their widows who applied too late for benefits.

The government was able to get the message out to the merchant navy vets on how to apply. Yet there were a few vets or their widows who for one reason or another did not find out about the government payout until it was too late. Many of them are widows and I might say they were not fully informed of their husbands' eligibility.

Since there are such few cases remaining the government should for compassionate reasons open the final 300 files to determine their eligibility. Only then should this file be closed permanently.

Terrorism

[Stockwell Day, Canadian Alliance, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the official opposition supports the Prime Minister's difficult decision to commit Canadian forces to join the international coalition against terrorism.

Three weeks ago the official opposition also joined with the government to oppose a motion that would have tied the hands of the Canadian military by insisting that the whole House vote before any military action at all was set in motion. We knew that a delay might have lost the element of surprise for a coalition response to al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

Could the Prime Minister clarify why he felt it necessary to commit troops even before the House of Commons reconvened?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the support he has offered to the government on that issue. Before the Americans decided to launch the campaign against terrorism we were asked on the Friday if we could contribute certain elements.

I had a discussion with the minister of defence and I authorized him to tell the planners in Washington where we had some Canadian generals who had been in consultations there, to agree and to inform. The president called me on Sunday morning and asked me if we would participate in the form that had been asked and I said yes.

In fact it is the responsibility of the government to make this decision because the government is the executive of Canada and we have the confidence of the House. However I have kept opposition leaders as informed as possible and I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his support.

[Stockwell Day, Canadian Alliance, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the Alliance strongly supports the deployment of our forces in Afghanistan, but they must be given the resources they need to defend us.

Experts are saying that our armed forces need an additional $1 billion annually just to maintain the status quo, and a lot more to build our army.

Will the Prime Minister finally promise to table a budget that will give an additional $2 billion minimum to our forces immediately?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I would first off point out to the Leader of the Opposition that the government increased the budget of the Department of National Defence by $3 billion over the past three years and that it is probably the department with the greatest increase among government departments. The hon. member has asked us to increase the budget even more. We look at the situation every day.

I would like to say to the hon. member that, when I received the secretary general of NATO, he confirmed that, every time Canada has been required, it has been there and every time with the equipment necessary to get the job done.

[Stockwell Day, Canadian Alliance, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, we need a budget.

The Minister of National Defence said this weekend that Canada was in all the way when it came to dealing with the problem of terrorism. He implied that Canada was prepared to consider supporting action in countries other than Afghanistan if necessary.

Iraq has been identified as a state sponsor of terrorism. Iraq refuses to let inspectors verify whether it is making biological weapons of terror. There were also contacts between Iraqi intelligence and the September 11 hijackers.

Will the Prime Minister confirm, if the government has reached a decision to support action against Saddam Hussein, if evidence is produced linking Iraq to recent terrorist attacks?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, this is an absolutely hypothetical question. There is no such plan at this moment and there is no such request.

National Defence

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, no matter what the minister of defence says about the Sea Kings being safe, they are unreliable. They are not able to perform their missions on a regular basis.

Will the minister rethink the bid criteria for the Sea King replacement by eliminating the split contract and recontract based on acquiring the best helicopter for the job with the earliest possible delivery date?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, a procurement is under way with respect to replacement of the Sea King, but no matter how fast we can make that procurement process, and we are doing everything we can to speed it up, it will not affect the current mission of operation.

It is not true to say that they are unreliable. There has been a $50 million upgrade with new engines and many new components in the Sea Kings. The people who fly them say that they are reliable to fly. They are prepared to go out there and to do their missions, which they state can be done.

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the record of the Sea Kings speaks for itself. The fact is the Minister of National Defence has said again and again that it is unnecessary to purchase the helicopter with the longest range to replace the Sea Kings. He argues that will represent cold war thinking.

Now we are sending our Sea Kings into a hot war in the Indian Ocean. Will the minister reconsider the bid criteria to ensure that we get the best helicopters with the longest range possible?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, we will get the best. The statement of requirements was written by the military based not on the cold war but on contemporary and future needs with respect to these helicopters, which is different from what it was in the days when the Soviet Union was the enemy and when open warfare in the high seas against submarines was considered to be the number one concern.

Things have changed and as in past cases a lot of the activity in the gulf is in and around the shoreline. All these matters were taken into consideration in writing the statement of requirements. That is what the military has asked for. That is what we will provide.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last Monday, the Americans informed the UN that actions might be taken against countries other than Afghanistan to fight terrorism. Moreover, the Minister of National Defence is now saying that Canada is prepared to go all the way with the United States.

Can the Prime Minister, who has been advocating patience and wisdom since the beginning of this crisis, guarantee that Canada will ask for solid evidence before taking part in military actions against countries other than Afghanistan?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence did not say that we would be there under any circumstances.

I just told the leader of the official opposition that, at this point, no request has been made to take action against other countries. The military operation is against the terrorists who are currently in Afghanistan and we intend to continue to pursue the same policy.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence was quite categorical and he hardly qualified his statement. By contrast, Tony Blair is asking for evidence and the secretary general of the United Nations is concerned about the possibility of an escalation. In fact, Kofi Annan's efforts to enlist all the countries in the fight against terrorism could be jeopardized.

In order to avoid unjustified attacks against other countries, does the Prime Minister agree that the UN is the body that should assess the evidence that the United States, or any other country, will have to provide?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, at this point we have no intention to take part in any attack other than the one that is currently taking place to try to eliminate terrorists where they are hiding. We know that the camps where bin Laden is are in Afghanistan. This is the government's policy.

It goes without saying that we have always demanded to see the evidence as to who the terrorists are and where they are hiding. At this point, we know that this terrorist group had camps and is hiding in Afghanistan.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence has just indicated that he was prepared to go along with the United States unconditionally, including extending the conflict to countries other than Afghanistan.

My question is for the Prime Minister. If Canada wants to play a useful role--and we agree that it should--should it not instead use its proximity and its role as an ally to urge the United States to recognize the need for involving the UN in forming and directing the international coalition against terrorism?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, following the attacks of September 11, the United Nations Security Council clearly stated on September 12 that the United States had been attacked and that it was entitled to defend itself against attacks such as those that had taken place at that time.

This is precisely what the United States is now doing. It is basing its action on the September 12 security council resolution. It has called on certain countries to provide assistance and that is what Canada, along with France, Great Britain, Germany and Australia, is now doing.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the United States has said that it saw a role for the United Nations in Afghanistan, but after the conflict.

Would the government not be well advised to intervene so that its ally recognizes a major role for the UN starting now in the war against terrorism, which we know will drag on for months, possibly years? Was this not what Lester B. Pearson did, when he dared to go against the tide of opinion of other allies so that the UN could play its vital role?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, the leaders of the various parties were with me when I met with the UN secretary general. He answered all the questions put to him when we were in New York City, two weeks ago.

Everything is proceeding with the necessary authorizations from the United Nations. There is no question of the United Nations directing the campaign at this time. It is the United States which was attacked and it is the United States which has assumed the responsibility of seeking out and destroying the elements which caused the horrific events in New York City and Washington on September 11.

Terrorism

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. The defence minister said that Canada would participate without reservation in the U.S. led military response to the September 11 terrorist crimes. “We are in all the way”, he said. What does all the way mean? How far is Canada prepared to go into how many military theatres without UN auspices?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to correct the interpretation of what was said by the Minister of National Defence, as mentioned by the leader of the NDP. He said:

There's no determination about any specific military operations beyond what we've committed to at this time but certainly all of those matters are reviewed as we go.

He had more nuance than the leader of the NDP when he gave this explanation. We have a commitment now, and if we have to face a new commitment we are ready to make a decision as an independent country.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians would be very grateful but this is not a without reservation kind of commitment. Let us be clear, and this is what is of great concern.

We know that the United States has a hit list and up to 30 countries, maybe 60 countries, may fall in the crosshairs. Before the death and destruction spread further beyond Afghanistan we need a broader international auspices.

Will the Prime Minister go all the way, instead, in supporting a truly international response under the Nobel peace prize winners, the United Nations and Kofi Annan?