Svend Robinson

[Division No. 317, February 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, in late October last year the Minister of Foreign Affairs met with Timorese leader and Nobel prize winner José Ramos-Horta.

Mr. Ramos-Horta was in Canada to urge the Government of Canada to support the people of East Timor, in particular to support their right to self-determination and to an internationally supervised referendum on their future. On that day I asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs what the position of the Government of Canada was with respect to support for East Timor's right to self-determination.

Unfortunately the Minister of Foreign Affairs did not come out in support of the right to self-determination. In fact, there have been 10 votes at the United Nations since the brutal invasion by Indonesia of East Timor and the annexation in 1975 and on not one of those votes has Canada supported the people of East Timor and their fundamental right to self-determination.

Earlier today in this House we spoke about the genocide in Armenia from 1915 to 1923. There has been genocide in East Timor as well. Since 1975 over 200,000 people, over one-third of the population, have lost their lives in the brutal repression and genocide that followed the occupation.

The East Timorese people have carried out a valiant fight for independence. We know that in 1991 hundreds of innocent marchers were massacred at a demonstration in Dili. The documentation of human rights abuses by Amnesty International, the East Timor Human Rights Centre and the UN human rights commission is extensive.

Just in the last few months Yayasan Hak, a very reliable East Timorese NGO, has monitored complaints filed by victims of extrajudicial executions, detentions, torture and forced disappearances. Over 7,000 refugees have been forced to leave their homes just in the last few months as a result of the terror and intimidation taking place there.

For too long the Canadian government has turned a blind eye to these abuses and instead placed the focus on establishing a cosy trade relationship with Suharto. We saw that in spades at the APEC leaders summit in Vancouver in 1997.

The fall of General Suharto last May provided some hope but clearly it is essential that the international community provide support for the people of East Timor at this time. I ask the Government of Canada today, I call on the Government of Canada to join in the growing call for a United Nations monitored peacekeeping force to oversee a referendum for self-determination. I call on our government to provide support for a transitional administration to help the territory toward independence.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs spoke just last week at the security council about the importance of his human security agenda and the importance of protecting civilians in armed conflict. What better place to apply those principles than in East Timor.

I call as well on the United Nations to dispatch a monitoring force to East Timor as soon as possible to oversee the disarming and disbanding of the paramilitaries, paramilitaries that are being actively armed and supported by the Indonesian army. We want to see a reduction in occupying troops. We want to see the protection of the population against further human rights abuses.

I urge the secretary of state, who I see in the House today, to call for a permanent United Nations office in East Timor to support and co-ordinate these very important activities. The time has come for Canada to play a positive role and to send a delegation to monitor the elections in East Timor and Indonesia. The people of East Timor have suffered long enough. Canada has been silent long enough. The time for justice is now.

[Armenians, February 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased and honoured to rise to strongly support the motion which has been placed before the House today by my colleague from Scarborough—Agincourt, not only speaking on my own behalf but on behalf of my colleagues in the New Democratic caucus. In doing so I want to pay tribute to the ongoing leadership of the Armenian National Committee of Canada which has kept this issue alive through a number of parliaments. Today we are joined by a number of of representatives of the Armenian National Committee and I want to salute them: Giro Manoyan, Rouben Kouyngian, Sylvia Baronian and Aris Babikian. It is important to acknowledge these individuals for the leadership they have shown on this issue, along of course with others such as the president, Girair Basmadjian.

I listened to the debate with interest. I appreciated the eloquent remarks of the mover of the motion. The official spokesperson for the government, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, was very clear. The Liberal government does not support this motion. That was quite obvious. He was quite up front about that which is no surprise given the position the government took in 1996 on another motion.

I have to confess some bewilderment in listening to the spokesperson on behalf of the Reform Party. He talked about Bosnia. He talked about Rwanda. He talked about the United Nations. He talked about international law. But the one thing he did not talk about was the motion. Did he support the motion or did he oppose the motion? No one in this House and no one in the country knows what the position of the Reform Party is after that speech.

I hope that perhaps another spokesperson, maybe the member for West Vancouver, might have an opportunity to clarify exactly where the Reform Party of Canada stands on this motion, because certainly we did not find out from its official spokesperson.

I was very pleased to hear the Bloc Quebecois member for Beauharnois—Salaberry supporting the motion. I recall clearly the very eloquent speech given by Michel Daviault on the subject in April 1996, during the last debate.

It is clear where most of the parties stand on this issue.

This has been an issue that my colleagues and I have been involved in for some time. I have a motion before the House that states:

That, in the opinion of this House, the government should officially recognize and condemn the Armenian genocide of 1915-1923 perpetrated by the Turkish-Ottoman government, which resulted in the murder of over one and one-half Armenians; designate April 24 as the day of annual commemoration of the Armenian genocide; and press the Government of Turkey to recognize and acknowledge the genocide and provide redress to the Armenian people.

That motion is before the House and it is also before the foreign affairs committee where it will be coming to a vote in the not too distant future.

I had the privilege of travelling to Armenia shortly after the devastating earthquake some years ago. I had the opportunity to meet with leaders of Armenia and to hear of the terrible and tragic legacy of suffering of those people. The greatest tragedy, the greatest suffering and yes, the genocide, was in 1915 to 1923, the first genocide of this dark century, the 20th century, a century in which we also witnessed genocide in other parts of the world, the Nazi Holocaust of World War II, the genocide in East Timor, in Rwanda, in Cambodia and elsewhere.

The member for Beauharnois—Salaberry quoted French archival material from 1920, which describes exactly what happened in this genocide.

While this was a tragedy, it was far beyond that. It was genocide and it was shameful that in this House in April 1996 when we had an opportunity to tell the truth, to be honest, to speak about what actually happened, instead some Liberal members, speaking on behalf of the government, watered down that motion.

We have to ask why they are taking this position. Could it have something to do with economic relations or trade relations with Turkey? It might just have something to do with the fact that we are trying to sell Candu reactors to Turkey. My goodness, we do not want to offend the Turkish government if it might interfere with the sale of Candu reactors. Good heavens no. We do not want to offend the Turkish government if it might interfere with our sale of military equipment to that country. Of course that has nothing to do with the position the government members are taking.

I want to speak for a moment about the Turkish government. The Turkish government has for too long displayed contempt for international law not just in this area but in too many others. Its contempt has been displayed in its reluctance to apply the principles of international law in its ongoing disputes with Greece; the continued illegal occupation by Turkey of part of Cypress; the profound violation of human rights of the Kurdish people in Turkey; the lack of respect for human rights, individual collective freedoms, attacks on journalists and others, attacks on freedom of religion; the continued imprisonment of elected members of parliament like Leyla Zana and others.

It is time our Liberal government showed some courage and honesty and spoke out on the genocide, condemned the genocide and recognized the truth.

Following the Holocaust of World War II, nations of the world adopted a convention on genocide. Canada was one of the signatories to that convention. Why today are we not prepared to acknowledge the truth of what happened? It is a very straightforward matter. We owe it to the victims of that genocide and to their families. We owe it to all Canadians to ensure that this genocide that killed 1.5 million Armenians is never repeated.

Today what we are asking for is the truth. That is all. This parliament has an opportunity today to allow the truth to be told and honesty to be our policy.

In closing, I once again appeal to all members of this House but most importantly to the Liberal government to end their silence and their revisionist history. Listening to the history lesson from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs was an astonishing experience because it flies in the face of reality in that region and denies the truth of the genocide.

On behalf of my colleagues in the New Democratic Party, it is an honour to join not just with Armenian Canadians but to join with parliaments such as the Belgium Senate, the French National Assembly, the European Parliament, the Israeli Knesset, the Russian Duma and many others that have taken this step. If they can take this step and acknowledge the truth, why can we not do the same in Canada?

[Supply, February 9th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Davenport for his support of the motion.

I also raise a concern with respect to the issue he identified around NAFTA and the implications of NAFTA for bulk freshwater exports.

The hon. member is a very distinguished and longstanding member of this House. He knows that there are serious questions at this time about the possible impact of NAFTA. There have been a number of challenges by American companies that seek to take advantage of what they allege are the provisions of NAFTA with respect to bulk water export.

Judging by the lawsuits that have been launched, for example Sun Belt claiming over $100 million in damages under the provisions of NAFTA, does the hon. member not agree that if Canada, the United States and Mexico really believe NAFTA does not apply to freshwater exports that there could very well be a memorandum of understanding that would have equal force and effect as the NAFTA itself just to clear up any misunderstanding?

In the absence of that, of course, there is still the possibility of ongoing legal harassment and actions. In light of that, would the hon. member be prepared to support both the amendment and the main motion?

[Petitions, February 9th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition deals with the MAI, the multilateral agreement on investment. The petitioners express grave concern about the implications of the MAI for Canada's sovereignty and they call upon parliament to consider the enormous implications to Canada with the signing of the MAI. They ask that it be put before the House for open debate and that a national referendum be held for the people of Canada to decide.

[Petitions, February 9th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present petitions this morning on two subjects. The first petition is signed by residents of Alberta and British Columbia and notes that the Constitution Act, 1982 guarantees freedom of conscience and religion in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The petitioners urge parliament to establish peace tax legislation by passing into law a private member's bill which recognizes the right of conscientious objectors to not pay for the military and within which the government would declare its commitment to apply that portion of taxes that was to be used for military purposes toward peaceful purposes such as peace education, war relief, humanitarian and environmental aid, housing and other peaceful purposes.

[Foreign Aid, February 4th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, this is International Development Week, an opportunity to remind the government of the devastating impact of ongoing Liberal cuts in foreign aid.

At the same time I salute the dedicated work of those individuals and NGOs, groups like the Canadian Council for International Cooperation, OXFAM, Results Canada, UNICEF and Canadian churches and labour, in fighting global poverty.

I urge the government to significantly increase our foreign aid in the upcoming budget, especially that aimed at meeting basic human needs including education and that directed at the poorest countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.

New Democrats strongly support the Jubilee 2000 campaign urging the government to cancel the crushing $2.2 billion debt owed to Canada by the world's poorest countries. In a week when all parties have voiced concern about the rights of children, let us not forget that 32,000 children die every day of preventable disease and hunger. Canada must do much more to respond to this global crisis and set a clear timetable to meet the UN target of .7%—

[Petitions, February 3rd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition gathered by a group called Canadians Concerned About Ethnic Violence in Indonesia. They note that human rights abuses are rampant in Indonesia, that last May in three days of looting and riots more than 1,300 people were killed and hundreds of ethnic Chinese women were raped along with various other atrocities. They note that although most of the ethnic Chinese have been living in Indonesia for several generations they have faced constant discrimination in all aspects of their lives. They note that Canada is a leader in human rights implementation and that it should show leadership on this issue.

Therefore they call on parliament to appeal to President Habibie of Indonesia to protect the human rights of ethnic Chinese and to bring to justice those who masterminded and participated in these very serious racial riots.

[Supply, February 2nd, 1999]

Madam Speaker, certainly I share the concern that has been voiced by all members of the House with respect to the decision of Justice Shaw and I strongly support the decision of the B.C. attorney general to appeal and welcome the decision of the federal government to seek an expedited hearing and intervene.

I want to ask the hon. member from Calgary to respond to two concerns that have been raised. The first concern is with respect to the issue of the distinction between the use of materials in which children are being used to produce the materials, in which the images of children are being used in child pornography. Certainly there is no question whatsoever that is repugnant and the possession of that material must be dealt with.

The B.C. Civil Liberties Association and others have suggested a distinction between that on the one hand and materials which may be written materials, materials which do not involve the use of children in their production. I want to ask the hon. member how he responds to the suggestion that there should be a distinction between those two.

Second, I ask him to respond to the concern that many have raised that by calling for immediate action, as the amendment of the Reform Party does now, the only immediate action that will pre-empt the courts is bringing in a law now with the notwithstanding clause and in effect that would be conceding that this law is unconstitutional and that rather we should support an expedited appeal. Should that appeal be unsuccessful then certainly we could give consideration to the avenue suggested by the official opposition.

[Petitions, February 1st, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition today signed by thousands of residents of British Columbia, including my own constituency of Burnaby—Douglas, homeowners affected by the leaky condominium crisis.

The petitioners urge the Government of Canada to provide a significant contribution toward homeowners affected by the residential construction crisis to ensure that the cost of all qualified repairs are deductible from income retroactively and in the future; to repeal and refund all GST on qualified repairs; and finally, to permit RRSP funds to be used to undertake qualified repairs without penalty and to permit previously withdrawn RRSP funds used to pay repair special assessments to be income tax rebated.

In presenting this petition, I want to acknowledge the work of Carmen Maretic, housing advocate, and Nona Saunders, president of the Condominium Home Owners Association of British Columbia, who have done an outstanding job in drawing this very serious issue to the attention of the Government of Canada.

[Questions On The Order Paper, December 10th, 1998]

With regards to Canada's involvement in APEC: ( a ) how much funding in total has been budgeted by the federal government for all the official APEC events and related APEC activities taking place in Canada; ( b ) which departments are financially responsible for which APEC events; ( c ) how much will each individual department spend on APEC; ( d ) what is the amount budgeted for direct and indirect costs incurred during the APEC leaders meeting in Vancouver; ( e ) how much is APEC itself contributing toward APEC related events; ( f ) how much revenue are these events expected to generate; and ( g ) what is the total contribution made by corporations to the financing of APEC, broken down by amount and name of corporation?