House of Commons Hansard #19 of the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was certificates.
Michael Ignatieff Liberal Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
Mr. Speaker, documents made public in Federal Court last week suggest that Canada is transferring minors to Afghan authorities.
This practice is a violation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. We are transferring children to a prison system that is the subject of allegations of torture.
How can the government justify transferring children and when will it put an end to this practice?
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Mr. Speaker, as with all cases of transfers, the Canadian Forces is in compliance with international law, including the Geneva Convention. We take this matter very seriously.
We have improved, as of last May, upon the agreement that was in put place by the previous government. We have an enhanced agreement that allows for greater tracking of these individuals and greater monitoring. We continue to work with the Afghan government to improve its capacity.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, since the spring, the government has been in possession of internal reports showing that torture is being practised in Afghan prisons. Yet for months the government has denied that it has this information. This is unacceptable for a government that is constantly going on about transparency.
Why did the Prime Minister conceal from us for months information that detainees transferred to the Afghan authorities were being tortured? Why did he mislead the House?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the facts are clear, and they are completely different from the Bloc leader's information.
The reality is that we have an arrangement with the Afghan government on monitoring and visiting detainees captured by Canada.
Recently, we discovered a case where there is evidence to support the allegations. The Afghan government is investigating this case, and we are in contact with the government to make sure it carries out its responsibilities.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, every time we asked questions about this, we were accused of defending the Taliban. Hamid Karzai—who I imagine is not a Taliban—says there was torture. It is all well and good to have an agreement, but it is not being enforced, and the president of Afghanistan has said there was torture.
Does the Prime Minister realize that the Geneva Convention is being violated and that the only thing he must do is immediately declare a moratorium on detainee transfers?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, President Karzai has clearly indicated that he is opposed to torture and that he is working to make sure it is not practised in Afghanistan.
We have an arrangement with his government to investigate any incident where there is evidence. This arrangement is working well, and we are continuing to work with our Afghan counterparts to solve this problem and investigate the existing cases.
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Department of National Defence is citing security reasons in order to avoid making public the data base of names of suppliers executing contracts in Afghanistan. We find the department's policy on this rather arbitrary, since some of the names on the list also appear on the department's website.
Thus, the security criteria vary, depending on whether one consults the data base or the website. I would like the Minister of National Defence to explain to the House why this is the case.
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure whether the hon. member is complaining because there is too much information or not enough.
There is information available on the website with respect to contracts. We follow a very strict process in terms of determining who the applicants are for certain contract work. We do the necessary due diligence, as is the case both inside and outside of Afghanistan on this particular matter. I am not sure what the hon. member is concerned about.
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, the government's secrecy surrounding the awarding of contracts is making us fear the worst. It is quite possible that this money could be diverted from its objective.
What is the minister waiting for to make public a complete list of the suppliers, those that execute contracts in Afghanistan, so that this money can be directed to good projects, rather than to certain warlords, for example?
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Mr. Speaker, as I said, we have a contracting process, whether it is with respect to the provincial reconstruction team, the work being done by the Joint Provincial Coordination Centre in Kandahar, or the Strategic Advisory Team in Kabul. We go through a very strict process in terms of who complies with the contracting process to see that they obey and comply with the enforcement on all applicable laws in Afghanistan.
Again, the hon. member seems to be a bit confused with respect to his complaint. We make these contracts available on the website after they have been awarded. Private security contractors with the Canadian Forces are not unusual.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, most Canadians by now have seen the terrible video of Robert Dziekanski being tasered at Vancouver international airport. I am sure members of the House would want to join with me in expressing our condolences to the family and the Polish community of Canada and abroad.
However, this raises very serious questions and these should be asked of the Prime Minister.
First, has the RCMP been asked to stop using tasers pending a full investigation and a review of the discharge policy? Second, is there a full retraining program in place now to be put in place before any further tasering is possible from the RCMP?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, let me repeat what the Leader of the NDP said. What we all saw I think was deeply disturbing to all of us, and we want to express our condolences to the family as well.
As he will know, the government does not interfere in the operational activities of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. That said, inquiries are underway. We will be following those inquiries and also looking at what other options and what other actions may be necessary in this case.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, we have no national rules. There is no national policy in place to govern the use of tasers and other so-called non-lethal devices such as this.
The Prime Minister is refusing to tell us whether the RCMP has been asked not to use tasers in the interim. My question would simply be, why not?
There are many other questions one could ask, which I am sure we will raise over the weeks to come. However, one thing is very clear. At least there should be a retraining program put in place immediately to ensure this does not happen again.
Why will the Prime Minister not support such a simple proposition?
Stockwell Day ConservativeMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister has said and as I said last week on a number of occasions, anybody who saw that video shares the shock and the grief. The disturbing elements of that were seen by everyone.
A number of reviews are ongoing right now. Four days after the incident, which would be about a month ago, I asked for a review to immediately be put in place. On Friday, the Canadian Police Research Centre, which is separate and independent of the RCMP, also announced it is doing a very thorough review. The RCMP is reviewing it.
Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON
“I have always wanted a career in politics and Brian Mulroney made it possible for me”. Mr. Speaker, those are the words of the current Minister of Justice.
Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON
As he is excited about it, I will repeat it. “I have always wanted a career in politics and Brian Mulroney made it possible for me”. These are the words of the current Minister of Justice, the same minister charged with deciding if the key witness in the Mulroney inquiry stays or goes, stays to testify or is extradited before he can.
In light of this obvious conflict of interest, will the justice minister step aside and allow someone who does not owe his career to Mr. Mulroney to make this critical decision?
Rob Nicholson ConservativeMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, first, I owe my political career to the good people of Niagara Falls, Niagara-on-the-Lake and Fort Erie, who were good enough to send me to Parliament.
That being said, I take my responsibilities as justice minister and attorney general of our country very seriously. In accordance with the practice of other justice ministers, we do not comment on extradition matters.
Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON
Mr. Speaker, it depends on the audience and it depends on whether or not there is a public inquiry. To have a public inquiry without its key witness is a complete sham, a meaningless PR exercise that has no hope of getting to the truth. Yet the government refuses to act on its own clear authority, refuses to ensure Mr. Schreiber testifies. Unless forced, the government chooses Mr. Mulroney over justice every time.
Since the conflict-ridden justice minister refuses to ensure the validity of the inquiry, will the Prime Minister keep Mr. Schreiber in Canada until he testifies, or does he too owe his job to Mr. Mulroney?
Rob Nicholson ConservativeMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated with respect to the extradition matters, it would be inappropriate to comment on that.
However, with respect to the public inquiry, the Prime Minister has set in motion a process that is reasonable. I think it is appropriate to let Professor Johnston make recommendations with respect to that public inquiry. I think most Canadians will believe that is satisfactory and reasonable.
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Mr. Speaker, after covering up Mr. Schreiber's allegations and ordering his party members not to speak to his mentor, Brian Mulroney, the Prime Minister broke his own rules.
At a dinner last week, the Prime Minister paid homage to Mr. Mulroney, saying: “I am proud to say that our government is continuing the work begun by Prime Minister Brian Mulroney”.
Why did the Prime Minister disregard his own orders?
Rob Nicholson ConservativeMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, once a sworn allegation in an affidavit came to light, just about a week ago, the Prime Minister set in motion a procedure, which I think most Canadians will find reasonable, and that is to have Professor Johnston have a look at this and set the parameters for a public inquiry. Most Canadians will agree with that.
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Mr. Speaker, it is too bad the Prime Minister did not feel he could be there personally. Loin of Harrington deer, cooked in its own juices was served at this dinner. Was it also on the menu when the Prime Minister entertained Mr. Mulroney at Harrington Lake, or when Mr. Mulroney hosted Mr. Schreiber while still prime minister.
With PCO well aware of these allegations for months and repeatedly getting documents on the file, why is the Prime Minister publicly praising Mr. Mulroney yet again?
Rob Nicholson ConservativeMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member may not have heard it the first time, but a process has been put in place with Dr. Johnston. Dr. Johnston will look particularly at the sworn allegations in an affidavit.
Dr. Johnston can set the parameters any way he sees fit. The professor is well regarded and well thought of across the country, and we can place our trust in him to set the parameters for this public inquiry.
