Debates of April 23rd, 2007

The Environment

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, 25,000 people demonstrated in favour of complying with the Kyoto protocol by taking part in the “Kyoto pour l'espoir” march in Montreal. Meanwhile, the Minister of the Environment waged a fear campaign against the Kyoto protocol, based on a study that predicts an economic apocalypse, no less, if Canada goes ahead with meeting the Kyoto targets.

Does the Prime Minister realize that what is more likely to cost Quebec and Canada dearly is his government's inaction on climate change?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it was the opposition parties that asked the government to detail the costs associated with the Kyoto protocol. It would cost a great deal to cut greenhouse gas emissions by a third immediately. This government will soon announce real greenhouse gas emission reduction targets that will preserve jobs and the health of Canada's economy.

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

Mr. Speaker, the basic premise behind the Minister of the Environment's report is biased. Whereas his study says that a carbon tax of $195 a tonne would have to be imposed on businesses, a far more serious UN study refers to a tax of between $25 and $50 a tonne.

Will the Prime Minister admit that his fear campaign against the Kyoto protocol is baseless and will benefit only his friends, the oil companies, who want to keep on polluting the environment with impunity?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, a tax of $25 a tonne will not allow us to meet the Kyoto targets by the dates set by the opposition. The challenge is simple: if the opposition has such a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it should table that plan. But up to now, it has been asking the government to table a plan because it does not have a no-cost plan for complying with the Kyoto protocol.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Kyoto protocol uses 1990 as the reference year for calculating greenhouse gas reductions. Now the Conservative government is planning to use 2006 as the reference year.

Does the Minister of the Environment realize that by selecting 2006 as the reference year, he is penalizing Quebec, especially the province's manufacturing sector, by wiping out 16 years of environmental efforts, and rewarding those who have done nothing, such as big oil companies?

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I want to assure the hon. member that this government considers climate change to be one of the greatest threats facing the world today.

I also want to make it very clear that Canada, under this government, remains committed to the principles and objectives of the United Nations framework on climate change and the Kyoto protocol.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, is the minister aware that setting 2006 as the reference year means that his plan is based on the polluter pay principle? Does he realize that by setting intensity targets instead of absolute targets, he is condemning future generations by endangering the environment because, even if oil companies pollute less per barrel, they will increase their production, thereby polluting more and destroying the environment?

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is asking specific questions on our framework announcements which will be coming out shortly. I encourage him to wait. The announcements on those targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will be coming out very shortly.

Afghanistan

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the revelations concerning torture victims in Afghanistan are positively appalling and Canadians are very concerned about this. The NDP raised this issue a year ago. Afghan authorities use torture in order to mentally and physically break their victims.

Will the government finally do the right thing, which is to immediately put an end to the transfer of prisoners, launch a public inquiry and dismiss the Minister of National Defence today?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said, we take these rumours seriously. We are asking our officials to investigate this with the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission and with the Afghan officials.

I might remind the member for Toronto—Danforth that we recently had an agreement with the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission. It has promised to advise us if any of our detainees are abused.

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, a moment ago the Prime Minister was enumerating the responsibilities of the Minister of National Defence. He forgot to mention that one of his responsibilities is to ensure that Canada is abiding by international law.

The fact is the minister has, by his own admission, misled the House. He stated himself that it was his responsibility to ensure that transferees were handled properly at our end and at the Afghan end.

Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and instruct his Minister of National Defence to stop the transfer of prisoners now and get a full inquiry going, and then ask for his resignation?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, we have the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission which has the authority to go into the Afghan system. It will advise us of any abuses. We said that we would provide any logistics support it needs to carry out that function and that is our stand.

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is good to be back.

The Minister of National Defence recently said that Canadian troops could stay in Afghanistan for over a decade. Additionally, last week he confirmed that cabinet has not even discussed this issue.

For months the government has given confused and conflicting messages about the Afghanistan mission. Will it now be clear with Canadians and support the Liberal motion that establishes 2009 as the end of our combat role in Afghanistan?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the member alleges things that I never said. I said that the current military commitment is at the end of February 2009.

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians and our allies deserve a clear and honest answer on when Canada's combat duties in southern Afghanistan will end.

Tomorrow there is a vote on the Liberal motion that gives the government an opportunity to be straightforward for a change and yet all we hear from the minister is rhetoric.

The question is not one of support for our troops. We all support them and their good work. The question is, will the minister do the right thing and commit to end Canada's combat role in Kandahar in 2009 and inform NATO allies of this deadline immediately?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I just want to take the opportunity to welcome the hon. member back. We are all delighted to see that he is looking in good health.

As I said last week in answer to this question, the government's position is clear. Our allies, the international community, the Afghan government, nobody is asking us to make a decision on 2009 this week.

I have to say that only the Liberal Party would consider a clear position to be a position that we must withdraw two years from now right away.

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this minority Conservative government has never been clear about the mission in Afghanistan and has never bothered to think about when or how this mission will end.

The Minister of National Defence now says that the Canadian Forces could pull out on the condition that the Afghan forces double their size, which seems very unlikely to occur by 2009.

Will the minister finally admit that he has no intention of pulling the Canadian Forces out of Afghanistan in 2009?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, our position is that the military commitment is until the end of February 2009. At an appropriate time our government will discuss any possible changes to that commitment.

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives continue to be completely inconsistent when it comes to Afghanistan.

The minister says one day that we are not at war and then says the exact opposite the next. One day, he says we are in Afghanistan to exact revenge, and the next day, he says we are there to beat the Taliban. In the past, he has said that we would not beat them with military force.

Given that the equipment recently purchased will not arrive in Afghanistan until a few months before 2009, will the Minister of National Defence finally admit his secret intention to extend the mission in Afghanistan?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, if we want to talk about flip-floppers, they are over there. The Leader of the Opposition voted against the extension in Afghanistan; now he supports it. Members over there are flip-flopping all the time. They are the ones who have no consistent position. That party has had three positions in the last year.

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last March we pointed out the dangers of turning over prisoners to the Afghan authorities. In April, we took it a step further and referred to a report by the U.S. State Department, which listed all the corrupt practices found in Afghan prisons.

What has the minister done since then? Nothing, even though a colonel responsible for human rights in the Afghan forces stated, “In some cases, individuals have to be tortured, otherwise they do not talk”.

In light of such serious accusations, the minister did nothing. There is only one thing for him to do—resign.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, in fact, our government has done something. We have signed an agreement with the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission and it has promised to inform us of any abuses of detainees in its system. This is a unique agreement that only Canada has.

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's representatives advised the prisoners to provide true information in order to avoid being mistreated. Even the Minister of Public Safety was informed of this on his last visit to Kandahar.

Why did the Minister of National Defence not take action sooner? What is the Prime Minister waiting for to ask for the resignation of the Minister of National Defence?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, we have an agreement with the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission. It will inform us of any abuses in the system.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence no longer has the credibility to manage this department. He has been hiding the truth for several months.

My question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Will he assume his responsibilities and does he intend to take action so that Canada will stop transferring prisoners to the Afghan authorities until such time as he has negotiated a new agreement that guarantees the safety of prisoners?