Debates of Oct. 31st, 2001

National Security

[Kevin Sorenson, Canadian Alliance, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that is a lot different response than what we heard when he was parading around like a puffed up peacock in front of the scrum yesterday.

It was wrong for this solicitor general to brag about this operation. It was wrong for this solicitor general to compromise the source and methods of our intelligence gathering efforts. According to a high ranking CSIS official, revealing such top secret information is clearly a breach of national security.

Does the Prime Minister support his solicitor general divulging top secret information?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we on this side support the solicitor general because he is doing a good job. When I hear members of the opposition claiming that the solicitor general tried to get publicity for himself, it is a funny affirmation.

Terrorism

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

Mr. Speaker, the fight against terrorism requires that there be a military response but not that any old weapon be used.

Understandably, Canada cannot be consulted daily on tactics but it is unacceptable for Canada to say nothing when cluster bombs, which are similar to anti-personnel mines, are dropped on Afghanistan.

Will the Prime Minister admit that saying nothing is consenting to the use of cluster bombs?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it is quite simply impossible to compare anti-personnel mines to these bombs.

Anti-personnel mines remain in the ground for 10, 20 or 30 years after a war ends, while the bombs being used—obviously, in all sincerity, I would prefer that no bombs ever be used.

On September 11 the terrorists did not give any thought to what would happen to American citizens in New York and Washington.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am surprised at the Prime Minister's answer.

These cluster bombs are similar to anti-personnel mines and there is a treaty about their use, the Ottawa treaty, of which Canada is quite rightly proud. We cannot go along with the use of such bombs.

The Prime Minister reminds us of what they did in New York. Are we going to start behaving like them? Are we going to take a page from their book, when our greatest strength is our difference, which is all about democracy against barbarity? That is the choice we must make.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, this is why this government took the lead in working to bring about a treaty on anti-personnel mines. We did our job and we were very successful at it.

There is a war on right now and these bombs are not illegal under international treaties. We have no reason and no way to protest at this time because those bombes are part of the arsenal of war.

These bombs will not remain in the ground when the war is over.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, each one of these cluster bombs contains about 200 smaller bombs which, when they do not explode, become extremely dangerous anti-personnel mines.

Worse still, we learned that unexploded bombs look so much like the food packages dropped by the UN—they are both yellow and their format is similar—that the United States are sending a message, supposedly to warn the population.

Will the Prime Minister exert pressure on the U.S. government to adopt war techniques that spare civilians?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, those cluster bombs are only being used in connection with the destruction of the military capability of the Taliban. They are being used in areas where there are tanks, artillery and military formations.

Canada has been a leader in terms of clearing up unexploded ordnance after any kind of military campaign. We would want to make sure those are cleaned up after, but they are a legitimate use if used in a military fashion against military targets, not against civilians, and that is exactly what is happening, use only against military targets.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the chair of the European parliament described the use of such bombs in Afghanistan as a human error and a political mistake.

These civilian casualties, including the victims of cluster bombs, fuel skepticism, both here and elsewhere, regarding the bombings. Public opinion everywhere is shifting, and this threatens the cohesion of the anti-terrorism coalition. We remain supportive of this coalition and we want it to be strong.

Will the Prime Minister, whose government has worked to ban anti-personnel landmines, question the use of these bombs?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, they are not being directed at civilians. It is unfortunate that in a military campaign sometimes civilians are injured or killed but that is not the intention here at all.

Every effort is being made to maintain that any use of cluster bombs or any kind of weaponry at all is directed at deteriorating the military capability of the Taliban, al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.

After all, those are the people who are responsible for the terrorist attacks that occurred in the United States. Those are the people responsible for the deaths of over 5,000 innocent men, women and children. We cannot give them rest. They in fact must continue to be pursued and that is the objective of the campaign.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, today there are media reports that Osama bin Laden was apparently in the American hospital at Dubai last summer. A CIA member reportedly even met him.

Given the attacks on U.S. embassies and on the USS Cole , is the Prime Minister concerned that the American government appears to have let bin Laden go rather than trying him?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, clearly, had the Americans had the opportunity to get their hands on bin Laden last July, they would have done so.

I see no problem there. If they did not, it was a dumb mistake on their part.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I think the question that remains is: Why did they not? Maybe I could direct my supplementary question to the solicitor general. He was more than willing yesterday to share information on security matters and maybe he will take some credit on this one too.

What information has the United States shared with Canada on the whereabouts of bin Laden on July 4 of this past summer?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is well aware that it would be totally inappropriate for me to respond to that question. I will not divulge any such information.

National Security

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago the minister responsible for critical infrastructure told us that his list of Canadian infrastructure that could be a terrorist target could be, and I quote him, “happening soon”.

Yesterday the attorney general of the United States warned of a potential new attack this week on American interests. In the context of these new threats, is the list of potential Canadian targets ready yet? Have all the provinces and territories concerned been informed? Has training begun for the frontline workers in these potential targets?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, there is a list of over 300 critical infrastructure facilities in this country. It is presently the subject of a discussion with provincial emergency preparedness organizations and with local responders as well.

In fact, through Emergency Preparedness Canada, which was the predecessor organization of the Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness, we had built up a very considerable base of information and training involved in helping to prepare people to deal with disasters. We have dealt with natural disasters in the past and can deal with man made disasters as well.

National Defence

[Elsie Wayne, Progressive Conservative, Saint John, NB]

Mr. Speaker, last March the Minister of National Defence confirmed that there was a pressing need to increase the number of men and women in our armed forces reserve. The minister then confirmed that the pay formula for reservists was, and I quote, “a locked in formula” at 85% of the regular forces pay rate.

Yet we now know that the minister has approved a 15% pay cut for some of our reservists and they were informed of it yesterday.

How can the minister possibly justify these cuts at time when we must recruit more reservists and when their help is needed more now than ever?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, there is no approved pay reduction at all.

Let me tell the House that the 21,000 reservists over the last three years have had very substantial pay increases, as have those in the regular force. There is a proposal that will involve some readjustment, some realignment. Some will get a reduction. Even more than that will get an increase.

Overall the entire reserve force of some 21,000 is receiving increases. Reservists will also receive better training and better equipment and they will play a very meaningful role in terms of the Canadian forces of the country.

Terrorism

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect some information from the Liberal government on terrorism. Accurate, reliable information would reassure us all, in regular briefings on issues of importance, non-classified information of importance.

When will the Prime Minister start giving regular briefings to the Canadian public on terrorism information, the information that they deserve?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I am in the House every week. The ministers are in the House all the time. They appear in front of committees. The members of the opposition can ask all the questions they want.

We are replying. We give all the information we have. It is why we said yesterday that the threat was not directed against Canada. We said that in the House of Commons through public television. It is the way that we operate and it is the way to give information to the Canadian public.

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Macleod, AB]

What a contrast, Mr. Speaker. In the U.S. there are regular briefings. In fact the U.S. public was told that there was an imminent threat and to be cautious, to be careful.

Today we see CF-18s flying over Ottawa, so maybe this is the only opportunity for the Prime Minister to do this. Will he give us a briefing now on just exactly what that means? He should do it outside.

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the CF-18s, indeed, the entire Canadian forces, are here to protect the safety and security of Canadians. The CF-18s have been redeployed from their usual places in Cold Lake, Alberta and Bagotville, Quebec to other parts of the country as well so that we can ensure, in fact, that we have protection of the entire country. This is a precautionary measure. They do exercises as part of that precautionary measure. There is no immediate threat to the country, but as low as that possibility is, we must take precautions. We can never take it for granted.

Finance

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if the economy were to keep growing at the same rate as it did in the first five months of the year, the surplus would be close to $20 billion.

Given the downturn, which cannot fail to have an impact on the economy, we are heading toward a surplus that will likely come in around $13 billion.

If our figures do not add up, then the Minister of Finance should tell us why, but in the meantime, will he finally stop trying to duck the issue, answer our questions and confirm the figures that we have submitted to him?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, there is not one economist in the country who will agree with the projections that the member just made.

I just said, and I have said repeatedly in the House, that there was a downturn prior to September 11. The terrible consequences of September 11 will most certainly be felt by the end of the year.

That being said, there will be a debate on the budget tomorrow. If the member would like to explain how she arrived at those figures she is free to do so.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, despite what the finance minister has said, I find it hard to believe that he does not have any figures to give us.

If the minister cannot give us any figures, could he at least identify the assumptions on which he has based his work?