House of Commons Hansard #38 of the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was judges.
Michael Ignatieff Liberal Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
Mr. Speaker, three times in November, the Minister of National Defence boasted about the detainee transfer agreement; however, this agreement was suspended on November 6.
Could he give us a little glimpse of the truth today? Can he tell us when the transfer of detainees to the Afghan authorities will resume?
Even more important, what concrete measures will he take to ensure that Afghan detainees will not be abused or tortured?
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Mr. Speaker, as the new enhanced agreement as of May 2007 allows for, there is increased monitoring. We do have eyes inside the prison. That allows for the type of discovery of the disclosure that this government proactively made.
I have a question for the member opposite. He seems to have changed his position somewhat and has now focused his concerns greatly on the issue of torture. We know he has said previously, “Sticking too firmly to the rule of law simply allows terrorists too much leeway to exploit our freedoms...To defeat evil” we must “traffic in evils: indefinite detention of suspects, coercive interrogations, targeted assassinations, even pre-emptive war”--
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, this morning, the Prime Minister commented on the Manley report, saying that a vote on the Afghanistan mission will not be held until the spring. If the Prime Minister were responsible he would hold the vote as soon as possible. That way he could attend the NATO summit in April with a clear mandate from parliamentarians and he could give the Afghans and the NATO allies a straight answer.
Will the Prime Minister be responsible and hold a vote on extending the Afghanistan mission as soon as possible in order to go to the NATO summit with a clear mandate?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I always appreciate getting advice from the Leader of the Bloc. This is a very important issue. I hope all the parties in this House will take the time to look at the report and all the considerations before making a decision.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, we have read the report.
That said, the Prime Minister's strategy is simple: go to the NATO summit, get 1,000 additional soldiers and stay in Afghanistan. If he does not get an additional 1,000 soldiers, the Prime Minister will argue that it is too late for an ally country to take Canada's place.
One way or another, the result is the same. The Prime Minister wants Canada to stay in Afghanistan at all cost. Is that not his intention?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Not at all, Mr. Speaker. I said earlier today that extending this mission depends on the other combat soldiers sent by the allies. If we cannot get more soldiers, this mission will not be extended.
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, dates are critical as regards the issue of detainees. On November 19, the Minister of National Defence said: “I spoke with the Chief of the Defence Staff this morning. We are in fairly regular contact.”
As for his colleague, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, he said, on November 14: “This agreement is proof that the process is working.” The process is working well? Then we learned that they stopped transferring detainees on November 5.
Why did the minister say in this House that the process was working, when the government had put an end to that process? Is this not precisely what is called misleading the House?
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is answering his own question. Clearly, agreements are working, as my colleague, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, indicated to the House of Commons, on November 14. The reason why this agreement is working is of course because of the current ability of Canadian Forces to make operational decisions on the ground in Afghanistan.
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, this government is constantly saying that it is being transparent regarding the issue of Afghan detainees.
If that is the case, will the minister tell us today what is happening with Afghan detainees right now? Are they being handed over to Afghan authorities? To Americans? To other NATO nations? What is happening to these detainees right now? Who is detaining them? Are they being held by Canadians at the Kandahar base? It is time the minister told us the truth about this issue.
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Mr. Speaker, clearly, political decisions are made by the Government of Canada, but decisions on the ground, during military operations, are made by the chain of command. Obviously, the government supports these decisions, but on the ground the decisions relating to the transfer of detainees are made by the military.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, Canadians were never officially informed that the government had suspended the transfer of prisoners, nor was this House. The Prime Minister is hiding behind so-called operational secrecy, but the Americans announce their captured and transferred prisoners in press releases. Everyone knows they continue to transfer prisoners.
Why does this government refuse to tell the truth and insist on keeping Canadians in the dark?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, this government took the initiative of disclosing a case of abuse when there was credible evidence. In other cases, naturally, we follow a very different procedure.
I am surprised that the Leader of the NDP would suggest that we follow the American example, which is to transfer prisoners to Guantanamo Bay. That is not the policy of this government.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, even the Bush administration, the practices of which this government usually likes to copy, makes it fully public and evident when transfers have taken place.
The fact is that the government does not know what it is doing on this issue and will not tell the truth about it.
Let us follow the sequence. First the government said we did not need a new detainee agreement and then said it had to be changed. Then it dismissed allegations of torture. Then it acknowledged them. Then it said that the detainee policy was working. Now we learn that the government withheld information and stopped the transfers but is opening the door again.
When are we going to get the truth and stop--
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, as I have already said, the transfer agreement with the Afghan government remains in place and military and other government authorities can avail themselves of that transfer agreement when they think it is appropriate. That is why the government has not announced that there will not be transfers: because there could well be.
Once again the leader of the NDP is now suggesting that we adopt the policy of the Bush government, which involves transferring detainees to Guantanamo Bay. To be clear, that is not the policy of this government.
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
Mr. Speaker, last week, the Minister of National Defence said that he was not aware that on November 5, 2007, the Canadian Forces had stopped transferring detainees to the Afghan authorities.
This will not do. Just where was this minister on November 5? In Afghanistan. Who is going to believe that the military there told him nothing? No one.
The fact is that at the very time he was insulting us while we asked him legitimate questions about this, the Minister of National Defence knew full well that these transfers had stopped.
What is he waiting for to hand in his resignation to the Prime Minister? It is the only cure for his chronic Pinocchio syndrome.
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Mr. Speaker, no one is saying I have no information about the operation on the ground in Afghanistan, except maybe the Liberal members.
As for this decision, I repeat, as the Prime Minister has said, the military in the field in Afghanistan are responsible for operational decisions and our government is responsible for political decisions.
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
Mr. Speaker, he said he did not know, but now he does.
The minister was quick to his feet to attack my patriotism last November, but last week when the Prime Minister's Office claimed the military was keeping his government in the dark, he suddenly went missing in action instead of taking a stand for our troops.
The minister knew the policy changed because he was in Afghanistan when it happened. He knew he was misleading the House last November when he answered questions on this file and he will have to pay for it.
On the other hand, here is what we want to know: where are the prisoners right now? What have we done with them?
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
More empty words and more unfounded allegations, Mr. Speaker. I see that the break has not tempered the member opposite at all in his flirtations with the truth.
Clearly what has happened here is an operational decision which impacts on the timelines of when prisoners are transferred. It is in place following the agreement that was improved upon, the failed agreement, the flawed agreement that we picked up when took government and that the hon. member's government left behind.
That agreement remains in place. It allows for discretion on the transfers. We are not going to talk about the details of this because it only helps the Taliban. Is that what the member wants?
Bryon Wilfert Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
Mr. Speaker, on November 15, 2007, the Minister of Foreign Affairs said in the House, “What we now have is an agreement that meets the highest standards”. This was a full 10 days after--
Bryon Wilfert Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, the applause is premature. This was a full 10 days after the Canadian Forces had stopped transferring detainees to the Afghan authorities because evidence of torture had been found.
The minister rose in the House and assured us the agreement was working when he knew full well that what he was saying was not the truth. How can the minister justify a blatant misrepresentation of the facts? How can he explain not telling the truth?
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Mr. Speaker, the policy is in place. The agreement is in place. It is an improved agreement. It allows for greater numbers of visits. It allows for greater disclosures, which is exactly what happened when the Minister of Foreign Affairs stood in the House of Commons on November 14 and disclosed that there was an issue of great concern. This exemplifies why the agreement was put in place. It replaced the flawed, inadequate agreement left by the previous government.
The operational details and discretions remain in the hands of the military. We make the policy, and we support our military.
