Aileen Carroll

[Supply, April 3rd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, my comment is not directed for the hon. member for Halifax but for the member across the way who made reference, I think casually and perhaps more callously than he had intended, in recalling the after effects of General Roméo Dallaire's condition, to losing his mind.

I think it would be far better to refer to the fact the General Dallaire did indeed suffer post-traumatic stress syndrome, was extraordinarily courageous in sharing that, and by doing so, helped facilitate a very strong set of programs within the Canadian armed forces to help those returning from that kind of a situation to assist them with that in recognition of it.

The incredible stature of Roméo Dallaire and all that he has been doing since, and the recognition given everywhere of a truly Canadian hero, should in no way be smirched by a casual and careless remark.

[Sex Offender Information Registration Act, April 2nd, 2003]

Madam Speaker, there having been lengthy discussion and consideration of Bill C-23, I think it is an appropriate time for the following motion. I move:

That the question be now put.

[Parthenon Marbles, April 1st, 2003]

Madam Speaker, I seek clarification of just what was required in order to pass this motion. Would you enlighten the House?

[Supply, March 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I only wanted to draw the attention of the hon. member to an interesting article this morning in the Globe and Mail , by Joseph Nye, who is head of the Kennedy foreign policy institute at Harvard. My eye caught that because he had come before a standing committee.

He made mention this morning that had the Canadian initiative, from his perspective, which set out very clear benchmarks and a firm timeline, been given more time, it might have been conducive to movement on this issue. Would the hon. member wish to comment on Professor Nye's advisement?

[Supply, March 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to mention to the--

[Supply, March 20th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I am almost speechless, but since I am in questions and comments, not quite. I find it incredulous that the hon. member can describe Canada and all the efforts it has made consistently through this entire crisis as being invisible.

It was the Canadian initiative at the United Nations that brought movement from two hardened positions, if not to the fruition we all would have hoped for, by reactivating dynamics that had ceased to be in any way productive.

As far as having been invisible, I was fortunate enough to have been to The Hague last week for the inauguration of the International Criminal Court which this country led. Often the conversation in all of the groups, with the British, the French and the Belgians, was about the Canadian initiative.

I find it appalling that the hon. member has somehow missed that when he sits on the foreign affairs committee.

Finally, when the member's hon. leader made mention of the fact that when he was in the position of prime minister and foreign affairs minister he spoke to his counterparts, I might recall for him that the Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs have been in constant dialogue with President Bush and with Secretary of State Powell doing exactly what he advocated.

These gentlemen should be a little more careful about observing what is happening. It will be very helpful in their future analysis.

[Falun Gong, February 28th, 2003]

Madam Speaker, we continue to raise human rights concerns and to urge Chinese leaders to respect internationally agreed upon human rights standards during meetings with Chinese ministers and officials. We will continue to register Canadian concerns about human rights abuses both in general terms and with respect to specific cases where appropriate.

Canada also continues to make reference to China in annual country situation public statements at the United Nations General Assembly Third Committee, the latest occurrence which took place in November 2002, and also at the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, and equally to support multilateral initiatives which promote our human rights objectives.

We believe that engagement, rather than isolation, will effect a sustained improvement in the human rights situation in China. The Canada-China human rights dialogue is an example of how engagement has allowed Canada access to Chinese agencies whose co-operation is essential if human rights practices are to improve in China. Canada plans to continue to express its concern on a range of issues which include freedom of religion, expression, association, women's rights, children's rights, good governance and minority rights among others.

The major components of Canada's human rights dialogue include the Joint Committee on Human Rights, JCHR, and the Plurilateral Human Rights Symposium co-hosted by Canada, Norway and China.

Last year's JCHR took place in Beijing and Xinjiang, China from November 4 to 8. The topics on the agenda included: recent progress in promotion and protection of human rights in China and Canada; conditions of detention, special concern for female prisoners and detainees; police training and international co-operation in human rights in the multilateral context. A frank and open discussion allowed for the free exchange of ideas and issues of concerns to both countries. In addition both China and Canada expressed belief in the value of the JCHR and its continuation to permit the ongoing exchange of issues and points of view.

Last year's Canada-China-Norway Plurilateral Symposium on Human Rights took place in Jakarta from March 11 to 12. The meeting brought delegations from the three co-sponsoring governments together with delegations from Bangladesh, Cambodia, Indonesia, Korea, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan and others. The meeting succeeded in achieving its immediate objectives which were a discussion of mutual human rights concerns, an exchange of strategies and policies to address them and confidence building among the participants so as to facilitate possible joint activities.

In so doing, the meeting again proved its value as a non-confrontational venue to discuss sensitive human rights issues in great depth than is possible in larger human rights fora.

Canada also tries to improve the human rights situation in China through CIDA programming. Some of CIDA's projects include training of senior Chinese judges; a women's law program to assist in understanding and exercising legal rights; the development of a national legal aid system; an international human rights implementation project to assist China's efforts in implementing international conventions; a civil society program to strengthen the functioning of autonomous people based voluntary community organizations; co-operation between the Canadian Bar Association and the All China Lawyers Association to promote the rule of law and links between the two legal professions; and a criminal law and criminal justice co-operation program to assist in the development of the rule of law in criminal procedure.

In addition to the points that I have raised on human rights I draw the attention of my colleague and the House to Canada's trade relationship with China.

In a broad sense our continuing goal is to see an evolution toward a more transparent economic and political system in China. To use the oft-quoted phrase, we seek to “engage China”. Canada's policy of engaging China is reflected in the numerous ongoing dialogues between state and non-state actors.

It is important to underline our view that trade and human rights are not mutually exclusive. Our trade interests are not pursued at the expense of voicing our concerns about human rights or vice versa. In fact, regular high level exchanges, including the team Canada missions to China, allow Canada to reinforce our concerns on issues such as human rights.

We also believe that improving our trade ties with other countries in a rules based system can reduce isolationism and open channels that will promote social progress and respect for human rights.

[Interparliamentary Delegations, February 28th, 2003]

Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the report of the delegation from the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association at the meeting of the Committee on Economic Affairs and Development, held in London, England, January 23 and 24, 2003, and at the first part of the 2003 ordinary session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe held in Strasbourg, France, from January 27 to January 31, 2003.

[International Women's Day, February 28th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, this year's International Women's Day theme in Canada is “World-Wide Women: Surfing the Digital Revolution!”

Technology is changing. Information and communications technologies, or ICTs, and the Internet are no exception. They have revolutionized the way we communicate, access information and create networks. The Internet, in particular, has opened up a number of resources to individuals or organizations across the world.

Online activism, for example, has generated worldwide support for important issues such as human rights violation, gender-based exploitation and violence against women.

The World March of Women 2000 and the situation of women in Afghanistan are just a couple of examples of how the Internet can be used with success to mobilize people around the world on women's issues.

The Internet and ICTs are tools that everyone should have access to. Canadians should take the opportunity to learn about the benefits that these technologies have to offer and to reflect on how they can continue to benefit women.

[Armenia, February 12th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Burnaby--Douglas for expressing his views. As well I listened to those just expressed and the litany of newspaper articles.

The hon. member for Burnaby--Douglas has expressed his views of the tragic events of 1914 to 1925, which was the time of the collapse of the Ottoman empire. Indeed it claimed so many lives and had such a profound effect on the Armenian community as well as on other communities in the region. Statements have also been made by other members of the House during previous debates on the subject.

That part of the world without a doubt experienced a particularly horrific period in history, marked by numerous atrocities and great suffering.

Whether it be through the Prime Minister's messages to Canadians of Armenian descent on the anniversaries of the Armenian tragedy of 1915, or during previous debates in the House, or in response to questions asked of the Minister of Foreign Affairs during question period, the government has expressed its heartfelt sympathy and compassion for the suffering experienced by the Armenian people during the period in question. The government has stressed the importance we attach to ensuring that the memory of this human tragedy is preserved in our collective consciousness.

I would particularly like to point out that during the debate on the Armenian tragedy in 1996 the House adopted a motion recognizing the week of April 20 to 27 each year as a week of remembrance of the inhumanity of people toward one another.

We will also recall that on June 10, 1999 following comprehensive consultations, the position of the Government of Canada with regard to these events was set out in a statement made in the House by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the hon. member for Halton, who spoke on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The hon. member stated:

We remember the calamity afflicted on the Armenian people in 1915. This tragedy was committed with the intent to destroy a national group in which hundreds of Armenians were subject to atrocities which included massive deportations and massacres. May the memory of this period contribute to healing wounds as well as to reconciliation of present day nations and communities and remind us all of our collective duty to work together toward world peace.

Canada is a land of immigrants. As such it promotes tolerance and respect for diversity in international organizations and in the development of effective multilateral tools that embody our ideals and our values, including tolerance, respect for human rights, democracy and rule of law, to prevent any recurrence of the tragic events of the past, such as the one which took such a terrible toll on the Armenian community.

Unfortunately we cannot change the past. What we can and must continuously do is work very hard to build a future of peace and tolerance for all people. For example, our peacekeeping missions in various regions of the globe reflect our desire and our willingness to provide concrete help in creating environments that foster reconciliation and tolerance.

By our Canadian example we show the rest of the world not only that it is possible for people of different cultures to live together in harmony and to flourish, but also that in doing so it is a remarkable, enriching and fascinating experience for us as individuals and as a nation on a cultural as well as on an economic level.

Canada seeks to establish positive, comprehensive and productive relations with all the countries of the region, including Turkey and Armenia. Indeed a reconciled stable and prosperous region will generate positive developments beyond the immediate borders of the countries concerned. Everyone stands to gain, including Canada.

In closing, let me repeat what we have already said, because in our eyes it is still essential, even fundamental, and we will all have to continue to devote our energy and efforts to it.

The tragic events of 1915 underscore and remind us of the importance of promoting tolerance and respect through diversity among peoples to ensure that the tragic events of the past, such as the ones which took a terrible toll on the Armenian community, are not repeated. We also invite the parties concerned to look to the future because the events of the past should not stand in the way of reconciliation.

In closing, the hon. member for Burnaby—Douglas said that the stand of this government is about not wanting to rock the boat with Turkey, but that is not what this government's position is. It is about refusing to be divisive. It is about refusing to inflame old hatreds and refusing to reopen old wounds as he continues to do. It is about building a nation of tolerance and healing, looking to the future and building the kind of relationships abroad and here within Canada which move us forward and not to act from political motivation to reopen and create the hatred and divisiveness. I am very proud of this government's stand which shows considerable courage in the road we continue to take.