The House is on summer break, scheduled to return Sept. 15
House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was forces.

Last in Parliament December 2009, as NDP MP for New Westminster—Coquitlam (B.C.)

Won her last election, in 2008, with 42% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Afghanistan February 25th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, the whole situation in Afghanistan is incredibly complex. I thought the parliamentary secretary understood that. Maybe I am not correct on that.

The fact is many parts to the United Nations are perfectly suited to work in Afghanistan. The UN High Commission on Human Rights is not involved in a major way. UNICEF, which works with children, is not involved in a major way now. The UN development program should be involved. Most of all, the UN has a Peacebuilding Commission, headed by a Canadian, the newest body in the United Nations, that is perfectly suited to foster the kinds of negotiations that would lead Afghanistan into a secure and peaceful future for the people.

All the reports, the UN report, have said IEDs are up, poppy production is up, corruption is up, security is down. Sarah Chayes was interviewed on television this past week. She has been working in Afghanistan in Kandahar since the fall of the Taliban. She said that when the Taliban first fell, she could drive her car from Kandahar to Kabul in safety, albeit along a dirt road. Now that road is paved from Kandahar to Kabul, she cannot drive on it because that part of the country is too unsafe to allow her to do so.

We have not progressed there. It is time we took a different tack and looked at ways to effectively help the people of southern Afghanistan.

Afghanistan February 25th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, since the last election we have had a number of debates in the House on Afghanistan, debates about the dramatic increase in the production of opium, increase in corruption, increase in suicide attacks, increase in IEDs, about the torture of detainees, and about the billions of dollars that Canadian taxpayers have been spending on this war. And above all, about the hundreds of brave Canadian soldiers who have lost their lives or been grievously injured.

Oxfam, the UN, and the Red Cross among others, all state that the situation in Afghanistan is getting much worse. In fact, the Afghanistan NGO safety office says that 2007 marked the beginning of the war, not the end of the war.

I made my first speech on Afghanistan on April 10, 2006, during the take note debate on the war. At that time, I expressed my sense of loss of the 11 Canadians who had lost their lives thus far. Today, less than two years later, the total number of soldiers lost is 78, as well as one Canadian diplomat. Hundreds more have suffered, suffered permanent disabling injuries and even more have been psychologically damaged.

Then there are the costs to their families, the mothers, fathers, wives, husbands, the girlfriends and boyfriends and above all, the children, who see the people they hold so dear return, if not in coffins, often with shattered bodies, minds and souls.

Today, as we debate this motion, it is of absolute importance that we remember the human costs of extending this mission. How many more young Canadians will die as a result of the political ideology of the Conservative Party and the political cowardice of the Liberals? How many more bereaved mothers, fathers, wives and husbands will be created? How many more children will grow up without their fathers?

If this motion is adopted, four more rotations of soldiers will serve combat duty in Kandahar. The government has not volunteered who exactly will be sent into harm's way and why would it because to do so would be to make plain exactly who will pay the price with their lives, with their bodies and with their minds based on the motion that we are debating today.

However, I have the information concerning the deployments that are planned for the months and years ahead. The Royal Canadian Regiment, made up mostly of soldiers from London and Petawawa, Ontario and Gagetown, New Brunswick, will leave for Kandahar this August.

The 2 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group based in Petawawa was sent to Fort Bliss, Texas last month as part of their training and will join the Royal Canadian Regiment in Kandahar. If we were to defeat the motion today, they would be the last Canadian soldiers to face death and injury in southern Afghanistan.

We are debating today rotations four, five and six into Afghanistan, those that will be approved by the Liberals and Conservatives when we vote on this motion. Those soldiers will begin training shortly and they will be in Kandahar starting February 2009. Starting February 2009, the Royal 22e Régiment, the Van Doos of Quebec, will go back into the Kandahar battle group.

From February to August 2009, more brave Quebeckers will be wounded or killed. More families will be devastated. After that, the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry, made up of thousands of soldiers from western Canada, will be redeployed in August 2009. More brave soldiers from Edmonton and Winnipeg may be killed or injured. More western Canadian families may be destined to care for broken bodies and broken minds.

In February 2010 the Royal Canadian Regiment will be sent back to Kandahar yet again to continue fighting and perhaps to continue dying. How many more? How many more?

Then in July 2010 the Van Doos will be sent to Kandahar for their third rotation. That is correct, today we are debating whether to send Quebec troops into combat not once more, but twice more.

How, I wonder, will the mothers, fathers, wives and husbands of these soldiers react to this devastating news? And what, again, of the children? We are in fact debating their future today.

I urge both the Conservative and Liberal members to listen. We are contemplating sending soldiers on multiple tours barely 12 months apart. We are asking their families, friends and communities to carry the heaviest of burdens and to do so again, and again, and again. Because of a narrow Conservative viewpoint and Liberal political cowardice, the House will be voting to ask all of these brave, noble, hard-working Canadians to go through hell for three more years.

On April 19 of last year, I asked the House, “How many more casualties must we suffer before the government comes to its senses?” At that time, I was a bit optimistic, because of growing public alarm and the minority government situation, that we would not be debating the continuation of war much longer.

A majority of Liberals, including their leader, voted to end the combat mission by February 2009. However now, to avoid an election, the Liberals are endorsing this war for another three years. We have indeed seen a regression in the House.

Some members have not paid attention to what is happening to those who return from combat. We have all seen the coffins. I have seen the broken bodies and psychological costs paid by those lucky enough to return alive. I have met and cried with mothers. As a mother of three sons, two of whom are police officers, I have some small appreciation of the hell those mothers go through, even if their sons and daughters escape injury.

No one has explained to me why it is necessary to continue combat until 2011 against a foe that we can neither identify nor eliminate. No one in the House can explain to me why Canada's overwhelming role in Afghanistan must be that of combat and war, when every political figure in the region says negotiation is necessary.

No one can explain to me why, despite the claims of the government, every other indication suggests that the security situation in Kandahar is growing worse, that the mission is failing, that we are sending our young women and men on a folly: a futile mission that will achieve nothing but more broken lives.

The only answer is more of the same. By the end of 2011 Canada will have suffered death and injuries in Afghanistan for nearly 10 years.

I implore all members present not to be scared by the threats made by the Prime Minister. We can find a way to help the people of Afghanistan that goes beyond combat, beyond search and destroy. Canada must be part of a political solution to Afghanistan's problems. We must seek the path of peace, not the path of never-ending war.

Those here who vote in favour of this motion will have to explain why they have opted for more war, when peace and negotiation was an option to follow. I would ask them to do as I have: to go to the funerals of soldiers who have died and meet with those who have survived.

I am asking every member of Parliament to talk to Canadians about this war. Millions of ordinary Canadians are opposed to this counter-insurgency mission. The majority of Canadians know instinctively it is wrong and it is simply not working.

I do not trust the government to conduct this war and I do not trust the Prime Minister to find peace. I am not ready to commit thousands more Canadian soldiers and their families to the horrors of a war without end.

The heaviest responsibility of any federal politician is when she or he votes on whether to send soldiers into harm's way. That is why, with a heavy heart, I will be voting no.

Therefore, I move the following amendment to the motion:

That the motion be amended by

A: Deleting all the words from “Whereas” to “goals in the region”, and replace them with:

That this House calls upon the government to begin preparations for the safe withdrawal of Canadian soldiers from the combat mission in Afghanistan with no further mission extensions,

That in the opinion of this House, the government should engage in a robust, diplomatic process to prepare the groundwork for a political solution, under explicit UN direction and authority, engaging both regional and local stakeholders, and ensuring the full respect for international human rights and humanitarian law,

That in the opinion of this House, the government should maintain the current suspension on the transfer of Afghan detainees to Afghan authorities until substantial reforms of the prison system are undertaken,

That in the opinion of this House, the government should provide effective and transparent development assistance under civilian direction consistent with the Afghanistan Compact.

And B:

By deleting all of the words following: “to ensure that Canadians are being provided with ample information on the conduct and the progress of the mission”.

Afghanistan February 25th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I appreciated the comments of the member opposite on the motion to extend the war in Afghanistan. How does she feel about the statements, which even the President of Afghanistan, Mr. Karzai, has made, that negotiations are needed with elements of the insurgency? Does she agree with that? Further, does she see the omission of a path for negotiations in the motion as a glaring omission?

Criminal Code February 25th, 2008

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-512, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (luring a child outside Canada).

Mr. Speaker, to combat child sex tourism, Canada has laws that prosecute Canadians who travel overseas to abuse children. We must be constantly vigilant and it is now time to strengthen and update these laws.

We know that child abuse often starts with luring and my bill would include luring in the list of offences committed abroad.

If my bill were to pass, Canadians would no longer be able to lure children who are living overseas in order to abuse them.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Criminal Code February 25th, 2008

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-511, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (means of communication for child luring).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present this private member's bill to strengthen the laws that protect our children. Children are special and vulnerable and deserve protection against those who would try to exploit or to abuse them.

Luring or grooming is the start of this abuse. Currently, luring a child is a crime only if it is carried out by computer but we know that luring does not always take place in this way. My bill would expand the definition of luring to include grooming by all means, including by cellphone or by mail.

It is time to modernize our child protection laws to ensure that we do protect the safety of our children.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Canadian Forces February 25th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, what we really need is a new dawn or a new start in Afghanistan.

All hon. members of this House support our brave women and men in the armed forces. That support must be more than words. Already the Auditor General reports that 27% of returning soldiers suffer from mental or physical injuries. However, current resources are simply inadequate, even for the current mission.

Will the minister support increased resources for those who suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder or acquired brain injury? Or does he agree with his parliamentary secretary who said that MPs should not meet with the families of those suffering from--

Afghanistan February 25th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, Canadian and U.S. military officials have confirmed it is impossible to have forces deployed in southern Afghanistan and not be engaged in active combat. Most recently, Admiral Fallon of the U.S. Central Command confirmed the impossibility to distinguish between a so-called defensive operation and the current operations ongoing in Kandahar.

Does the Minister of National Defence agree with the admiral when he stated unequivocally that they cannot be in Kandahar and not engaged in combat, or does he agree with his new coalition partners, the Liberals, who say that they can?

Afghanistan February 25th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the Leader of the Opposition as he gave his comments. I also heard the question from my Bloc Québécois colleague.

I would simply take issue with the Leader of the Opposition saying that the government has not asked for help in southern Afghanistan. I think the government has pleaded over and over again for assistance in southern Afghanistan. It is simply that other NATO countries are not willing and do not have the support of their people to go to the south.

I congratulate the leader of the Liberal Party on his flexibility today in turning this motion around. I want to ask him two specific questions.

My first question is, does this motion prevent a future government from adopting a new motion supporting a further extension past 2011?

My second question is, does this motion preclude combat concurrent with the position that the Leader of the Opposition was advocating only a couple of short weeks ago? I have a quote by the Leader of the Opposition who said, “the combat mission in Kandahar must end by February 2009”.

Afghanistan February 25th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the minister's address today. All Canadians want to see the lives of the Afghan people improve but it is a question of how we go about that.

I also listened to his short story from the book A Bed of Red Flowers: In Search of My Afghanistan. I have read the book. She also tells another story in that book, a story of when the Russians came and handed out things to students in Afghanistan. She talked about how they reacted to those gifts, such as school supplies and dresses from the Russian, and how they destroyed them after they were handed to them.

Will the battle group remain in Kandahar after 2009, and will the Canadian Forces no longer be involved in any form of combat after 2009?

Afghanistan February 4th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, the government has blamed the military for not allowing information to be disclosed about Afghan detainees. It has even tried to blame its own lawyers.

The law established by Parliament is very clear. It is the minister who is the ultimate decision maker on information disclosed. Now we learn through La Presse, not through the minister, that Canadians are considering building their own prison in Kabul.

Will the government make it clear today that it is the one hiding information on torture and abuse of detainees and not Canada's military?