Mr. Speaker, we just listened to the parliamentary secretary tie himself into knots in his pretzel logic. He sounded more like a cheerleader for cluster bombs than an opponent of cluster bombs. He spent most of his speech justifying places where they maybe need to be used in the interests of some higher power. He sounded like he worked for the NRA, not the peace movement.
It is no surprise that the loophole clause is called chapter 11, because 22 is a multiple, and my colleague has a Catch-22 mentality about the banning of cluster mines that is worthy of Joseph Heller.
I was hoping there would be a serious debate on this issue tonight, because the country is watching. The country was optimistic that we might be taking some tentative measures to reclaim our position in the global community, much as we did when the whole nation got involved in the land mines treaty. School kids got involved. People were proud of our country and of the lead position that we took as part of the international community, whether it was led by Lady Diana or by others in our own country, such as Dr. Samantha Nutt and Lloyd Axworthy. They played powerful roles and made the country proud.
Instead, we took something that was virtuous and had great merit, and then sabotaged and undermined it. We are actually undermining and sabotaging the international community with this loophole clause.
Let me explain.
The parliamentary secretary is laughing. I do not think he realizes how bad he is making our country look with his shenanigans.
I do not know if he is responsible for the sabotage. I do not think he is that high up the totem pole in his rank. I am going to back up a second while he is still here, while we have his attention and while he is still lucid, because it is getting late and he may be reverting to the chitter-chatter that goes on to try to undermine any kind of meaningful debate in this place.
I will read clause 6. I am going to go through a few parts of it.
Clause 6 would meet the nod test with most Canadians and in fact would make most Canadians proud that we signed on to this treaty in 2008. Clause 6 states:
—it is prohibited for any person to
(a) use a cluster munition...
(b) develop, make, acquire or possess, a cluster munition...
(c) move a cluster munition...
(d) import or export a cluster munition...
(e) attempt to commit any act referred to in paragraphs (a) to (d);
(f) aid, abet or counsel another person to commit any act referred to in paragraphs (a) to (d);
(g) conspire with another person to commit any act referred to in paragraphs (a) to (d);...
All of that sounds great. It sounds very thorough and comprehensive that Canada will have no part of cluster munitions in any way, shape or form, including the manufacture, the shipping, the export, the sale, the handling or the use. We are out.
We are out until we go a few pages further, to a much larger clause that goes on for a full two pages. It is clause 11, which states:
Section 6 does not prohibit a person...from
(a) directing or authorizing an activity that may involve the use, acquisition, possession, import or export of a cluster [musician]...
(b) expressly requesting the use of a cluster [musician]...
(c) using, acquiring or possessing a cluster munition...
These are all the exceptions.
Clause 11 goes on to state:
Section 6 does not prohibit a person, in the course of military cooperation...from
(a) aiding, abetting or counselling another person to [use a munition]...
In other words, it gives a road map for all the ways that Canada can participate in the use of cluster musicians.
Did I say “musicians” again? That is what members are laughing about. I am a little upset, and they ought to cut me some slack because I have never been so disappointed, I do not think, in my 16 years here.
There are many things wrong with how this came before us, but I think it is absolutely tragic that we are missing this opportunity to accurately reflect the mood of the nation and engage in a robust denunciation of cluster musicians.
Now I am going to say it all the time.