Debates of Sept. 26th, 2017

Situation in Myanmar

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Madam Speaker, the short answer is yes. I have no special insights into the internal workings of the Myanmar or Burmese regime. Therefore, I am unable to say anything other than all members of that regime ought to act responsibly. It is obvious that we cannot force out a population on a scale like this without the active involvement of the military. That goes without saying, so of course they ought to stop. I have no hope whatsoever that it will act responsibly unless forced from the outside.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon member for touching on what motivates people, particularly those of us who are in comfortable lives in a relatively extraordinarily safe country, to feel compelled to do something. He reminded us of that tragic photo of Alan Kurdi on the beach. His family had been trying to reach Canada, unable to reach safe haven in Greece.

Tonight we have heard unbearable stories of sadistic cruelty and violence toward Rohingya people. Is this enough to move us to act? We are having an emergency debate in the House, but I would hope we can, in an non-partisan fashion, as this debate continues over the next two hours, increasingly focus on those things on which we all agree and which we can urge our government to do so it is not a transitory sense of disgust, horror, and loss of confidence in what we thought was potentially a new age for Myanmar. We find ourselves disillusioned with its leadership and looking at Bangladesh suffering under the burden of people racing to safety in Bangladesh. Surely there is more Canada can do and I ask my hon. colleague what specific recommendations he thinks we can all agree on where Canada can play a constructive role.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Madam Speaker, in the very short run, we need to try to ensure that the people who are refugees in Bangladesh are properly housed, have proper sanitation, and have the necessities of life. This is the world's most crowded country. It is one of the world's poorest countries. Infrastructure, especially in its eastern region, in terms of getting supplies to individuals, is very problematic. We have some capacity to do help there. We have used our resources before in the case of natural disasters and it might be appropriate to do so here. That is one thing.

Second, and at an entirely different level, this qualifies as a genocide. However, it is not a genocide on paper until the United Nations says it is a genocide at which time a series of legal mechanisms kick into place that could put an enormous amount of pressure on the Myanmar government. Therefore, we should do what we can to call it what it clearly is. We would not be leaders in doing this. I mentioned a number of heads of state who have already called it a genocide. We would merely be joining in, but our voice means something. We have a certainty of moral weight and we ought to use it to that effect.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank all participants in this emergency debate tonight. I would like to thank my colleague from Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston for his submissions. In particular, I would like to thank my friend and deputy critic, the member of parliament for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, for bringing this emergency debate to the floor of the House of Commons.

In the last few weeks and months, a lot of Canadians have probably learned a lot about Myanmar and the plight of the Rohingya people. That is part of what our mandate as parliamentarians should be. Our comfort in Canada, our remarkable freedoms, are often displaced from those suffering. Parliament can be used to bring the plight of some of these people to light.

I would like to comment on what the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan did. He did not just bring the debate here this week, after several weeks of front page coverage in The Globe and Mail and other sources. The first time he advocated in the House for the Rohingya was March 2016. That is an important note to raise. I know some of my other colleagues in the House, particularly those on the Subcommittee on International Human Rights, have been raising the plight of these people for some time. A tragic situation has gone from dislocation and profound discrimination to death, dislocation and, as we have heard in this debate tonight, to ethnic cleansing and extreme violence.

I will use my portion of time to in the debate, in part as the shadow cabinet member for the opposition for foreign affairs, to talk about why we should be helping the Rohingya of Myanmar. They are a religious minority in that country. They make up approximately 1.1 million in a country of 53 million. They are a Muslim minority population confined largely to the Rakhine province of the country that borders southeastern Bangladesh. That is why we have heard so much about refugee and dislocation into that country. People have been fleeing persecution and violence, trying to escape what appears to be a sustained effort by the government to suppress a people, a religious minority.

Going back several years to date, approximately half a million people have been displaced either on a semi-permanent or permanent basis, including tens of thousands in camps run by the government, and almost entirely made up a minority Muslim population. It is not confined to poverty or areas within the province. It is clearly defined to an identifiable minority group. That is what leads to the concern.

It is hard to get verified reports. I know my colleagues have been working on this. Thousands have been killed or are missing. We have seen reports of 3,000 to 10,000, but it is easy to say that thousands have been killed, displaced, or are missing. Then of course the terrible crimes against humanity, including rape as a weapon, have been engaged as well.

This week in the House we heard the minister raise the term “ethnic cleansing”. We have heard the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees use the same language. My friend from Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston suggested that “genocide” was the better term. Regardless of the term, Canadians should be shocked and deeply concerned by what is happening to a religious minority people, particularly in a country that has as its State Counsellor one of five recipients of honorary Canadian citizenship.

I hope with this debate that Aung San Suu Kyi can see Canadians and Canada united are calling for intervention and a succession to this displacement and ethnic cleansing that appears to be going on with respect to an identifiable minority religion in that country.

It troubled me that this figure of the world, Nobel laureate, and honorary citizen did not appear at the UN General Assembly last week. Rather, she sent a note. I will quote from the diplomatic letter, which states:

There has been much concern around the world with regard to the situation in Rakhine. It is not the intention of the Myanmar government to apportion blame or to abnegate responsibility. We condemn all human rights violations and unlawful violence. We are committed to the restoration of peace, stability and rule of law throughout the state.

That is not happening. Those are empty words if a State Counsellor cannot control the military and the machinery of a government that has clearly been involved in targeting a minority population, and not just in the last few weeks, when a lot of Canadians have been attuned to the issue.

I will point to a report, on an office the government cancelled, on the great work done by ambassador Andrew Bennett, the former ambassador for religious freedom. The headline from CTV online, in May 2015, is entitled, “Canada's religious freedom envoy denounces treatment of Rohingya Muslims”. That was the first time I became aware of this profound state of long-standing discrimination, where over a million people in that country are not granted the same rights that others in Myanmar are granted. Mr. Bennett began advocating for that religious minority population back in the final months of his mandate.

What is great about Mr. Bennett is that last month he was still writing editorial opinions challenging Canadians, and challenging the world, to take the plight of the Rohingya seriously. All Canadians, including the Liberals in this House, should be concerned that the office was cancelled by the government, an office that was meant to defend the defenceless, an office that was beginning to raise the plight of the Rohingya before the former minister Stéphane Dion turned the lights out.

I am glad that we are asking some questions, because I have been looking for this new Office of Human Rights, Freedoms and Inclusion. Remember that the government said that it was not just closing the office of religious freedom but was expanding it. However, there has been absolute silence from this quasi-office of Global Affairs Canada.

Who else was silent? Canada's Prime Minister was last week at the UN General Assembly, where the plight of the Rohingya was not mentioned.

As my friends in this place know, I think there are times when we can work together, such as in this debate. However, I dislike the fact that this non-partisan, specialized, ambassador-level office, which was meant to fight for religious minorities, was cancelled out of petty politics. It is refreshing that an ambassador who was politically let go is still advocating for the Rohingya. I hear more from Andrew Bennett the citizen than I do from this Office of Human Rights, Freedoms and Inclusion. That has to change.

I think the Prime Minister had an opportunity at the UN General Assembly, with his second appearance as the Prime Minister in the mid-part of his term, to use some of his goodwill, which the Liberals love to talk about, as leverage to show Canada's role as a traditional leader of middle powers.

I am refreshed by the fact that Rohingya who have come to Canada for the safety and security we offer have been emailing me, and I want to thank them. Before coming here, I read the latest letter from Syed Hussaini, who has challenged the government and all parliamentarians to work together to have matching funds, to accelerate refugees, and to provide technical assistance, and a number of other smart recommendations, but also to call for change.

Canada should leverage the aid Global Affairs Canada provides. We should leverage and push our honorary citizen to not just send diplomatic notes to the UN General Assembly but to make assurances that ethnic cleansing or the targeting of a religious minority population in Myanmar comes to an end. That is what the Parliament of Canada can do. It can educate our fellow citizens on the plight of the oppressed and then serve as the leader of a middle power to try to help those in need.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Madam Speaker, it is important to clear the record and state unequivocally that the matter of how Canada can continue to intervene and play a leadership role on the situation in Myanmar, on the crisis that is facing Rakhine State, and on the situation facing the Rohingya was raised by our Prime Minister in his meetings with his counterparts at the UN General Assembly last week, in addition to the leadership provided by the Minister of Foreign Affairs in her bilateral meetings with a number of allies.

Canada has been present, providing humanitarian assistance of $9 million in 2017 alone, including the recent announcement of $2.55 million on September 15, for the situation in Rakhine State. Also, there was the letter sent to Aung San Suu Kyi by the Prime Minister clearly laying the responsibility to fix the situation on her shoulders, as well as on that of the military leadership in Myanmar. Canada has been present and will continue to be present.

It is great that this is being debated in the House of Commons this evening so that Canadians can understand where the Government of Canada stands on this issue, and how we can work together to ensure that Canada continues to play a re-engaged role on the world scene.

I would ask my hon. colleague to acknowledge that the Government of Canada wants to be seen as an important leader in helping resolve the situation.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, I applaud the government on its pronouncement of aid. I applaud the minister for speaking so clearly on the plight of the Rohingya. I compliment the Prime Minister on his letter to Aung San Suu Kyi.

The challenge is this. I do expect the Prime Minister of Canada not to just have meetings in the margins of the United Nations General Assembly. Rather, I expect him to use the privileged platform of that general assembly to raise a few areas of the world where Canada and Canadians have concerns. Myanmar is one of those. As the critic for foreign affairs, my concern is that the Prime Minister's desire to have a temporary seat on the Security Council may mean that Canada has been more silent on these issues than normal. I hope that is not the case. However, the fact that the Prime Minister did not mention a single foreign affairs issue of concern at the UN General Assembly has me concerned that the pursuit of that seat could mean that Canada is a bit more silent on issues when it comes to the persecution of peoples around the world. If we add to that the fact that the Prime Minister cancelled the Office of Religious Freedom, which was just starting to take up the case of the Rohingyas, it means he will have to prove to us that his intentions go beyond just sending some letters.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, I thought my colleague made great points about the Office of Religious Freedom. That office was not there to just speak out publicly but to inform the government about issues of faith as they relate to politics and foreign policy, and to ensure our department could understand some of the complex interreligious conflicts so often overlaid with the inter-ethnic issues that can exist and make sure we were fully informed in advance on how to engage in those situations.

The problem in this case was that the government was slow to see the problem and slow to react. It only became fully engaged in the last few weeks in response to the current crisis. Does the member think that, if that infrastructure were in place to ensure that informing, perhaps we would have seen a faster response from the government?

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, the simple answer is yes. That office was structured to provide support for the government and to point out the plight of people.

I will end with this. The rally cry of the Prime Minister following his election was that Canada is back. There is an absence of Canada when our leader does not even mention this at the United Nations General Assembly. There is an absence of Canada when we close down and shutter an office that was meant to speak up when people are being oppressed. I hope that a lot of Liberal MPs who I know care about this issue will push the government on it and push this new office to take up the work where Ambassador Bennett left off.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage (Multiculturalism)]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time this evening with the member for Kitchener South—Hespeler. I appreciate the opportunity to stand this evening to speak on the urgent crisis facing the Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar.

I want to start by thanking the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan for seeking this emergency debate. While we disagree on nearly all matters of policy and ideology, I have always respected my colleague's passion for the protection of minorities abroad. When that passion takes the form of a Conservative member on the opposite side standing to defend the rights of a Muslim minority, I take note and I think all members of this House should as well.

The focus of my speech this evening is primarily from my perspective as a former war crimes prosecutor who worked at the Rwanda genocide tribunal on behalf of the United Nations. That tribunal was established in 1997, three years after the Rwanda genocide. That experience taught me that even the best of intentions, if not carried out contemporaneously, will have limited effect.

That is why I was very proud to stand with my colleagues in this chamber about one year ago when we decided collectively as a Parliament to act quickly and decisively to aid Yazidis, not years after the fact but rather while their persecution at the hands of Daesh was ongoing.

Fast forward to now, and we know that the plight of Rohingya Muslims in Rakhine State is desperate and that there is a complete absence of leadership on the part of the Myanmar leader to stop ethnic cleansing that is unfolding before our very eyes. A moral failure, as Prime Minister and the Subcommittee on International Human Rights have called it.

However, it is not just parliamentarians who are taking note. Everyday Canadians are as well. In my riding of Parkdale—High Park, I have heard from worshippers who attend at the Jami Mosque and the Hamza Mosque, but I have also heard from many others, Canadians of different faiths, backgrounds, races, and religions, all united by their horror at what they are witnessing and reading about in the media. They are seeking action.

I want to turn to the action taken thus far. I want to turn to some of the precise words used by the Prime Minister in his very terse letter to Aung Sang Suu Kyi. I appreciate this has been the matter of some of the debate this evening. In his letter dated September 18, the Prime Minister opened with:

It is with profound surprise, disappointment and dismay that your fellow Canadians have witnessed your continuing silence in the face of the brutal oppression of Myanmar's Rohingya Muslim people.

The Prime Minister then goes on to reference the Peace Prize that was bestowed on Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi, and to quote her when she said:

...disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspirations of the common people.

Then the Prime Minister continues to say:

The situation in Rakhine State betrays these moral commitments. Since violence erupted on August 25, reports indicate that 415,000 refugees, 70% of whom are women and children, have fled to Bangladesh to date, with additional people internally displaced. Emblematic of longstanding discrimination and gross violations of human rights, reports cite the disproportionate use of force, extrajudicial killings and burning of villages by security forces.

The Prime Minister continues:

Landmines are allegedly being laid with systemic violations of international law, which, if established by a court of law, amount to crimes against humanity.

I concur in that. This is an aside by me as a war crimes prosecutor. I concur in that legal analysis.

The United Nations is denied access to investigate fully and international humanitarian agencies lack safe and unhindered access to help all those in need.

The Prime Minister then goes on to state that:

As...my Minister of Foreign Affairs [has stated], there is no escaping the conclusion reached by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights...that the “situation seems a textbook example of ethnic cleansing.”

As he winds up the letter, he states that:

The responsibility for resolving this crisis falls squarely upon you [Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi] and upon the military leadership of Myanmar, including Commander-in-Chief Min Aung Hlaing.

I read that text verbatim because it is important to note in this chamber that the leadership and the position of the Government of Canada has been made clear by the Prime Minister. In this chamber just yesterday, the Minister of Foreign Affairs herself was unequivocal when she stated:

...we are absolutely seized by the urgent question of the persecution of the Rohingya. Based on reports from the region, this is ethnic cleansing, and it is important for Canada to condemn it in the strongest possible terms and to act. It is important particularly to call on the military leadership to cease this horror.

Why are we debating this issue tonight? We have a motion that has been moved, but I would be keen to share with the House some important facts about what is happening on the ground in Myanmar.

While this issue was studied at length by the Subcommittee on International Human Rights, I must take a moment to outline the most recent situation.

Since August 25, we understand that 3,000 Rohingya have been estimated to have been killed. Almost 480,000 Rohingya refugees have fled Myanmar to Bangladesh, with 190,000 in makeshift camps, 89,000 arrivals in host communities, and 201,000 arrivals in new spontaneous sites. Reports indicate that tens of thousands of Rohingya Muslims remain stranded in northern Rakhine State without access to basic supplies such as food and water.

Amnesty International has also been clear in its assessment. It has reported that Myanmar security forces and vigilante mobs are burning down entire villages and shooting people at random as they try to flee. Amnesty's analysis shows how an “orchestrated campaign of systematic burnings” has targeted Rohingya villages across northern Rakhine State for almost three weeks. Amnesty's crisis response director has stated:

The evidence is irrefutable—the Myanmar security forces are setting northern Rakhine State ablaze in a targeted campaign to push the Rohingya people out of Myanmar. Make no mistake: this is ethnic cleansing.

She is also quoted as saying:

There is a clear and systematic pattern of abuse here. Security forces surround a village, shoot people fleeing in panic and then torch houses to the ground. In legal terms, these are crimes against humanity—systematic attacks and forcible deportation of civilians.

As stated previously, our government has been continuously engaged on this file and continues to be. For example, we have taken the following concrete actions. At the United Nations General Assembly, the Minister of Foreign Affairs engaged in bilateral meetings with the European Union, Indonesia, and Turkey on this very issue. The Minister of Foreign Affairs has also spoken with the foreign ministers of Germany, Bangladesh, Norway, Sweden, and with Mr. Kofi Annan on what actions the international community can take to address this crisis. The parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs has spoken with Bangladesh's high commissioner in Canada and raised this issue.

The Prime Minister, in the letter I started reading to the House, has called on the Myanmar security forces “to end all violence and to hold all perpetrators of human rights violations accountable on the basis of independent and impartial investigation.”

The Prime Minister continues:

The Myanmar government must welcome publically the return of all Rohingya refugees and this must be accompanied by a firm commitment to address their citizenship, equality before the law and the realization of rights for all ethnic minorities. I also call on the government to provide full access to the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and to facilitate safe and unimpeded international humanitarian access to provide life-saving assistance to all civilian population.

We have also made a request as a government that our ambassador be granted access to visit Rakhine State. Our government continues to support the Rohingya people through aid, providing $27.47 million in development assistance in 2015-16, through reputable third-party groups such as the Joint Peace Fund. That included $4.3 million in humanitarian assistance funding to meet the immediate needs of conflict-affected and displaced populations, including the Rohingya.

To date, in 2017, we have announced $9.18 million in humanitarian assistance to the region to address this crisis. This funding is for things like therapeutic feeding for pregnant women, clinical care, psychosocial counselling, emergency obstetric and newborn care, and child-friendly spaces.

We have not stopped there. We have taken actions, including sanctions against Myanmar. They include a freeze on assets in Canada of any designated Myanmar nationals and an arms embargo, including prohibitions on importing and exporting arms. While these actions are important, I strongly believe that we can and must do more in terms of additional concrete action.

I will return to what I said at the outset. My experience at the Rwandan war crimes tribunal taught me clearly that contemporaneous action is vital when horrific violations of human rights are unfolding before the very eyes of the international community. By concrete action, I mean taking steps to directly assist the Rohingya Muslim minority itself, the victims of the very ethnic cleansing that is unfolding.

We are working hard to restore Canada to a place of international engagement and international leadership. To my mind, international leadership means several things. It means building on the strong statements we have made and continuing to speak out. International leadership means building a coalition of like-minded nations, allies who believe in the importance of international human rights and the rule of law. International leadership means working creatively. If access to Rakhine State is not forthcoming thus far, it means working with allies like Bangladesh to put international observers in border states.

International leadership also has a domestic manifestation. It means empowering Canadians of all faiths, backgrounds, and races who are determined that the Rohingya not be forgotten, and aiding them in their efforts. International leadership means not shying away from solutions that can help desperate victims now, before it is too late.

To paraphrase our dear departed colleague and friend, international leadership means using our heads, but following our hearts.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my friend from Parkdale—High Park for his experience as a war-crimes prosecutor and his Canadian experience as a Somali Canadian who came to this country for religious freedom and the opportunity we provided when a minority was being attacked. His family and the family of my best friend, Riyaz Lalani, have made Canada a better place.

What is Canada's opportunity or potential here? When the Aga Khan addressed our Parliament, he said that cosmopolitan, civil societies like Canada can be “voices of hope for people living in fear”. I agree. Canada's responsibility is to be that voice of hope.

The member mentioned the terse letter that the Prime Minister wrote to State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi of Myanmar, but should there not be a voice of hope at the United Nations? Should not Canada be using our privileged platform to do more than just write terse letters? Can the member tell the House that he will push the minister and the Prime Minister to make sure that religious freedom and particularly the plight of the Rohingya people get more attention in the Prime Minister's trips and speeches overseas?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, what I can say is that the voice that Canada needs is the voice that we have started to reclaim since 2015. By that I mean a voice that speaks out on the world stage, that is engaged internationally not only with like-minded nations but also with nations that perhaps need a bit of coaxing along the path toward the protection of rights and protection of minorities. Canada has very clearly pivoted since the last election toward a stance of engagement, toward embracing international institutions like the the UN, the UNHCR, and the High Commissioner for Human Rights, for example. We have been told again and again about the clear statements that the minister and Prime Minister have made. I can assure the member opposite that as a member of this government caucus and of this chamber, I will continue to advocate for the human rights that I have spent my entire lifetime defending, both domestically and abroad.

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

Madam Speaker, I was unable to make a comment in response to the member for Durham, but I recall vividly the times that the former prime minister, Stephen Harper, shunned the United Nations. If that stage were so important to stand up on for human rights, where was he?

I do not want the debate to become partisan, and I am afraid that the speech by my friend from Durham was one of the few partisan speeches I have heard. I want to remind him, and ask the hon. member for Parkdale—High Park, how is it that in secret we negotiated an agreement with the People's Republic of China that binds Canada for 31 years so it can bring secret claims against us? How often did Stephen Harper ask China about human rights?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, the point has to be made again and again that international engagement is important. Canada was once known internationally as a broker of international relations, as a country that punched far above its weight. With the disengagement that we saw under the previous government, unfortunately that status declined, resulting ultimately in our not standing for a position on the Security Council. We have turned the page on that in our response to the Syrian refugee crisis, in what we are trying to do in boosting international institutions, in the funding and aid that we are delivering internationally, in our leadership, and in the feminization of our international aid and development policies.

In respect of the Rohingya, I am confident in the leadership of the Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs and in the passion of Canadians in ensuring that we as parliamentarians of all stripes—and again it should not be partisan—are raising this issue in important debates like this evening's debate in the House.

[Marwan Tabbara, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to discuss the plight of the Rohingya people and condemn the atrocities they continue to be subjected to. My remarks today will echo those of my colleagues as we stand unanimously in condemning the persecution of the Rohingyas in Rakhine State and along the border of Myanmar, formerly known as Burma.

The Rohingyas are often described as the world's most persecuted minority. Despite having inhabited Myanmar for centuries, they are not recognized as one of the country's 135 official ethnic groups. Following the 1963 military coup in Myanmar, all citizens were required to obtain national registration cards according to Al Jazeera. However, the Rohingyas were only allowed to obtain foreign identity cards furthering the “othering” of them. This move did not just “other” the Rohingyas, but had a significant impact on them by limiting job and educational opportunities they could pursue and obtain.

Since 1982, the Rohingyas have also been denied citizenship in Myanmar. I want to stress that this denial of citizenship renders them stateless. As a result of the 1982 citizenship law, the Rohingyas continue to be denied other basic human rights. Their rights to study, work, travel, marry, practise their religion, and access health services have been restricted. Furthermore, the Rohingyas face significant barriers if they choose to vote and other limitations if they want to pursue fields such as medicine, law, or running for office. These basic rights have long been denied to the Rohingyas, whose misery is now compounded by being subjected to the waves of violence and acts of ethnic cleansing that have erupted before and, most recently, since October 9, 2016.

Over the past year, my colleagues and I who sit on the Subcommittee on International Human Rights have worked diligently on the Rohingya file. I would like to acknowledge the hon. member for Mississauga—Erin Mills for the motion she tabled in April 2016 to study the plight of the Rohingyas in Myanmar. The subcommittee adopted the motion and conducted a detailed study on the issues. Arising out of this study, the subcommittee submitted a report to the House entitled, “Sentenced to a Slow Demise: The Plight of Myanmar's Rohingya Minority”, which made recommendations to the government and to which the government responded in full and very positively.

In addition, in November 2016, the Subcommittee on International Human Rights released a joint statement expressing alarm over the response by security forces to violence in the Maungdaw District, which had begun in October 2016. Recently, in response to another outbreak of violence in early 2017, the subcommittee held an emergency meeting with experts on the issue. It heard evidence from the Burma Task Force and the Rohingya Association of Canada.These witnesses appeared again last week at the subcommittee to provide an update on the human rights situation of the Rohingyas.

Despite the measures taken to condemn the violence in Myanmar against the Rohingyas and the humanitarian assistance provided to assist the region, Canada continues to be greatly concerned by the situation of the Rohingyas.

Last week, the Subcommittee on International Human Rights heard from Anwar Arkani, the president of the Rohingya Association of Canada. Mr. Arkani's testimony pointed out that the persecution of the Rohingyas is not a crisis that began last year when the media reports of violence began to increase. In fact, the state-sponsored violence spans four decades, during which the Rohingyas have been persecuted relentlessly by the Burmese military and government. Mr. Arkani discussed the systemic oppression of the Rohingyas since 1978, illustrating that the state has continuously adopted measures to oust the Rohingyas from Myanmar.

I also want to repeat what Mr. Arkani said of members of his family, who are caught up in the conflict. They live in a village around the border of Buthidaung and Rathedaung. He has one sister and some nieces and nephews, to whom he speaks every night. The last time he called them, they said, “Uncle, if we do not die, if we do not get killed by the army or their attacks, then we will die here without food”.

This is a dire situation. These individuals are not just in danger of losing their lives to brutal military attacks, but are unable to access the food and humanitarian aid they need for their survival. Only last week, a boat carrying supplies from the International Committee of the Red Cross supplies was blocked by a mob who threw petrol bombs at it.

We heard other testimony from Mr. Matthew Smith of a human rights organization called Fortify Rights. Mr. Smith is based out of Southeast Asia and works in Myanmar, including Rakhine State. According to Mr. Smith, hundreds of thousands have been displaced since August 25. Rohingya men and women and aid workers are currently trapped in villages. Few of them are fighting with the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army, also known as al-Yaqin.

Myanmar army soldiers are reported to have shot and killed men, women, and children of all ages; to have administered fatal knife wounds; and to have burned victims alive. In addition, Myanmar's military forces continue to use anti-personnel land mines along the borders with Bangladesh, as cited in a press release by the international campaign to ban land mines.

These weapons are harming and killing civilians fleeing their homes in Myanmar in an effort to find safety in Bangladesh. Eyewitness testimonies, photographic evidence, and multiple reports show that anti-personnel mines have been laid between Myanmar's two major land crossings with Bangladesh, resulting in casualties among Rohingya refugees fleeing government attacks on their homes. I support the international campaign to ban land mines in condemning the use of anti-personnel land mines by Myanmar's armed forces.

There are several headlines that I wish to share: “Who will help Myanmar's Rohingya?”, by the BBC; “Myanmar Rohingya refugees' future unclear as Bangladesh registers flood of arrivals”, by ABC News; “UN: Rohingya in Bangladesh need 'massive' assistance”, by Al Jazeera; “Rohingya crisis: A month of misery in Myanmar's Rakhine”, by Al Jazeera. These headlines are just a glimpse into the atrocities being committed against the Rohingya in Myanmar.

As the Prime Minister said in his open letter to Aung Sang Suu Kyi, the responsibility for resolving the crisis falls squarely upon her and the military leadership of Myanmar, including Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, commander in chief of Myanmar's armed forces.

We continue to support the Rohingya people. In 2015-16, Canada provided a total of $27.47 million in official development assistance to Myanmar through reputable third-party groups such as the Joint Peace Fund. This included $4.3 million in humanitarian assistance funding to meet the immediate needs of the conflict affected and displaced populations, including Rohingya. To date in 2017, we have announced $9.18 million in humanitarian assistance to the region to address this crisis.

Despite these funding efforts, we need to do more to address the horrific campaign of violence, rape, and murder being carried out by the Myanmar government. Echoing the concerns of the international community and my own constituents of Kitchener South—Hespeler, we must call upon the Myanmar security forces to end all violence and hold all perpetrators of human rights violations accountable on the basis of an independent and impartial investigation; call upon the Myanmar government to affirm the right of the Rohingya to return to their homes and to live in peace and security; and encourage and support the Myanmar government to commit to finding meaningful and lasting solutions to the issues in the Rakhine State.

I want to end by reiterating that the civilian and military leadership in Myanmar must stop the horror they are subjecting the Rohingya to. Before the world's eyes, before our eyes, multiple acts of ethnic cleansing are taking place. We cannot stand by and watch the Myanmar security forces violently push the Rohingya out of Myanmar. As Canadians, we pride ourselves on our history of international peacekeeping and support for human rights. The plight of the Rohingya people should not go by unnoticed and unanswered.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, I want to briefly respond to a fairly partisan comment from another member earlier. The previous prime minister spoke at the United Nations more than many prime ministers before him, and he always raised issues of foreign policy, including issues of development assistance and fundamental human rights. We wish the present Prime Minister had taken the opportunity to raise the issue of the Rohingya in his UN speech.

I want to ask the member about the question of capacity within government to respond to these things.

My colleague spoke earlier about the Office of Religious Freedom. A new office was created called the Office of Human Rights, Freedoms and Inclusion. It is not clear to me exactly what its mandate is.

Perhaps the member does not know the detail on this, but if he does, could he tell me if this office has been engaged with this issue? Has it been speaking out about this issue? Has it been working on projects on the ground? If not, what capacity exists within the government to effectively respond to these issues in a way that ensures the government is kept up to date and is aware of all the detail? Is a lack of capacity a possible reason why it has taken too long for there to be a response?

[Marwan Tabbara, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Madam Speaker, as mentioned in my speech, I sit on the Subcommittee for International Human Rights. I applaud my colleague for bringing this study forward in the last session.

Our response to the Myanmar Muslims who are in Rakhine State and now fleeing to Bangladesh is that our Prime Minister has denounced this and has done so in an open letter to Aung San Suu Kyi. Our Minister of Foreign Affairs has denounced this as well. We have committed millions of dollars in humanitarian aid to those in Bangladesh and in Rakhine State. Our response has been rapid. We had a prior response within our subcommittee.

We will continue to advocate for the Rohingya Muslims fleeing to Bangladesh. We will be supporting them.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Madam Speaker, I have received many letters from constituents. They are very concerned about the situation in Myanmar and what we are doing to help the Rohingya people. I want to put for my friend some of the recommendations that have been put forth in correspondence, and perhaps he could tell us what his thoughts are.

For example, one letter suggested matching funds collected by Canadian charities for relief and aid efforts for the Rohingya; accelerating the processing of Rohingya refugees; providing technical assistance and increased aid for relief organizations that were serving the needs of the Rohingya, who have been forced to flee to Bangladesh; and calling on the Myanmar government to affirm the right of the Rohingya to return to their homes and to live in peace and security. There are also a few requests to go to the UN for further investigation and assistance.

Perhaps my colleague could comment as to what he believes we should do with these recommendations and how we could use these as a path forward.

[Marwan Tabbara, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Madam Speaker, the first is to work with multilateral nations as well as the United Nations and like-minded nations to look at instilling peace and security there and to ensure atrocities do not happen anymore.

Second, it is absolutely imperative that we ensure that humanitarian aid gets to the most vulnerable, whether in Bangladesh or in Rakhine State. As I mentioned, vulnerable people will die if humanitarian aid does not reach them. We have pledged $9 million in humanitarian assistance. That is part of our initiative as well. We will continue to support the humanitarian response.

We strongly urge that the Rohingya receive the rights that many citizens in Myanmar receive and that they are treated equally in that regard.

[Cheryl Hardcastle, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise with great sadness tonight to reiterate the urgent situation that must compel the Government of Canada to demand unrestricted access for humanitarian agencies and for those doing the investigation work and to provide the humanitarian funding necessary for this crisis.

This is a discussion that has already gone on far too long without action over the years. As vice-chair of the subcommittee on international human rights, I can tell members that it was only last year that we completed a lengthy study of the situation of the Rohingya in Myanmar, and here we are yet again, the situation having grown even worse since our first report.

The world had great hopes for Myanmar when, in November 2015, historic elections ushered in a new civilian government. The National League for Democracy, or NLD, led by Nobel Peace Price laureate, democracy activist, and honorary Canadian Aung San Suu Kyi, assumed power through a peaceful, democratic transition in March 2016.

For over 50 years, Myanmar had been governed by repressive military rule, characterized by grave human rights violations, an absence of the rule of law, and low levels of human and economic development. The country's new government is now faced with the legacy of long-standing repression of Myanmar's ethnic minorities by successive military regimes whose attempt to shape Myanmar as an ethnically Burman nation in which the official religion is Buddhism has led to persistent internal armed conflict.

The Rohingya are concentrated in Rakhine State, also known as Arakan State. Rakhine State is located on the west coast of Myanmar and is very ethnically diverse. The majority of the population, about 60%, are ethnic Rakhine, who are Buddhists and recognized by the government as an ethnic minority indigenous to Myanmar. Muslim communities, including the Rohingya, make up 30% of the population. In the northern part of Rakhine State, which shares the border with Bangladesh, Rohingya comprise 90% of the population. The state is one of the poorest in Myanmar, where decades of economic neglect by successive regimes have resulted in poverty and underdevelopment all across communities.

The Rohingya are referred to as Bengalis by Myanmar's government and most of its public. This contributes to the false narrative that they are a community of “illegal immigrants”, when in fact the Rohingya have been established in Myanmar for generations. Myanmar's citizenship law, enacted in 1982, provided a list of 135 ethnic minorities recognized by the government. It excluded the Rohingya, resulting in the withdrawal of their citizenship. This judgment was based on the false claim that their ancestors were not present in Myanmar at the start of the British occupation of Rakhine State in 1823.

Further, the word “Rohingya” has become politicized in light of concerns that referring to the minority by their proper name could lead to their being identified as a recognized ethnic group with the full set of citizenship rights that follow. Rakhine Buddhists, themselves an ethnic minority in Myanmar, view the Rohingya Muslims as an existential threat to their current ethnic majority in Rakhine State, their desire for more political autonomy, their reassertion of their ethnic identity, and their economic well-being.

Over the decades, successive military regimes have used a divide-and-conquer ruling approach against or in Rakhine State, pitting Rakhine Buddhists and Rohingya Muslims against each other for political gain, exacerbating tensions and causing numerous flare-ups between the two communities.

While Rakhine hostility against the Rohingya has grown since Myanmar's independence from the United Kingdom in 1948, successive military regimes have also gradually imposed policies of persecution and exclusion against the Rohingya. Even before their loss of citizenship in 1982, the Rohingya experienced the severest forms of legal, economic, educational, and social discrimination, including restrictions on their freedom of movement, which further affected their ability to earn a livelihood, pursue an education, or receive medical care. Their right to assemble to practise their religion was also curtailed.

According to testimony by Rebecca Wolsak of Inter Pares, the country's dictators have a vision “to build one nation, with one race and one religion”, one race being Burman and one religion being Buddhism. However, she also states that “Approximately 40% of the population are not Burman. They identity as ethnic nationalities.”

In a country with over 135 ethnic groups, implementing this vision led to widespread human rights abuses by successive military regimes, including the violent suppression of ethnic, political, cultural, social, and religious rights, and the economic neglect of ethnic dominated regions. A number of ethnic minorities formed their own guerilla armies to counter government oppression and violence, resulting in numerous protracted armed conflicts across the country. In all of these conflict areas, Myanmar's military has been responsible for human rights abuses against civilians, including forced labour, extra-judicial killings, the recruitment of child soldiers, the use of anti-personnel land mines, and sexual violence against women and girls.

This brings us to where we are tonight with the current crisis. I believe strongly that forums such as this emergency debate should be used for more than a recitation of the atrocities. New Democrats believe that it is our job to bring forward workable propositions, concrete ideas that might serve to improve conditions on the ground. Just last week, we heard powerful testimony at the Subcommittee on International Human Rights from Mr. Anwar Arkani, the president of the Rohingya Association of Canada, and Ahmed Ramadan, the coordinator of Burma Task Force Canada.

According to their very powerful, graphic, and disturbing testimony, some of which was recited here tonight, there is and has been for some time a very serious problem with humanitarian aid. In Myanmar, more than 120,000 Rohingya are presently confined to internment camps by the government. This is similar to the situation that occurred during the pogroms against the Rohingya in 2012.

Accessing humanitarian aid in those camps has been very difficult for several years. Right now, food is not getting into these camps. In northern Rakhine State where the recent violence has been taking place, the government has effectively ousted all of the major humanitarian groups that were on the ground providing life-saving aid. The World Food Programme is not permitted to deliver food to northern Rakhine State. There are tens of thousands of children who are suffering from severe, acute malnutrition. Without humanitarian intervention, they will die. This is an area that the government of Myanmar has completely sealed off to all humanitarian group, with one exception, the International Committee of the Red Cross. Here the government seems content with allowing local Burmese civilians to prevent the International Committee of the Red Cross from delivering aid.

In Bangladesh the needs are massive. There is an enormous influx of people, upward of half a million people since August 25, and the needs are dramatic. Food and health care are in great need. After fleeing horrific violence and travelling on foot, dodging areas strewn with anti-personnel land mines, with little food for up to two weeks, refugees are arriving exhausted, hungry, dehydrated, and in most cases traumatized by their experiences.

Major concerns exist for the children's survival and well-being, with emergency food, nutrition, and health interventions as well as psycho-social support all critical and time sensitive to prevent further harm. In addition to urgent food and shelter needs, of particular concern is the potential outbreak of contagious diseases, given the low health status of the population, severely crowded conditions in the settlements, and poor water and sanitation. We might as well say no sanitation.

With new arrivals crossing the border daily, aid agencies, local communities, and the Bangladeshi government do not currently have the resources to meet the spiralling scale or scope of the need, which brings me to what we, the New Democrats, hope to see from our own government.

When crimes against humanity are taking place, Canada has a moral and international legal obligation to ensure these crimes come to an end, and that all those responsible are brought to justice. Canada must call on the UN Security Council to take measures, including targeted sanctions and referral to the International Criminal Court, in order to stop the violence and bring those responsible to justice.

The Government of Canada must demand that the Government of Myanmar guarantee unrestricted and meaningful access to humanitarian agencies that provide the crucial life-saving services in Rohingya communities and in camps for the internally displaced Rohingya.

The Burmese government should likewise immediately stop using anti-personnel land mines and join the 1997 mine ban treaty. Several reports from the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and others have documented the use of anti-personnel mines, having been laid between Myanmar's two major land crossings with Bangladesh, resulting in casualties among Rohingya refugees who are fleeing government attacks on their homes. The use of land mines must stop, and all must be removed. Our government must also demand that Myanmar guarantee unfettered access to UN and other independent investigators so that all human rights violations are fully documented. Without this full accounting, justice simply is not possible.

We also believe that Canada should increase humanitarian assistance for conflict-afflicted Rohingya in Bangladesh and Myanmar through trusted humanitarian partners. Given the scale of this crisis, $6.63 million is a start but not nearly enough. The United Nations has called this the most urgent refugee crisis in the world. We also believe that Canada should plan to accept Rohingya refugees in Canada.

We very much would like to see more leadership from Canada on this and other international issues. So far, our government is great with a selfie and a sound bite, but it comes up seriously wanting when actual global leadership is required. Accordingly, Canada must work actively, indeed lead with like-minded states to find a political solution.

I would now like to quote former foreign affairs minister Lloyd Axworthy and Allan Rock, former ambassador to the UN. Here is what they wrote in a recent column:

And what does that mean for Canada in concrete terms? It means forming a coalition of like-minded states drawn from all the world's regions to demand that Ms. Suu Kyi end the Myanmar military's rampage. It means calling for accountability for those in Myanmar who have committed crimes against humanity. It means mobilizing global public opinion to put pressure on the UN Security Council, where China and Russia are already standing in the way of any sensible discussion, to take measures that will end the violence.

It is good to hear these former statesmen, both Liberals, speak out about this important issue. Now, if only we could see some action from the Liberals who are now in government.

Last, we believe that Canada must call on the Government of Myanmar to repudiate anti-Muslim violence, to end impunity for acts of violence against the Rohingya and other minorities, and to develop a strategy for promoting tolerance between the Rakhine and Rohingya in Rakhine State.

I mentioned Ahmed Ramadan earlier, from Burma Task Force Canada, who spoke last week at the Subcommittee on International Human Rights. Mr. Ramadan requested that Canada work to bring in UN peacekeepers to create a safe zone for the remaining Rohingya, because he believes that nothing short of that will be able to provide the requisite security and safety so that food and medical aid can be brought in. While Canada certainly cannot do something like this on its own, it is something that can be accomplished by the international community working together, and Canada must speak up.

Myanmar is a party to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The UDHR, which is not a treaty, requires member states to confer, in a non-discriminatory manner, some of the most fundamental rights denied to the Rohingya: the right to life, liberty and security of the person; the right to a nationality; the provision of equal protection before the law; protection from discrimination; freedom of movement; freedom of religion, including communal worship; the right to a livelihood; the right to access public services; and the right to health, including providing special care to mothers and children.

It is not a treaty. Many of the rights guaranteed by the UDHR have been recognized in international case law and have gained the status of customary international law. That is to say, it is widely and uniformly applied by states on the understanding that it is legally mandatory. This effectively creates a universally binding obligation on all states, including Myanmar.

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has condemned this situation as “a textbook example of ethnic cleansing”. We have the opportunity to seize this opportunity, with the global community, to act now.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for her great advocacy and passion on this specific issue for the past year and a half in our international human rights subcommittee.

The member spoke about justice and accountability. I would like to ask the member what kind of measures the international community can take to hold Aung San Suu Kyi and her government accountable for what is happening in Myanmar and Rakhine State.

[Cheryl Hardcastle, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question. She is an engaging member of our international subcommittee and really escalates the level of discussion. We are very proud to have consensus on that committee, and the hon. member is a key personality in that consensus-building.

We have international, respected agencies that provide the required documentation to the International Criminal Court. As a matter of fact, we heard from my colleague who posed the question. We heard from another member of her caucus who has done war crimes prosecution, so we know how important it is to document evidence.

We also know that a population that is so traumatized, stressed, and low-resourced does not have the capability to provide the documentation that is required. Developed nations are finding ways to contribute through non-governmental organizations that can work through the United Nations and provide this effectively so that justice comes to fruition.

When we have a situation of impunity, moving forward they are only going to have a situation of dysfunction as they try to rebuild civil society in Myanmar. That is an extremely important example of how we can actually do something significant in terms of making people face justice for the atrocities being suffered right now.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Windsor—Tecumseh for her detailed and thoughtful remarks tonight and the clarion call near the end of her speech for global leadership. I agree with large portions of that part of her speech.

I have a twofold question for her. First, does she think global leadership means, to quote a parliamentary secretary in the debate tonight, a terse letter being written to the head of government in Myanmar, or would it have been a better opportunity for Canada to have publicly raised concerns about the Rohingyas at the UN General Assembly?

Second, the member had some detailed remarks on UN peacekeeping. The government does have an outstanding commitment to deploy 600 peacekeepers, but it has to indicate where that will be. It will be hosting a global or multi-country summit on peacekeeping. Does the member feel that this situation in Myanmar could be an opportunity for Canada to offer to deploy peacekeepers there? Does she think Myanmar might be the solution and that the government should announce this while hosting the summit?

[Cheryl Hardcastle, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague's remarks and question indicate the way he thinks we should go, which is very important.

We need to be a strong voice. The upcoming summit is an opportunity for us to lend our voice and for the Government of Canada to demand unfettered access for NGOs that need to go in to do the humanitarian aid. Once we arrive at that as a global community, that yes we are going to do that and will provide the peacekeepers for the safe zone, that is part of the voice that we need to contribute to. It is not something we can do on our own, as I said in my speech, but something we can do as a global community, and we have to take the lead. This is such an overwhelming situation that people do not know where to begin.

I suggested that this is where we should begin. We should demand that unfettered access and bring in the resources so that the humanitarian aid can be delivered safely, including to the internment camps, and collect the evidence that we need so there is no impunity moving forward, which is significant. Yes, we have to have a game plan and really step up and say that we are doing it. Should we do it alone? No, but we should indicate, yes, we are willing to put our resources into this for the rest of the United Nations community that is looking at this with concern. If we do this together, it is not just aspirational anymore but tangible, and there are ways that we can do it.

We cannot fool ourselves in thinking that we can go in with great guns and fix this overnight. This is a long-term, ongoing commitment that the government will have to remain strong in regard to. That is the key.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, there have been a few back-and-forths on the issue of engagement through the United Nations. I was in New York last week for the UN General Assembly and, yes, I was disappointed that the Prime Minister did not raise the issue of the Rohingyas. However, there was also a lot of discussion in the meetings I was in about the question of UN reform, with people noting that we see these atrocities and there does not seem to be the capacity to respond through the Security Council and other bodies of the UN. Different people had different solutions for that problem, but if we look at what has happened in Syria, what is happening in Burma, and what is happening in other places, it becomes clear that the proof is in the pudding and that we need to look for other ways of responding. Here I think that part of the solution is UN reform.

I would be curious about the member's thoughts on what we can do to promote changes in the United Nations that would increase that body's effectiveness when it comes to responding to emerging cases of ethnic cleansing and genocide.

[Cheryl Hardcastle, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Madam Speaker, I understand the sentiment for UN reform.

Once we prioritize international human rights, once we prioritize citizens, when we put people before economic decisions, when we ensure that we are not exploiting people, that is the start for a global community.

When we can reform the United Nations, it will be a different mindset. We have to buy into that. The United Nations will only be as strong as member nations allow it to be. If we act with our own personal agendas, different individuals, sovereign personalities around the world, the UN will never be anything more than a figurehead.

We need total buy-in and use the United Nations. That way, it can be powerful and effective. Whatever reforms we aspire to will actually mean something. The important point is that the membership as a whole needs that greater level of commitment to the international community, to international human rights. That is how I see it.