Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader. He is quite right that if it were not for the inclusion of mid-air refuelling capacity for bombers and reconnaissance missions to aid others in targeting bombing, I would support the resolution. I certainly support removing the CF-18s. I think that most Canadians do.
There has been a general effort to say after the Paris attacks that Canadian public opinion shifted. I do not believe that to be the case. I have not seen it in my own community, and this issue was hotly debated in all the town hall meetings I held through the month of January in my community. There is a horror and a revulsion at the events that occurred on November 13 in Paris. Of course, being at the climate negotiations just two weeks later, the pall was still across Paris. However, there was a resilience and a resolve that I think extends from Paris to Canada that we may not be able to stop individual attacks by terrorist operations, but we can do whatever we can to do to improve intelligence.
My memory is long enough to remember what used to be called the “Irish Troubles” in Northern Ireland and the attacks and horrific events there. These are not new. We have to say that Daesh has something novel in that it has taken very modern, sophisticated film-making techniques and used social media to attract people to its cause. I think we should spend a lot more time on how to ensure that no one is attracted to its so-called cause.
As for the anti-radicalization efforts that we have yet to see from the current government, I hope we will see soon ways and means to that end. Canadians care deeply about stopping radicalization, whether it takes place in our prisons or our schools, which are the two institutions that U.K. anti-radicalization efforts have focused upon.