Debates of Sept. 16th, 2014

Situation in Iraq

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we are all shocked by what is going on in Iraq. I had the opportunity to be on site in Baghdad in September 2011 as one of the first Canadian representatives in many years.

Meanwhile, while we are speaking about armed intervention, there is an army of civilians in Canada who also want to do something. I know certainly in the Vancouver area, people like Ernest Lang, Helen Miller and Farid Rohani are trying to bring together Canadians to rally and encourage our government to do something. They are talking about how to cut off financial resources to ISIL. They are talking about expanding humanitarian aid.

What does he recommend Canadian citizens do to send a message that we will end this perfidious nightmare in Iraq?

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate what my hon. colleague has said, that there are Canadians who are watching and seeing what is happening: the indiscriminate killing, the rape of women, and the humanitarian crisis taking place. As my colleague, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration has said, we have taken the largest number of refugees from Iraq of any country that we know of.

I do understand that, but at the current time, the bigger threat is that this group does not conform to any laws. It does not conform to any human rights, does not respect any human rights or anything. That is the biggest threat that needs to confronted. To confront that, it is necessary that we take this collective action, but the government is also committed to helping with humanitarian assistance for the displaced people of Iraq.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, in 2004, the then-opposition leader, today the Prime Minister, joined with Jack Layton in calling for a change to the Standing Orders of the House of Commons.

They agreed that all MPs should be allowed to vote on any Canadian participation in armed conflicts.

In 2006, the Conservative Party platform pledged to:

Make Parliament responsible for exercising oversight over the conduct of Canadian foreign policy and the commitment of Canadian Forces to foreign operations.

Members might notice that it does not say “to some foreign operations”. There are no conditions. There are no exceptions. It does not say “to combat missions”, ill-defined or not defined.

In 2007, the Conservative Speech from the Throne, the most formal form of address in our Parliament reiterated that the government has made clear to Canadians and our allies that:

...any future military deployments must also be supported by a majority of parliamentarians.

We know how parliamentarians express their voice. It is through a vote in this House.

In 2009, the Prime Minister declared unequivocally that his government would henceforth:

...require that military deployments...be supported by the Parliament of Canada.

I listened with great interest as the member of Parliament for Westmount—Ville-Marie and after him the Liberal member for Vancouver Quadra expressed their unconditional support for what the government was doing. The only problem is that we do not know what those troops are being asked to do on the ground.

Referencing back to last week's hearings in committee of course provides no information whatsoever. I was gobsmacked to hear the minister evoke weapons of mass destruction. I had a feeling that I had got into a time machine as the Conservatives were groping for a way to explain this thing.

We have just heard the parliamentary secretary say, with incredible arrogance, that they will let us know when the 30 days are up. In other words, their timing is up to them, the contents of the mission will never be discussed in this House, and those who have been elected to represent Canadians will not be allowed to vote. The NDP does not accept this.

I am extremely disappointed that neither the Prime Minister nor the leader of the Liberal Party is here with us this evening. This is a state matter. It is a question of defining what type of society we want to live in. To us, their absence speaks volumes. This is an emergency debate, a rare event in our parliamentary lives. They should have been here. They should have been speaking.

It is important to understand the threat, and let us look at that objectively. Members of the House fully understand the serious humanitarian and security risk posed by the organization Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, ISIL.

The violence perpetrated by ISIL is reprehensible. It includes mass killings, sexual violence against women, threatening religious and ethnic minorities with genocide, forcibly displacing civilians, and destroying holy sites. More than 1.5 million people have already been affected by the humanitarian situation in Iraq, which goes back far beyond the current one. Some 1.2 million people have been displaced, and conditions, of course, are worsening every day.

The United Nations declared what they call the highest level of emergency. The humanitarian crisis and the security threats could spill over the borders of Iraq and Syria. Responding to ISIL's threats requires a thorough and serious assessment of the facts on the ground and a clear understanding of the role Canada intends to play. From the government we get nothing, just empty meaningless words.

That is where the government has failed to answer fundamental questions from Canadians and representatives of the House. We cannot defeat ISIL by being vague and failing to show transparency.

We are not even told how many troops are being deployed, after being told today that yesterday it was several dozen and today it was 69. I was listening to the Minister of Foreign Affairs figure skating on one of the panel shows this afternoon, talking about how it was about logistics and planes and how long it takes them to get out.

We do not know. The government is not being transparent with Canadians.

More importantly, no one has told us yet in clear terms what the troops are going to do in this conflict. The only answer we get is that our troops will advise the Kurdish forces. Maybe so, but the Minister of National Defence told Parliament and the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development that our troops will not be in a combat role and that this was not a combat mission. He even reiterated that our combat troops will not put boots on Iraqi soil. It had to be done.

Boots will not be on the ground. They are either wearing sandals or they are levitating. Which one is it?

He cannot or does not want to answer questions regarding the type of advice that a dozen special operations forces units will be giving to Kurdish forces. Given the Peshmerga's history, knowledge of the region and expertise, what advice would they need from Canada?

If these special forces are helping to line up targets but letting someone else fire the shots, does that constitute advice? Is it not merely a matter of semantics? The member for Toronto—Danforth mentioned this earlier when he quoted the Australian prime minister. The Australian prime minister added a qualifier because he would not get directly involved in a cause all on his own. Is that the type of game we are playing?

I could not believe what the member for Vancouver Quadra said earlier. She rose and said:

We should be “briefed fully”.

That is good enough for the Liberals when it comes to international affairs.

We should be briefed fully.

As parliamentarians, we do not just have the right to be informed. We should also be consulted and we have the right to vote.

The government says it will reassess our contribution in 30 days. We are not told what criteria they have used for the reassessment, and after all, this initial contribution was made at the request of Americans based on their assessment. It is safe to assume that this conflict will not end in 30 days, obviously. The U.S. administration has talked about a multi-year strategy, as do the Conservatives. It is no surprise that so many Canadians are deeply concerned about mission creep. This is a slippery slope.

These are serious strategic questions that need to be answered. The lack of focus is not benign, especially when we enter the theatre of war in a region marred by decades of conflict. If the government is incapable of answering basic strategic questions about its military commitment to Iraq, then how are Canadians to know what it is doing, and how are they to believe the information they are being given? It is quite clear from what we have heard tonight that it does not know what it is doing.

Still, it is committing us to a conflict that will expand. That is why it is essential for the government to present a clear motion in the House that outlines the details of Canada's commitment to Iraq. I said that the way it was meant. It is the government's responsibility, because I also heard the Minister of Foreign Affairs tonight say that it was the opposition's responsibility to bring it to a vote. We can, with an opposition day, but tonight we were supposed to get clear information and answers to our questions, and we have gotten nothing. Canadians do not know any more about this mission happening.

After a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, Canadians expect their leaders to approach potential military commitments with prudence and transparency. That is why Canadians will be deeply disappointed that the Prime Minister and the Liberal leader did not participate in tonight's emergency debate.

We can all remember back in 2003 that the current Prime Minister, who at the time served as opposition leader, was so keen to join the U.S. military involvement in Iraq. He even penned an op-ed in an American paper bemoaning Canadian opposition to the war. We all remember that. Maybe the minister was hoping he would get special bonus points for mentioning weapons of mass destruction tonight. Frankly, I think he has only embarrassed himself and his government. It is of particular concern that the government appears incapable of conveying a coherent understanding of the mission's objectives, strategy, costs, and timelines.

The same vagueness under the Liberals led to almost a decade of mission creep in Afghanistan. This House must remember that Canada's involvement in Afghanistan was also only supposed to be a short-term deployment of a small group of special operations forces. That should tell us something.

That mission also began under a veil of secrecy and without a debate in the House of Commons. That is why the current Prime Minister, who was an opposition member at the time, said that he was outraged that Parliament had not been consulted. I imagine that this is a case of “that was then, this is now”.

A decade later, a different government risks repeating those same mistakes by getting Canada involved in a military mission in Iraq, this time without having clearly defined the mandate of the members of the Canadian Forces or obtaining Parliament's approval.

The same vagueness under the Liberals led almost to a decade of mission creep in Afghanistan. This House has to recall that Canada's involvement in Afghanistan also began with what was supposed to be a short-term deployment of a small group of special operations forces. That mission also began under a veil of secrecy and without a debate and vote in the House of Commons.

A decade later, a different government risks repeating those same mistakes. There is no excuse for it, because the Conservatives were the ones who stood up and said we have to change the rules, Parliament has to be consulted, Parliament has to be informed and Parliament has a right to vote on these issues.

Now there are clear humanitarian needs. When it comes to the humanitarian needs on the ground and Canada's expertise in addressing these needs, there is no vagueness.

Our foreign affairs critic was in Iraq just two weeks ago. Officials in Baghdad and in Erbil asked Canadian parliamentarians for a contribution to their humanitarian needs. Interestingly enough, there was no request for Canadian military involvement in the conflict.

We have called on the government to contribute to the United Nations appeal for aid to meet the needs of the internally displaced in Iraq. Winter is coming and we have models from other countries, like Norway, which has sent in massive supplies to help.

We have called on the government to assist in addressing sexual violence. The Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General on sexual violence has reported numerous acts of violence, including acts of sexual violence against women, girls and boys, who are members of Iraqi minorities. Canada could allocate funds to meet the special needs of the victims of this sexual violence.

We have urged the government to ensure that international humanitarian law is respected and to ensure that those responsible for these war crimes are put on trial. Despite the government's promises, we are still waiting for it to do something. We must keep paying close attention to the Syrian refugee crisis, which has already had a major impact on Jordan and Turkey, countries that are currently doing their part. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of Canada under this Conservative government that is doing nothing.

There are too many unanswered questions about the Conservative government's approach to Iraq. We need immediate action on the humanitarian front. We need prudence and transparency on the military front. Tonight's debate cannot meet these objectives, since the government still refuses to present a motion that clearly outlines the objectives, parameters and timelines of this mission.

The Prime Minister must keep his promise to Canadians and put this military deployment to a democratic vote of Canada's Parliament.

There are too many unanswered questions about the Conservative government's approach to the deployment of the Canadian troops in Iraq. The Prime Minister must keep his promises to Canadians and put this issue to a vote in the House. Without a real debate, without any real information, no responsible person can support this mission in Iraq.

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition just laughed about the issue of weapons of mass destruction with his caucus members just over one year after chemical weapons were used against the population of Syria.

If he does not realize that these terrorist groups did their utmost to try to acquire that capacity, that they operate in both Syria and Iraq, that the Taliban and al Qaeda went to great lengths to try to acquire nuclear materials, he is showing deep ignorance. I think he has shown us today the least serious speech by a leader of the opposition in this place on an important matter of international peace and security in the history of this place.

I have a question for the Leader of the Opposition. Is he listening?

A CC-130 Hercules, a CC-177 Globemaster supported by 75 Canadian Armed Forces personnel in the Mediterranean, 69 special operations members of the Canadian Forces advising the government of Iraq on how to enable security forces in the northern part of the country to be more effective against the threat they face, providing strategic and tactical advice in an advisory and assistance role, not in a combat role.

Does he understand that? Does he know what our troops are doing, after so many people have told him in plain English exactly what this mission amounts to? How would he vote if it were brought to a vote in this place?

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when I hear the foolishness the minister was just spouting, I am somewhat concerned about how seriously he is taking this matter, given that he holds a very important position.

It is astounding that he confused the Syrian government, which used chemical weapons, with the terrorists. The whole weapons of mass destruction hoax, which was the reason behind the botched invasion in 2003, is being repeated by a cabinet minister in 2014.

What a disgrace.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the hon. Leader of the Opposition the following question.

If at the end of this evening there were a vote, and if all of his questions were answered, if all of his questions were answered to his satisfaction, and if he understood this to be a non-combat role, behind the wire, to be reviewed after 30 days; if that were the situation and all his questions were answered, would he tell us how he would vote?

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, beyond the wire, in an asymmetrical war, brilliant.

These are the members of the team, the Liberal team, who have shown us what they think about international affairs. Their leader stood up and applauded the government's European trade deal, a deal the Liberals had yet to read.

The Liberals are standing up tonight and applauding the government's military intervention in Iraq, despite the fact that this House is not being allowed to vote on it, and in his intervention the member of Parliament for Westmount—Ville-Marie said that if the role does change, the government is going to have to let us know and it is going to have to inform us.

We do not want to be informed. We have a right to vote. We were elected to do a job. It is too bad that he does not do his.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I do have a question for the Leader of the Opposition in light of the comments heard here tonight from the member for Westmount—Ville-Marie that Canadians should be prepared for a long battle.

The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration talked about the length of time it would take to do the work.

We have a 30-day mission with a vague mandate.

I wonder, given the fact that mission creep has been dismissed by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, what the Leader of the Opposition thinks of reports out of the U.S. that the Joint Chiefs of Staff's General Martin Dempsey is already talking about considering having the use of the military advisers in attacks against ISIS.

That is before Canadians are even there. The Americans are talking about advancing the advisers. These are the advisers and assisters that we are going to be sending. The Americans are looking at possibly using them for attacks on ISIS.

Is the Leader of the Opposition concerned? Does he wonder why Canadians are concerned about the potential of being dragged into a war in Iraq?

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague from St. John's East raises the most important question of all: what is the nature of this mission?

What words are being played with as the government describes an advisory role? These are Canada's top, elite special forces. If they are targeting, and someone else is doing the shooting, is that just advising?

We do not have any details about that. What we had tonight was a diatribe, un ramassis of George W. Bush-era arguments.

This is what we are listening to here tonight. There is nothing that has been put on the table tonight that would allow any reasonable Canadian to vote in favour of the mission being proposed by the Conservatives, because we know, as my colleague correctly points out, that the Americans are already talking about several years. We have been down that path before.

We were down that path when the Liberals, after deciding correctly not to go into Iraq, decided that we should go into Kandahar, unprepared for the situation we were being put into. That is mission creep.

That is the slippery slope that the government is putting us on. That is why we are insisting, not to be informed but to be consulted and to have a right to vote based on full information.

As things now stand, we do not have enough information to do that. That is why the only responsible thing is to say no to the Conservatives.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and for International Human Rights]

Mr. Speaker, let me say this for the Leader of the Opposition. When this House was discussing the issue of Afghanistan and the NDP was sitting over there, it was the same argument that they were trying to make: we do not want to go, we do not want to go. We do not want to be looking for excuses to do all that. The same speech he is making here today was made by Jack Layton and his people sitting over there. Today—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order, please. The hon. parliamentary secretary will come to order.

The hon. Leader of the Opposition.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if there were still people listening tonight who thought that perhaps the government was serious, I think that all doubt has been removed. What we are looking at now is the same thing we are going to be looking at from the government benches: posturing, positioning, using the lives of our brave women and men in uniform, sending them into an ill-defined mission, asking Canadians to buy a pig in a poke.

Canadians deserve to know what this mission is about and what the real dangers are. We are not going to be like the Liberals. We are not going to drag us down the slippery slope that brought us into Kandahar. We are not going to accept being told by the Conservatives, especially when it is the same Conservatives who brought motion after motion to say that no Canadian military mission should ever take place without a vote in this House. That is what they said they wanted. That is what we demand: there should be a vote in the House of Commons on this mission.

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the truth is that military missions happen all the time without votes in this House. We deploy people to join NATO missions, to join training missions, to join reassurance missions throughout the NATO area of operations without votes in this House. For the reassurance mission to stand up to Vladimir Putin's aggression, we did not hear the Leader of the Opposition complaining that we deployed Canadian Forces there.

Let us ask the leader again. Is it that he does not believe, that he does not understand or that he still does not know that this a combat mission, or is he still gobsmacked to learn that Osama bin Laden is actually dead?

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this is coming from the same person who, a little bit earlier this evening, said that he took it really seriously when people in one of those groups said they were going to take over everything from Al-Andalus, which is in Spain, to India. That is how serious he thinks this is.

This is what we are dealing with. We are dealing with a government that does not even recognize that it is doing the exact same thing, and it is true that when we do not learn the lessons of history, we are condemned to repeat them. The lessons in Afghanistan were that we were drawn into a conflict that cost well over 100 Canadians, cost tens of billions of dollars, for a situation that is right now barely more stable than it was then. This is because the Conservatives and the Liberals simply followed all the instructions from other powers.

This is not a NATO mission. There is no NATO mandate here. It has nothing to do with NATO. So any reference by this minister to NATO in Iraq shows the paucity of his empty rhetoric and his incapacity to present a case that will convince Canadians.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Development]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to join this debate tonight on the current crisis that is unfolding in Iraq. Before I begin, I would like to mention that I will be splitting my time with the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence.

I would like to thank the hon. member for bringing this issue to the House, as I believe it is one that merits the full benefit of parliamentary discussion—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, may I continue?

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The hon. members may wish to take their seats and come to order.

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Development.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that all colleagues across the House can agree that the threat posed by terrorist regimes taking greater control of Iraq is of great concern. It is of great concern to the well-being of the Iraqi people. It is a concern to the peace and stability in the Middle East. It is a concern to global security.

Canada is not willing to accept a scenario in which the Islamic State of Iraq is allowed to consolidate territory between Iraq and Syria into an autonomous region from which to operate. Many of the reasons for this have been previously mentioned: the ability to transfer weapons and extremists across borders; oppressive control over large populations of innocent civilians; and further degradation of already troubling humanitarian conditions across the region.

Canada and Canadians condemn in the strongest possible terms the barbaric methods of ISIS, such as the murder and rape of innocent women and children, the barbaric murder of American journalists and a British aid worker, and the repugnant killing of innocent civilians in northern Iraq, including the religious minorities.

The humanitarian toll this has taken on the local population is indeed a tragedy. Violence has displaced an estimated 850,000 people in Iraq. This brings the number of Iraqis who have had to flee their homes since the year began to 1.7 million, which represents one of the largest cases of internal displacement in the world. Armed clashes in northern Iraq have driven further displacement, causing the humanitarian context to deteriorate even further. The living conditions for many are desperate. They need water, food and shelter. They also need medical supplies.

In early August nearly 200,000 people made their way to Iraq's Kurdistan region or to disputed border areas. Thousands more reportedly fled across the border into Syria, then back again into the Kurdistan region as well. These people all need help but humanitarian efforts are hampered by the considerable deterioration of security conditions. An unknown number of civilians remain trapped in contested areas with limited access to services. They are living in vulnerable locations, some in schools, others in churches, many in mosques and unfinished buildings.

The influx of internally displaced people is also putting added strain on an already fragile health care structure. Many health facilities are simply overwhelmed, incapable of fully managing a caseload docket that grows larger by the day.

Further, insecurity has interrupted normal supply routes, meaning food is not reaching the hungry. Just as worrisome, the next harvest will be impacted as nearly one-third of Iraq's wheat production comes from areas affected by the current conflict. Food security is becoming a growing concern.

These facts and figures tell quite a story and are enough to prompt any well-meaning country to join the relief effort. Canada recognized early its responsibility to assist and even before the United Nations declared that the situation in Iraq was a level 3 emergency, we had already committed resources to the humanitarian response.

On August 10, the Minister of International Development announced an assistance package of $5 million delivered through four experienced humanitarian partners with long histories of activity in Iraq and robust organizations in the country. Development and Peace, the International Committee of the Red Cross, Save the Children Canada, and Mercy Corps have used our support to address the immediate humanitarian needs of those affected by the civil unrest.

On August 29, the minister announced an additional deployment of relief supplies from Canada's emergency stockpile to be distributed to conflict-affected people in northern Iraq. That stockpile is managed by the Canadian Red Cross. It is composed of relief items designed to meet the basic needs of populations in crisis, including tents, blankets, kitchen sets, hygiene kits, and jerry cans. Recently, in early September, the Minister of Foreign Affairs met with Kurdistan regional government officials to discuss their efforts to address the humanitarian and security situation in the region. At that meeting, he announced an additional $7 million in humanitarian assistance.

Canada cares deeply about the current situation in Iraq and wants a resolution that allows Iraqis to regain at least some semblance of stability. This will not be easy, nor will it be quick. Still, we believe that with the international community's backing, Iraq, and the world, can overcome the ISIS threat, allowing us to shift our focus in Iraq from humanitarian assistance to development work.

In June, Iraq was identified as a development partner country for Canada. The details of our future development assistance program in Iraq are currently being explored and assessed, and the size of our financial envelope is still being determined. However, we do know that our focus in Iraq will be to advance the priorities that we seek to advance in all developing countries. These are increasing food security, securing the future of children and youth, stimulating sustainable economic growth, and supporting governance.

There is hope for Iraq, for its future and the future well-being of its people. With its humanitarian assistance and eventual development programming, Canada intends to play an important role in that progress.

Canada is committed to helping all those affected. We are currently one of the top donors and have provided over $28 million in humanitarian aid since the beginning of 2014. Canadians should rightly be proud of this contribution. Canada will continue to work closely with our allies to determine how we can best continue to support the needs of Iraqi civilians, particularly religious minorities.

Mr. Speaker, I thank you for undertaking to have this debate tonight. It is one that Canadians need to participate in and I am very grateful that we have the opportunity to bring these issues to the floor of the House.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to just put on the record that it was June 13 that I asked a question to the government about the crisis at the time. My question was the following:

Mr. Speaker, the violence in Iraq is growing. Aid groups are warning of a looming crisis that will spin out of control.

This week half a million people—

It has grown since then.

—fled Mosul after a heavily armed terrorist group took over the city. Iraq is already struggling to provide aid to [the] Syrian refugees....

What is the government doing to help with the crisis? Specifically, what concrete steps is it taking to help with the refugee crisis?

What I got as a response from the parliamentary secretary was nothing. He just said they were concerned about this and they felt sorry for the victims.

I asked that question in June, saying that this crisis was going to deepen. It has deepened, and sadly it is going to deepen further. We had commitments at committee when I asked the foreign affairs minister about the following: support for victims of sexual violence, support for refugees and to build camps, support to bring the perpetrators to justice, and also to protect minorities.

We have heard about the military commitment, where is the further humanitarian assistance that they said they were going to pledge?

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that it took the member of the opposition until June to ask those questions. As I stated in my comments earlier, we have been active in Iraq for quite some time. We have spent over $28 million there since the beginning of 2014. Since 2009, we have supported one in every 10 refugees around the world and we have brought them into Canada. We have brought in, since 2009, 18,200 refugees, mostly from Iraq. We have committed to another 5,000 Iraqi refugees coming from Turkey.

It is unfortunate that it took the opposition until June to come up with these questions. We have been active there for a long time, supporting organizations that are doing humanitarian work on the ground. We will continue to assess the situation. We want to ensure that the people, particularly the affected religious minorities, are getting the attention they need. We will continue to work with our partners and ensure that happens.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there are currently 1.8 million people displaced over 1,500 locations. Only about 100,000 internally displaced persons, or IDPs, are in camps. Families and children are living in construction sites, under bridges, on the road. There are too many to assist. Shelter planning needs to be accelerated and more shelter needs to be urgently established.

I am wondering what more the government is doing to meet imminent weather-related needs of internally displaced families. Will Canada play a supportive role in providing funding for additional shelter?

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, again I reiterate that Canada has been working in Iraq for quite some time. When we announced the funding in August, we announced funding that is going to three particular organizations that have long histories of working in Iraq: the International Committee of the Red Cross, Mercy Corps, and Save the Children. We also recently announced the establishment of another facility in the UAE from which we can deploy, very quickly, the emergency supplies that are necessary for crisis-torn areas, and that will be an area from which we will be drawing the supplies.

We depend on these organizations that have a lengthy history of working in conflict areas and we are very thankful for the work that they do. We will continue to support those people.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Westmount—Ville-Marie for bringing forward tonight's debate as part of the ongoing discussion we are having among members of Parliament, government and the opposition parties, on the situation in Iraq.

As we just heard, this is a humanitarian crisis. I am glad that the Government of Canada has already pledged over $28 million in humanitarian aid. I would also like to remind members that we have also committed $15 million in security aid to Iraq since the beginning of this year, and we are delivering critical military supplies donated by our allies to Iraqi security forces in northern Iraq. As well, as was mentioned earlier today, Canada has initiated the deployment of 69 military advisers to serve in the north.

Our military advisers will work with the U.S. and our coalition partners to provide strategic and tactical advice to Iraqi security forces as they battle the ruthless and cruel terrorist group known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant or ISIL.

I can proudly state that their deployment and the deployment of the Canadian Special Operations Forces represents a significant step by this government in taking our turn at stopping ISIL's devastating advance.

Last Tuesday, I had the opportunity to attend the special committee meeting of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development on this very topic. Although just a week has passed since that meeting, events are developing quickly. The continuing brutality of ISIL was once again demonstrated this past weekend with the barbaric murder of British aid worker David Haines.

It is clear that, if ISIL is left unchecked, its savage menace will only grow into a greater regional and indeed a global security challenge that will ultimately threaten the security of Canadians all around the world. ISIL must be stopped.

Two weeks ago in Wales at the NATO summit, the Prime Minister made a statement regarding the Government of Canada's response to the situation in Iraq. The Prime Minister announced the deployment of members of the Canadian Armed Forces to Iraq. Specifically, the Canadian Armed Forces members will provide strategic and tactical advice to Iraqi forces with the goal of increasing the effectiveness of operations against this extremist group.

Canada is a world leader when it comes to the provision of military training, capacity-building and mentorship outside the NATO community. The Canadian Armed Forces have significant experience in hostile regions where armed insurgency is rife. Again, I have to stress that it is important to note that our forces in Iraq will be present in an advisory and assistance role, not a combat role. The deployment is for a period of up to 30 days and will be reassessed at that time. This deployment is in support of Iraqi security forces in the north and occurs with the full and willing consent of the Iraqi government because, as everyone in this House should agree, any long-term solution to Iraq's stability is first and foremost an Iraqi responsibility.

Canada is not alone in offering assistance to the Government of Iraq. In recent days, an international coalition led by the United States has coalesced to confront the ISIL threat. Hon. members will have heard the statement by U.S. President Obama last week. In this statement he announced that the U.S. will lead a broad coalition to degrade and destroy ISIL.

He also outlined a four-pronged strategy to succeed in this mission: first, a systematic campaign of airstrikes at ISIL military targets; second, increased funding and practical support to the Iraqi security forces fighting ISIL on the ground; third, stepping up counterterrorism efforts against ISIL, especially in areas such as cutting off its financial sources and seeking to counter radicalization; and fourth, increasing the humanitarian aid to the region to help those who have been displaced by the ISIL threat.

Of course, to get humanitarian aid to those who are in the most need, those who have been persecuted, brutalized and terrorized by ISIL, we have to bring security to that region to deliver that aid.

As everyone can recognize, Canada's role thus far has been crucial to the success of this strategy. In all our military collaborations abroad, Canada always rises to the occasion and is receptive to the needs of our partner nations on the ground. Our assistance will be crucial. Our soldiers are highly educated and professional. They possess incredible technical skills and have been battle-tested in some of the most austere and dangerous environments in the world, including Afghanistan, where they worked closely with their U.S. and NATO counterparts to fight insurgents and protect allied forces during Operation Enduring Freedom.

The high level of expertise, readiness and maturity that our Special Operations Forces have attained through their work and training give them the technical and diplomatic skills they need to support, advise and instruct.

Canadian Armed Forces deployment represents an immediate and significant step that this government is taking to turn back ISIL's devastating advance in Iraq and Syria.

In addition to the deployment of military advisers that I have already mentioned, I also want to talk about the critical delivery system that we have put in place to support military supplies being delivered to the Iraqi security forces. As has already been mentioned, CC-130J Hercules and CC-177 Globemaster aircraft are being used to support almost 100 members of the Royal Canadian Air Force stationed in the Mediterranean. They are engaged, and they began flying flights back on August 28. They are delivering military supplies donated by our allies, including Albania. This week, we started delivering supplies from the Czech Republic.

I can confirm that, as of today, 18 flights by the Royal Canadian Air Force have taken place, delivering over 850,000 pounds of military supplies from our allies. That includes things like 1,000 helmets, 6,600 protective vests and 1,760 pieces of body armour that were donated by the Netherlands. They were transported to the Mediterranean by Denmark, airlifted by Canada, unloaded by the United States and coordinated by the United Kingdom. This provides an excellent example of the close co-operation between allies that has characterized the international response to the situation in Iraq.

Again, while this is not a combat mission, this mission is not without risk, and as always, our men and women in uniform are ready to answer the call. I think everyone in the House will join me and all Canadians in thanking them for always being prepared to defend Canadian values and interests in this increasingly dangerous world.