Debates of March 26th, 2015

Military Contribution Against ISIL

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Minister of National Defence and Minister for Multiculturalism]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know where to begin with that speech. The member said that the coalition response to this genocidal terrorist organization is what is creating civilian displacement. Frankly, what planet is she living on?

One hundred percent of the civilian displacement has been caused by this genocidal organization that is trying to create a seventh-century caliphate through ethnic cleansing, mass rape, sexual slavery, and barbarism of the worst kind. This is why people have been displaced from their communities. This is why the Assyrians, Yazidis, and Mandaeans of the Nineveh Plains had to flee after that being their homeland for millennia

I happen to know the Iraqi Canadian community quite well. It was a result of, frankly, my initiative in 2009 to open the largest refugee resettlement program in 25 years, in which we have welcomed more than 20,000 Iraqi refugees.

I know them quite well. We had a bunch of them here this week from the Kurdish community, the Yazidi community, and the Assyrian, Chaldean, Kurdish, Sunni Arab, and Shia communities. Every single one of those communities in this country supports the motion, supports the allied military campaign, and is actually calling on us to do more in terms of a military response to protect the civilians, to prevent the displacement of even more civilians.

My question for the member is this. What does she say to those Yazidis, Kurds, Chaldeans, and Assyrians in Canada who are asking for a military response to protect their people and prevent the creation of yet more victims? What is her response to them?

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I find it really too bad that the minister has, apparently, only a knowledge of the history of Iraq going back about two years. It seems as though he has forgotten that there have been decades of violent dictatorship in Iraq that have caused extremism to rise; and building political institutions that are democratic, strong, and inclusive has been very difficult. It has not been a priority of the international community. Rather, in 2003, the United States invaded Iraq against the will of the international community.

What we are seeing today is only a continuing of decades of violence not being addressed in long-term, sustainable ways. Obviously, what is happening right now is a humanitarian crisis of the highest level, but it did not arise out of nowhere.

We need to understand what the consequences are of intervention in Iraq and what it is going to mean decades in the future.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, even though the Liberal Party does not support the NDP's position, there are certain aspects of the position that are quite acceptable. I would like the member to provide comment on the issue the government is trying to shape on this. The Conservative spin that is coming out of the Prime Minister's Office is that, if we vote against the motion, somehow we are supporting ISIL.

We in the Liberal Party, and I suspect all members of the chamber, understand and appreciate just how abhorrent and revolting ISIL and its actions are. However, there are other alternatives. I wonder if she might want to provide some comment on the way the Conservatives are trying to spin this issue, which is definitely misinforming Canadians.

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, indeed it is very difficult to see what is happening with this sort of discussion and the way it is being taken out of context, when we are talking about intervening in a humanitarian way, as though that means I am not concerned. I am in fact alarmed by the situation.

I do want to stress that there is a completely different vision of how we should be intervening globally in conflicts; how we need to be able to support countries and communities; and how we need to be able to support development of communities economically. We need to be able to support the equality of women. These are things that create sustainable development. That is what we need to be going in and doing. Of course, right now there is a need for direct humanitarian aid, but also going into communities to prevent the spread is something we could be doing, rather than intervening militarily.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and for Western Economic Diversification]

Mr. Speaker, it is certainly an honour to rise in the House today. The debate we are having is one of our most solemn responsibilities. We are talking about our government's motion that seeks an endorsement from the House of Commons for the government's decision to contribute military assets to the fight against ISIL.

As the motion before the House clearly outlines, the terrorist group known as ISIL has repeatedly called on its members to target Canada and Canadians at home and abroad. It is clear that ISIL poses a clear and active threat to the people of the Middle East, especially members of vulnerable religious and ethnic minority groups. ISIL is boastful in posting videos to the Internet of its brutal and barbaric campaigns of sexual violence, murder and intimidation.

Canada cannot sit on the sidelines while innocent men, women and children are slaughtered by a genocidal death cult that also wants to bring brutal violence to our shores. The Prime Minister has made it clear that unless ISIL is confronted with strong and direct force, it will continue to grow and expand its territory. This is a threat to not only international peace and security, but also a direct threat to Canada and Canadians.

The situation is improving from last spring when ISIL was spreading at a terrifying pace. ISIL has more or less been halted and pushed back at the margins. This is in large part because of the breadth and intensity of the international opposition against ISIL not only in the west but throughout the Arab world as well.

ISIL continues to attract jihadi terrorists from around the globe and is attempting to increase its network of jihadi forces. ISIL continues to threaten nations like Canada and inspire attacks across the globe in many western nations. The Islamic state has clearly indicated that it will continue to target Canadians, Canada and our western allies that believe in standing up to its barbaric form of Islam. It is a disturbed, perverted ideology and anyone who does not accept ISIL's form of religion it believes should be killed. It is as self-evident to it as it is incomprehensible, barbaric and evil to us, but it is no idle threat.

ISIL does not just kill its enemies in the battlefield; it targets journalists, workers, and innocent men, women and children. There have been horrific and disturbing attacks against vulnerable and peaceful, ethnic and religious minorities. We know about these incidents because it brags about them. We must prevent and contain this peril before it leads to the entrenchment of repressive rule across the region.

Extending the current Canadian Armed Forces mission is not an impulsive or knee-jerk reaction, but a decision borne of necessity to protect Canada, an acknowledgement that we must continue to fight with our allies and partners in the pursuit of Canada's national interests to protect Canada and Canadians from an evil death cult that has declared war on all of us.

Our experience over the past few years has shown that we cannot expect quick and decisive victories, but it is no less necessary to act when confronted with the savagery of the enemy simply because we cannot affix an end point to the mission. It does not mean that we should walk away from our responsibilities as an international citizen. If we falter now, ISIL will continue to gain in strength, increase its brutality and ruthlessness, and consolidate its territory. This would plunge the Middle East into new depths of volatility, chaos and bloodshed. If ISIL's fundamentalism is not dealt with soon, we risk seeing it spread. We simply cannot allow that to happen.

There is not an either/or, and we are hearing that in the debate tonight when the NDP talk about humanitarian assistance. It is what the opposition parties would have us believe. We have been committed to humanitarian assistance. As the Prime Minister has said in the House, in the past six months we have helped to feed 1.7 million people in Iraq, provide shelter and relief supplies to 1.25 million children and give education to at least 500,000 children.

It has been said time and again that in order to provide humanitarian relief, there has to be stability. To be honest, the preference of the people who need humanitarian relief is to not have that need but to live in their countries in peace and return to their homes.

We have help to support 200,000 refugees in Iraq with food, water, shelter and protection. Canada is the fifth largest donor of aid to Iraq, and the sixth largest donor of aid to Syria. Through these efforts, we continue to provide one of the largest per capita donations of aid in the world.

Our participation in this multinational mission is in Canada's national interest. This much is clear. Indeed, it is a broad international coalition of more than 60 partners, approximately 30 of which contribute to the military effort led by the United States which has coalesced to confront ISIL.

Canada is collaborating with some of our closest allies and partners, including the United States, the United Kingdom, France, the Netherlands and Australia to degrade and defeat ISIL. Moreover, Middle Eastern countries are playing a vital role in the coalition. Again, this demonstrates this is not just a western conflict against Islam. We have partners from many countries in the Middle East. Rather, it is a fight that pits broad international concerns for Iraq and Syria, regional stability and humanitarian assistance against murderous extremism.

That is why I will be supporting the government's motion before the House. I support our continued deployment of Canadian military assets to fight against ISIL and terrorists aligned with ISIL, using air strike capability to bomb ISIL in Iraq and Syria. I support the government's decision to extend this mission to March 30, 2016. I support the government's position that there should be no deployment of troops in a ground combat role.

I, like all parliamentarians, offer my resolute and wholehearted support and thanks to the brave men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces who stand on guard for all of us.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. I think that we all want peace and an end to violence, but this debate is not really about the ends, it is about the means. In that respect we disagree profoundly.

After so many years of military intervention in that part of the world, I do not understand how the member can believe that by extending the mission for 12 months we will manage to restore peace and allow people to go back home. Frankly, I think that we can learn from the past, come up with a more constructive approach and recognize the importance of local players. That is the key to all of this.

One thing the NDP motion is asking for is an end to the participation of Canadian Forces troops in combat and air strikes.

Does the member think that, rather than participate in combat and air strikes, we can find another approach to achieving real results?

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I watched the maps and the maps showed a rapidly growing caliphate that was spreading across Iraq and Syria.

Like many in the House, we are aware of the horrific videos. We are aware of issues that have been inspired, whether they are in Paris, Australia or in Canada, in terms of the spread and the direct threat to Canada and other countries around this world.

These need to be degraded. It has been working. Again, if we look at a map today compared to where we were, that expansion has been stopped. It is due to the coalition efforts of many of our partners that are willing to do the very tough work that needs to be done to degrade this horrific threat.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the government member just indicated that this had not been a knee-jerk reaction by the government, but that it had been well thought through.

The question I have for the member is a question that no one else in her caucus has answered. I have posed it a couple of times.

On CBC, there is a posting in the National news watch section that reads, “Syrian air strikes could help al-Qaeda”. Does the member have any comment on that issue? The sub-headline is, “Experts warn that the West's focus on attacking ISIS is boosting its equally dangerous rival”. Could she provide any comment on that story? I am sure many Canadians are concerned about it. It is a story that has just appeared on CBC.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we know there are many incredible challenges in the Middle East. We are talking about the need to degrade ISIL.

There has certainly been significant work done in Afghanistan in terms of al Qaeda and other organizations, but, again, right now we are looking at a significant threat posed by ISIL, and not just against us. There is a huge coalition, whether it be France, Australia, many countries, that has identified the same needs as the Canadian government and is moving to take action.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo for her support for the motion.

Could she quickly touch on how much humanitarian aid in the region and how important it is for the people who have been displaced by this terrorist organization?

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in my speech, I briefly talked about the significant efforts we had made in being one of the biggest donors per capita. We heard earlier from one of my colleagues who had visited some of the camps. There is tremendous respect, support and gratitude from the people who have such needs.

Again, I have to go back to my original point. These people want to return to their homes and homelands. Being a refugee is not their choice. Most important, they want peace in their country.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a very sobering responsibility that we all have as parliamentarians in addressing this issue this evening. It is an issue that will involve sending brave men and women into harm's way. Therefore, I wish to say from the outset that I will be speaking against this motion, but wish to do so in a context and with a spirit of concern for the individuals that the government is prepared to send into harm's way in this quagmire. That is what I think we are asking them to do.

I would like to begin by providing an overview and then talk about issues of legality, which I believe are at issue here this evening.

First of all, this was initially a short mission, then a longer one, and now it is going to be a year-long mission to push us over past the election. After that, who knows how much longer it will be? Our experience in Afghanistan and the Americans' experience in Iraq would lead us to believe that it is not likely to be a short mission. That is probably why this issue is even more significant this evening than it would be if we took the Prime Minister at his word that it will only be until March of 2016.

To extend and expand for one year is misleading, given the history that anyone who studied in this part of the world would have to concede exists.

Some six months ago, the Leader of the Opposition asked the Prime Minister specifically whether Canadian troops would be involved in painting targets for air strikes or would accompany Iraqi troops to the front line. The Prime Minister said no. Of course, the tragic death of Sergeant Andrew Doiron proved that the Prime Minister had misled Parliament and the Canadian public.

The Leader of the Opposition stood up two days ago and very eloquently explained what military planners have told us from the get-go, which is that a successful mission requires two things. They are defined objectives and an exit strategy. It is our submission that the Conservative government has neither. It has no strategy, other than the obvious political one of dividing Canadians. It does not even know whether this is a mission to degrade or destroy, as different people in the government have said different things. One day it was to degrade; then the Minister of National Defence said that it was to destroy. Frankly, who knows? The Conservatives have no objective, except issues that are more political than otherwise whose goals are to divide Canadians.

Exit strategy? There is no such thing. I will speak a little later about the issues of legality in this context.

I suspect that polls have made it clear that we need to talk about radicalization, but where is there anything about the de-radicalization of our youth in this particular initiative? There is nothing. Rhetoric such as “it is an attack on Canada” and “we are at war” is misleading to the extreme and serves the Conservatives' purpose of getting us into this quagmire even further.

Do we have an alternative? Obviously we do: protect refugees and offer humanitarian support. Children are freezing to death in non-winterized camps. Families are destroyed.

I was talking to a friend I visited in the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon. That economy is being destroyed by the millions of people who are surging across that border. Lebanon simply cannot afford it. Turkey is in the same position. I am not even talking about the internal displacement in Iraq and Syria.

The second thing that we think needs to be done, which Canada has done very well as a country, is assist in regional diplomacy. Canada used to be a country that did that. It is not anymore.

Third, we need to counter the extremist messaging and expose the brutality of ISIS. In a sense, we need to deal with that issue on the ground in order to turn public opinion, which I think is going to be required.

I have been to the mosque in Victoria a couple of times. I am going to Friday prayers again next week to see if the solutions that they are proposing to deal with any concerns arising in our community about radicalization can be dealt with, because if there is a threat, and if it is to Canada, it will be within our borders that we will solve that problem.

We have certainly see lone wolf extremists, as they are called, here in Ottawa. That does not mean there is a jihadi war against our country, rhetoric to the contrary.

In the words of our foreign affairs critic, this has gone from mission creep to mission leap. We do not even know what the costs are going to be. Apparently the effort by the member for St. John's East to get the information from the Parliamentary Budget Officer was denied. We do not know what it is going to cost, or if the government knows. There is a new report today from the Parliamentary Budget Officer, who believes that our defence spending has become or will become unsustainable. I would have thought that was something that Canadians would be concerned about.

The humanitarian crisis that other colleagues have talked about is what I think ought to preoccupy the House, rather than painting targets and assisting in what can only be described, if any use of the English language is to be clear, as a combat mission to which the government wishes to commit our brave men and women. It is a combat mission that has no sanction from the United Nations, no sanction even from NATO. It seems we are the only NATO member other than the United States that is prepared to go into Syria.

As the official opposition, we were not opposed to and voted in favour of a mission that had the United Nations sanction. I speak of Libya. That is not what this is about, and I will talk about legality in a moment because that is what Canadians really wish to know about as well.

We can talk about the brutality. We all look at the pictures on TV. We all know how horrible ISIS is. This is not a situation of standing in Parliament and talking to each other about just how horrible this group is. We all know that to be true, but as a country, are we doing the right thing in committing our brave men and women in this context? That is what we are here to talk about, and I will be arguing that it is entirely illegal and that we have no trust in the Prime Minister in committing our troops in this fashion.

The mission has gone from 30 days to six months to a year, and now, we assume, forever, or another decade, or whatever it takes before we find ourselves in the same situation we found ourselves in in Afghanistan. Why is it any different here? Why will it be any different from what happened in that context? Somehow we are supposed to make an unholy alliance, like it or not, with Bashar al-Assad, the brutal dictator who kills his own people. It is unclear whether we are going in at the request of the Syrian people or not.

Sometimes an article captures things very well. Today's article by Mr. Siddiqui in the Toronto Star starts with “[The Prime Minister's] flip-flop on war fits pattern of deceit”. I commend it to Canadians to read because it so clearly describes what is going on before our very eyes today. It says:

The non-combat mission featured combat. The short-term commitment has become long. No involvement in Syria has evolved into a war on Syria.

His reasons for extending and expanding the mission are patently false. The Islamic State did not move into Syria yesterday — it was there last year as well. It does not pose a direct threat to Canada the way the prime minister frames it in order to scare us, just as George W. Bush whipped up fear about weapons of mass destruction and terrorism to justify his wars and get re-elected.

If the Islamic State poses as big a threat to Canada as the Prime Minister says it does, why has he committed only six planes and 69 Special Forces soldiers?

And on and on. What we are dealing with in this context is so disingenuous.

In the time available to me, let me now turn to the legality of this issue.

The proposed motion by the Conservative government involves Canada engaging in an illegal act under international law. The only time an engagement is deemed legal is if it is sanctioned by the UN Security Council, unless some kind of anticipatory self-defence argument can be conjured up.

I commend to Canadians the speech given by my colleague, the MP for Toronto—Danforth, earlier today, a colleague who is a Rhodes Scholar in public international law who I suggest, on careful reading of his analysis, has eviscerated any pretext of legality by the government for what it is doing by claiming that somehow we should use the Judge Advocate General to give us legal opinion. Whatever happened, in our civil context, with the opinion from the Department of Foreign Affairs? Why are we using military advisers expert in the law of war to tell us whether this mission is indeed legal?

Of course, today we heard the Minister of Foreign Affairs say it is about solicitor-client privilege, so Canadians have no right to see the legal basis. To that I would say, with respect, nonsense. The government is the client and can reveal that information should it wish to do so. From my perspective, that argument is as bogus as could be in the context of this discussion. If Canadians do not have a right to know this kind of information, how can we trust the government with the mission leap that I have described in this context?

If I may just end with one comment, Kofi Annan, the former UN Secretary-General, said the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was a mistake and helped to create the Islamic State militant group. He also blamed regional powers for making the conflict worse. If the Prime Minister had been in government then, Canada would also have been contributing to the development of ISIS.

In other words, the various acts of military aggression by the west have directly contributed to the radicalization that has led to the deplorable state that we are here to debate today.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Minister of National Defence and Minister for Multiculturalism]

Mr. Speaker, there were a number of mistruths in the member's speech.

For example, he said the government has not been clear about our objective. We could not be more clear. Our objective is, in co-operation with our allies, to degrade the so-called Islamic State to the point where it can no longer pose a threat to Canada or the international community and, I would add, to degrade it to a point where it no longer has the seductive power to radicalize or recruit individuals, including Canadians. That is how I would characterize defeating that organization.

He says that we are in a quagmire but then goes on to quote an article saying we have only contributed six aircraft and 69 ground personnel. Which is it? In terms of a quagmire and a so-called exit strategy, it is very simple. Once Canada believes we have achieved our objective or we are no longer able to make a useful contribution, we bring back the aircraft—nine, actually—and the 69 ground personnel.

He says humanitarian support is an alternative to what we are doing. No, it is not, because we are already doing humanitarian support with the largest per capita contribution of any developed country, the fifth-largest contribution overall, at nearly $70 million.

He says we do not know the cost. That is not true. We revealed the costs of the mission for the first six months in this fiscal year and we have revealed the estimated costs of the mission going forward.

He says that we require sanction from the United Nations. Is it now the position of the NDP that President Vladimir Putin and the Chinese Politburo should have a veto on Canadian foreign policy?

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for his questions. I think there were five or six of them, and I am expected to answer them in, I suppose, one minute or two.

The first question I think was about what the mission is and whether it was clear. The Minister of Foreign Affairs initially said on Wednesday that our commitment is to degrade ISIS, and that will be the focus of our operations in the region. Then the Minister of National Defence, who just spoke, earlier had told CBC's Power and Politics that the goal was to defeat ISIS. I do not know if that is clear to him, but it certainly is not a clear objective to me.

A quagmire is something one gets into deeper and deeper, as we saw in Vietnam and Afghanistan. It seems to me that if he is proud of our humanitarian support, we would like to make him even prouder by doing more for the poor people of the area.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, one of the things that has been oft repeated in the debate tonight is that we are with our allies in the strike into Syria. While there is no doubt there are a lot of countries contributing in general to the campaign against ISIS, we make a mistake in jumping to the conclusion that many other countries are willing to conduct air strikes into Syria.

In fact, we know that the European nations of Denmark, France, the Netherlands, and Germany, as well as Australia, are not prepared to bomb inside Syria. Of western allies, only the United States is conducting those bombing campaigns, and they are much more problematic in a country like Syria in civil war.

Even now, the air strikes in Iraq that the U.S. is conducting, with the invitation of the Iraqi government, have made groups of militia angry at the United States, and they are withdrawing from being willing to work with the U.S. to retake Tikrit. I only mention these things and ask my friend from Victoria if he would not agree that western military involvement in largely local sectarian violence can have many elements go awry, and that even with the best of intentions, Canada's current government may regret this decision.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, of course I agree that military involvement of this sort can go awry, to use her phrase.

What we will be doing is joining a very small contingent of nations in going into Syria. Right now only America, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Qatar, Bahrain, the UAE, and Morocco have launched strikes on Syria. Canada will be only the second NATO nation to join the Syrian side of the mission, which I think is telling.

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Minister of Labour and Minister of Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise to speak in the debate this evening to support this important motion. Our objective remains the same: to degrade ISIL so that it no longer poses a threat to Canadians and the international community, as the hon. Minister of National Defence just stated.

We know that the threat ISIL poses is real. It is a threat to the world and to Canadians right here at home. The international jihadist movement has declared war on our country, and we must respond. That is why our Conservative government has shown leadership and has put forward measures to protect Canadians.

Throughout our nation's history, brave Canadians have fought against immeasurable odds for what they believed was right. We have not abandoned that tradition.

Our government's approach is multi-faceted and includes both military support and humanitarian aid. As a physician and as the Minister of Status of Women, I know that it is especially important for Canada to continue to support the victims of ISIL's sexual violence. These are truly barbaric acts: sexual slavery, forced marriage, and rape. ISIL has no respect for human life, and its actions represent all that is evil in this world.

Canada is providing a variety of services, including medical support, legal advice, counselling, and clinical care for sexual assault survivors. ISIL's victims require our support, and that is what we as Canadians are providing. However, they also require security and freedom from ISIL's reign of terror, something the opposition would do nothing to address. The military component of our approach allows aid to flow to these areas and allows for more accountable security for aid workers. Aid workers simply cannot get to the places they need to be unless they are protected. The opposition seems to be completely blind to this issue.

Our Conservative government has committed substantial funds to international aid agencies, including the UN and the Red Cross, which have provided food for upward of 1.5 million people, shelter, and relief supplies to over 1.25 million people, and improved access to education opportunities for over 500,000 children, something the opposition again turns a blind eye to. In fact, a previous member stated that we have not done any of these things, which I found quite abhorrent.

In addition, we are working with our British partners in Iraq and are looking for other opportunities to make sure that we address these heinous crimes. The priority is and will continue to be those who are most at risk because they are religious minorities, sexual minorities, or victims of sexual abuse. The reality and gravity of this situation needs to be addressed, and we are doing just that.

I would like to turn my attention to Canada's response. Canada is at the forefront of international efforts to address the situation in Iraq and Syria, and we will continue to co-operate with like-minded partners in responding to this crisis. Canadians have never shied away from our responsibility to our international partners. Our actions with our partners are focused on five key areas: military support to our partners, working to stem the flow of foreign fighters, taking steps to stop ISIL's financing and funding, addressing the humanitarian crisis in the region, and undermining ISIL's narrative.

Canada has deployed six CF-18 fighter aircraft to join the air strikes against ISIL in Iraq as well as several dozen armed forces personnel to provide strategic and tactical counsel to Iraqi forces fighting ISIL militants.

Canadian and allied air strikes are making a difference in Iraq. They have destroyed ISIL equipment, reversed some of the territorial gains, and affected ISIL's leadership, command, control, and logistics. They are stopping the advance. They are making efforts to make sure that individuals can get back to their homes. This is important. That is what the Syrian people want. They want to be in their own homes.

In response to the crisis in Iraq, Canada has committed over $102 million in humanitarian, stabilization, and security programs, and as was just mentioned by my colleague, the Minister of National Defence, these are the largest per capita humanitarian donations. Canada is at the forefront of international efforts to address this situation. We are working rapidly to deliver new development assistance programming in Iraq both to address short-term needs during the crisis and to support stability and prosperity in Iraq over the long term.

In addition, Canada is deeply concerned about the reports of foreign fighters, including Canadians, participating in terrorist activities perpetrated by ISIL. To this end, Canada has recently committed an additional $5 million in assistance to support regional efforts to stem the flow of foreign fighters to Iraq and Syria and has listed ISIL as a terrorist entity in Canada under the Criminal Code. We have had success attacking targets in Iraq and are now expanding to where the terrorists are consolidating.

As I and my colleagues have said before, the jihadi terrorists in ISIL have declared war on Canada. They have specifically targeted Canada by urging supporters to attack disbelieving Canadians in any manner and vowing that we should not feel secure even in our own homes. I am not sure what part of this threat opposition members missed, but it is concerning to me that they do not believe that we need to actually make sure that Canadians are safe and secure.

Unlike the NDP and the Liberals, we actually take this threat very seriously. We believe that unless confronted with strong and direct force, the threat ISIL poses to Canada will continue to grow. That is why Canada is not sitting on the sidelines, as the NDP and the Liberals would have us do. We instead are proud members of the international allied coalition fighting ISIL.

Finally, I would like to express my personal thanks to the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, who put themselves in harm's way selflessly every day to protect our democracy and to protect Canadians

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

Mr. Speaker, there is a bit of a theme I would like to put to the hon. minister concerning the kind of exaggerations we hear from the other side. It is the point about Canada being the largest contributor per capita in humanitarian efforts.

The country of Turkey, which is a coalition partner, has spent $5 billion looking after 1.7 million refugees in Turkey and Syria, and it has had international contributions of up to $265 million for that. How does that make Canada the single largest contributor, whether it is per capita or otherwise, to the humanitarian effort?

Why does the government keep fantasizing about some of these things just to try to bolster the case? A lot of people, frankly, are wondering whether they can trust the Conservative government about anything.

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I guess I would ask the member opposite why his party thinks we can deliver humanitarian aid without having the humanitarians supported and secured. I stood on the ground in Afghanistan. I actually had to have Canadian Armed Forces members with me to make sure that we could do our jobs. I encourage the member opposite to understand how humanitarian aid is actually delivered in these places.

Canadians are doing what we should be doing on safety and security to make sure that we can deliver humanitarian aid. There are 1.7 million people who have received food; 1.2 million people, in fact more than that, have actually received shelter and relief. Over 500,000 children have received education. Obviously the opposition has no idea how to read, because they have not actually read the documents on what Canadians are doing to make sure that these individuals are safe, secure, and receiving the humanitarian aid they deserve.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a point about the government and the Prime Minister not being clear about their objectives.

Depending on which minister it is, or even the Prime Minister, one might say “destroy ISIL”, another might say “degrade”, another might say “defeat”. In fact, the Minister of Foreign Affairs explicitly compared this war to Afghanistan, stating that we are in this for the long term. In Afghanistan, of course, we all know that it meant a decade.

How long does the member believe we will be in Syria? Are we talking about destroying ISIL completely, or are we talking about degrading it? I wonder if she could provide some comment on those two specific questions.

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I actually answered this at the beginning of my speech. I encourage the member opposite to read that again. I will not repeat myself.

As opposed to focusing on semantics, our government is focused on the safety and security of the individuals whose lives need to be saved and also on making sure that there is peace in the region.

Let me be very clear. This is a huge undertaking by members of the Canadian Forces. We should be supporting them and making sure that they are able to move forward in what they have to do.

Our government has outlined that we have made a one-year commitment with respect to what we are moving forward on. That is what the Prime Minister announced earlier this week.

I will be very clear: we need to make sure that there is safety and security in the region to make sure that there is humanitarian aid delivered.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister said that the opposition does not know how to read. However, obviously the minister does not know how to add, because she talks about the humanitarian aid and the so-called benefits the humanitarian aid from the Conservative government has actually brought to the 2.5 million refugees who are out sleeping in extremely harsh conditions tonight, but it adds up to five cents a day per refugee. The minister seems to think that for five cents a day, they can provide a lot of food for those refugees. Five cents a day is a few grains of rice and perhaps a tablespoon of powdered milk.

My question is very simple. Since the Conservatives seem to be unclear, if not speaking mistruths about every aspect of this mission, why have they tried to cover up the fact that the humanitarian aid amounts to five cents a day per refugee?

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this is absolutely false. I would encourage anyone who is listening to this to know that actually this is absolutely false.

Let us be very clear. The Canadian government has made substantive investments to make sure that there is available humanitarian aid. What I care the most about is making sure that women and children, religious minorities, and sexual minorities are protected and that they receive humanitarian aid. That is what Canadians are doing. That is what the Canadian Armed Forces are doing.

We are supporting that effort. The opposition is completely against supporting any of these efforts to make sure that individuals receive humanitarian aid or the security they need to receive it.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today on a critical international issue, the ongoing crisis caused by the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

While the military dimension of this crisis is important, it constitutes but one aspect of Canada's response. Indeed, Canada's contribution is also aimed to address the political, security, humanitarian and human rights dimensions of this crisis. I will elaborate on this in the second part of my speech, but first let me point out Canada's part in the international coalition against ISIL. In the summer of 2014 when ISIL broke through Iraq's borders, its rapid territorial gains resulted in significant internal displacement and abhorrent acts of violence against civilians. In response, Canada joined a U.S.-led coalition of over 60 partner countries to counter the ISIL threat.

Most coalition partners' contributions include military equipment and humanitarian supplies. Canada is part of a small group that is also contributing military support to forces combating ISIL. This small group includes many of Canada's closest allies and partners, such as the United States, the U.K., France and Australia as well as a number of key regional partners, including Jordan and Kuwait.

Coalition partners recognize that ISIL's advance has destabilized the region and poses a very real threat to global security. Defeating ISIL and bringing stability to Iraq will require a long-term multi-year effort.

The only sustainable solution to defeating terrorism and creating stability is an inclusive Iraq government that serves all of its ethnic and religious communities. For too long, marginalization and discrimination have marred Iraq's political process. Political reconciliation is needed to effectively address Iraq's sectarian challenges.

To foster conditions conducive to this political reconciliation, Canada and its coalition partners are working along a number of lines of effort, namely carrying out military efforts to degrade ISIL, stemming the flow of foreign fighters, limiting ISIL's financing and funding, providing humanitarian assistance, undertaking stabilization efforts and countering ISIL's message.

In February 2015, the coalition established working groups around these lines of effort, and Canada is a full participant in each area of engagement. I will now provide a more detailed outline of Canada's contribution to each line of effort.

In response to this crisis, Canada's military contribution has included six CF-18 fighter aircraft to participate in air strikes against ISIL's extremists in Iraq. Canada has also committed a number of support aircraft, including one CC-150 Polaris tanker, two CP-140 Aurora surveillance aircraft and one dedicated airlift aircraft.

Canada has also deployed several dozen armed forces personnel to provide strategic and tactical counsel for Iraq forces fighting ISIL, and has assisted in the delivery of critical military supplies from contributing allies to Kurdish peshmerga forces.

Canada is extremely concerned by reports of foreign fighters, including Canadians, participating in terrorist activities perpetrated by ISIL. Additionally, when these Canadian foreign fighters return, they pose a serious domestic security threat. That is why Canada is working with partners to address this threat, including to the Global Counterterrorism Forum's foreign terrorist fighter working group.

During the former Minister of Foreign Affairs' visit to Iraq in September, Canada announced $5 million over the next three years to support regional efforts to detect, deter and interdict foreign fighters at source, destination and transit points, and to limit their movement in Syria and Iraq.

On March 4, 2015, the Minister of Foreign Affairs visited Iraq as part of his first overseas trip as Minister of Foreign Affairs. He met with the Iraqi Prime Minister, Foreign Minister and the Speaker of the Council of Representatives, and at these meetings, our Minister of Foreign Affairs reaffirmed Canada's support to Iraq.

Canada is also very concerned about the financing generated by and provided to the terrorist group ISIL. We have demonstrated our commitment to stopping terrorist financing by contributing to the financial action task force report on ISIL financing, as well as by participating in the Manama meeting on combating the financing of terrorism in November, 2014.

Canada's efforts to fully and effectively implement the financial action task force's recommendations on terrorist financing are ongoing, and Canada is also supporting capacity building efforts in the region to help governments protect their financial systems from terrorist financing efforts.

Canada is also making important contributions in the area of stabilization and development efforts. One of the government's main priorities is responding to sexual and gender-based violence perpetrated by ISIL. UN reports of women and girls being bought and sold in Mosul was one shocking example of the sexual violence being inflicted on women by ISIL.

That is why Canada has made a contribution of up to $5 million to Justice Rapid Response and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to investigate sexual violence and other serious human rights abuses. Canada also made a $5-million contribution to the prevention of and response to sexual violence and related abuses. Our support is being used to increase access to services and treatment for Syrian and Iraqi refugees and displaced persons who have been victims of violence in ISIL-affected areas.

Another major Canadian priority in this area is the protection of religious minority communities. The ongoing severe oppression of religious and ethnic communities that reject ISIL's extremist ideology underscores the barbaric nature of ISIL's terrorist actions. The Office of Religious Freedom is developing projects to monitor and protect the rights of religious minorities in Iraq and the region.

On the development side, in 2014, Canada identified Iraq as a partner country for Canadian bilateral assistance. It will aim to address short-term needs during the crisis and support stability and prosperity in Iraq over the longer term.

On the security front, Canada has provided $10 million in non-lethal security assistance for equipment, including personal protective gear, vehicles, GPS and robots to disable improvised explosive devices. This amount is in addition to the direct military support being provided by the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces that I mentioned earlier in my remarks.

The security of the broader region is critically important to Canada, as well as to our coalition partners. Therefore, Canada is assisting Jordan in its efforts to contain ISIL by providing equipment and training to enhance Jordan's ability to identify and respond to terrorist threats. Canadian assistance will also support Jordan's efforts to manage the influx of refugees.

The humanitarian situation in Iraq continues to deteriorate as ISIL perpetrates acts of brutality. That is why since the beginning of the crisis, Canada has committed $67.4 million to respond to the humanitarian needs of Iraqis affected by the violence.

ISIL has been adept at recruiting supporters. Canada is working with its allies to support local and international initiatives to counter ISIL narratives. At the Global Counterterrorism Forum ministerial meeting in September 2014, Canada announced $1.5 million funding for the Hedayah centre of excellence on countering violent extremism and the Global Community Engagement and Resilience Fund.

In January 2015, Canada announced up to $9 million for the Munk School of Global Affairs' digital public square project. This initiative will increase digital space for free expression, open political dialogue and engagement in places where civil society and citizens' participation is under threat and counter extremist narratives. This initiative complements our work to reduce radicalization at home through enhanced community engagement and dialogue.

Collectively, these efforts are designed to impede the recruitment of foreign fighters to ISIL, diminish financial and material support to the group and discourage the ideological support it seeks.

In addition, Canada has been very active on the diplomatic front. Along with our allies, Canada is encouraging Iraqi leaders to embrace inclusion and to implement a comprehensive program that addresses the divisions in their society.

Canadian diplomatic efforts have also focused on strengthening international processes to address illicit financial flows, countering violent extremism, supporting persecuted minorities and keeping ISIL-perpetrated sexual crimes on the international agenda. In this regard, Canadian ministers and diplomats have maintained an intensive level of dialogue and engagement with Iraqi leaders and our coalition partners.

In conclusion, our engagement in Iraq incorporates a range of measures to tackle the various security, humanitarian, human rights and political aspects of this conflict. The challenges that Iraq faces are enormous.

The good news is that the international community is united in responding to the threat of ISIL. The threat posed by ISIL is broad-based, and Canada is taking a holistic approach in response to this crisis. We are doing our part, and Canadians can be proud of this contribution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the listing of the contributions and we agree with many of the contributions the member talked about in terms of Canada's efforts. However, I want to ask the member this.

The government and the member talked about terrorists, and used the word often, particularly in terms of Canada and Canada's fears. However, yesterday there was an editorial in the Globe and Mail with respect to Syria which talked about the actual threat that ISIL poses to Canada. It stated that the Prime Minister:

...has repeatedly tried to closely tie ISIS to the terrorist threat in Canada. The truth is that the same nihilistic ideology may motivate both. But so far, the actual connections are thin to non-existent.

Again and again we hear of the direct threat ISIL poses to Canada. However, Canadians do not even believe that, and more and more people are understanding that this is part of the current government's propaganda. A recent poll showed that the majority of Canadians supported the mission and the former mission in Iraq, or did at that point at least. I believe the extension is a different matter. However, in the poll a wide margin, 38%, saw the war as more dangerous to Canada and only 19% making us safer, so what I am trying to understand here—