Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to thank my friend and colleague from Ottawa Centre who shared his time with me during this very important debate.
I would like to congratulate the member for Bourassa. Although we are from different political parties, some subjects transcend the normal partisanship in the House and the situation in Haiti is one of them. With the hon. member for Bourassa and the hon. member for Jeanne-Le Ber, who came up with the idea, we have a committee made up of Canadian parliamentarians who are trying to begin to ensure that Canada's action on this issue is as relevant and meaningful as possible.
That is why I am a bit confused by the off-putting and even aggressive tone we are hearing from the government side. This is very inappropriate for an emergency debate centred on finding solutions. We are not here to use that sort of tone. The Haitian people, courageous and proud people, have already experienced enough tragedy this year. Now is the time to engage in sober reflection and to begin to find solutions that will be beneficial in the long term.
My colleague clearly summarized the issue: our current number one priority must be to continue to save lives. It does not make any sense. We are in the most economically developed part of the world. We live in the western hemisphere, what we call North and South America and western Europe. Nevertheless, in one country, hundreds of thousands of people are at risk of catching a disease that we thought had been relegated to the pages of history books: cholera. A number of people have already died from this disease. I know that Canada is doing its part. The government responded quickly and made sure that the public knew what it was doing. It proposed a fairly large fund in order to match any donations made by the public. This was an excellent way to go about it. But where are we now, almost a year later? That is the question we need to be asking ourselves.
The elections have been much talked about. Let us take a hard look at the facts. We can talk about building democratic institutions, but if we are in Haiti to try to find a solution, then holding the elections in relative calm to ensure reliable results should have been a priority. That does not seem to have been the case, though. It is all well and good for the minister to say that he might not allow the result if something is found to have happened. Clearly, from what we have seen, heard and read, there were major problems with the election. But we need to remember that Haiti was the first country to free itself from slavery, so the last thing we want to do is treat Haiti like a colony.
Haiti is and always will be free to make its own choices, even though we are all trying to help as best we can. Like everyone, I deplore the fact that the election results are ambiguous. At least, we cannot know whether the announcement that was made is accurate. But let us be clear: it is not up to Canada to decide for Haiti. The time for Canada to act was before the election, not after. We should have said we had resources, we would provide others as well, and we would bring in people who could organize and structure an election process that was as probative and reliable as possible.The thing to do is not to take action after the fact. In a way, what we are doing is blaming the victims, which is not the best approach. Even though Canada has done many very good things from the outset, this was not our finest hour. The minister launched an all-out attack on the ambiguous outcome, but that ambiguity is largely the fault of the government, which did not do enough with the other allies there.
We must also start to rebuild. We must work with the civil society. Although I applaud the fact that the government created a fund to match public contributions, the public still needs objective information on the NGOs and groups that are transferring all of that money to Haiti.
Last year, I was disturbed to see some groups make official claims that people could come to them and trust them with respect to Haiti. They said that the money contributed would help Haiti but also other good causes in the world. I absolutely want them to support other causes, but the people who want to specifically help Haiti must have adequate information on the charities and NGOs that are managing all of this money to get through a crisis that is unique in the history of this part of the world.
In the long term, we must help Haiti build its capacity in terms of infrastructure and governance. When I talk about infrastructure in a country that has experienced so many natural disasters in recent years, such as flooding and the earthquake that is the main issue today, we understand that general healthiness, something we have taken for granted for centuries, is not guaranteed there. Furthermore, hundreds of thousands of people still live in makeshift camps and are still dealing with terrible weather conditions.
Clearly, Canada can continue to do its part. Earlier, my colleague from Bourassa mentioned that a specific part of the armed forces may have left too soon. In any event, there are certainly solutions, and this might be the time to advocate for our priorities. They are wondering if the election is a priority. Perhaps they should have had the resources in place to avoid ambiguity and the current dispute. If soldiers and military personnel are being sent to a place like Haiti, it means that it is considered to be a priority relative to other activities.
That is unfortunate. In the House, we decided to pull our soldiers out of Afghanistan in 2011. We would have liked that to have happened earlier. However, when the 2011 deadline was set, it was known that troops would be leaving Afghanistan at that time. Instead of having these men and women at our disposal to do this work in Haiti, thousands of them will still be in Afghanistan in the years ahead. That demonstrates how the government makes its choices and sets its priorities.
The New Democratic Party feels that civil society has made the necessary effort. In Montreal, teams of men and women were trained by health and social service centres in the greater metropolitan area to ensure respect for the specific cultural context of those arriving, many of them in an advanced state of distress. Teams of psychologists greeted them at the airport, sometimes at 2 or 3 o'clock in the morning. The public responded, and Canadians expressed a heartfelt desire to help their Haitian brothers and sisters. It is a top priority for all of us.
Now we need to keep our promises. We have to set our priorities and continue to help.