House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was debate.

Last in Parliament May 2004, as Conservative MP for Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Aldershot (Ontario)

Won his last election, in 2000, with 41% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Kosovo April 12th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, uranium bullets have been used in military hardware by all sides for many years. It is because the uranium is heavy and gets higher penetration. We should put that aside because it is a red herring in this debate.

I listened very carefully to the member's speech and I appreciated everything he said. Does he see any parallels, any relationships, between what is happening to the Albanians in Kosovo to what happened to the Armenians in 1915 as a result of Turkey and the first world war?

Kosovo April 12th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, the member spoke of a motion that would involve a vote in the House. During question period he proposed a vote that pertained to the deployment of ground troops. The Prime Minister, while not rejecting the possibility of a vote out of hand, did evade a direct reply.

In my constituency office during the Croatian struggles and the Bosnian struggles I had all kinds of representations and anger on both sides. If the Prime Minister had said there would be a vote on ground troops, is it not true that every one of us would be subject to pressure and intimidation from both sides in our ridings?

Kosovo April 12th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the hon. member on an excellent speech. I felt it came very much from her heart, but I have a question.

I alluded to the Palestinian situation in my remarks. What happened after the expulsion of the Palestinians was that they remained in refugee camps for decades. Indeed, they are still in refugee camps.

What does the hon. member think is a reasonable length of time to have the Kosovo Albanians in refugee camps? If there is a limit to that time, does she suggest some other solution other than refugee camps?

Kosovo April 12th, 1999

Madam Speaker, had it not been for the United Nations at the time of the expulsion of the Palestinians from the West Bank in Gaza during the six day war, they would have all died. The member should know that the Middle East does not have the nicest climate in the world. People die very quickly in deserts. People probably die quicker in deserts than traversing parts of Turkey in the direction of Syria and Iraq.

If we say that people died as part of the expulsion in Turkey as a result of genocide, we have to ascribe to the Israelis the intention of genocide. I am not prepared to do that because for centuries countries have believed that it was legally and ethically permissible to expel ethnic groups in times of war and that it was not genocide. Genocide was something such as in Rwanda when machetes were used or in Nazi Germany when ovens were used.

If the member makes a parallel with what happened in the former Ottoman Empire, he has to apply that parallel to Israel, to the Boar War and all kinds of other examples. From my knowledge I do not accept that what happened in the former Ottoman Empire was genocide.

The whole point of my speech was that we should get away from that type of language. We should admit that ethnic cleansing is the wrong thing to do under any circumstances as it creates bitterness and hate. We should be looking for forgiveness, atonement and forgetfulness in these instances so that we can live together in the future. That is the way to go.

I think I have answered the other question asked by the member.

Kosovo April 12th, 1999

Madam Speaker, this is an open debate. When I speak here, as I was asked by my Prime Minister who asked all of us to speak, I speak from my heart. I speak as I see the situation.

I hope that not only is my leadership listening but that the world is listening. We are one of the few open democracies. Each one of us can stand and not parrot the party line or beat our chests and say the government must be right because it is a war. It is not that at all. We have to speak and try to contribute to finding solutions in this debate.

In my opinion we should at least pause the bombing, give talk an opportunity to take hold again and give the Serbs dignity. We can never stop a war when we take away a people's dignity. This is why I am so afraid of NATO's propaganda.

Genocide and ethnic cleansing are very different. When we talk about genocide we talk about what Hitler did. When we talk about atrocities in Kosovo we do not know what has happened. It may be the normal atrocities—and they are horrible enough—that occur in civil wars. Genocide is something entirely different. We must be careful of the language and we must not be trapped by it. We must speak up in the House to make our government know that we appreciate these distinctions.

Kosovo April 12th, 1999

Madam Speaker, I would like to speak of peace, not war. I would like to speak of hope, not despair. Indeed, despite the fact that we have talked only of war, of violence and of bombing, I think there is a glimmer of hope. I saw that glimmer, at least I believe it was a glimmer, on an airplane coming from Winnipeg on Friday when I was reading the Winnipeg Free Press .

There was a page on the war in Kosovo which had the usual headlines about bombing, troops moving, feeling the pain of the refugees and so forth. However, what was interesting about this page was the picture at the centre of it. The picture showed a soldier in full uniform bending over a baby. The cutline read: “An Israeli soldier covers a Kosovo refugee baby with an army blanket after it was born in a field hospital in Macedonia”. It was an Israeli soldier.

The page also contained a sidebar story detailing which countries had decided to take Kosovo refugees. One of the countries that had already taken refugees was Turkey. It had taken 7,000 refugees and, as I understand, intends to take more.

I submit that there is a glimmer of hope there. There is a connection between the mention of Turkey taking refugees and the Israeli soldier in the field in Macedonia. Those two countries were the scenes, and some might say the perpetrators, of two of the other great ethnic cleansings of the 20th century. Those are two out of three, the third being the holocaust.

In 1915, Turkey, the former Ottoman Empire, was at war with Russia and the other allied powers because it was on the side of Germany. In an effort to quell an uprising of Armenians who were siding with the Russians it banished some 700,000 Armenians. It transported them forcibly out of their homes, villages and cities and sent them to Lebanon, Syria and Iraq. This occurred at a time when there was no United Nations and when there was no infrastructure to look after such a massive movement of people, many of whom died.

In 1967 there was a six day war against Egypt and the other Arab powers in the region in which the Israelis were in a fight for their lives. After six days, when it was clear the Israelis were winning, they shelled Palestinian villages. I remember the consequence of that. I remember seeing the photographs in the newspapers and seeing the television clips, which were very similar to what we are seeing now. There were hordes of Palestinian refugees crossing bridges into Jordan.

Here is the hope. Remember that it was the former Ottoman Empire that actually perpetrated the expulsion of the Armenians, but Turkey and Israel have deeply drank of the bitterness of those expulsions. Neither country would ever say they were genocides. They would say it was necessary because they were in a state of war. But look at what has happened over the years, at how big a price Israel and Turkey have both paid in bitterness. The whole Middle East destabilized and Lebanon, one of the jewels of the Middle East, was destroyed because of the expulsion of the Palestinians and the conflict that resulted.

When I see that the Israelis are in Macedonia because of the refugees and when I see Turkey putting out a hand to Albanian refugees, I say that is a recognition of the deepness of the bitterness and of the destabilization it causes. It is a recognition and an atonement. It is a beginning where we can hope there will be some forgiveness on the part of the Palestinians of the Israelis, on the part of the Armenians of the Turks and the other way around. So there is hope. I hope that is something we can look forward to coming out of this.

What of Kosovo? What makes it different from what happened in the former Ottoman Empire and in Israel? What is different is how it parallels the other great ethnic cleansing, what happened in Nazi Germany to the Jews. In Germany, as in Kosovo, a government was expelling innocent civilians with force and terror. Germany was not at war with its Jewish population. Kosovo was not at war with the majority of the ethnic Albanians. We admit that it did have guerrilla problems, but it was not at war with one million Kosovars. Yet it was expelling them. The consequence has been the destabilization of the region.

When we talk about legalities we have to remember that countries and groups of countries have always reserved the right to take military action when there is a major destabilization of some region of interest that can lead to further wars. NATO was quite correct to enter into the Kosovo situation because already 400,000 ethnic Albanians had been expelled and there were another 500,000 to go. It had to act.

There certainly was the moral imperative in the humanitarian sense that the regime in Belgrade had no right to expel 90% of the population of Kosovo. Quite apart from that, NATO had to act because we could expect the same destabilization in Kosovo that we saw in the Middle East with the Palestinian refugees.

Once having acted, what is next? It has not unfolded as we would have hoped. Belgrade has not backed down. We have an impasse. The last thing in the world we want to do is to send in Canadian ground forces, or any ground forces for that matter. We must remember to look at the situation from the perspective of the Serbians. All through history it has been a solution of many governments including Britain and the United States. When they have a problem they have ethnically cleansed the region that is the problem. They do not see that they are doing anything that is particularly wrong.

I will give a few examples. In the Boer War the British were in South Africa and they could not quell the Boer farmers. What did they do? They rounded up all the civilians, all the wives and children, and put them into concentration camps. That is how the British solved the Boer War question.

There have been many examples in the past but they belong in the past. The problem right now is that what is wrong in Serbia is that it is repeating the past. We have to convince the people in Serbia that is not the way to do it. They can no longer use the tool of ethnic cleansing.

We must be very careful because this is not necessarily genocide. We know what genocide is. It is what occurred in the Holocaust when the state systematically murdered people. To expel people as is occurring in Kosovo, if we want to make a fine point of it, is exactly the same as what happened with the Ottoman Empire and exactly the same as what happened with the Israelis. They would rightly be offended if we suggested that was a case of genocide.

On the other hand atrocities do occur. Whenever there is a civil war, whenever there is an expulsion of people, atrocities do occur. We have to give the Serbs credit for wanting to preserve what they think is a legitimate ethnic identity based on territory. We are very wrong if we do not give them some opportunities to find a way out, to join the rest of the world, and to appreciate that the tactics they are using are wrong.

If we send in ground troops, every Serb soldier will believe he is fighting for a just cause and will become a martyr. We will be making martyrs out of criminals. That would be the wrong tactic.

What is the solution? I do not know but I can suggest there is a key. I believe that key is Russia. We should be pleading with Russia to intervene to try to persuade the Serbs that there is a way out of the impasse, that there is dignity. I do not know what it is, but I know that we cannot just simply say that these are the five conditions and we will bomb the daylights out of them if they do not agree. I do not think that is the way to do it. I think that is the message coming from the leadership of NATO. I hope it is not the message that is being delivered by this country.

I think the bombing has to stop or at least pause. I support going into Kosovo. There is no doubt we had to do it for the reason of stability in the region and for humanitarian reasons. To keep on bombing is not the answer. Diplomacy is the answer. We should ask the country with the greatest experience in that region that is a great power to intervene on our behalf to try to find a solution, and I believe that is Russia.

Kosovo April 12th, 1999

Madam Speaker, actually I thought we were having a rather good debate. I have been here a very long time. Many members on all sides of the House have contributed very significantly and very well. I hope the government is taking note because many points of view have been presented.

I asked a question earlier of the hon. member's leader pertaining to the promise of a vote before Canada put ground forces into Kosovo, if Canada were to do so. I would like to observe one of the difficulties of promising a vote. When the time comes maybe there will be a vote. Indeed I rather hope there will be a vote. Between now and then, if we promise that putting in ground forces depends on a vote, every one of us would be subject in our constituency offices to pressure from the two sides in this conflict.

I remind the member that the sides in this conflict are extremely bitter. We are talking about conflict possibly leading to the killing with Canadian troops of people's relatives in Serbia or in Kosovo. The reason we cannot say that putting in ground forces depends on a vote is that we would be subject to not only intense pressure but possibly even intimidation in our ridings. It is very dangerous.

I would prefer that we set aside the question of a promise of a vote if we deployed ground forces. Let the government do what it must do when the time comes, should the time come, and I dearly hope the time never comes that we use ground troops.

Kosovo April 12th, 1999

Madam Speaker, would my colleague support the use of ground troops in the former Yugoslavia if necessary?

Division No. 363 March 25th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, I am the a member who said “so what”. On issues like this one, issues involving the lives of people and understanding justice issues, we should not conduct opinion polls in order to enact legislation. Those people, the Mulroney Tories, were the ones who tried to run the government and the country by opinion polls.

The bill got due process in committee. It heard from witnesses who found fault with it. I suggest that members of the Reform Party accept parliament as it is. Members of parliament have spoken to the bill, so let us leave it and move on.

Division No. 363 March 25th, 1999

So what?