Denis Coderre

[Afghanistan, February 25th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I do not want to speak in sound bites with an eye to an upcoming election campaign. We need to be above all that. When we are talking about Canada's role in the world, we need to be bigger than that. I therefore do not want to say that we will be on Quebec's side, see what the polls say, and all that.

I do know one thing: the Liberal Party of Canada said that the mission had to change and focus on reconstruction. We even talked about rotation. I was one of those who talked about it.

I have a question for the member for Saint-Jean. I have often heard him say that he would agree to a rotation, but that Canada would have to go into other regions of Afghanistan. Am I to understand now that the Bloc has reversed its position? Does the member want the troops not only to leave Kandahar but to withdraw from Afghanistan completely? Or has he changed his mind, too?

[Afghanistan, February 25th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I share the concerns of the Minister of National Defence regarding the situation in Afghanistan. I too actually visited the area and we saw that we need to do things differently. We support the Afghanistan Compact. We must focus much more on development and reconstruction. The purpose of today's debate, however, is also to seek clarification. It is important for us to take the time to debate this, but it is also important to clearly understand the issue since all Canadians are now watching this debate.

The minister said earlier that it was not a Liberal mission or a Conservative mission, but rather a Canadian mission. In fact, it is a NATO mission, in which Canada is participating. It is crucial that the wording of the motion presented reflects very clearly the government's official position on certain concepts. The official opposition believes that the mission must change.

I would like the minister to explain to us, in his own words, what he means by the word “rotation”.

Does that mean to support or does it mean to replace? If we need to do that mission, we will need to ensure we are sharing the burden, which means that other countries will need to step up to the plate. Therefore, I would like a definition of “rotation” from the Minister of National Defence.

[Criminal Code, February 12th, 2008]

moved for leave to introduce Bill S-213, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (lottery schemes).

Mr. Speaker, once again, I am pleased to sponsor Bill S-213, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (lottery schemes), concerning video lottery terminals.

Pursuant to Standing Order 86.2, I wish to state that this bill is in the same form as S-211, which was before the House in the first session, and I ask that this bill be reinstated.

As reported in the news this morning, more and more tragic suicides are happening because of gambling problems. In light of what we have learned about this, I think it is high time we addressed this issue. Members of the other place have done excellent work, and now it is our turn to move forward with this well-crafted bill.

(Motion deemed adopted and bill read the first time)

[Afghanistan, February 7th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the government is still shirking its responsibilities.

Justice Mactavish also said:

Furthermore, in the event that transfers do resume...we do not know what additional safeguards may be put into place to protect detainees while they are in the hands of the Afghan authorities.

What will it take for this government to tell us the truth about this scandal that is marring our reputation on the world stage because of their insignificance, their incompetence and their dishonesty?

[Afghanistan, February 7th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, when Justice Mactavish dismissed today the injunction sought by Amnesty International and the B.C. Civil Liberties Association on the Afghan detainees transfer, she clearly stated that there are:

--very real concerns as to the effectiveness of the steps that have been taken thus far to ensure that detainees transferred by the Canadian Forces to the custody of Afghan authorities are not mistreated.

Since torture is a serious issue in Afghan controlled prisons, will the government notify Parliament and Canadians before transfers are resumed?

[Afghanistan, February 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the government keeps talking about an open and honest debate, but every answer we get from it seems to be misleading or simply incorrect.

This is very simple. C'est facile. Écoutez bien là. Canadians deserve to know the truth. Is the government planning to build a Canadian wing inside the prison of Pul-e-Charkhi in Kabul? Is the government planning a Canadian Guantanamo, yes or no?

[Afghanistan, February 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday we witnessed another pathetic performance from the worst Minister of Foreign Affairs that Canada has seen since the current Minister of National Defence. Once again, he misled the House. Contrary to what he said yesterday, his Defence buddy told us that David Mulroney, the Associate Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, was looking at the possibility of building a Canadian wing inside an Afghan prison.

Why does he not have the courage to tell us that his government wants to create a Canadian Guantanamo in Pul-e-Charkhi, in Kabul?

[Afghanistan, February 4th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is out in left field. I asked him whether the Minister of National Defence met with the governor. He should re-read his notes.

We learn today that the government would like to build a Canadian wing inside an existing Afghan prison at Pul-e-Charkhi in Kabul. This is the same place where the Americans built theirs. The Afghans call this place Guantanamo. This is yet another secret policy shift without any consideration of or consultation with Parliament or our NATO allies.

Would this finally ensure that the Afghan detainees are not tortured? Who would be in charge of this new Canadian Guantanamo?

[Afghanistan, February 4th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, right from the start, this government has been giving evasive and incorrect responses to serious questions about how the Conservatives are dealing with Afghan detainees in Kandahar.

The Minister of National Defence said in this House that he addressed the issue with the governor of Kandahar during a face to face meeting. The minister will have to make up a new story; the governor himself has said that he does not recall ever meeting the minister.

We want to hear the Minister of National Defence's latest version. Who is telling the truth: the minister or the governor of Kandahar?

[Public Works and Government Services, January 31st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to note that he said there was no meeting with any military arms company.

We also understand that Léo Housakos, a friend of Dimitri Soudas and the Prime Minister, engaged in influence peddling although Mr. Housakos was not officially registered as a lobbyist. So he acted illegally. That did not stop the Prime Minister from appointing him to the board of directors of Via Rail, for services rendered to the Conservatives.

Does the Prime Minister plan on keeping his press secretary and will he let Léo Housakos keep his seat at Via Rail?