Debates of Nov. 24th, 2009

Afghanistan

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

Mr. Speaker, the committee will hear witnesses when it has uncensored documents. The members do not want censored documents that start with “Mr. Minister” and end with “thank you”, with nothing in between. They want to know what happened.

Moreover, in 2006, a meeting took place at the Privy Council Office concerning the governor of Kandahar's involvement in the issue of tortured Afghan detainees. Will the Prime Minister confirm that such a meeting did take place? If so, will he admit that he was personally informed of the allegations of torture as early as December 2006?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, if I understood the question correctly, my answer is that I never had any discussion with the governor of Kandahar about this issue.

Once again, if the Bloc and the opposition parties are serious about this issue and if it is more than a political game to them, they should hear testimony from the people who have information and want to tell their stories.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence confirmed that the transfer of detainees to Afghan authorities has been halted three times since the agreement was signed. We know that detainees were transferred between 2002 and 2007 under an agreement that the Conservative government has called inadequate.

Will the government acknowledge that although there are still concerns about the safety of prisoners transferred under the current agreement, the situation was even more worrisome before and that, therefore, the government failed to fulfill its international obligations?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Minister of National Defence and Minister for the Atlantic Gateway]

Mr. Speaker, as has been stated numerous times in the House, two and half years ago we did improve upon a transfer arrangement that allowed for operational pauses. The Afghan officials were not living up to the expectations and were not complying in this instance. One of those occurred when we were not given the unfettered access.

We have improved upon that system. We now have rigorous checks and balances that allow Canadian officials to go into prisons and to track Taliban prisoners who have been transferred by Canadian Forces. We have improved upon that. When we are satisfied with the provisions being met, then the transfers will of course begin again.

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

Mr. Speaker, the government has halted the transfer of detainees three times this year because there was a risk of torture. The problem is that hundreds of other detainees were already in the Afghan authorities' hands when the transfers were halted.

How does halting transfers protect detainees who have already been transferred by the Canadian Forces to Afghan authorities?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Minister of National Defence and Minister for the Atlantic Gateway]

Mr. Speaker, I have a few points of correction. These are operational decisions taken on the ground by commanders, as was indicated by Chief of Defence Staff Walt Natynczyk. We know the transfer arrangement works much better now because we have more access. We have more ability to have eyes on inside the Afghan prisons. Numerous officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs to Public Safety now have that ability.

It is an improved transfer arrangement. We know it works. We know it is in place to protect human rights, and we are proud of that arrangement.

Poverty

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

Mr. Speaker, 20 years ago today in this chamber, NDP leader Ed Broadbent moved a motion to eradicate child poverty and it was passed unanimously by the House of Commons.

Here we are in 2009 and yet we have one in ten children in Canada living in poverty, one out of four aboriginal children. Many provinces are taking action to bring forward poverty eradication plans. Just earlier today in this chamber even the Conservatives voted in favour of our motion to eradicate child poverty.

Was the vote meaningful? Will the Prime Minister tell us if he is committed to eradicating child poverty?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, no one is for child poverty. Under this government, we are spending three times more than our predecessors on early childhood learning, child care and education.

When I look at the number of initiatives we have taken, what is interesting is in almost every case the NDP has voted against these things. I hope the NDP will go back to the days of Ed Broadbent and actually stand with us on some of these matters.

Afghanistan

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

Mr. Speaker, the torture issue is turning into a complete fiasco for the Conservatives. While the Prime Minister is busy holding photo opportunities that could easily have been scheduled at other times, he is abandoning any pretense of caring about this issue or that Canada may have been in the past and may still be violating Geneva Convention rules.

The NDP's call for an inquiry into this matter has many supporters now, including Amnesty International today. Why will the Prime Minister not agree to our call for a public inquiry to get to the bottom of this whole matter?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, appropriate action has been taken on all these matters, and in some cases taken years ago.

Once again, if the NDP and the other opposition parties are at all serious about getting to the truth, they will actually hear from those who want to testify before the parliamentary committee. There are a number; let them be heard. What is the opposition afraid of, other than the truth?

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

Mr. Speaker, the problem is that the Conservatives refuse to be transparent on this. The Conservatives want so badly to keep everything secret that they do not inform the Red Cross when detainees are transferred. Just because the Liberals did the same thing in 2002, that does not mean the Conservatives should repeat those mistakes.

Can the Prime Minister at least admit that there is torture in Afghan prisons? It is a simple question.

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, this government took steps to improve the transfer of information to the Red Cross in 2006.

In 2006 we made that change. In 2007 officials of the Department of Foreign Affairs negotiated an entire new transfer arrangement with the government of Afghanistan, two and a half years ago.

In every instance, Canadian diplomats and Canadian soldiers, whenever they are aware of abuse, take the action they are required to take under international law because that is how our country acts. We are proud of those people.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Richard Colvin is one of those diplomats of whom we are proud.

What did Allan Cutler, former whistleblower and Conservative candidate, have to say yesterday when asked about Richard Colvin? “His career is dead. He doesn't have a career. He's never going to recover from this, never”.

The government's smear campaign against Colvin is a blatant attempt to intimidate other witnesses from coming forward and corroborating Colvin's testimony. Why is the Conservative government so relentless in its cover-up?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps Mr. Cutler was speaking in respect of his experience with the former Liberal government.

Our government is committed to ensuring that employees feel safe to raise concerns honestly and openly about wrongdoing. That is why we strengthened protection for whistleblowers under the Federal Accountability Act and brought into force the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act.

This witness has the protection of that act. This government is proud that we brought in this protection, which that government refused to bring in.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Allan Cutler also said yesterday that the Conservative Party, the party for which he was a candidate, “never listens to the message. They attack the messenger. Nothing has changed”.

Why should Canadians trust that Conservative Prime Minister and his government when they continue to hide the truth, cover up and put the muzzle on anyone else who wishes to come forward and corroborate Colvin's testimony?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the diplomat in question, as everyone knows, has a right to his opinion and has given his opinion. We also know that a large number of his colleagues do not agree with those opinions. They have asked for their right to speak, so I encourage the opposition not to muzzle them.

[Bob Rae, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. No witness will ever be blocked by the Liberal Party or the Liberal caucus with respect to documents. That is not the issue.

At the same time, we need the minutes of the cabinet committee leading up to the change in 2007. We need the memos of Richard Colvin. We need the memos of those in response to Richard Colvin. We need the human rights reports of the Department of Foreign Affairs with respect to Afghanistan.

Could he not commit today to doing what his colleague, the Minister of National Defence, said yesterday and commit to releasing those documents to the committee?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Minister of National Defence and Minister for the Atlantic Gateway]

Mr. Speaker, as has been stated many times, we will release all documents legally obliged to do so.

What is interesting is these qualifications that are now being put in place by members opposite. These aspersions that are being now cast upon individuals who want to come forward and testify, somehow suggesting that they are partisan.

Here is what Mr. Paul Chapin, an individual who is non-partisan and someone who is a respected public servant, had to say:

Colvin’s charge is not that there was general torture going on. His charge is that we, Canada, knowingly turned over people to be tortured. And that’s irresponsible because he has no hard evidence for that.

[Bob Rae, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is the government that is in charge of all the documents. It is the government that has the documents and reports that go to committee or cabinet. It is the government that controls all the information, and so far, it is the government that is refusing to share information and clearly say that, as a government, it is committed to disclosing the whole truth on the situation. It is the government's responsibility to do so.

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Minister of National Defence and Minister for the Atlantic Gateway]

Mr. Speaker, it is the responsibility of the opposition and, in fact, the responsibility of the committee to hear from witnesses who have relevant information to place before the committee, particularly when they have been invited to come and testify, when they have indicated their willingness to come and testify and when their names have been impugned. For members of the opposition to cast aspersions on that person and suggest that somehow the person is partisan is hypocritical.

The words, the hot breath of the member opposite is dripping with hypocrisy in suggesting they will not let the member testify.

Climate Change

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government's goal of a 3% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions is totally irresponsible, especially since it is not backed by a credible and rigorous plan. By voting for the Bloc Québécois motion, a majority of parliamentarians will be asking that the Conservative government stop undermining the Copenhagen negotiations and will be demanding an ambitious plan. Even the United States is saying that it is prepared to propose greenhouse gas reduction targets.

Will the government respect democracy and comply with the House's vote?

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, we have a strategy. For example, our government is a major player in Quebec. We provided $350 million for Quebec's green plan. As Premier Charest said in February 2007, the federal contribution will allow Quebec to attain its objectives.

We have always played our part and the Bloc should support our efforts.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister should have listened to Quebec's premier. He gave the federal government a lesson yesterday. That is the reality.

By choosing 2006 as the reference year, the government is refusing to recognize the efforts made by Quebec between 1990 and 2006. Aluminum producers reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 15% and manufacturing industries by 24%. And yet the federal government refuses to give Quebec credits for past efforts.

Is that not further proof that the government is defending the oil companies instead of Quebec's manufacturing industry?

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, that is not the case. I salute Quebec's efforts. The Bloc should congratulate us for having supported Quebec's efforts. For example the $350 million was more than Quebec and even the Bloc had asked for. It was not the Bloc that helped Quebec; it was our government.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government is undermining work in Copenhagen, and this could have some serious consequences for Quebec. While President Sarkozy regularly mentions the possibility of creating a carbon tax, and the WTO says that it would be legal under certain conditions, Quebec could end up being the victim of the federal government's inaction.

Does the government realize that by thinking only of the interests of Alberta oil companies, it is sacrificing the economic and environmental interests of Quebec?