House of Commons Hansard #190 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was isil.

Topics

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

10:40 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party came to make its decision to vote against the motion based on four principles articulated last fall.

First, Canada has a role to play in confronting humanitarian crises in the world. Second, when a government considers deploying our men and women in uniform, there must be a clear mission and a clear role for Canada. Third, the case for deploying our forces must be made openly and transparently based on clear, reliable, dispassionately presented facts. Fourth, Canada's role must reflect the broad scope of the Canadian capabilities in how best we can help. Obviously, the government has fallen short.

The question I have for the member is quite specific. The Minister of Foreign Affairs compares this war to Afghanistan, which implies that it could be a 10-year war. What does the member believe? How long does the member believe this war will go on?

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

10:40 p.m.

Conservative

Costas Menegakis Conservative Richmond Hill, ON

Mr. Speaker, I need to point out a couple of key elements that I think elude my hon. colleague opposite.

The international jihadist movement has declared war on Canada. We are talking about an organization that just a few months ago lined up 21 Coptic Christians after having beaten them, tied their hands and feet behind their backs, the terrorists hid their own faces and proceeded to behead them.

Canadians are not fooled. We all know the Liberal Party does not support this mission. The Liberal position on combatting ISIL, this threat, is typical of that party. Once again, those members have their feet firmly planted in thin air. They should stop looking at their own internal polls and see what is important for that region and what is important for Canadians.

We are talking about a jihadist movement that has declared barbaric war on families and is displacing people from their homes by the tens of thousands.

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

10:45 p.m.

NDP

Hoang Mai NDP Brossard—La Prairie, QC

Mr. Speaker, it is 10:45 p.m., and I am pleased and proud to rise in the House today.

As a new parliamentarian—even though I have been here four years now—I think that this is a very important debate. We are talking about a mission of war that Canada wants to continue overseas.

When we think about the impact of this war, we need to think about the men and women in uniform that we are sending abroad, because they are going to be risking their lives and making every possible sacrifice to keep our country safe. We therefore have to wonder exactly what they will be doing.

Unfortunately, when we asked the government questions about that six months ago, when it decided to send our men and women in uniform to fight abroad, the mission was not clearly defined. When we asked clear questions about the mission to find out what our soldiers would be doing there, the government said that the mission would simply involve assistance, advice and support. It was never meant to be a combat mission.

Today, we know that our soldiers are unfortunately facing fire. Our men and women in uniform who are there have to protect themselves and fire on the enemy. They are very close to the fighting. What is more, we have unfortunately lost a soldier, who was killed by friendly fire, even though there was nothing friendly about it.

This decision goes way beyond the intention that the government claimed to have initially, when it said that we were only there to provide advice. Even then, we were opposed to this mission. I was very proud of the NDP's position and I still am. We proposed that, instead, Canada focus its efforts on humanitarian aid, since we know that this conflict is having a serious impact.

I heard my colleagues opposite saying that the NDP is not taking the threat seriously. On the contrary, we are. However, the solution the NDP is proposing is very different from the Conservatives' solution.

Our amendment to the motion is very clear, so I will not get into the details of our proposals, but we think the most important thing is ending the participation of Canadian troops in combat, air strikes and the advise-and-assist training in Iraq and Syria as soon as possible. I am proud of our position.

I got into politics for a number of reasons. The first was Canada's involvement in Afghanistan when Jean Chrétien's Liberals were in power. I am actually a little disappointed that we have not heard from our Liberal colleagues because I had a lot of questions for them. Unfortunately, all we have heard from them is questions. We have not had a chance to hear them explain their position in speeches, nor have we been able to ask them questions, and I am very disappointed about that.

Let us remember that it was the Liberals who sent Canada to Afghanistan. They did pretty much what George Bush did after the events of September 11, 2001, which shocked not only Canadians but the whole world. They reacted by sending our troops to fight in Afghanistan.

The Liberals are so proud of themselves for not getting involved in Iraq. The Prime Minister, who was a member of the opposition at the time, wanted to get involved in Iraq. However, all these years later, it has become clear that getting involved there was a mistake.

To illustrate the Liberals' doublespeak, during the last election, the Liberal candidate I was debating admitted that the mission in Afghanistan was a mistake.

In 2003, the Conservative government said that we had to intervene in Iraq because there were weapons of mass destruction there.

Then they took our position. They realized that it was basically nonsense. Now they want to continue the war that we unfortunately did not wage at the time—or so the Conservatives say. They are very disappointed that we did not take part in it in 2003.

We need to think about the repercussions. Once again, perhaps it is because of my roots and my parents that I think this way. I often talk about the Vietnam War when I am addressing the House, but that is also one of the reasons I am here in Canada. It is also one of the reasons I believe we need to learn from our past mistakes and from history. There was a war in Vietnam, which was bombed all over the place. The question we need to ask is whether, in the end, that was a good way to help the people. If you were to go there today and ask the Vietnamese people if they were happy to have a war and be bombed, if it helped their society, many would say no.

That is a question we need to ask ourselves now. We need to learn from our mistakes. I do not know whether my colleagues opposite or anyone can say that it was a really great thing for us to go into Afghanistan. There were 160 Canadian soldiers who lost their lives over there. Thousands of soldiers were wounded and they still suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder back at home in Canada. Was that a good thing? That is why I am very disappointed that we were not able to have this debate with the Liberals, whom I unfortunately did not hear from tonight. However, apart from the partisan side of this whole debate, the fundamental question we must ask ourselves as members of Parliament is whether this is the best course of action. What is the best option?

I can understand the Conservatives who say that they want to protect the people in Iraq. However, it is very simplistic to say that dropping bombs will fix the situation. The other side has been talking about humanitarian assistance. Canada is providing assistance, but it is not much compared to what is being invested in the military, with all of the consequences and devastation.

One thing we cannot forget and that is rarely mentioned here in the House, especially on the government side, is what we call collateral damage. How many people will die as a result of a bombing? We apparently have all the new technology and, by some miracle, the government thinks that there will be no impact. I am not just talking about the innocent people who will die, the civilians, the men and women. The damage extends to the entire families that will have to live with this.

The government tries to simplify everything when it talks about bombing some group. Initially, the government started by targeting Iraq, but now it is increasingly targeting Syria. What is the objective? Just where will this deployment end up? That is what the government is not capable of answering. These questions make it obvious that the government does not have a clear vision.

We know—and the government has said it—that we are talking about years and years of war. I remind the House once again that we were in Afghanistan for 10 years. It was Canada's longest military mission. Can we truly say that with pride? Can we truly say that we managed to fix the problem? Is this really the solution?

The government is asking for a one-year extension. It initially talked about six months, but now it is one year. We are getting ourselves into a quagmire.

That is why we are saying that right now we need to be looking at humanitarian assistance and how we can truly help people. The simplistic solution is to drop bombs, but that will not fix the problem.

I am expecting some attacks, and we have already heard some. I remind members that the mission in Libya had the support of the UN and the NDP went along with it. However, we did not support the government's decision to go further.

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

10:55 p.m.

Calgary Southeast Alberta

Conservative

Jason Kenney ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister for Multiculturalism

Mr. Speaker, I am again hearing in this speech the NDP's empty rhetoric and the pacifist ideology that refuses to consider the complexity of the situation. He is talking about a simplistic approach based on dropping bombs.

Does he really think that the approach of Canada or the 24 other allies involved in military action against this genocidal terrorist organization is just randomly to send bombs, or as one of the NDP MPs said to bomb here and there, bomb east and west? This is the House of Commons. This place deserves a serious debate, not just a bunch of slogans from protest signs.

Of course we do not believe that military action alone can resolve the problem of this emerging caliphate. However, we also are realistic enough to understand that while military action is not sufficient, it is necessary. It is necessary, to push ISIL back, away from the territory that it has gained so that the indigenous people of those areas can go back to their homes and live, one hopes, one day with security and peace.

My question for the member is this. I have posed this to a number of New Democratic MPs and none of them has even come within a mile of answering it. Every organization in Canada representing the Assyrian, Chaldean, Mandean, Yazidi, Iraqi Canadian communities support military action against ISIL. Is this member willing to meet with them and tell them that they are all wrong?

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

10:55 p.m.

NDP

Hoang Mai NDP Brossard—La Prairie, QC

I would love to meet with anyone who wants to talk about it. I would love to explain my position, and that is what I did tonight. We all have different solutions. That is why I am very proud of the position that the NDP has taken. I invite the minister to read the amendment that was proposed. I hope the minister will actually look at it and realize what we are proposing here.

There are different visions in terms of how we can solve a problem and obviously from the other side yes, it is true that the Conservatives want to send troops.

On this side of the House, we want to bring our Canadian Armed Forces home. The UN, among others, talked about solutions. Why not tackle funding directly? The Conservatives did not talk about that solution. We know that the Islamic State makes money by selling oil. Why not target that specifically? That is one way to cut them off. Why not address the radicalization taking place here? That is what we are proposing. These are solutions. It is not as simple as the minister claims.

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

10:55 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, I do take exception to the member's comments in terms of the Liberal Party's absence, what he refers to as being absent in terms of contribution to the debate. As the deputy House leader and a member who has served in the Canadian Forces, I have been deeply engaged in this process. We have had several members who have been speaking and asking questions in regard to the motion.

When the member wants to ask a question, I am always happy to provide answers to the member. He makes reference to Afghanistan and Iraq. I think Canadians as a whole are very appreciative of the role that the former prime minister Jean Chrétien played. When they use hindsight it is wonderful, but Canadians were very supportive of Mr. Chrétien's role in Afghanistan.

Might the member want to acknowledge the fact that the UN and NATO played a very critical role in encouraging Canada's involvement in Afghanistan. Were the UN and NATO wrong?

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11 p.m.

NDP

Hoang Mai NDP Brossard—La Prairie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for being here tonight. It is true that he is very hard-working. If we look at his record, he would be the one who probably speaks the most in the House, and I would like to congratulate him for that.

It is true that he talks a lot for his party. However, when we are here to have a debate and ask questions, unfortunately we are not hearing from everyone on that side with respect to what they have to put forward.

On the member's question, we were against the war in Afghanistan. That is why I got involved with the NDP. The member's position is why I actually got into politics. The fact that Canada went to war in Afghanistan is why I am here as a NDP member and that is why I am in politics. It is their vision that I didn't agree with, and that is why I got into politics.

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11 p.m.

Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon B.C.

Conservative

Mark Strahl ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand in the House on behalf of the people of Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon to speak in favour of the government motion to extend and expand the military mission against the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL.

Like the previous speaker, I count it a great privilege to stand in this House of Commons to debate a motion like this, which is something that has been unique in this country since our government came to power. The Liberal Party never put motions like this before the House for its support. Certainly I am proud to be part of a government that does.

Since early last year, ISIL has cut a wide swath of ethnic cleansing, massacres, assassinations, abductions, rapes, kidnappings, and destruction across parts of Iraq and Syria. It wears its heinous crimes as badges of honour and broadcasts its barbarism widely in order to try to win depraved individuals over to its jihadist terrorist cause. ISIL speaks openly of wanting to establish a cross-border caliphate stretching from India to the south of Spain.

As the Minister of National Defence has mentioned, before the international community of 24 nations from North America, Europe, the Middle East, and around the world stepped in to militarily assist Iraqi and Kurdish security forces, ISIL was operating in the region with impunity. It was rolling across the region and wiping out anything and anyone in its path that did not conform to its twisted ideology.

While efforts to degrade ISIL's capabilities to operate in the open have proven successful, jihadi terrorism continues to threaten vulnerable minority communities in the Middle East. ISIL also continues to pose a danger to the security of Canada, as is evidenced by its attempts to establish a region from which it can launch and inspire further international attacks and by naming Canada specifically as a target in multiple directives to its followers.

When Canadians are threatened by terrorism, the Government of Canada will act. Canadians support the mission against ISIL, as do the vast majority of my constituents, who have taken the time to indicate that they are overwhelmingly in favour of Canada's military action against ISIL because they believe that civilized nations of the world must not remain on the sidelines when a threat of this nature presents itself.

I followed the debate today closely, and unfortunately many opposition members have chosen to focus on everything but the mission outlined in this motion. That is why we are here: to talk about why this mission is so necessary and why Canada must do its part and engage with our allies to say that we and other civilized, capable, and free nations will not stand idly by while genocide is perpetrated against so many innocents.

Allow me to focus for a few moments on one example of ISIL's actions in Iraq so that all members might understand the gravity of what is taking place.

ISIL is systematically targeting communities and individuals who do not share its twisted, fanatical beliefs. Entire religious minority communities are at risk of disappearing forever under the tyranny of ISIL. Nowhere is this clearer than on the Nineveh plains, where Christian communities dating back to the time of the first apostles are being systematically erased from the landscape. These Christians are among the last people on earth still using Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus Christ. It is estimated that 100,000 Christians have been driven from their ancestral lands. Religious artifacts have also been desecrated, and ancient manuscripts dating to the first century have been destroyed by ISIL.

In a disturbing parallel to the Nazi practice of marking property owned by Jews, ISIL marked the homes of Christians in Mosul, one of Iraq's largest cities, with the Arabic letter “N” for Nazara, an early Islamic term for Christians. Once identified, Christians were given the choice to convert to radical Islam, pay a massive fine, or face death by the sword. Most chose to flee for their lives.

Canon Andrew White, known as the vicar of Baghdad, has described the situation in Iraq as “the worst reality of religious persecution since the Holocaust.”

Amnesty International investigator Donatella Rovera has said:

The massacres and abductions being carried out by the Islamic State provide harrowing new evidence that a wave of ethnic cleansing against minorities is sweeping across northern Iraq.

William Youmaran, president of the Assyrian American National Federation, made the following comments, which all members of this House would be wise to heed. He said:

We understand that not all peoples see the tremendous religious and regional implications of such a loss, but if the world community no longer fear the judgment of God, let us all fear the judgment of history for failing to act at this critical and dire moment for millions in the Middle East.

The crimes against these Christians are just one example of the unspeakable acts that ISIL has perpetrated in Iraq and Syria. We are all aware of the others: rape being used as a weapon of war, women and children being sold into slavery, beheadings, people burned alive in cages.

Canadians have seen these images and read these stories. They know that evil like this cannot be confronted armed only with strongly worded resolutions or good intentions. That is why they support targeted military action against ISIL.

At the same time that we participated in these types of military strikes in Iraq, Canada was and is one of the largest humanitarian donors to Iraq and displaced Syrians. This is not an either-or proposition. Canada was among the first to recognize and address the significant needs of the Iraqis and Syrians affected by ISIL's reign of terror in the region.

As the Prime Minister said in his address to this House on Tuesday, over the last six months we have helped feed 1.7 million people in Iraq, provide shelter and relief supplies to 1.25 million people, and give some education to at least half a million children. We provided support to the over 200,000 Syrian refugees in Iraq with food, water, shelter, and protection.

What the opposition fails to recognize is that aid cannot be delivered without security and security cannot exist in an environment where aid workers are routinely taken as hostages and decapitated in front of the cameras, nor are we satisfied to merely offer a hot meal or a warm coat to those who happen to escape the clutches of ISIL. We believe Canada's obligation to a vulnerable population is to prevent refugees and displaced persons from being created in the first place.

Canada has never been afraid to do its part when it comes to the responsibility to protect innocents. We have done it throughout our history, and Canadians can be proud that we are doing so again.

It is clear that the depravity of ISIL knows no bounds. Barbaric practices such as stoning, crucifixions, torture, rape, and murder, including that of children, have become their common practices. It is also clear that if left unchecked, ISIL would pose a real and present danger to Canada and Canadians. ISIL spokesmen have praised the cowardly attack on Corporal Nathan Cirillo and Warrant Office Patrice Vincent. They have encouraged others to conduct similar attacks here. They have made repeated and specific threats against our country and Canadians, and if allowed to establish their caliphate, they would use it as a base from which to launch terrorist attacks against us and our allies.

As long as Canada remains a pluralistic, tolerant, and open society where individuals are free to believe and worship, or not worship, in a manner of their own choosing, we will be a target of ISIL.

The world has been confronted by a group of jihadi terrorists, the likes of which we have never seen. ISIL will not stop committing atrocities until it is stopped by force, and we have been asked by the Iraqis to help provide it. That is why we must continue to work with our coalition partners to diminish and degrade the capacity of ISIL to operate in the open. We must not allow ISIL to establish a base from which it can launch further terrorist attacks. We must not allow ISIL to continue the barbaric assault on innocents without a response.

Canadians support this mission, and I am proud to support this motion in the House of Commons on their behalf.

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:10 p.m.

NDP

Tarik Brahmi NDP Saint-Jean, QC

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite mentioned that Canada was directly attacked by ISIL. He mentioned the despicable crime against Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent.

However, the truth about the mentally disturbed individual who committed that despicable criminal act is that he did it because he was not able to make any connection to ISIL in Iraq or in Syria, and the reason for that was that he did not speak Arabic.

Although he tried for months to make connections with ISIL, he was so frustrated that eventually he decided, in a moment of craziness, to use his car and run into Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent.

It is a contradiction. The reason he committed this crime was that he was not able to connect with ISIL. He wanted to go to Iraq or Syria to fight. He was not able to get anyone in the local mosque to connect him with anyone abroad. That is the reason he committed this crime.

How does the member explain that contradiction?

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:10 p.m.

Conservative

Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC

Mr. Speaker, what was committed was an act of terrorism in Parliament. That is clear from the tapes that have been released now.

What I said in my speech was that ISIL had used that attack and asked others to conduct similar attacks in the future. He was inspired by ISIL as well. I know those members want to talk abut all these technicalities of was it terrorism, was it mental illness. There was a soldier shot in the back at the National War Memorial by a terrorist who was inspired by ISIL.

ISIL has used that incident and has said in particular that it wants others to do that again. This is the type of organization with which we are dealing. To think we can just wish it away, ignore it or let someone else deal with it, is irresponsible. Canadians want us to act. They overwhelmingly support the motion and the mission. I will be happy to support it as well.

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:10 p.m.

Selkirk—Interlake Manitoba

Conservative

James Bezan ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development for his passion on this matter and for his clear illustration of some of the atrocities that are being committed by ISIL, as well as clearly making the argument of how ISIL has inspired terrorist attacks here.

Could my colleague and friend talk a bit more about how dangerous it would be if we allowed ISIL to entrench and fortify itself in a caliphate in eastern Syria, headquartered in the city of Raqqa?

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:10 p.m.

Conservative

Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence for his work today in this debate as well as for his support for our men and women in uniform.

If we allow ISIL to operate out in the open, as happened before the international military interventions, the attacks it would perpetrate in the region and internationally would just grow. Because of the air strikes in Iraq, it has now retreated across the border in Syria. That is why we have expanded the mission to allow Canadian pilots to target ISIL targets in Syria.

Giving ISIL unfettered access to a region where it can do whatever it wants, plan, train and carry out attacks, would be a disaster even greater than what is already there. We cannot stand by as an international community and let that happen.

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:15 p.m.

Etobicoke—Lakeshore Ontario

Conservative

Bernard Trottier ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and for La Francophonie

Mr. Speaker, since last fall's debate about Canada's participation in the fight against the Islamic State, the threat that this vicious and repugnant organization poses to the region and western countries, including Canada, has persisted. This group continues to commit horrible acts of violence against innocent civilians and to threaten the safety of countries in the region and elsewhere.

The weekend of March 14 and 15 marked four years since the beginning of the conflict in Syria, a crisis resulting from President Bashar al-Assad's brutal repression of his own citizens. I wanted to mention that because the chaos and violence spawned by the Assad regime created an opening for the Islamic State to wade into the conflict and extend its reach. The Islamic State's disgusting and hateful persecution of civilians, ethnic minorities and religious groups in Iraq and Syria and the resulting humanitarian crisis make it clear that there is a need for strong intervention.

I am proud to say that Canada is getting involved on all fronts and that it is combining its diplomatic and military efforts with those of its partners in over 60 countries who share a common perspective. The air strikes and other deployments that the courageous members of our armed forces are participating in are making an important contribution. Our soldiers deserve our unwavering support.

ISIL's horrific campaign of terror and violence has been tormenting the people of Iraq and Syria. It also threatens stability and security in the Middle East and beyond. Over the past few months, we have noticed that groups affiliated with ISIL in Libya and Egypt, and more recently Boko Haram, a group whose violence was unequalled before the emergence of ISIL, have pledged allegiance to that organization.

Countries in the region are more affected by the crisis and are working to overcome this serious humanitarian crisis by taking strong action. Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt have welcomed over two million refugees who have fled the war in Syria and the brutality of ISIL. Saudi Arabia has given hundreds of millions of dollars in humanitarian aid to help the Iraqis displaced by the conflict. Kuwait and other countries in the region are also providing humanitarian aid, and so are our western allies and many other stakeholders.

The barbaric acts perpetrated by ISIL demonstrate not only its total indifference to human rights, but also its absolute contempt for other cultures. Earlier this month in Iraq, ISIL deliberately destroyed the renowned historic site of Nimrud, which dates back over 3,000 years. ISIL is destroying not only Iraqi and Syrian archeological sites, but also cultural treasures that belong to us all.

I believe that we all agree on the need to fight with resolve against the threat that is the Islamic State, not just in Iraq and Syria, but also in the region and around the world. Canadians are guided by values such as peace, democracy, religious freedom and pluralism. We want everyone to be able to live in a free and democratic society based on respect for human rights and the rule of law. Canada supports the aspirations of the people of Iraq and Syria to establish stable and democratic societies that protect the fundamental rights of their people. They deserve our help in the fight against the Islamic State so that they can make progress in achieving this objective.

The fundamental question is this: how can we defeat the Islamic State and what is the best way to work together with our partners to help make the Middle East safe for everyone?

This question has been studied by our partners, the United States, Europe, Australia and New Zealand and, with more urgency, by the countries in the Middle East.

Last September, 10 countries in the Middle East and North Africa met in Jeddah in order to join the international coalition against the Islamic State. Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Bahrain joined the air campaign against the Islamic State in Syria a few weeks later.

Turkey, a NATO ally, decided not only to fight against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, but also to give foreign troops access to its military bases for that purpose. Active participation of regional powers in the international coalition against the Islamic State is essential. What is more, their participation in air strikes helps to degrade the Islamic State group.

The participation of predominantly Muslim countries, such as Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, also helps to undermine the simplistic and twisted propaganda spread by the Islamic State holding that their opponents are enemies of Islam. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, religious Muslim leaders strongly denounce the Islamic State and its beliefs. The war waged by this group is not between Muslims and non-Muslims, or between Sunnis and Shiites. The number of countries and people opposed to the violent and extremist ideology of the Islamic State continues to grow, and includes a number of predominantly Sunni Muslim countries.

The Islamic State makes no secret of its expansionist designs. The threat it poses to Iraq's neighbours and Canada's friends in the region is not indirect. On the contrary, it is immediate and very direct, and is at their borders and even within their territories.

As we know, the issues of terrorism financing and the recruitment of foreign fighters that affect western countries are particularly acute in countries in the region. ISIL is not only actively recruiting fighters in several countries in the region, including in the Maghreb, where it has set up clandestine cells, but is reaching out to target young people well beyond the region. The cases of young people from North America and Europe being lured to join ISIL in Syria and Iraq are worrying, especially for their families.

The horrific threat posed by ISIL has drawn together nations from across the world, stretching over religious, ethnic, and geographic divides. ISIL's aims and ideology have generated near universal disgust among civilized peoples.

Iran and Syria claim to stand on the right side of history in the fight against ISIL, but make no mistake, Iran and Syria are not partners. It is the ideology and actions of these regimes that helped to create the conditions that have allowed ISIL to flourish. They do not stand for peace and stability. They stand with terror. They support sectarian forces across the Middle East, and they continue to persecute and deny the human rights and freedoms of their own citizens. Their violent aims further inflame sectarian divisions and continue to destabilize the region.

The Assad regime in Syria has for four years violated international law on many occasions. It can no longer be regarded as a legitimate member of the international community. As documented and widely reported, the regime has repeatedly unleashed the terror of chemical weapons against its own people, combatants and civilians alike.

ISIL continues to threaten Iraq and other states in the region from its bases in Syria. Canada will support the people of Syria in achieving their democratic aspirations and welcomes efforts aimed at ensuring that the Assad regime does not unduly benefit from efforts to combat ISIL in Syria.

A development of serious concern to Canada and its partners is the role Iran has assumed in Iraq over the past several months to fight ISIL with its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds force. Members may remember that the IRGC Quds force is a listed terrorist entity responsible for some of the deadliest terrorist attacks of the past decades. This force can only compromise and complicate efforts to bring long-term peace and stability to Iraq and the region. It is arming and directing Shia militias within Iraq and is undermining attempts by the new government to gain the trust of its Sunni population and and to build an inclusive government in Baghdad.

This is no accident. An independent and inclusive government representative of Iraq's diverse communities would not be in Iran's interest. There is no way that Syria and Iran can be part of a peaceful long-term solution when they refuse to change their ways. They remain a large part of the problem.

Over four years ago, the forerunner of ISIL was considered defeated in Iraq. A lot has happened since then. The reality is that the only way to defeat ISIL definitively is to eliminate the conditions that have allowed it to grow. A just political solution to the war in Syria must be found, and the government of Bashar al-Assad must fully commit, in word and deed, to addressing Iraq's sectarian and ethnic divides.

We know that a stable, secure, and prosperous Iraq that embraces pluralism and religious diversity is a key factor for regional stability and would be a model for others in the Middle East.

We know that ISIL is recruiting its fighters from all over the world, including from Canada. We are aware that ISIL's propaganda includes threats to destroy Canada. We cannot treat ISIL as a remote problem that only affects countries in the region. We should continue to be part of the international coalition and do everything in our power to stop ISIL.

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:25 p.m.

NDP

Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the hon. member could comment on the fact that renowned experts in the Middle East have said that the campaign again ISIS in Syria helps the Assad regime and also helps al-Nusra, which is a branch of al Qaeda that is emerging as well and wants to form its own network to support al Qaeda in the region.

Is it any wonder that so many Canadians are worried about where this expansion and move into Syria will lead? Even the minister said that even if we are successful in defeating ISIL in Syria, he does not have a crystal ball to know what the consequence and the result will be. Is it really any wonder that people feel that this is a mistake and that it will lead we do not know where?

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:25 p.m.

Conservative

Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Speaker, the biggest threat to stability in the region is ISIL right now. I know that the member opposite thinks there are potentially other threats. Currently the international coalition of about 60 countries is focused on degrading and ultimately defeating ISIL. That is the biggest threat to stability. It is the biggest threat to pluralism. It is the biggest threat to democracy and human rights. That is the battle we are fighting right now.

Kuwait has had some experience with this in the past. The foreign minister of Kuwait talked recently about the effect of the military action in degrading ISIL. He really thinks that it is critical. Without that sustained military effort against ISIL, they cannot move forward in that whole region. It is absolutely essential, and that is the main focus of all of our efforts right now.

We recognize at the same time that while we are having this military campaign, the humanitarian assistance Canada has been providing has been well more than our share. We are the fifth-largest contributor of humanitarian assistance in Iraq and the sixth-largest in Syria. Only large countries like Saudi Arabia and the United States are providing more. Canada is doing everything it can to fight this menace.

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:25 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, if I may, I will quote the leader of the Liberal Party from two days ago, when he stated:

This government is proposing that Canadian Forces participate in a vague combat mission with no clear end point, and we cannot support that.

One thing is clear: Canada has a role to play in the campaign against ISIL. That role must serve our national interests. The one being proposed today by the Prime Minister does not meet that test.

Can the member explain why this motion does not limit the government's action to just Iraq and Syria?

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:25 p.m.

Conservative

Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Speaker, we will take the battle to ISIL. Currently it is established in Iraq and Syria, and that is why we are there. As events change, we will adjust, but right now, it is Iraq and Syria. The objective of this motion is to root out ISIL in Iraq and Syria. I cannot be more clear than that.

I know the member's leader makes adolescent comments about our CF-18s and compares them to body parts. I think we need to have a mature debate about Canada's role in fighting this menace. Canada in the past has stepped up and taken on challenges like this. We are doing our share. It is not a problem Canada created, but it has come to our own shores in terms of terrorist menaces in Canada and in terms of the recruitment of ISIL fighters in Canada going to fight the battle there.

Canada needs to do its share. We need to take the military action, as I mentioned many times, and also the humanitarian efforts we are sustaining there.

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:30 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I want to put to my hon. colleague the following quote from our former ambassador to the United Nations, Paul Heinbecker, because he is not someone who rules out that some military action might be needed, and I differ with him on that point. He said recently:

If out of fear of Islamic State and of a desire to stop them, the Coalition were to ally itself, de facto or de jure, with Bashar al-Assad for fleeting tactical advantage, it would be the ultimate betrayal of the Syrian innocents. And of our own values.

Could my hon. colleague respond to that? I think we run a serious risk, in focusing on ISIS, of actually assisting Bashar al-Assad.

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:30 p.m.

Conservative

Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Speaker, all I can say about the Syrian regime is that it is a state sponsor of terror. It is not part of the solution, it is part of the problem. It has created the conditions in Syria that have allowed ISIL to flourish. We are taking on ISIL, because that is menace right now to the entire region, and we will deal with Assad in due course.

We have to, of course, root out ISIL, and we are going to provide conditions at some point, not Canada specifically but the international community, so that peace and human rights can exist once again in Syria.

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:30 p.m.

NDP

Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of my constituents from Surrey North to speak on the government's Motion No. 17, which seeks to extend Canada's combat mission in Iraq and further extend it into Syria.

I talked to many of my constituents over the last two weeks and I will summarize some of their concerns today.

The issue that we have at hand is deeply concerning and should not be taken lightly. With the motion before us, the government is basically asking the House of Commons, myself as a member of Parliament, and Canadians as a whole to commit to war. The motion, if passed, will require our brave women and men in uniform to risk their lives overseas. A decision like this needs to be carried out with the utmost responsibility and should not by any means have any political motivations.

There is no doubt that the crimes perpetrated by ISIL are appalling and deeply concerning. We are witnessing heinous acts of oppression, kidnapping, rape, ethnic cleansing and cultural targeting.

There also other conflicts around the world. We have ISIL in Iraq, Boko Haram in Nigeria, the conflict in Ukraine, civil war in Syria, and there are tensions in the Balkans and other parts of the world with violence happening as we speak.

However, what the Conservatives are asking from us today is to risk the lives of our soldiers for a mission that is not defined. It is not part of an international response, and clearly has not been taken into consideration with the seriousness and responsibility that it deserves.

As a representative from Surrey North, as I said, I have talked to many constituents. I cannot, in good conscience, agree to blindly commit the lives of our women and men in uniform to a mission that has no plan and no exit strategy.

How can we support this mission when the Conservatives have misled Canadians about our role in Iraq since day one?

It was not too long ago when the Prime Minister insisted that we were only sending troops for a month, and it was only to advise and assist deployment. On September 30, we all saw the headlines when the leader of the opposition, the member for Outremont, stood in this House and asked the Prime Minister specifically whether Canadian troops would be involved in directing air strikes in Iraq. The Prime Minister denied it. However, the mission has quickly escalated to a potential year-long conflict where Canadian troops have been on the front lines exchanging fire with ISIL. Now the Prime Minister is openly considering a massive expansion of the mission into Syria.

The Syrian President Assad has committed heinous crimes against civilians. Now the Prime Minister wants to treat him as a friend. Assad is not an ally. He is a war criminal who uses chemical weapons against his own people and bombs schools and hospitals. We have seen this on television stations. Canada should not be allying itself with Assad or strengthening his hand in any way. This is why none of our western allies, except the United States, are conducting air strikes in Syria.

Paul Heinbecker, Canada's last ambassador to the UN Security Council, was quoted in The Globe and Mail on March 23. He said:

If out of fear of Islamic State and of a desire to stop them, the Coalition were to ally itself, de facto or de jure, with Bashar al-Assad for fleeting tactical advantage, it would be the ultimate betrayal of the Syrian innocents. And of our own values.

Simply put, our women and men in uniform have no place being in Iraq and they certainly have no place being in Syria. It is very disturbing to see that the Prime Minister is willing to sleepwalk Canadians into a war without accountability.

The Conservatives have been very dishonest about our role in Iraq since day one, but for the Prime Minister to still deny Canadian troops are involved in combat is simply disrespectful to our forces. The Conservatives continue to mislead us about our soldiers being involved in ground combat, and now they want to put our troops in danger.

They have not gained our trust for us to commit to this mission. They have not gained the trust of Canadians because they have not put out all the facts for Canadians to judge. They have not done that for parliamentarians to be able to look at the facts and decide whether this mission should be approved. The Parliamentary Budget Officer is having trouble getting some facts and figures from the government with regard to how much this war is going to cost.

The recent death of Sergeant Doiron reminds us of the risk of deploying troops to the front lines. History has shown us the dramatic horrors that war can bring. Let us not repeat history. The Prime Minister does not seem to be at all concerned about the risks or lack of clear objectives. He seems to want his war in Iraq just as he wanted George W. Bush's war in 2003. However, history showed us that Canada was right in not participating at that time.

We also need to remember Canada's involvement in the war in Afghanistan. Just like our current mission in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan started with Canadian Forces participating in a very limited operations. We know what happened in Iraq and in Afghanistan. It was the longest mission, which was 10 years. New Democrats stood in the House and opposed both of those wars. Today, after 10 years, we can see why the NDP made the right decision, because NDP members make their decisions based on principles. We do not base them on fear or political motivations. We stand up for what is right.

There is a lot we can learn from our military intervention in Afghanistan. Only a few days ago, March 5, the Minister of Foreign Affairs actually said in the media, “Being in this for the long term—it’s similar to what we did in Afghanistan, for instance”. That is what the foreign affairs minister said. I would like to point out for the minister that the deployment in Afghanistan is nothing Canadians want to see repeated. It was the longest mission, 10 years, cost billions of dollars, and resulted in 166 soldiers, brave men and women, being killed, more than 1,000 injured, and thousands of others who suffered and are still suffering today from post-traumatic stress disorder.

We ask our soldiers to go overseas. We ask them to fight for our country, to defend our freedoms, to ensure our right to practise religion, to freely speak in the House, and yet when those soldiers come home, we have seen the record of the government over the last number of years on the treatment they have given our soldiers. That is shameful. It is time we invested in various services that our soldiers require when they serve for this country.

The Conservatives do not like to look after our veterans, but when it comes to war, they seem to be more than willing to blindly spend money to ensure that we go into some sort of war with no plan and no exit strategy. We must learn from history so that we do not repeat it. Another example is the Libya situation, and we know what happened there. There is a lawless society there. There is no rule of law. We continue to see the same pattern of the Conservatives following in the footsteps of the United States and sleepwalking into military interventions.

I want to quote Mrs. Jaisri Margaret Lambert. She is a constituent of mine, and she sent me an email that came to my office.

Canadians are peacemakers, not warmongers. This is a critical time to disallow the government to even seek the right to kill and find a way of making it “legal”. Canada is historically wisely governed by a foreign policy of peacekeeping. Let not my taxes be used to bomb. Help! Life and death issue most important. Please make my voice heard in the House of Commons!”

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:40 p.m.

Calgary Southeast Alberta

Conservative

Jason Kenney ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister for Multiculturalism

Mr. Speaker, that speech was regrettable for a couple of reasons, one of which is that about 80% was verbatim the template speech of New Democratic MPs. I have been here for 11 hours. I think I have heard that speech four times verbatim.

Point two, I think it is really unfortunate for the member to characterize those who believe we must use military force to stop the growth of a genocidal terrorist organization as being “warmongers” who want to kill people.

In point of fact, what the government and 24 other countries want, including the many social democratic governments of Europe, such as those of France and Denmark, which have similar policies and similar military activity, is to save lives, to save ethnic minorities, and to save women and girls from the brutality of this organization.

The hon. member quoted one constituent. That is fine. However, I would point out to the member that I have been several times to the Chaldean parish in his constituency in Surrey North, which is the home of about 1,000 Chaldean-Canadians, almost all of them refugees. The size of the parish has tripled in the past several years because of this government's Iraqi refugee resettlement program.

I have spent a lot of time with the Chaldeans in his riding. I wonder if he has. If he has, would he not admit that every member of that community wants Canada to engage in a military action against ISIL? They want their relatives to be able to go back to their homes in the Nineveh plains. They understand that region. They understand Iraq, and they know that only through an appropriate use of force will ISIL be stopped.

Has he talked to them, and why does he disregard the voices of the Chaldean-Iraqi refugees in his own constituency?

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:40 p.m.

NDP

Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC

I want to thank the hard-working Minister of National Defence for his question. He has actually been working way too hard over the last number of years.

While the Minister of National Defence was asking a question, I had a chance to tweet and find out what has been happening. I googled his name, and voilà, what comes up? This is what the Minister of National Defence said the other day. He was pressed by one of the journalists at CBC, who asked him whether he has an exit strategy, whether he has a plan to get out of Syria, and whether the land that will be cleared of ISIL will be reclaimed by President Assad. This is what the minister said:

I don't have a crystal ball to tell you exactly how this is going to end but I can tell you that Canada has a responsibility to play a role with 20 other like-minded countries in degrading this organization.

Sometimes it is degrading. Other times it is that we are going to finish them off. Is the minister's exist strategy to tweet his way out of Syria?

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:45 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to comment on the criticism of the member for Surrey North by my friend, the Minister of National Defence. I have also been here for many hours today.

First, compliments to the Minister of National Defence. He is the only minister who consistently attends debates on any item under his portfolio, including when he was Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and now as Minister of National Defence.

However, having sat here, I have also heard a lot of canned speeches that have emanated from the PMO. I do not find the member for Surrey North to have repeated anything verbatim.

However, I would ask the member for Surrey North if he would also offer in a brief comment what it is we can do instead, because I do not believe any of us want to stand on the sidelines and allow ISIS to get any stronger.

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:45 p.m.

NDP

Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC

Mr. Speaker, absolutely there is a role that Canada can play. As one of my constituents said to me today, we have traditionally played a role of peacemakers and of humanitarian aid. We can play that role. We can help the very refugees who need our help in Syria. That is a role Canada has traditionally played, and that is how we brought the world together. We were able to resolve and lead in that field.

Unfortunately the Conservatives are meeting their 2013 targets for Syrian refugees in 2015, which is two years late.

Military Contribution Against ISILGovernment Orders

11:45 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, the theme from the Conservatives has been that they care about keeping Canadians safe.

After a decade now of Conservative governments, where we have seen their complete incompetence and irresponsibility around 1,200 missing and murdered indigenous women, where we have seen Canadians who have died because of their cutbacks in food safety and the appalling incident that we saw in Lac-Mégantic where we lacked rail safety that led to the death of dozens of Canadians, we take no lessons from Conservatives on keeping Canadians safe. They have an appallingly poor record on that, and that is something on which I think Canadians will judge them on October 19.

The second point I want to make is that I am profoundly disappointed in the fact that the Liberals have not shown up to the debate this evening. They had three speaking spots and time after time this evening they simply refused to stand and defend their position. I have been following the position of the Liberals over the last six months. They reversed themselves three times over that time. First they were in favour of the mission, then they were opposed, then they were in favour, then they were opposed. It would have been nice to have Liberals actually stand to explain and defend their position.

My family history is very similar to so many other Canadian families across the country. When people go to New Westminster, they will see a cenotaph in front of city hall. Two members of my family have their names inscribed on that cenotaph, having given their lives for their country. There is no doubt that many Canadian families have the same story. Many Canadian families have shown great courage. The reality is that our men and women in uniform show great courage all the time.

It is important, though, as the Leader of the Opposition stressed earlier this week, that when we send our men and women in service overseas, we are honest and forthright with them. The government has been anything but.

I will start with the history of the Minister of National Defence. I am happy he is here this evening, but he cannot deny that his record has been less than forthright when we look at it in cabinet.

Back in 2011, he manufactured a fake citizenship ceremony. It was bizarre and unprecedented. He has never apologized for what was an essential fib that was put forward.

Since he has become Minister of National Defence, we have seen a number of these fibs, misleading statements, statements that are completely manufactured. First, there was the photo of a woman taken at a religious ceremony, that the minister purported to be of a woman being abused. More recently, there was an incident that was manufactured where a Russian jet supposedly buzzed a Canadian warship. NATO had to openly contradict the minister and say that incident simply did not happen.

These are not isolated incidents, because it comes into the narrative that we have seen from the Prime Minister.

On September 24, the Prime Minister and the government said that Canada was considering a request from the United States to provide assistance in the fight against ISIL. On September 25, as many of my colleagues have outlined over the course of the day, it was actually revealed that the Canadian government was going to the U.S. government asking to provide options for Canadian support. On September 30, we were told that our forces were not going into a combat mission, not going to the front lines, but the casualties that we have seen so far belie that fib. The tragic death of Sergeant Andrew Doiron as well shows very clearly that the statement by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons was simply not true.

The most egregious comments coming from the Conservatives, and we have heard them tonight repeatedly, was the point that somehow this was a balanced approach, that somehow there was just as much emphasis being put on humanitarian aid as there was on the bombing mission. We have already seen from the Parliamentary Budget Officer that the government has deliberately hidden information from the Parliamentary Budget Officer and actually broken the law, and that the actual size, scope and extent of the bombing mission is perhaps as high now as $1 billion.

We cannot get accurate figures on that because the government has been hiding information, contrary to the law, from the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

The reality is the government seems to be willing to spend unlimited amounts of money, even hiding it from the Parliamentary Budget Officer, for the bombing mission, bombing people and targets in Iraq, and now looking to bomb targets in Syria.

However, to say that somehow the government is emphasizing, equally, a humanitarian mission is simply ridiculous. The government itself has tried to spin its figures. Tonight we heard from the Minister of Labour that the Conservative government has fed millions of the 2.5 million refugees who are living in appallingly dire circumstances right now in areas of northern Iraq and southern Iraq.

Let us look at the figures the Conservatives themselves have released, and this is a figure that we have started to raise today, and not one Conservative has been able to answer the question. When we do the math, it amounts to five cents a day per refugee.

We are being asked to believe, if we listen to the Minister of Labour, that somehow at five cents a day per refugee we are feeding, clothing, putting tents up, creating hospitals and educating millions of refugees. That is a whopper that defies any attempt at realistic and constructive debate. It is simply a whopper that, compared to inventing incidents with Russian jets, inventing fake citizenship ceremonies, having the Prime Minister invent that somehow the United States was asking Canada to come in, pales in comparison.

It is a myth that somehow the Conservatives are providing humanitarian aid in such a way that we are helping the millions of people who are living in appallingly dire circumstances.

As members well know, we have had the Kurdish government and the Iraqi government hamstrung by the extent of the humanitarian crisis. Canada is simply not there in any meaningful way at five cents a day per refugee. That is what the government's own figures tell us about the extent of the humanitarian aid. It is five cents a day. A few grains of rice, maybe a tablespoon of powdered milk.

However, to say that there are tents and somehow there are schools being constructed, somehow there are hospitals and medical facilities being constructed, somehow sanitation is being taken care of, somehow water programs that are desperately needed are being taken care of, it is simply not true. It is the biggest whopper of all the whoppers the Conservatives have brought forward tonight.

It is simply the reason we are seeing that steady erosion in support for this mission since the beginning. It is because the Conservatives have simply not been honest and forthright with the Canadian population. That is why we have seen, over the course of the last few weeks, a steady decline in support for this mission.

It is because Canadians have fundamental values. They understand that ISIS is terrible and has created a terrible humanitarian crisis. Canadians can also see that what we should be doing is offering that immediate humanitarian support, not at five cents per refugee per day, enough for a few grains of rice or a tablespoon of powdered milk.

Canada really should be stepping up to a humanitarian mission. We really should be looking at this, instead of pretending that somehow we are building schools and hospitals. We really should be putting and investing so that we can help stem that extent of the humanitarian crisis. That is the appropriate role for Canada.

The government has said yes to $1 billion for bombing, that it is willing to do that, it will even hide funds from the Parliamentary Budget Officer, it will not be straightforward, and it will not be transparent.

The reality is there are millions of people suffering tonight. They need support tonight. What Canada should be doing, and if Conservatives support the amendment that was brought forward by the member for Ottawa Centre, what Parliament would be directing our military forces to be doing and the government to be doing is providing humanitarian support now for the 2.5 million refugees who are living in such dire circumstances.

We should be looking at providing schools and medical support. We should be looking at sanitation. We should be looking at providing food and water, and not at five cents per refugee per day, which is what the Conservatives have ultimately admitted is what they are actually providing in humanitarian support.

That is why we are urging Conservative members to support the NDP amendment and put in place real humanitarian relief.