Bill Graham

[National Defence, February 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that recently in the House members in the party opposite were saying that Mr. Bush was here, asked us to join the ballistic missile defence and what were we waiting for? Obviously the hon. member is confused or perhaps he has not been listening to his previous rhetoric.

I will repeat for his benefit and that of members of the House that we are participating with our American allies in understanding what goes on in the space above us. That is what Norad does, and the ambassador was right to say that this is how we are helping our American friends.

This is not the same as sending a missile up to intercept another missile. That decision will be taken in due time by the Prime Minister in the best interests of Canada.

[National Defence, February 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, I would not comment on what diplomats do in terms of winking or nudging or anything else.

However, I think it is very clear to all members of the House that we as a government are making the policy for this country, and this policy will be made in the House and it will be made by our Prime Minister. We work with the Americans on threat assessment, and we will determine in our own time in accordance with our own schedule and our own priorities whether we participate in ballistic missile defence for the good of Canada and Canada's interests alone.

[National Defence, February 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to welcome the hon. member back. He may have lost his appendix, but he has not lost any of his usual verve for life, so it is great to see him here in the House.

However, I want to assure him that it is possible to work with our American friends, and tell them we are helping them in terms of a threat assessment to North America. I know the member has some problems about dealing with the United States. I know his party basically does not want to go there. However, on this side of the House we want to work with our American friends because we believe the defence of North America can only be done by two of us working together.

[National Defence, February 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I believe confusion reigns in the House on this matter through no fault of hon. members on this side. We have always been clear. We have contributed to the Norad amendment in order to work with our American friends on assessing threats to North America. We will take a decision on deploying a missile defence shield once we have all had a chance to discuss it with our colleagues in this House. That way all Canadians will understand the nature of our solution.

[National Defence, February 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, what I do not understand at all in this House full of intelligent people is that we agreed to the Norad amendment with the knowledge of everyone here a few months ago, in August.

Mr. Bush, the President of the United States, was here last month. He asked us to be part of the missile defence shield. The Bloc now claims to be surprised that we are already there. It seems Mr. Bush was also led astray. Mr. Bush does not know that we are not part of it.

These are ridiculous arguments. We are not part of the missile defence shield. We will make that decision according to our—

[National Defence, February 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, it is a fairly clear matter of logic. Even the Bloc can understand, I believe, that there is a difference between assessing a threat that may be dangerous, exchanging information, cooperating with a friend, understanding this information, and making the decision to launch a missile. That is a different thing, a different stage. That is what we are looking at. The Prime Minister said that we will never get to that stage without first consulting the House and making a decision in Canada's best interest.

[National Defence, February 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I should begin by pointing out that the Bloc leader has mixed a number of things. The first point to be made is that the weaponization of space is not part of the missile defence shield program.

The second point is that, as I have just told the hon. members, we have amended the Norad agreement, which is totally logical as far as threats to North America are concerned. The hon. member is well aware of this because the PM phoned him directly to inform him of it.

We continue to work with our American friends, but as far as their missile defence program is concerned, we will make the decision when the time comes, when it is the right time for Canada.

[National Defence, February 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, let me assure the hon. member and other hon. members of the House that Canada's position is not a done deal.

We will decide about whether we are going to participate in the aspect of ballistic missile defence, which involves its determination of how it works and ultimate deployment in the interest of Canada, in the appropriate way and we will discuss it with members of the House. The Prime Minister is anxious to do that. We will make that move when it is appropriate.

The fact that we signed the Norad agreement is of no surprise to anybody in the House. It was a natural thing to do in order to help our American friends in understanding threats to North America and we will always participate with them on that.

[National Defence, February 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I just had lunch with the ambassador. I want to assure all hon. members that there is no problem between the ambassador, myself, the Deputy Prime Minister, or the Prime Minister.

It is clear what the ambassador is seeking to do. He is telling our American partners that we are active with them in defence of North America and in appreciation of the threats that come to North America. That is why we did the Norad amendment. In many ways he was quite correct in saying that this is all that Canada needs to do to help our American allies in this situation. It was a perfectly obvious thing for him to say. It does not change the Government of Canada's policy whatsoever.

[National Defence, February 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, all the ambassador said was that we signed the amendment to Norad. If this comes as a surprise to the leader of the opposition, it certainly comes as no surprise to us.

We have talked about this in the House on numerous occasions and we will talk about it again. The decision as to whether we will take part in the missile defence shield is a separate discussion. The question is whether or not we will take part in delivering these missiles. That is in the future. I assure the House that no such decision has been made.