Bob Rae

[Committees of the House, November 27th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the third report of the Special Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan.

The committee wishes to bring to the attention of the House its belief that a breach of privilege has occurred in the context of its study on the transfer of Afghan detainees.

[Afghanistan, November 27th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the problem with the minister's answer is very simple. The government has all the information and is refusing to give it to us. We do not have access to the documents we need to find the truth.

So far, it is clear that the government is refusing to disclose the information and also refusing to face a huge problem, which is that for more than a year, the Canadian government did not conduct an investigation, but just tried to record—

[Afghanistan, November 27th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, what the minister would now appear to be saying is that in 2006 there were problems, which is exactly what Mr. Colvin was saying, which is exactly what others were saying.

However, the problem is that it was not possible for Canada to investigate independently any allegations. Department of Foreign Affairs officials said “We don't investigate allegations. We record them”.

In light of that fact, could the minister explain why it took a year and a half for his government to develop the political will to finally get the evidence?

[Afghanistan, November 27th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, in 2006 the United States Department of State noted a human rights report in which authorities allegedly continued to routinely torture and abuse detainees. Torture and abuse consisted of pulling out fingernails and toenails, burning with hot oil, beatings, sexual humiliation and sodomy.

A year later the United Nations Secretary-General told the Security Council that initial findings noted that ill treatment and torture had been used to force confessions.

Would the minister not at least agree that in 2006 reports of widespread abuse were available to the Government of Canada?

[Privilege, November 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague from Winnipeg South Centre for a very fine presentation, and my good friend from Mount Royal with respect to the interventions he made.

I want to read into the record a couple of things. I know a number of papers have been read into the record but a recent editorial in the Toronto Star read as follows:

Through a deliberate twisting of the facts, the flyers suggested that the Liberals are anti-Semites.

It goes on to say:

What is really grating about these vile flyers is that they were delivered at taxpayers' expense....

A third quote is as follows:

[The Prime Minister] and his party should repudiate the flyers and apologize for having distributed them.

I think my friends opposite need to reflect on what has happened. I know we all get engaged in partisan exchange and in very vigorous political fights. As somebody who has been through a few of those myself and having delivered a couple of blows, some of them unfair, over 30 years, I think we would all say that there are times and moments when we might have wished that we had not said something that we had said.

I think this is a time for all of us to reflect on a couple of things. The first is the issue of substance before us, that is to say the content of the leaflet that was distributed. I find that I am in agreement with the comments made by the Toronto Star with respect to the document. It is vile and it associates the Liberal Party with anti-Semitism.

When we come to understand a little better the history and meaning of that terrible phenomenon in world history, we need to understand how deeply wrong it is for a political party to accuse another political party of hosting or encouraging any such views. To put it in more accurate terms, anti-Semitism is Jew hatred and the suggestion that members of the Liberal Party engage in that kind of activity is, frankly, nauseating.

The second is the question of these flyers. I am happy to engage in a discussion with my colleague from Windsor—Tecumseh with respect to the issue of what we should do about the ten percenters, but if anybody thinks that this can be allowed to continue at taxpayer expense, they are sadly mistaken.

[Afghanistan, November 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the fact remains that partially and heavily blacked-out documents with key information missing are not disclosure. Non-answers in the House are not disclosure. Rhetorical personal attacks, such as the minister has just indulged in, are not disclosure and do not amount to disclosure.

We need to get at the truth. Why is the government afraid of a public inquiry to get at the truth? What is it about the truth that the government is afraid of?

[Afghanistan, November 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the only party that has attacked the credibility of a public servant serving in Afghanistan is the Conservative Party of Canada in its attack on Mr. Colvin. The Conservatives are the only ones who have done it.

We now have the spectacle of Mr. Colvin, the three generals yesterday and, no doubt, Mr. Mulroney today all having full and complete access to documents that members of Parliament cannot see. We are barred from having access to information the government has full control of and that ministers, and even retired generals, can review.

We are asked to do our work blindfolded and in the dark. Does the minister not realize that only a public inquiry—

[Afghanistan, November 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government has shut down the Military Police Complaints Commission. It has refused to renew the commissioner's mandate. It is obstructing the hearing of witnesses and is telling Richard Colvin that if he cooperates with the House committee, he could end up in jail.

How is this compatible with seeking the truth behind allegations of mistreatment in Afghan prisons?

[Afghanistan, November 25th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the simple fact is that the government is not willing to let the documents come out that will allow us to do our job. That is what is at stake.

Also, the current director general of DFAIT, with respect to the Afghan task force, said this about how they go about doing their business: “We don't investigate those allegations. We simply record them”. He went on to say that having recorded them, they then passed them on to the Government of Afghanistan.

How can the Conservatives possibly hope to get to the bottom of any allegation if they take such a passive attitude to the information that is coming forward?

[Afghanistan, November 25th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I have just learned that Mr. Colvin has advised members of the committee that he is not in a position to provide the committee with the documents that he undertook to provide them. He has been told by Department of Justice lawyers, through his employer, the Department of Foreign Affairs, not to disclose those documents to members of the committee.

How can the minister continue to stand in this place and talk with such piety about who is censoring what and who is restricting what, when it is very clear that the only party in the House that is restricting evidence coming before the committee and coming before the House of Commons is the Conservative Party of Canada and the Government of Canada?