Bob Dechert

[Libya, June 14th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, Canada has supported and continues to support, many countries around the world with the development of democratic institutions. We will continue to work with all the international partners, the United Nations and the regional partners in that region of the world to support the development of democracy in Libya. When it becomes clear what the situation is following the cessation of hostilities, Canada will certainly be supporting the development of democratic institutions.

[Libya, June 14th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member and I have worked together in the past on the special committee on Afghanistan and I wish to congratulate him on his re-election and his re-appointment as the critic for defence for the New Democratic Party.

The member should know that we are being very clear. Our mission is not regime change. Our mission is to protect the civilians of Libya. As they go forward, it is our view that they will select someone else to lead their country and we will work with the government they choose. The military will not be involved in any way, shape or form in making that change for them. They will make that change themselves.

Our brave men and women are simply there, flying those missions, to protect the civilians from the atrocities that have been allegedly and reportedly committed by the Libyan regime to date.

[Libya, June 14th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, as this is my first opportunity to speak since the occurrence of the last election, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the people of Mississauga—Erindale for the trust they have placed in me in returning me to this place to represent them. I pledge to them today that I will work each and every day to the best of my ability to continue to earn that trust as we go forward over the next four years.

I would also like to take this opportunity to thank my family, friends, supporters and volunteers for their efforts on my behalf in assisting me to return to this place to continue to represent the people of Mississauga—Erindale and the broader city of Mississauga.

I am pleased to participate today in this debate on the motion before the House which seeks the support of members to extend Canada's military engagement in Libya. In March of this year, the House unanimously adopted a motion deploring the ongoing use of violence by the Gadhafi regime against the Libyan people.

Our actions in Libya came after the passage of United Nations Security Council resolutions 1970 and 1973 and sought to take all necessary measures to protect civilians and populated areas under threat of attack.

At that time members from all parties stood together in support of Canada's engagement in Libya and for the men and women of the Canadian Forces. It was not then and should not be now an issue for partisan or political games. It is an issue of human rights and we believe that the horrific violence which is being imposed on the Libyan people must come to an end.

Canada has shown international leadership in Libya and from the outset has pushed for swift and decisive action. Abroad we have worked closely with international and regional partners, including the League of Arab States, the African Union, NATO partners and allies to press the regime to comply with its international obligations.

Canada, along with our NATO allies and partners, has called on the Libyan regime to respect a ceasefire and to adhere to the United Nations Resolution 1973. These calls have thus far been ignored.

We have clearly defined the three military objectives of the mission in Libya. First, an end to all attacks and threats of attack against civilians. Second, the withdrawal of the regime's military and paramilitary forces to their bases. Third, full and unhindered access to humanitarian aid to all those who need it across Libya.

None of these demands has been seriously considered by Gadhafi, even less respected. Gadhafi's attacks on his own population are unacceptable and abhorrent. We believe that he is a clear and present threat to both his people and to the stability in the region, a region which has been undergoing an important transition.

Clearly we have reached the point of no return and we need to be forward-looking. The overwhelming majority of Libyan citizens cannot imagine a future or building a civil society in Libya in association with Gadhafi or his inner circle.

The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court has requested that arrest warrants be issued for Gadhafi, his son, Saif al-Islam Gadhafi and his brother-in-law, Abdullah Senussi. The prosecutor alleged that these individuals have planned and directed crimes against humanity, that is they have organized widespread and systematic attacks on civilian populations, including murder, torture and persecution.

The International Commission of Inquiry conducted an investigation and also concluded that crimes against humanity and war crimes were being committed by the government forces of Libya.

Canada continues to support calls for Gadhafi's inevitable departure. We are encouraged by the increasing international consensus in that regard.

Consistent with our principle of diplomacy, we are engaging more closely with the legitimate representatives of the Libyan people who commit to stand by democratic and human rights principles and values. People in Benghazi, Misrata and other cities are being empowered to take on the responsibility of protecting civilians, developing policy and administrative structures, and providing urgent social services.

These are transformative moments and we should not underestimate how fragile and unique this period is. Canada will therefore enhance its engagement with the national transitional council which we base on a continued commitment to a vigorous democratic transition, respect for the rule of law and transparent governance.

As clearly expressed at the contact group meeting in the UAE, the national transitional council is endeavouring credible efforts to prepare for the future and set Libya on a decisive path of transition. Canada and its members stand ready to offer support for this process, as well as for the political dialogue led by the very capable UN special envoy, al-Khatib.

It is clear that we expect full compliance with the international humanitarian law and human rights as a new and free Libya takes shape. The national transitional council must ensure the protection of all civilians, including migrants and sub-Saharan Africans.

We welcome and fully support the NTC's vision for a democratic Libya and road map for a political transition.

For all these reasons, Canada considers the interim national council the legitimate representative of the Libyan people.

However, let me be clear. Libya is not ours to reconcile, nor is it ours to reconstruct. The reconciliation and reconstruction of Libya is a project that must be led and undertaken by the Libyan people.

As clearly expressed by the Libya contact group, the UN international regional partners and also Canada, will be there to provide help and support. Just as Canadians are actively engaged in protecting civilians from Gadhafi and his regime, we will also be there as they rebuild their country.

Despite progress that has been made, the reasons for which Parliament voted unanimously to endorse military engagement in Libya still exists today; so do the conditions that prompted the UN and NATO to act. Colonel Gadhafi must go. The Libyan people must be protected. For that reason, it is our position that Canada's role in Libya must continue.

Canada stands in solidarity with the Libyan people and is proud that our contributions will help them to determine their own united, independent and sovereign future.

I encourage all members to once again support this motion.

[Syria, June 13th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has taken a clear and principled stand in opposition to the current Syrian regime. We have implemented sanctions designed to punish those currently in power for the violence and atrocities they have perpetrated against their own citizens.

Sadly, the regime has continued its abhorrent ways this weekend, sending military forces into the town of Jisr al-Shugur, to suppress anyone who might oppose it, even peacefully. Thousands of people have fled to other parts of Syria and to neighbouring Turkey.

I would like to commend Turkey for its openness and organization in welcoming these refugees and attending to them in an orderly way. Turkey is a friend of these new refugees and a long-time ally of Canada. Syrian officials are to be soundly condemned for their actions.

Our government will continue to monitor the situation in Syria. Working with our allies, we will continue to act decisively in support of the Syrian people who are seeking greater freedoms and the most basic of human rights through peaceful means.

[Syria, June 8th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, Canada remains gravely concerned about the situation in Syria, and the ongoing use of violence and torture against innocent people. Syria's blatant violations of its own human rights obligations threaten the security of the Middle East, a region which is undergoing important transition.

On May 24, our government took concrete actions against Syria, including various sanctions and imposing a freeze on the assets of those associated with the violent regime. Furthermore, Canada has called in the Syrian chargé d'affaires to raise our concerns and to once again call on Syria to cease the use of force against peaceful demonstrations.

The actions this weekend in the Golan demonstrate a regime that is becoming more isolated and desperate. It is an attempt to distract both domestically and internationally from its own failures and shortcomings, and Israel has every right to defend itself.

Today we hear that Britain and France will be bringing forward a resolution to the United Nations Security Council condemning the repression, and demanding accountability and action.

We will continue to work with our allies in the hopes that the regime will change its ways and end its brutal assault against the Syrian people.

[Business of Supply, March 10th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to my hon. colleague's speech and I did not hear him refer to the comments made by Mr. Robin Sears. His remarks were mentioned several times here today, in fact I mentioned them myself earlier today.

I would like to inform the member, because he may not have been here when I was speaking earlier, that I actually had a personal conversation with Mr. Robin Sears. Mr. Robin Sears is a former national campaign director of the New Democratic Party. He told me that the New Democratic Party did exactly this. It was not just transferring funds from the local level to the national level and back and forth. It was actually transferring funds from the national level to the local level for the purposes of advertising during election campaigns.

I am prepared to swear an affidavit about the comments and the discussions I had with Mr. Sears. I will say clearly what he told me, which is that the New Democratic Party has for many years done exactly what was done in the case we are talking about today.

I wonder if that member would like to comment on those comments.

[Business of Supply, March 10th, 2011]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his remarks, especially the volume of his remarks. It made it easy for me to hear and I did not need to use any amplification. We could probably save some taxpayer dollars on the amplification system.

I want to ask the member if he is familiar with Mr. Robin Sears, the former national campaign director of the New Democratic Party. I had the occasion to speak to Mr. Sears recently in Toronto with respect to the arrangement known as the in and out arrangement. He told me very clearly that the New Democratic Party had in fact been doing exactly that for years, and that all parties did it. He did not understand what the big fuss was all about. He said on the CTV News channel on February 25, 2011:

It's a load of nonsense—the guys at Elections Canada have a few bricks short of a load. Every party plays games with moving money around, have always done, will always do. What's a national ad, what's a local ad? It's nonsense. It's time we got back to things Canadians care about.

This is a direct quote from the former national campaign manager of the New Democratic Party. Perhaps the hon. member could comment on that.

[Citizen's Arrest and Self-defence Act, March 7th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I know the member met with her constituent, Mr. Chen, and other shop owners in her constituency. She is sincerely trying to amend the law to fix what everyone recognizes are anomalies in the law.

In her comments, the member asked why we need to amend the right to self-defence and the right to defence of property. With respect, I think she answered her own question in her remarks.

The member then went on to describe some of the facts in the Mr. Chen, Lucky Moose Market case. She rightly mentioned that he was charged with assault and forcible confinement. What happened in that case was that he chased the perpetrator down the laneway, arrested him, tied him up and put him in the back of a van. Therefore, he was charged with assault and with confinement. He needs to know that the provisions of the law that he was charged with are: What right did he have to defend his property; what actions could he take to defend his property; and what actions, in a more broader case, could he take to defend himself.

I wonder if the member could comment on that.

[Citizen's Arrest and Self-defence Act, March 7th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, if the member actually took the time to speak to shopkeepers, she would understand that in the vast majority of cases they are actually defending themselves in addition to defending their property. They need to know what they can do in order to protect their personal health. Also, they need to know what steps they can take to protect their property. These things are all intertwined.

If members actually take the time to think about what is going on and what shopkeepers need to do when they see somebody come into a store and take something off the shelf, they will realize that we are taking nine very confusing provisions of the Criminal Code, section 34 to section 42, and section 494, and we are simplifying them into three provisions that everyone will be able to understand.

[Citizen's Arrest and Self-defence Act, March 7th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, that is a good question. What is reasonable really has to depend on the circumstances. It is very difficult to say generally what would be reasonable. In the specific case that was a catalyst for this bill, the court actually found that the period of time was not really in question because the perpetrator was actually in the process of perpetrating a secondary crime at the time the citizen's arrest was made.

However, we have made it clear that in addition to a reasonable period of time, it must also be not feasible in the circumstances for the police to be called in to make the arrest, which is of course what we want to happen in the vast majority of cases. However, when that is not feasible and police are not available, it would be reasonable for a citizen to make an arrest.

If the member is a lawyer, he may know that Lord Denning, a famous member of the House of Lords, said that what is reasonable is what is in the mind of the man on the Clapham omnibus. If I could put that in Canadian terms, it is what citizens on the Burnhamthorpe Road West bus in my riding or on the GO train going to work every morning would think is a reasonable period of time in which they could make an arrest in order to protect their property.