Bob Rae

[Afghanistan, March 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, we trust Mr. Iacobucci. We do not trust the government. That is the difference, and there is a big difference.

Mr. Iacobucci does not have the power to subpoena the documents. The test of relevance is a test that the government itself will apply. It is not Mr. Iacobucci who determines what relevance is.

Again, I ask the minister, why not have a public inquiry and give Mr. Justice Iacobucci the powers that he so richly deserves to do the job that Canadians want him to do? That is the question.

[Afghanistan, March 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, we have the utmost confidence in Justice Iacobucci; that is not the question. It is not him that we have a problem with, it is the government. There is a difference between starting a public inquiry and simply finding a new lawyer who does not have the power to do the necessary work.

I have a very simple question: why not have a public inquiry to finally get to the bottom of things?

[Afghanistan, March 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, last week the Prime Minister of Canada said in the House that Justice Iacobucci would conduct a thorough inquiry into the issue of Afghan detainees. At the end of the week, we learned that Justice Iacobucci does not even have the power to subpoena new documents.

Why did the government not do what the Prime Minister promised last week?

[Afghanistan, March 12th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the minister has raised the question of Mr. Justice Iacobucci. It has now been a week since the former judge was asked to do something by the government. We do not know exactly what he was asked to do. We do not have the terms of reference of what he was asked to do.

The other day the Prime Minister referred to it as a thorough inquiry and on the same day the Minister of Justice said that there will be no inquiry, that there would simply be a review.

I would like to ask the minister, when will we finally get the terms of reference of the work that will be done by Mr. Iacobucci?

[Afghanistan, March 12th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I have often thought of the Minister of National Defence as being many things, but a shrinking violet is not one of them. I am sorry he is not in a position to answer the question.

To the same minister, the Minister of Industry, who is now answering questions for the Minister of National Defence on the question of the detainees, how can he explain the following contradiction? The state department report that was issued yesterday with respect to what is happening in 2009 is a public document that can be seen on the Web.

I would like to ask the minister very--

[Afghanistan, March 12th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence. It is now clear that not only in 2006 but even today there are widespread and well-sustained reports of the ill-treatment and indeed torture of prisoners in the Afghan prison system, including detainees from NATO forces.

Why were these reports ignored in 2006 and why are they being ignored today?

[Human Rights, March 12th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the House needs to take note of the continuing political and legal harassment of Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysia's former deputy prime minister and the current leader of the opposition.

Mr. Ibrahim has long been a compelling spokesman for democracy and for human rights in his country, and despite an unjustified prison sentence continues to speak out with courage and with determination. It is important for Canada to send a consistent message on democracy and human rights.

For the record, I hope all members of the House will join me in expressing our solidarity with Mr. Anwar Ibrahim and his continuing legal struggle in Malaysia, and join me in calling on the Government of Canada to express its deep concern to the government of Malaysia about this matter.

[Afghanistan, March 10th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I have very simple questions for the minister.

First, will Mr. Justice Iacobucci be able to review this document, and how much of it can and should be made public? Second, could the minister please tell us what are the terms of reference of the Iacobucci inquiry? Who will be represented at that inquiry? Who will have the ability to make representations to that inquiry? What exactly is that inquiry?

[Afghanistan, March 10th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the same minister. He said in the past, “The truth is there is no credible evidence to suggest that a prisoner was ever tortured”. There now appears to be evidence of photographs being taken in order to ensure that something that happened in the past did not happen again.

If something happened in the past, would the minister not agree with me that that in fact is credible evidence?

[Rights & Democracy, March 4th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that when Mr. Beauregard's reputation was being attacked by members of the board, that minister and the government were silent in his defence. It was a shameful moment. When he asked and begged for assistance, they refused to give it to him.

Those are the facts with respect to the conduct of the Government of Canada and the organization Rights & Democracy. When employees were fired for something called “insubordination”, which means they simply expressed their opinion, the government was silent and allowed it to happen.

Where are rights and democracy for Rights & Democracy?