Debates of April 8th, 2003

Iraq

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the first day of the war or the second day, I said that I wanted, and we wanted, the Americans and the British to succeed. That is what we said in the House right at the beginning, even if we are not there for the reasons that I have given very clearly this morning. This has been the position of the government.

If there is another government, we will decide as we do with every change of regime that occurs around the world. We decide what we will do after there is a change of government.

[Stockwell Day, Canadian Alliance, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we are listening carefully to what the Prime Minister is saying and maybe that is our mistake.

We know that most people want the hostilities to end. We know that the Liberals feel strongly about it because he lets his MPs use very strong language about the Americans. He said he is opposed to someone going around the world changing regimes. We know that.

We are asking very clearly. His motion says he hopes the allies are successful. They are changing the regime. Are you supporting the change of Saddam's regime--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member knows he must address his question to the Chair. I know he will in the supplementary.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, they keep repeating the same question. If the member had listened he would know the position I gave to his leader a minute ago.

[Stockwell Day, Canadian Alliance, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we are going to give him another chance.

This is the dying days of the regime. It is a malignant regime. The odious creatures of this regime are being removed. Iraqis are actually celebrating in the streets their freedom that is coming toward them.

Does the Prime Minister support the allied mission to finally remove Saddam Hussein's regime, yes or no?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, they want me to say that we accepted this as a policy.

I want him to know, for example, that at this moment I am not supporting Mugabe in Zimbabwe. There are a lot of people that I think should not be there. I do not think that it is, for example, the role of Canada as one of the senior members of the Commonwealth to change a regime in Zimbabwe. If we start that, where do we stop?

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

Mr. Speaker, to prevent excessive unilateralism, international institutions, above all the United Nations, must play a key role that can absolutely not be ignored, before, during and after a war. The coalition went to Iraq without the approval of the UN. The United States want snot only to lead reconstruction in Iraq, but also to try Iraqi criminals in its own courts.

Will Canada register a protest with the Bush administration and ask that Iraqi war criminals be tried by an international criminal tribunal?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, first, with respect to the hon. member's assertion that the Americans have decided to act completely unilaterally, if he read the dispatches a few minutes ago, he will know that the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Great Britain both said that the United Nations were to play a major role in what is to come in Irak.

Based on this statement, we will see what happens. I think that as we speak, the Secretary General of the United Nations is on his way to meet with European leaders to try to reach a consensus to help ensure proper management of the post-war situation.

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

Mr. Speaker, what the clarifications provided around lunchtime mean is that they will leave humanitarian assistance to the UN, but that reconstruction contracts will go to friends of the government, both in the U.S. and in Great Britain. That is what we are condemning.

Regarding war criminals—and that is what my question was about—if the Milosevic trial has any credibility, it is because he is being tried by an international criminal tribunal.

My question to the Prime Minister is the following. With respect to the specific topic of Iraqi war criminals, will Canada demand that they be tried by an international criminal tribunal, and not a strictly American or British led tribunal?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, at this time, the secretary general is discussing with the British, the Americans, the Europeans as well as our officials to determine what system should be put in place after the war. It is premature to conclude that it will be one rather than another.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this morning the Prime Minister solemnly told us that the serious decision to send troops into combat must not be made out of economic considerations or friendship, but for reasons of principle.

Why did the Prime Minister not use those same rules for the Canadian soldiers who are in combat zones in Iraq?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, it is true, as the hon. member suggests, that making such decisions is sometimes a very solemn and very difficult matter. The government has, however, stated on a number of occasions that our alliances with our partners are crucial. The government has decided to honour those agreements. The government unreservedly supports our men and women who are in the region.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, how many soldiers can be sent into combat before the Prime Minister's principles apply? How many soldiers can be sent into combat for reasons of economics or friendship in an unjustified war?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the last thing the government would do, as the Prime Minister has said, would be to send men and women to war for economic reasons. We have not done so, nor will we ever. This is the position of the government, as the Prime Minister explained very clearly this morning.

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the right hon. Prime Minister. I listened carefully to his answer to a previous question about whether Iraqi war criminals would be tried in the United States or by an international trade tribunal, and the Prime Minister said that he did not know what would happen.

We do not want to know from the Prime Minister what he thinks will happen. We want to know from the Prime Minister what he thinks should happen. We want to know what principle is informing the Canadian government position on this.

Could he tell us, does he believe that these war criminals should be tried by the United States in the United States or by an international tribunal?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, of course there is no question of trading anything there. He talked about a trade tribunal but I do not think it is that.

We said that at this moment the Secretary of the United Nations is in communication with everyone on that issue. We do not know exactly, the war is not over. They are all speculating about what would happen after that. It is very important that all the bridges be built among the different nations at this time.

The last few months have been very difficult for the international community and we have to build bridges between Europe and America, among all the nations of the world, that would be beneficial to everyone.

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has said that the government's position on the war is informed by a principle, the principle of United Nations having to sanction a war in Iraq. That did not happen. The government did not participate.

I am asking the Prime Minister this. Why is his position about what happens after the war not informed by the same principle, that any trial of Iraqi war criminals be conducted in the context of an international tribunal and not by the United States alone? It seems to me it is the same principle.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, there are laws on that and there are international conventions on that. I hope everybody will follow the international conventions post-war.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister tells us what Kofi Annan is doing. He tells us what Tony Blair is doing. Then he says that we will sit back and wait to see what happens.

The Prime Minister knows there is a major difference between humanitarian aid and reconstruction. He knows Tony Blair and other European leaders are making concrete positive proposals about the UN role.

What specifically is Canada proposing to give the United Nations the authority to play a leading role in the reconstruction of post-war Iraq?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we are working on that with our ambassador to the United Nations. I have had the occasion to talk with some of the leaders about what will happen, both in terms of humanitarian aid and reconstruction. I have made many telephone calls on it.

I had a chance to talk with Mr. Blair and we discussed exactly that. We were in agreement that there should be an important role for the UN in the reconstruction of Iraq.

Member for LaSalle--Émard

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

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has a personal duty to ensure that his ministers are not in conflict of interest. The Prime Minister's ethics counsellor sat in on the secret meetings between the former minister of finance and the shipping company the former minister owns.

On April 2 I asked the Prime Minister whether he had asked the ethics counsellor whether the then finance minister discussed his company's move to Barbados. The Prime Minister said, “I have not been informed”. That was six days ago.

Has the Prime Minister informed himself now and will he give us his word, categorically, that the member for LaSalle—Émard was not in conflict of interest.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, when somebody is in the cabinet for nine years, we cannot know exactly at what meeting he was in or out of a cabinet meeting. I said that the former minister of finance was an honourable man and he knew what his duty was. On many occasions, he abstained himself from discussions, but I cannot on every file know if he was there or not.

I think the former minister of finance said clearly that he followed all the rules. I have no reason not to believe what he said.

Canada Customs and Revenue Agency

[Rahim Jaffer, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, today's Auditor General's report singles out the government's failure to take corrective action following a report done on the effectiveness of Canada customs officers in maintaining security at our border. The Auditor General has blamed the government for having no co-ordinated security policy at our border.

Why will the government not take border security seriously and shift the priority for customs from revenue collection to primarily protecting Canadians?

[Elinor Caplan, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the role that customs officers play on the primary line at all Canada's ports of entry. We also are really pleased to say that we have signed a memorandum of understanding with citizenship and immigration.

We have taken the Auditor General's recommendations and already begun to implement them to ensure that we better monitor the effectiveness so that we and all Canadians can be assured that Canada customs is doing the job. All Canadians should be proud of them.

[Rahim Jaffer, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, for 10 years the government has done nothing. The government has failed in protecting Canadians and our customs agents. It has failed in providing adequate training and in giving them proper resources.

The minister obviously does not take her job seriously. In fact she has gone as far as calling customs agents glorified bank tellers.

When will the minister finally take her job seriously and give customs agents the power, the respect and the responsibility to protect this country?