Debates of April 29th, 2015

Ongoing Situation in Ukraine

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Chair, the hon. member quite rightly raises the whole question of the economy. The measures we have taken on sanctions against entities and individuals is in effect applying economic pressure on those who are oppressing the Ukrainian people. We have the toughest regime in the world. Two hundred and seventy entities and individuals are on that, so that is part of that. On the other hand, we have been providing loans assistance to Ukraine, because we believe that extending financial assistance to it will help it develop the economy and stay on track.

The hon. member mentioned the SWIFT network. It is a private entity under Belgian law. Such action would require a significant multilateral effect in terms of cutting Russian banks. That being said though, we will continue to support Ukraine on an economic level, which is what we have done in terms of hundreds of millions of dollars. We have made it very clear in our discussions with Ukraine that our support is for the long term. It is not just for the next five weeks or five months. Ukraine can count on us for as long as it takes. We are going to stand with Ukraine.

I agree with the hon. member that it has to be done on every level. Sanctions are a part of it. The assistance we are providing, with the 200 troops we are providing for training, is all part of the efforts Canada is taking, and that certainly will continue.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, I would like to thank the minister for all his support and help, both as the Minister of Foreign Affairs now and in his previous incarnation as the minister of national defence. There is no one who has been stronger on this file. I am very grateful for the fact that in his name I was able to announce 238 state-of-the-art night vision goggles, which Canada recently sent to Ukraine to help those soldiers.

My question has to do with the ceasefire between Ukraine and the Russian-backed rebels. They have signed the Minsk agreement, but I have tremendous concerns about the conduct and execution of the agreement. I wonder if the minister would be kind enough to comment on that.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Chair, I would be glad to do so, but first I want to thank the member for all his efforts in this particular area. He has continually taken an interest and has been very supportive of all our actions in this area. Indeed, he has shown leadership on that. I want to publicly thank him for that.

The member asked me to comment on the ceasefire between Ukraine and Russian-backed rebels. We are having a look obviously very closely at what has happened since the February 12 Minsk agreement. We have been very clear that we will judge Russia on its actions, quite apart from any agreements it says it is supporting, and we are prepared to take further action against Russia should it fail to implement this agreement.

We remain committed to supporting Ukraine to be a democratic, stable and prosperous country. Canada has a great record on this. I was a member of Parliament in the early 1980s when Prime Minister Brian Mulroney was the first world leader to step forward and recognize the independence and freedom of Ukraine. I remember how proud I was to be a member of that government.

What we are doing here is certainly consistent with the actions we have taken as a government and the actions of the government of Brian Mulroney. I am very proud we are doing this and making very clear to Russia that it has to live up to these agreements because our position and I believe the position of many of our allies is going to be continuously with Ukraine, because we believe ultimately in Ukraine's prosperity, freedom and security.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Chair, all parliamentarians in this House stand with Ukraine. We continue to want to send a very strong message to Putin to get out of Ukrainian territory. We appreciate that.

I do want to raise the issue of the humanitarian situation in Ukraine. We know that there are more than one million people in Ukraine who have been displaced. There is tremendous concern about the economic well-being of people in Ukraine with the hryvnia, the currency, having dropped by more than 70%.

I know the minister talked about offering some loans to Ukraine, but given that it is so highly indebted, and the conflict is costing it $5 million a day, I am wondering what specific humanitarian aid is being offered to help people in their desperate need, those who have been affected by this conflict.

Given the desperate financial situation, can we do more to help the economy of Ukraine and to help its indebtedness?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Chair, quite apart from the loans assistance that I referred to in a previous question, Canada has a very impressive record in this area. We have committed more than $568 million in assistance to Ukraine since January 2014. Yes, it does include humanitarian assistance, in fact on every level. I do agree with the hon. member that as important as our support is for the military of Ukraine, and the soldiers that are there for training and the exercises we have participated in as part of NATO, ours has to be a complete package, which it is.

We are supporting Ukraine on every level, whether it is the democratic institutions or economic institutions. We are helping Ukraine on the humanitarian side. We are providing millions of dollars in that particular area, and rightly so. We want to have a complete package to assist Ukrainians. That is exactly what we are going to continue to do.

[The Assistant Deputy Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We are going to go to resuming debate, but before we do, I have a note for hon. members in respect to the period that we have for questions and comments.

During the usual time when we are chairing when the House is in session, if whoever has the floor at the time goes on too long, the Speaker or whoever the chair occupant is can stand and that usually interrupts whoever is speaking. The microphone is cut off, and we then carry on to the next speaker.

We do not have that same advantage when we are chairing from the table here. We will try to give you a hand signal to let you know that your time is just about up, but I would certainly appreciate the co-operation of hon. members through the debate this evening to think about a roughly one minute question and response. That will keep things running and it will help other hon. members who may wish to pose questions and to participate in this evening's take note debate.

With that, we will resume debate with the hon. member for St. John's East.

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

Mr. Chair, I appreciate your comments and that we only have 10 minutes. That is not very long, so I will try to cut right to the chase.

I first want to agree with my colleague from Parkdale—High Park that we stand here in solidarity with the people of Ukraine as they struggle to confront the many problems they have and at the same time deal with the fact that the Russians are trying to undermine the stability that we thought they had achieved. What is frightening in a way is how quickly the situation deteriorated from a year and a half ago to what we are dealing with today.

Originally, this debate was going to be about the subject of Canadian support to help train and build the capacity of Ukrainian military personnel, but it has turned to a more broad point about the conflict situation in Ukraine. I guess people can talk about whatever aspect of it is important to them.

I want to talk about the current situation that we have, with the UN human rights office recognizing that since last April, only one year ago, more than 6,000 people, military and civilians, have been killed and some 15,000 wounded, and that conditions in eastern Ukraine, particularly those areas held by anti-government forces are extremely difficult. In northern Donetsk and Luhansk, water and electricity supplies are frequently disrupted by shelling and rocket attacks and the number of people internally displaced has now reached some 1.2 million. That is an astonishing situation in about a year.

We know how this started, with the instability in the government and the actions by Yanukovych. The path that Ukraine was on to make a close economic arrangement with Europe was stopped by the then prime minister. That led to a protest, which eventually led to a civil war after he was deposed. How quickly that turned into the situation we have now is really an indication of how much instability there was in Ukraine that could be fomented into the civil war so quickly.

Who can forget the shock in July 2014 when Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 was shot down and the loss of 298 lives? All of us were shocked to know that such a thing could happen. A civilian airliner with innocent rights of passage over Ukraine was shot down in that situation. That was followed by the horrific scenes of preventing rescue personnel and international relief efforts from trying to remove the bodies and bring them back to loved ones. It was a shock to all of us that this could happen so rapidly in a country that we thought was on the road to a relationship with some harmony, with some conflict and dispute, yes, but with an opportunity at least to have a relationship with Europe as well as hopefully continuing a relationship with Russia. That turned out not to be possible, and we are where we are today.

A lot of work has been done. I want to talk about some of the military side of it, because this debate has been prompted by the recent decision by Canada to send 200 troops to Ukraine to help in training and building the capacity of the Ukrainian military, which is very important for the stability of Ukraine and for the ability of the Ukrainian people to maintain their territorial integrity. We know there are serious problems in the Ukrainian military. When we tried to deliver non-lethal weaponry, we actually had to build up our own supply lines to ensure the goods got to where they were supposed to, because of ongoing problems with corruption within the Ukrainian military.

Something has to be done about that, and I think NATO has stepped in to do that. There are five trust funds set up by NATO to make that possible: the logistics and standardization trust fund; command, control, communications trust fund, to which Canada has contributed $1 million; the cyberdefence trust fund; the military career management trust fund; and a medical rehabilitation trust fund. These are funds that were set up by NATO to build on the medium term professionalism and growth, and the ability of the Ukrainian military to do a proper job.

Canada has also contributed to the NATO reassurance mission. We need to put that in the right perspective. What was the purpose of that? The purpose of that was to show, first of all, the Russians and Mr. Putin, in particular, but also to show our allies, particularly in the Baltics and the neighbouring states of Russia that NATO means business, that article 5, the special and most important clause of the NATO treaty where one country is attacked, all other countries would come to its defence.

It was particularly concerning to the Baltic states: Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. They felt very vulnerable and as a result NATO stepped up the efforts, called the reassurance package. Canada participated quite dramatically in that with aircraft, with naval vessels and with training missions both in Poland and contributing for the first time to Baltic air policing that had been going on since 2005. That was an important contribution.

As a member of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, I have been to Riga, Latvia and Vilnius. We do learn from these experiences how important NATO is to these countries, which are recently part of NATO and were part of the former Soviet Union. It is extremely important for them to know that NATO is there to help them.

NATO played a very significant role and Canada, being a part of that to provide that assurance, is there. It is indirectly helping Ukraine. The government has overplayed that a little and said this was a direct support to Ukraine. It did support Ukraine because Ukraine was aware that NATO and the allies would ensure Mr. Putin did not go any further than he has and these sanctions are a very important part of that. That was indirect assistance to Ukraine.

The direct assistance we are talking about now with 200 troops to provide some training is important as well. I imagine the Minister of National Defence will speak in a little while and talk about the exact role. These are some of the questions that we wanted answered. We wanted a debate in the House and wanted to have a vote on this. We wanted to know what exactly has happened.

We do know that Ukraine needs a lot of help not just on the military side but as the Minister of Foreign Affairs said, we have to talk about the long-term stability of Ukraine. I will end by reflecting on the statement made by the minister of finance of Ukraine who was quoted by my colleague from Parkdale—High Park because it is a role for the Ukrainian government to play and people to play. There needs to be a lot of institutional changes.

I know from talking to people from Ukraine that the whole issue of corruption is extremely important and has to be fixed. Canada should be able to make a bigger contribution to that specific aspect than it has so far.

Natalie Jaresko, Ukrainian minister of finance, said in March of this year:

International support can only be effective if the Ukrainian government is also effective and diligent in its efforts to reform the country, fight corruption, improve transparency and accountability, improve the rule of law and create the conditions for the return of economic growth and prosperity.

We know that the European Union has put up $11 billion euros to assist in economic development and $5 billion of that has already been advanced in loans and grants. That is a considerable and significant effort. There is a strong international effort to help the Ukrainian people and Canada should be, and is, a part of it.

We do have some issues about that and I think the foreign affairs critic for our party and other colleagues will make some comments on that in the debate as we go forward.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the comments from my colleague from St. John's East. I think it is going to be a fairly constructive, collegial, mutually supportive debate in the long-term. This latest effort by Canada to train Ukrainians and help them become better equipped to withstand whatever Putin may be throwing their way may seem like a small amount, but it will be added to by NATO and the rest of our allies.

I would like my colleague to perhaps get inside Putin's head. It may be a pretty scary place to determine the ultimate aim of what he is doing. He has taken Crimea and there is a long stretch of territory between Russia and Crimea.

What does my colleague think Putin's aim might be with respect to forming a land bridge by force, if necessary, and gradually, if necessary, between Russia and Crimea and joining the two?

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

Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for Edmonton Centre for his question. It is one that gives rise to a lot of discussion.

I mentioned the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. I have attended several meetings over the last number of months and the topic of discussion is about the intention of the strategy that Mr. Putin is following. Some of the strongest experts have said that he is operating tactically and not strategically, that there is no grand plan, that the taking of Crimea was in fact opportunistic, and that all will depend on the reactions from the west and from how resolute the support is for Ukraine, for example, in terms of the kinds of things that NATO was doing. I think the NATO reassurance package has made a difference.

I am not sure there is a master plan. Mr. Putin is opportunistic, I think is the consensus of some the experts, and not predictable in that sense. However, it is important that the sanctions that are there are kept up and kept strong, but also conditional on what Putin might or might not do. I do not think that we will have sanctions forever, regardless of what happens. We may have to start putting some conditions on the sanctions, so that they may change behaviours and make it work.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Chair, as most members have mentioned this evening, over the many months that this topic has been discussed on the floor of the House of Commons or in our parliamentary committees, it has largely been a non-partisan discussion with all parties representing the vast majority of Canadians wanting to do everything conceivable and reasonable to support freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law in Ukraine, and to assist the Ukrainian people in facing the interference that they are facing from Russia.

The training mission in that regard is important. We indicated very quickly after this announcement was made by the government that we would be supportive. I take if from what the defence critic for the NDP has said tonight that his party as well is supporting the training mission that Canada has sent to Ukraine.

I wonder if he could elaborate upon that support.

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

Mr. Chair, we have considered the situation with the military support that is being offered. We do have questions about whether it is effective in dealing with the major problems that the Ukrainian military is having. We know that they have serious problems. They have been criticized by the international crisis group for very serious problems at the senior levels, lack of transparency, and some corruption at the senior levels. We wonder whether this will help solve those problems and what other plans Canada has.

However, what has been proposed in terms of providing training to individuals to deal with improvised explosives, to provide medical systems, to provide training in the NATO facility, we do not have a problem with that at all. We are just not sure it is the most effective thing we could be doing, but obviously we think that the Ukrainian people and the Ukrainian military need a lot of support to have a more effective opportunity to defend its sovereignty.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Chair, I thank my hon. colleague for his very cogent remarks. I thank those who suggested this debate tonight. Those who have people of Ukrainian-Canadian heritage in their community know that this is an important matter, front of mind.

One cannot grow up in our community without either having Ukrainian-Canadians in one's family or having those as close friends, so this is obviously near and dear to the hearts of many of us here tonight who are taking our time to try to bring this forward. As the colleague across the way said, this is a collegial debate. We all want to support Ukraine.

I notice that our country has just come out of a donor conference which started as a donor conference and became, as I understand, an international support for Ukraine conference. It just ended yesterday in Ukraine. The Europeans and the Americans are being very clear. They want to continue to support Ukraine, including the military assistance and training, but on condition that the country generally starts moving toward rule of law, democratic governance and more equitable sharing of the resources.

I am wondering if my colleague could speak to what additionally Canada could do. We have tended to focus on military assistance, but can I suggest we go back to the report that came out of our mission that I joined in Ukraine in 2012, where our recommendations included ensuring that Ukraine moves to a more democratic, rule of law nation. What can we do additionally to ensure it moves in that direction and that we not abandon it?

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

Mr. Chair, I want to thank the member for her comments and recognition of the importance of the Ukrainian population in Canada.

I went to law school in Edmonton and I know that a lot of fellow students were Ukrainian. One of my former colleagues in the House of Commons in 1987-88, the hon. Ray Hnatyshyn, became the Governor General of Canada, the first Governor General of Ukrainian descent. Everybody in the Ukrainian community was very proud of that, and rightly so. Ukrainians play an important role.

Canada also has an important role and a potentially significant role to play on the governance side. We are a federation and have an understanding of how federations work. There has been a suggestion that one of the solutions within Ukraine to keep the country unified is to develop some sort of regional participation in governance to help bridge some of the differences and problems.

That is where Canada can help. Where is that in this equation? I would like to hear something from the government about that and what plans it might have to help in that way.

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

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the intervention from the NDP defence critic and the work that he and I have been able to do together on national defence issues, including Ukraine.

I want to go back to the question that came from the member for Wascana. He specifically asked where the NDP is on the greater need of assisting the Ukrainian military. The Ukrainian Canadian Congress is supportive of this training mission, of having Canadian soldiers there to provide the doctrine and much-needed training at both the unit and individual levels to deal with tactics and operations.

Beyond that, where does the member feel we need to be going in assisting Ukraine's military, as has been suggested by the Ukrainian Canadian Congress, which is also advocating for more kinetic and non-kinetic military aid?

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

Mr. Chair, I want to thank the member for his question, although it is a question that he has not answered, nor has his government, in terms of the best way for Ukrainians to be helped. It is a matter of great debate in Europe as to what the next steps might be. What we are doing now in terms of assisting the Ukrainian people to have a more effective and professional military is the first step, an important step, and the kind of training that we are providing will help to do that.

Anything beyond that is a very difficult question. Where does it go from there and what does it lead to? I do not think we are ready to answer that question. Talk is cheap and tough talk is easy to say, but when we look at the situation we are dealing with, and the Europeans are very conscious of this because of their history, we have to avoid a situation which goes further than we see the full consequences.

We do not want to start a new cold war and we do not want to start a hot war. We want to manage the situation in such a way that Mr. Putin and the Russians are well aware of the consequences of what might happen and that we are able to manage the situation without leading to a hot war.

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

Mr. Chair, the Liberal Party and I welcome this take note debate. Canada has been involved in a significant manner in support of Ukraine in a number of different ways over the past year. It is a good thing for us to meet tonight to discuss the latest involvement, which is the provision of training for Ukrainian soldiers, a measure that we in the Liberal Party have said quite clearly we support.

Speaking very candidly, I would also like to point out, and I am very proud of this, that if we go back to December 2013, it was, in fact, my colleague from Wascana who first brought the need to come to the assistance of Ukraine to the attention of the House. We have done quite a bit since then and I commend the government for it, and we will, of course, be continuing to do that.

It is important for us as members to express why Canada has taken the position it has to provide assistance to Ukraine.

Let me begin with some fundamentals.

We in Canada recognize the sovereignty of Ukraine. It is important to say that. It is a country which is totally free to chart its own destiny. It does not matter one bit that it is a country which at one time was part of the Soviet Union. The past is irrelevant, if I can put it that way. History cannot be allowed to dictate the future. Since the breakup of the Soviet Union, Ukraine has been an independent and sovereign country. That is a fundamental starting point of this discussion.

Let us start with Crimea. Crimea is part of Ukraine. More than 50 years ago, the Soviet regime under Nikita Khrushchev ceded Crimea to Ukraine, except for the Sevastopol naval base. Crimea belongs to Ukraine, period. I would also add that Ukraine got rid of its nuclear weapons in the 1990s, an act that was supposed to guarantee Ukraine’s territorial integrity. It is clearly a commitment that has not been respected by Russia.

I repeat: Ukraine is a sovereign country that includes Crimea and all its territory, including the eastern part of the country, even though there are people of Russian ethnic origin in this country. No foreign power has the right to violate Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

Ukraine made the decision to turn to the west for economic reasons in order to seek greater ties with Europe. It is perfectly free to do so. These are the decisions that sovereign countries make. President Putin is not entitled to protest such a decision for the simple reason that it might create more competition for Russian exports. Nor is he allowed to invoke the historical past and argue that Russia somehow has a say in such a decision. Nor is President Putin entitled to say that he is coming to the rescue of those Ukrainians who want to remain closely allied to Russia, whether for ethnic or other reasons.

To put it bluntly, it is simply none of his business, and for anyone to invoke historical ties or previous dominance is unacceptable. It is a matter for Ukraine to decide its future destiny because it is a sovereign state.

It is important for a country such as Canada to stand up for Ukraine. That is what we have done with various measures in the past year.

Canada decided to act to show Russia that its actions, beginning with the invasion of Crimea, were completely unacceptable. We all support this decision.

Let us now take a look at the details, beginning with the economic sanctions. Like other countries, including the United States and a number of other European countries, Canada decided to impose economic sanctions on certain Russian citizens, in particular those who were close to the president. These kinds of sanctions may have an effect over the long term, but we must be patient and persistent. Ultimately the sanctions will prove effective, and we have already noted that there have been a number of consequences for Russia. Combined with the drop in the price of oil, Russia’s major export, sanctions are beginning to have a negative impact on the Russian economy.

However, we must continue to be patient and keep Russia isolated. As we know, the value of the Russian currency has fallen on financial markets. President Putin himself recently announced that Russia’s GDP has dropped about 4% this year.

Economic sanctions work. Look at Iran, for example. However, we have to be patient and we have to ramp them up over time so that their effect becomes more and more constraining. No amount of bravado on the part of President Putin can disguise the fact that economic sanctions are having a negative effect on Russia. Eventually, it will become hard to hide from the majority of Russian citizens.

Before leaving the issue of sanctions, it is important to point out that it is not so much the number of people who are sanctioned as it is who is sanctioned. It is for this reason that the Liberal Party of Canada has been for asking for a long time that Igor Sechin, possibly the second most powerful person in Russia after Putin and an extremely close confidant of the president, be added by Canada to the list of sanctioned people. The United States and other countries have done this, and we simply cannot understand why Canada has not yet done so. The same applies to Vladimir Yakunin.

We need to follow our strong rhetoric with strong action. Other measures taken by Canada include the following military and security-related measures: contributing to the NATO reassurance mission; providing Ukrainian forces with non-kinetic military equipment; and what we are discussing today, which is the recent decision that the Liberal Party supports of providing training to Ukrainian soldiers at bases in the west of the country over the next two years.

Some have raised the issue that Canada could end up providing training to soldiers of questionable loyalty. Having spoken to a DND official recently at the foreign affairs committee on this matter, I am not concerned about that risk.

Finally, Canada is also making available RADARSAT-2 satellite data to Ukraine in order to provide it with greater situational awareness of what is happening on its territory.

In addition to all this, Canada made a commitment to providing moderate economic assistance, a loan of $200 million, and we have also opened the door to discussions leading to a possible free trade agreement. The Liberal Party believes it is also important for Canada to eliminate, for the time being, certain tariffs on Ukrainian exports in order to help stimulate Ukraine’s economy.

Furthermore, it is important for Canada to become involved in the process to democratize Ukrainian institutions, particularly in order to help Ukraine get rid of corruption, which is a major problem. We must remember that Ukraine does not have a long-standing democratic tradition.

Before I conclude, let us talk about diplomacy.

While the Prime Minister's strong words to President Putin at the G20 Australian summit may have made us feel good, it is important never to lose and never to close the door to diplomacy and negotiation. This is what has effectively happened between Canada and Russia. While our position may be clear, solutions are never found without diplomacy and discussion, even if those discussions are difficult. Angela Merkel and François Hollande understand this and they continue diplomatic efforts.

I hope that we in Canada will also be part of future discussions. Otherwise, we remain somewhat on the sidelines in helping to find any possible solution.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Mr. Chair, I listened carefully to the member's speech. He referred to negotiations and international relations between Canada, Europe, Russia and Ukraine, and the importance of these negotiations and talks. I would agree that we need to be able to talk to one another.

My concern, and I would like his opinion on this, is with regard to the situation with Russia and its motives. Is it willing to negotiate? Is it willing to dialogue and is it able to? We have seen a very strategic plan that comes out of Russia through its media. It is not an open media. It is controlled by the state.

Angela Merkel has met with Putin. Every time the president meets, it is almost like starting from the beginning. Does the member believe Russia is open to dialogue, or is Putin using dialogue as a stalling tactic to move his forces further into Ukraine?

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

Mr. Chair, I will agree with my colleague that so far there does not appear to have been any progress whatsoever on the diplomatic front. Nevertheless, I asked in committee recently whether Canada was still trying to keep the door open for bilateral discussions with Russia.

At the Australian G20 summit, Angela Merkel spent four hours with Mr. Putin. She continues to try to engage him on the Minsk agreements and things like that, so far with no success, but she continues to keep that door open.

In diplomatic situations that are as difficult as this, if people like Angela Merkel and François Hollande, who have also put sanctions and have a lot at stake in this situation, are able to keep the door open, there is nothing to prevent us from doing what we have done so far and yet still maintain that ability to actually speak to the Russians.

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

Mr. Chair, I would like to ask the member for Westmount—Ville-Marie a question concerning the role of sanctions.

I know he mentioned the diplomatic efforts of François Hollande and Angela Merkel, and the lengthy and ongoing, 18 hours I think, negotiations to get the Minsk agreement, which was denounced by the Conservative government. It at least provided a framework where the tone was turned down a little, with the question of the sanctions for the ceasefire holding perfectly still at large.

On the point of sanctions, have there been enough sanctions and have they been specific enough on whether they are conditional? Will these sanctions be there forever, as long as Crimea is in the hands of Russia, or are they sanctions such that some are there forever until that happens and others may be conditional upon the behaviour of the Russian federation in what it does in eastern Ukraine? Would the member care to comment on the value of sanctions and what they actually are for?

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

Mr. Chair, I and the Liberal Party believe that sanctions in a phased manner, progressively being applied more and more strongly, are a way to deter somebody from taking certain actions, as in the case of President Putin in eastern Ukraine, in Crimea.

The thing about sanctions is that they do take time to have their effect felt. We have to be willing to increase the amplitude of those sanctions, which is why my colleague for Wascana asked the question about the SWIFT measures, which are very powerful and difficult sanctions to implement, but certainly are very powerful on the economic front.

If we begin the process of putting sanctions in place, we have to be prepared to continue to strengthen them over time, and all countries that believe the same thing as Canada must be prepared to be consistent and continue to apply those sanctions.

I will repeat something I said in my speech. It is not necessarily how many people we sanction, it is who we sanction. Again, I would like to ask the government why Igor Sechin and Vladimir Yakunin are not on that list when they are key people who are very powerful and very close to Mr. Putin.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Chair, I hope we will hear from the Minister of National Defence this evening about the precise details of the training mission that is now under way, exactly the role being played by Canadians and his forecast for how that mission will unfold.

Now that Canada is committed to that mission, and as he indicated, the Liberals are supportive of that measure, would it be useful for Canada and for this Parliament, in what is likely to be a rather busy political season in Canada in the months ahead, for a committee of Canadian parliamentarians to have the opportunity to visit the training sites in Ukraine in the period immediately ahead so we can all better inform ourselves of the exact nature of that training mission that is now beginning to get under way?

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

Mr. Chair, I think that would be a very good idea. I have to repeat the fact, as I have done on many occasions, that I complimented previous foreign minister Baird for inviting me and the member for Ottawa Centre to go to Iraq last September. That was very much appreciated,because big decisions have been made, in the case of Iraq, and for all the parties to have at least one person who has some understanding on the ground of some of the more important details is certainly appreciated.

If the government chose to follow up on what my colleague has said, that would be an extremely good idea, because I think we are here for the long haul, and a multi-party delegation going to the training installations in western Ukraine would allow all parties to have a good sense of what our 200 troops are going to be doing over there for the next couple of years at least.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Chair, I was listening to my colleague, and I wonder if he could comment on the Budapest Memorandum. He is probably aware that when Ukraine became independent, it signed a memorandum and gave up its nuclear weapons. That was so the countries that signed on to this respected its boundaries. Russia signed on to this, and obviously it has not respected Ukraine's boundaries. I wonder if he could comment on whether Russia is really serious when it wants to talk about negotiations, given its previous behaviour. Could he comment on his position on that?

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

Mr. Chair, thank you for the question, and with great respect, I said it in French, but I did not call it the Budapest treaty. I said in the 90s, Ukraine rid itself of its nuclear weapons on the understanding that its territorial integrity would be protected. The member is quite right. It has not been protected. We have seen that very clearly.

Make no mistake about it. Mr. Putin is totally guilty, 100 per cent, of violating the territorial integrity of Ukraine. I think everyone in this room is in agreement with that part. The Budapest treaty is another glaring example of an undertaking that was not respected.

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

Mr. Chair, thank you to you and members of the committee for their participation in this important debate about Canada's ongoing and forward leaning leadership role in supporting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine against the aggression planned and executed by Russian president Vladimir Putin and his support of violent extremists, who are responsible for the loss of thousands of lives in Ukraine over the past many months.

The Government of Canada believes that the ultimate responsibility for the terrible crime and disaster of the Malaysian Airlines flight being shot down over eastern Ukrainian territory rests with the Kremlin and President Putin. We join with all free and civilized peoples in demanding accountability for that terrible crime.

I am pleased to contribute to this important debate concerning our ongoing response.

When Russia launched its attack on Ukraine last February, resulting in the illegal occupation of Crimea, Canada acted quickly, in a show of solidarity with the people of Ukraine. We continue to take action today.

As the Prime Minister has made clear, “Canada continues to stand with the people of Ukraine in the face of the Putin regime's ongoing aggression”. As he said face to face with President Putin at their meeting at the G20 in Melbourne last fall, “I'll shake your hand, just so I can tell you that you need to get out of Ukraine now”.

On April 13, the Prime Minister, the Chief of Defence Staff, General Lawson, and I announced enhanced support for Ukraine in the form of a training mission that will start later this year.

This is in addition to the long-standing training opportunities already offered by the Department of National Defence through its military training and cooperation program. The training will be held in western Ukraine, primarily at the NATO Partnership for Peace Training and Education Centre in Yavoriv.

I should add that Canada and the United States helped the Ukrainians build this training centre a few years ago. There will also be training on improvised explosive devices at the Ukrainian Ministry of Defence Demining Centre in Kamyanets-Podilskyk, in southwestern Ukraine.

Our contribution will consist of approximately 200 personnel who will provide training assistance until March 21, 2017. That is the decision of the government, of course. The government at that time will make a decision as to whether or not to expand or extend the training mission.

It will do so in the fields of first, individual and unit tactics training, which most lay people would understand as conventional military training; second, military police skills and procedures; third, explosive ordnance disposal; and fourth, flight safety training, combat and combat first aid, and logistics systems modernization.

Let me assure members that the Canadian Armed Forces will only train units from the Ukrainian armed forces, not from individual militias, contrary to some inaccurate media reports in the Ottawa Citizen.

We will work closely with Ukraine's Ministry of Internal Affairs, which will conduct a thorough investigation of everyone who participates in this training.

We will also continue to share satellite images and information with the Ukrainian government, to help it stay on top of the situation.

Sharing satellite imagery with Ukraine has no negative effect on Canada's ability to use RADARSAT-2 for supporting the defence and security of Canada, again contrary to inaccurate and misleading reports that appeared in the Ottawa Citizen.

I should point out that when President Petro Poroshenko visited us in Ottawa last autumn, his number one ask of Canada was the sharing of these RADARSAT images to assist Ukraine in having a better situational understanding of the Russian threat posed within its own territory.

I am pleased to say that within days of becoming Minister of National Defence, we signed the memorandum of understanding and began sharing those images on a regular basis. They have been enormously helpful to the Ukrainians.

Canada's contribution has been fully coordinated and sychronized with the efforts of the United States in the region through the United States-Ukraine Joint Commission. This support to the Ukrainian people exemplifies Canada's commitment to work with our international allies and partners to help build Ukraine's capacity and to preserve and promote a free, democratic, and peaceful region.

We are helping Ukraine with the resources available. This past August, Canada provided non-lethal military supplies to Ukraine, including a range of targeted protection medical and logistical equipment, such as 7,000 helmets, 30,000 sets of ballistic eyewear, 2,300 protective vests, 300 first aid kits, 100 tents, and 735 sleeping bags.

When he spoke to this very place, where you are sitting, Mr. Chair, this past September, President Poroshenko said:

As a commander-in-chief, as a Ukrainian, and as a father of a soldier, I thank Canada for each life that is being saved today in the Ukrainian Donbass by the helmets and bulletproof vests you gave us.

Since that time, we have made further commitments. Canada committed to a further contribution of non-lethal military supplies. From that commitment, Canada has delivered 30,000 coats, 70,000 pairs of Gore-Tex boots, and other equipment.

I have been told by Ukrainians who have contact with the troops that this Canadian equipment was, throughout the last winter, the most desired equipment in the Ukrainian military. In fact, it became known as Kanadki, basically Canadian wear, a very popular expression of solidarity.

Once manufacturing is finalized, Canada will also be sending 22 Harris high-frequency radios, 238 pairs of PVS-7 night vision goggles, 1,100 tactical medical kits, a mobile field hospital structure, and a yet to-be-determined amount of explosive ordnance disposal equipment.

Let me add a word of appreciation for the enormous contributions made, charitably, by Canadians, many but not all from the Canadian-Ukrainian community, who have contributed millions of dollars to support first aid kits, and indeed, for medical doctors who have flown to Ukraine to act as medical volunteers. We salute them for their contribution.

In addition to this commitment, in January 2014, the government announced a contribution of more than $578 million in assistance to Ukraine.

This assistance includes initiatives to promote stabilization and economic growth in order to strengthen security and foster civil society.

I should add that Ukraine is the only European country with which Canada has a humanitarian development program through which it receives this assistance. Furthermore, in August 2014, we donated non-lethal military supplies to Ukraine, such as medical and logistics supplies, including helmets, goggles and ballistic protective equipment. In November, Canada also committed to providing additional supplies, as I mentioned.

The following month, Canada signed a declaration of intent with Ukraine for joint military training and capacity building in response to Russia's belligerence. In January, we formalized the provision of military assistance to Ukraine by joining the U.S.–Ukraine Joint Commission and agreeing to co-chair with Ukraine that commission's military police subcommittee.

I would also like to speak to the strong role we are playing in NATO assurance measures. We have made robust contributions to strengthening security in central and eastern Europe by providing $1 million to the NATO trust fund for Ukraine, with a focus on improving its command, control, communications, and computer capabilities. We have contributed to three NATO-accredited centres of excellence in the Baltic region on cyberdefence, energy, security, and strategic communications. There is, of course, the deployment of Canadian military personnel and assets in central and eastern Europe as part of Operation REASSURANCE, including CF-18s, which have participated in Baltic air policing patrol; the HMCS Fredericton, which is participating in patrols in the Black Sea; and more than 200 Canadian infantrymen, who are present in Poland as we speak.

The Canadian army is deployed on the ground in central Europe, as I said, which is giving confidence to the countries in eastern Europe.

All of this constitutes a robust response by Canada. Let there be no doubt, with this further military training operation, that Canada, Canadians, and the Canadian Armed Forces stand side by side with our Ukrainian friends and partners in sending a message of strength and resolve to a bully in Vladimir Putin, who only understands the language of deterrence. We continue to stand by the people of Ukraine.