Bob Dechert

[Foreign Affairs, February 25th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, under the provisions of Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the following treaties entitled, one, Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United Arab Emirates for Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy, done at Ottawa on September 18, 2012; two, Protocol Amending the Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the People's Republic of China on Air Transport, done at Zhuhai on November 13, 2012; and three, Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America for the Sharing of Visa and Immigration Information, done at Ottawa on December 13, 2012.

An explanatory memorandum is included with each treaty.

[Foreign Affairs, February 25th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has spoken out, loudly and clearly, on this very important issue of human rights. He voiced our concerns on the lack of accountability for the serious allegations of war crimes and the lack of reconciliation with the Tamil community, and said the events that have taken place since the end of the civil war are unacceptable.

We have relayed the Government of Canada's position both to the high commissioner and directly to the minister of foreign affairs for Sri Lanka. Canada will continue to speak loudly and clearly on behalf of human rights around the world, especially in Sri Lanka.

[Office of Religious Freedom, February 25th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to applaud our government regarding the announcement made last week to establish an office of religious freedom within the Department of Foreign Affairs. The new office will have the responsibility to enshrine and promote the freedom of religion or belief as a Canadian foreign policy priority.

Many of my constituents in Mississauga are excited to see the launch of this new office, as it shows our government's continued dedication to promoting this fundamental freedom and to addressing the concerns of its citizens.

The office will be an important vehicle through which Canada can advance fundamental Canadian values, including freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law worldwide.

At the same event, the Prime Minister announced that Dr. Andrew Bennett will be heading up this new office. I had the pleasure to sit down with Dr. Bennett last week. It was apparent to me that he is a man of principle and deep conviction. I would encourage all members of this House to support the work of Dr. Bennett as he heads up Canada's new office of religious freedom.

[Questions on the Order Paper, February 12th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the government House leader I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[Foreign Affairs, February 8th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for the question and for the good work he does in the Canada-U.K. Interparliamentary Association.

Canadians who have visited London may know that our High Commission enjoys a place of privilege in Canada House on Trafalgar Square. What many people may not realize is that our mission is currently split between Canada House and another aging building miles away.

We will be expanding Canada House, taking over the building immediately adjacent and consolidating the High Commission's operations in one spot. This will save taxpayers money and will provide better service to Canadians. This exciting project will improve our operations in one of the world's greatest cities.

[Foreign Affairs, February 8th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, as my hon. colleague said, the Leader of the Opposition showed yesterday that he wants to take Canada back to failed foreign policy approaches.

Canada will no longer go along just to get along. We have consistently protected and promoted freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law around the world. Our government has a principled foreign policy approach. Under our government, Canada no longer panders to every dictator with a vote at the United Nations.

The NDP leader would kill trade agreements and hurt Canadian exports. He would also send Canadian taxpayers' dollars to developing countries without any plan to achieve results.

[Conflict in Mali, February 5th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, earlier this evening we heard a lot from the opposition about how the Canadian government has somehow abandoned Africa, and yet statistics show that since the time that the Liberal member who just asked the question was a minister in the Canadian government, the Government of Canada has doubled its assistance to Africa. Last year nearly half of all CIDA's assistance was focused on sub-Saharan Africa. In 2011-12, Africa received 62% of the agency's total food security programming, 60% of its agricultural support and 63% of its health support.

I wonder if my hon. colleague would comment on those statistics and say why he thinks the opposition is confused about the Canadian government's commitment to Africa.

[Conflict in Mali, February 5th, 2013]

Mr. Chair, I listened intently to my friend when he answered the question about what we could possibly do and he said “lots of things”. We could actually do lots of things. NGOs could do lots of things. The government could do lots of things. When he finally arrived at specifying one thing, he specified an election observation mission, and that is interesting. The country he was referring to was Ukraine, which is just a tiny bit different than Mali. There are not a lot of terrorists running around in Ukraine today. I am not sure how we would send 500 Canadians to Mali and protect them. We would probably have to send a lot of troops there to protect the Canadian observation mission to observe that election.

Some form of international observation mission I am sure will be suggested and Canada will certainly consider it when that is suggested by the appropriate international organization. I do not think sending 500 Canadian civilians with a lot of Canadian soldiers to protect them from the al-Qaeda terrorists makes a lot of sense right now.

[Conflict in Mali, February 5th, 2013]

Mr. Chair, I would point out to my hon. colleague that I rose very gently to my feet to ask him this question.

I listened to his speech, and I am trying very hard to understand what it is exactly the NDP wants the government to do. I am instructed by comments his colleague, the NDP critic for foreign affairs, made on January 8, on the Power & Politics with Evan Solomon show, where he said, “We would be very different. This is what the NDP would be doing right now”. That was on January 8, just a few days after the French troops landed in Mali. He said, “First of all, we'd be engaged with peacekeeping, peace-building”.

Evan Solomon said, “So, is it troops on the ground?”

He said, “We would have a conversation with our partners to say 'what can Canada do?'”

Evan Solomon said again, “but you would consider...”.

The NDP foreign affairs critic replied, “[A]ll options are on the table”.

If they are not considering boots on the ground, Canadian soldiers on the ground in Mali in some way, what exactly did his colleague, the critic for foreign affairs, mean? Perhaps he could explain it to us and enlighten the Canadian people on that point.

[Conflict in Mali, February 5th, 2013]

Mr. Chair, I thank my hon. colleague for his very cogent and well-thought-out speech. He takes us through what is essential history for the region.

The member knows that France was formerly a colonial government in the region, and that the French military has three bases in the region. I wonder if the member could take us through how quickly France responded to the UN resolution and how quickly Canada responded to France's request to assist.