Mr. Speaker, I will soon have been in this House for 15 years and, in my opinion, one of the issues that has been the most poorly handled by successive governments is that of Afghanistan.
Let us recall the debates in this House when the current Minister of National Revenue, who was then the Conservative Party defence critic, asked about 15 questions about the relevance of the mission, the objectives to be met and the consideration of an exit strategy. Yet, when the Conservative Party formed the government, this debate disappeared. They held a vote—a very rushed event—on extending the mission, which we initially opposed. It was agreed to respect Canada's commitment abroad.
Obviously we cannot rewrite history, but can my colleague tell me if this was not the right attitude to have from the beginning, before we first embarked on the war in Afghanistan and this international mission? The committee that will be put in place will perhaps be able to adopt this attitude after the fact, unfortunately. Taking a closer look at the outset would have been better.
So far, the western world has not necessarily shown the Afghans that our way of doing things is worth adopting for the future of development in this country. We have put too much emphasis on the military aspect instead of the two other aspects: diplomacy and development.
Is there not still a major change that must take place, given that Canada's mission should, in my opinion, end in February 2009?
In light of the decision made in this House, what actions should be taken to fix our mistaken intervention?
To start with, should we not respond to the questions asked earlier by the Conservative defence critic? Now that they are in power, they have not responded in any way that will allow us to get back on the right track.