Debates of Nov. 26th, 2009

Official Languages

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House, I rose to denounce the Bloc's attitude because, in committee, its members denied me the right to have documents translated from English to French. I rose to defend the right of francophones to work in their first language.

Because I denounced that attitude, the Bloc leader attacked my integrity yesterday during a scrum. He knows what he said.

Is that any way to behave, to insult a unilingual francophone member because he wanted to stand up for the French language in Ottawa? French is my language, and I am proud of it.

By reacting as he did, the Bloc leader insulted all unilingual Quebec francophones.

Where I come from, in the regions, unilingual francophones are the majority, and we fight for our rights.

Where I come from, nobody insults people who speak French. People stand up to defend the values of the Quebec nation.

Middle East

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured that the report of the parliamentary delegation to the West Bank and Gaza this past August has been presented.

It was a significant and compelling experience, and I am committed to raising awareness about the worsening humanitarian disaster in Gaza and the need to end the blockade, normalize borders and end the occupation of Palestinian lands.

I am deeply concerned that the Conservative government has so politicized the situation in the Middle East and has gone so far as to attack MPs and organizations who criticize the actions of Israel as being anti-Semitic. Let us be clear. Anti-Semitism has no place in Canada.

The Conservative attacks are reminiscent of McCarthyism and also have no place in Canadian society.

Rather than trying to silence and denigrate legitimate public debate, including its contempt of the Goldstone report, the Conservative government must stand up for international law, human rights and the fourth Geneva Convention.

I hope all members will consider this report and ensure that Canada affirms its commitment to peace and justice for Palestinians and for a lasting--

[The Speaker, Peter Milliken]

Order, please. The hon. member for Calgary East.

Terrorism

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, today, Canada remembers the victims of last year's deadly attacks in Mumbai. A year ago, cowardly terrorist attacks took the lives of 166 innocent civilians, including two Canadians.

Our thoughts are with the families of the victims and with the survivors of this terrible tragedy.

Last week, the Prime Minister, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and I stayed in Mumbai at one of the hotels that was attacked.

Canada itself is not immune to terrorist attacks. Canadians lost their lives in the Air India bombings, as well as in the September 11 attacks in New York.

Canada has designated June 23 as the National Day of Remembrance for Victims of Terrorism, which aims to denounce terrorism and honour the memory of its victims, such as those who lost their lives in the deadly attacks in Mumbai.

Canada and India have agreed to continue to fight against global terrorism.

Marcel Prud'homme

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise here today to pay tribute to Senator Marcel Prud'homme. First elected on February 10, 1964, in the riding of Saint-Denis, in Montreal, and appointed to the Senate in 1993, Marcel Prud'homme is Canada's longest serving parliamentarian with a total of 45 years of service.

Senator Prud'homme possesses immeasurable experience of political life and a solid understanding of international affairs. In fact, he helped establish several interparliamentary groups that work tirelessly to promote and encourage participation in the dialogue needed between various countries to ensure the future of humanity.

He has become friends with some of the world's most influential individuals and has always worked to ensure understanding and friendship between peoples. Throughout his career, he has never been afraid to become involved in the most controversial issues in the pursuit of justice. He has been a tireless advocate for peace, human rights and the dignity of all human beings.

Senator Prud'homme, we wish you all the best in your future endeavours.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the dean of Parliament, the hon. Senator Marcel Prud'homme from Montreal, a member of the Privy Council, will retire in just a few days' time, on November 30, the day he turns 75.

After spending 45 years, 9 months and 20 days as a member of the House who won nine consecutive elections from 1964 to 1993 in Saint-Denis as a Liberal and as an independent senator since May 26, 1993, he leaves us as the corporate memory of Parliament. Senator Prud'homme is a proud French-Canadian nationalist who has always believed and still believes in our federation, and he was a true patriot when it came to defending Canadian interests on the international scene.

Marcel Prud'homme's political vision of a more just world and his fight for nuclear disarmament, peace in the Middle East and gender equality are a political legacy that we must preserve.

I wish Senator Prud'homme a wonderful retirement and every success in his future endeavours.

Afghanistan

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Mr. Speaker, today a Liberal MP will stand on behalf of the Liberal leader and ask a question about detainees in Afghanistan. The Liberal leader's stand-in will throw mud and make allegations, smearing our armed forces and our mission.

However, no matter what the question or the answer, the Liberal leader has proven what we have been saying all along: he is just in it for himself. He proved it because the Liberal leader is actually fundraising on this issue.

My colleagues and I do not support this calculated cynicism and we are not alone. The Liberal member for Vancouver South, when asked if this was an appropriate issue to fundraise on, said “no, it's not”.

Shortly, mark my words, a Liberal member will stand on behalf of the Liberal leader and ask a question about Afghan detainees. But the question is: How long before the Liberal Party uses that trumped up question to fill its war chest? It is deplorable.

[Bob Rae, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government has shut down the Military Police Complaints Commission. It has refused to renew the commissioner's mandate. It is obstructing the hearing of witnesses and is telling Richard Colvin that if he cooperates with the House committee, he could end up in jail.

How is this compatible with seeking the truth behind allegations of mistreatment in Afghan prisons?

[John Baird, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, what is not compatible, and what is a shameless attempt to raise money, is for the Liberal Party to malign Canada and question the actions of our public servants and our brave men and women in uniform.

The Liberal Party is politicizing a very sensitive issue on the backs of our brave men and women in uniform. It is unwarranted, it is appalling and it is absolutely shameful.

[Bob Rae, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the only party that has attacked the credibility of a public servant serving in Afghanistan is the Conservative Party of Canada in its attack on Mr. Colvin. The Conservatives are the only ones who have done it.

We now have the spectacle of Mr. Colvin, the three generals yesterday and, no doubt, Mr. Mulroney today all having full and complete access to documents that members of Parliament cannot see. We are barred from having access to information the government has full control of and that ministers, and even retired generals, can review.

We are asked to do our work blindfolded and in the dark. Does the minister not realize that only a public inquiry—

[The Speaker, Peter Milliken]

The hon. Minister of Transport.

[John Baird, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, to be very clear, we have and will continue to provide all legally available information to Parliament and to the committee. We think that is important.

The member opposite talks about darkness, but I will talk about the darkness that members of the Canadian armed forces remember, the decade of darkness of the Liberals' time in power.

I know the member for Toronto Centre. I know he would believe it is wrong to raise money on the backs of our men and women in uniform by maligning Canada. I would call on him to match the statements by the member for Vancouver South and stand in this place and call those types of shameless fundraising tactics wrong for what they are.

[Bob Rae, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the fact remains that partially and heavily blacked-out documents with key information missing are not disclosure. Non-answers in the House are not disclosure. Rhetorical personal attacks, such as the minister has just indulged in, are not disclosure and do not amount to disclosure.

We need to get at the truth. Why is the government afraid of a public inquiry to get at the truth? What is it about the truth that the government is afraid of?

[John Baird, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, a great Canadian hero spoke to the House of Commons committee yesterday. General Rick Hillier, a great Canadian hero, dismissed the claims against the Canadian Forces as ludicrous and uninformed. We heard another general who said he was “mortified” at the questions being put by some members of the opposition.

I know the member for Toronto Centre and he was never more correct in his life when in the House of Commons on June 10, 1980, he said:

Nothing embarrasses the Liberals because they do not know the meaning of shame. They are without shame; they are shameless.

He was right then and is just as right today.

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, for years there has been a compelling body of evidence about the risk of torture in Afghan jails in the public domain: the U.S. Department of State, the UN, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, the Red Cross and even DFAIT itself, to name just a few sources.

The Dutch were so worried that they wanted to build a NATO prison to ensure the proper treatment of prisoners.

Why the cover-up? Why no disclosure? Why not have a public inquiry?

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

Mr. Speaker, as we have indicated a number of times, when we had credible allegations, we acted. When we had evidence that substantiated concerns, we moved. We invested. We helped Afghans.

Let us take a look at what General Gauthier, a highly decorated 36 year veteran of the Canadian Forces, had to say yesterday. He said, “I can very safely say there is nothing in any of these 2006 reports that caused any of the subject matter experts on my staff, nor, by extension, me, to be alerted me to either the fact of torture or a very high risk of torture, nothing”.

That is what the general had to say. I will take his word over that of the member opposite any day.

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, General Gauthier also said, release the documents, because that would prove that the government has continued to transfer detainees to the risk of torture in Afghan jails.

In February 2008, the Federal Court of Canada said:

The evidence...clearly establishes the existence of very real concerns as to the effectiveness of the steps that have been taken thus far to ensure that detainees transferred by the Canadian Forces to the custody of Afghan authorities are not mistreated.

Why the cover-up? Why no disclosure? Why is there not a public inquiry? What does this accountable and honest government have to fear from the truth?

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

Mr. Speaker, more verbiage and volume from the member opposite add nothing. I thank him for pointing out that we are an accountable and honest government.

Let us look again and get beyond the rhetorical flourishes. Let us get beyond those who are in partisan mode. Let us look at what a highly decorated, recognized former chief of the defence staff had to say:

We didn't base our actions upon people making statements that all detainees were being tortured. How ludicrous a statement is that from any one single individual who really has no knowledge to be able to say something like that.

We are putting documents out that we are legally obliged to. We will continue to do so.

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

Mr. Speaker, the government has always claimed that it did not receive any information regarding allegations of torture of Afghan detainees. Two former high-ranking army officers reiterated this yesterday before the parliamentary committee. Yet, Richard Colvin sent emails to the Minister of Foreign Affairs in May and June 2006 informing him that the Red Cross could not track prisoners once they were transferred to Afghan authorities and that all sorts of things were happening.

Why has the government always denied receiving warnings about the fate of Afghan detainees?

[John Baird, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

When the government gets credible evidence the government acts, Mr. Speaker, but we require proven, substantiated and credible evidence to act.

Yesterday, the House of Commons committee heard from two great Canadian heroes, General Rick Hillier, who called the allegations ludicrous. We also heard from one 36 year veteran in the Canadian Forces, Lieutenant-General Michel Gauthier, who said that he felt mortified to see members of the opposition basically label the troops as war criminals. That is a disgrace and that is shameful.

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

Mr. Speaker, for security reasons, the government is refusing to provide the opposition parties with reports on allegations of torture of Afghan detainees. And yet, former military personnel, who have now returned to civil life—those who testified yesterday—were given the reports before appearing before the committee, even though they are no longer in the armed forces.

Will the Prime Minister or the minister admit that security is just an excuse to save face in a matter where the government has lost all credibility?

[John Baird, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the generals who appeared yesterday reiterated exactly what this government has been saying all along, and in the House for more than a week. They dismissed the allegations against themselves and the government as completely baseless. I would encourage the member opposite to accept that.

If we have to hear from people, there is no more credible Canadian on this issue than General Rick Hillier. I believe what General Hillier said. I support our men and women in the military. Those of us on this side of the House will never ever do anything that will not ensure the complete security of our men and women in uniform.

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

Mr. Speaker, the government is doing everything it can to hide the truth. Without immunity, the diplomat Richard Colvin does not wish to provide his reports on torture to the parliamentary committee. The government's lawyers are threatening him with reprisals, including incarceration.

I am asking the government to confirm for the House that Mr. Colvin has immunity, as do all witnesses, and that he has the right to table all documents he believes are pertinent.

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

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Colvin gave his testimony. That testimony was the subject of cross-examination, as was the testimony given yesterday by three top generals.

With respect to this question of emails and communications, we have answered this question a number of times. When our military, when our diplomats, when individuals involved in the mission received information, they acted. They acted quickly. They acted decisively. We have invested to make improvements in the Afghan system.

Disparaging remarks and rhetorical flourishes are not going to help us get to the bottom of this issue. We are co-operating with the parliamentary committee and will continue to do so.

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

Mr. Speaker, this goes to the core of what will happen in the next few days with witnesses. Not only do we not have the documents but witnesses are now being threatened, as is the immunity of parliamentary committees. That is unacceptable.

The minister is not answering my question and I am asking him to answer. If Mr. Colvin comes to the committee and tables his documents, does he run the risk of being incarcerated? If so, that is totally unacceptable.