Adam Vaughan

[Rouge National Urban Park Act, October 8th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, putting aside the very strange comment we just heard from the opposite side, my question is not about whether the Conservatives do or do not support hunting and do or do not support logging. Apparently they do not anymore. That is news, I guess, to many of their party followers.

The issue that I think concerns us all is the environmental standards that have to do with the quality of water, the quality of soil, and the quality of the natural infrastructure.

Does the member share the concern of our party that the federal standards do not speak to water quality and the quality of the biosphere and to whether some of the runoff from local farms may in fact damage the quality of the natural environment we seek to protect with the park designation?

[Military Contribution Against ISIL, October 7th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, as a party, we have supported the need to get military intelligence and the need to train on-the-ground indigenous militia to defend both the refugee camps and national interests, as has been eloquently expressed by the member opposite.

The concern, and the reason that my party is standing in opposition to air strikes, is that we do not know how to measure their success and we do not know their exact mission.

I appreciate that the government cannot define targets and cannot define in debate exactly what the nature of the mission is. However, I think it is a fair question and Canadians deserve an answer on exactly how the success of that mission will be measured. It is the success of that mission that will allow those service personnel and aircraft to return to this country to be deployed elsewhere if needed.

How is the government prepared to measure success and how will it report that success back to the House of Commons? More importantly, what will define that success on an ongoing basis?

[Military Contribution Against ISIL, October 7th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I will preface my question with the same remarks. We share the concerns that the member's party has spoken to around the effectiveness of air strikes and also the damage that air strikes can do. As a result, we are taking a position in opposition to using air strikes as a way to resolve the significant challenges in this part of the world.

I am asking the question again through the Speaker. The NDP amendment to the motion says it wishes to transport and supply weapons to people on the ground in the area. The previous member from the same party said they are going to transport those weapons and arm people they met in Turkey over the summer.

That still does not define exactly which forces the NDP seeks to arm, what weapons it seeks to ship, how those weapons would be used, or what accountability there is to make sure we do not just dump more weapons into a troubled area and find them in the wrong hands.

Which groups does the NDP want to arm in this part of the world?

[Military Contribution Against ISIL, October 7th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat a question I asked of another member who rose in the House today.

We share the member's apprehension about bombing. We have clearly seen that bombing one's way to a solution in that part of the world has not led to problems resolving themselves.

We are onside with the call for a much stronger response on the refugee issue both inside the area of conflict and in neighbouring countries, as well as bringing refugees to this country.

The amendment that the NDP has moved raises the issue of transporting weapons. I asked the question earlier and I am looking for an answer. To whom would these weapons be transported? How would these weapons be used? What accountability would be put in place to make sure these weapons do not fall into the hands of yet another group that then causes even more trouble in that part of the world? How would transporting more weapons to that part of the world solve this problem? If that party is opposed to military action, how would those weapons be used in a non-military way?

[Military Contribution Against ISIL, October 7th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, our party and the member's party share a perspective on the urgency and the need for a much more substantial humanitarian gesture and engagement in protecting in particular the refugee camps along the Turkish border. We also share that party's apprehension and worry that the bombings will not result in either an immediate peace, a lasting peace, or a situation stabilized to the point where human rights are respected.

The amendment that the NDP moved calls for the shipment of arms. I am curious as to what arms would be shipped, to whom they would be shipped, if not shipped to some depot, who would they be intended for and how would they be expected to be used?

[Military Contribution Against ISIL, October 6th, 2014]

Except when they come to Canada.

[Military Contribution Against ISIL, October 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest as the member opposite described the extraordinary hardship that refugees are enduring as they get dislocated and look for new places to live in a very difficult part of the world.

However, my question is a very simple one. When refugees come to this country, the government across the aisle denies social assistance and health care. It does not have a housing program that actually puts the refugees under a roof with a subsidy. In fact, a study has been released in Toronto that shows that when refugees come to this country, their mental health status deteriorates. If the government is so concerned about the status of refugees, why does it treat them so deplorably when they land in this country?

[Combating Counterfeit Products Act, October 2nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the opposition party mused about a Liberal position around trying to assume some individual responsibility in this situation. I would like to ask the member this question.

Does he not think that curbing demand by individuals is also a way of managing this issue? In particular, in the riding I represent, many artists, musicians and writers suffer from copyright infringement and the transmission of that copyright across borders. Does he not think that taking steps to somehow curb the market and the demand may also be a way of protecting income and copyrights for individual artists who are suffering because it is only a systemic approach, a corporate approach, to managing this situation?

[Canada-Korea Economic Growth and Prosperity Act, September 25th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, it was nice to hear the member reference the 100-mile diet.

One of the sectors within the 100 miles of the riding that the member opposite represents is the auto sector. That is the one sector that is the most nervous, and worry continues to circle it as we talk about this trade deal.

We support this trade deal, but does the member opposite not realize that, by not supporting the auto sector as strongly as the government could have, the very industries he talks about in his riding may lose customers at home as auto workers may lose their jobs in a very fragile market?

[National Defence, September 25th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence and the Minister of Foreign Affairs committed publicly that the government would engage and inform members of this Parliament about any extension or changes to the deployment of Canadian Forces members in Iraq. The best way to inform opposition members and all Canadians is to hold a debate in Parliament.

Before extending the current mission on October 5 and before any larger military role is decided, will the minister inform Parliament what the U.S. has requested and will he commit to holding that presentation in Parliament?