Jean Chrétien

[Iraq, March 17th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, a year ago I said to the President of the United States that Canada would intervene in a conflict with Iraq only if we were to have a resolution authorizing intervention by the Security Council. They have known my position and the position of the government since the first day. We have always stuck with that position. Today we have the conclusion that the Security Council does not have a resolution to authorize action, so we are not participating.

[Iraq, March 17th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, last week there was a very important development. The Americans, the British and the Spanish introduced a resolution in the Security Council to authorize action, and it was not voted in, so they have superposed this resolution over 1441, and they did not get the authorization from the Security Council.

[Iraq, March 17th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, we have a certain number of people who are in exchange with the British and the American troops and they are doing some activities there. It is not in a combat situation. I think that they should respect the undertakings they have made to the other governments as their troops are doing that. The number is quite limited. Some are involved in surveillance in planes and so on, and they will carry on their duty that they started some months ago.

[Iraq, March 17th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I want to set out the position of the Government of Canada. We believe that Iraq must fully abide by the resolution of the United Nations Security Council. We have always made clear that Canada would require the approval of the Security Council if we were to participate in a military campaign.

Over the last few weeks the Security Council has been unable to agree on a new resolution authorizing military action. Canada worked very hard to find a compromise to bridge the gap in the Security Council. Unfortunately, we were not successful. If military action proceeds without a new resolution of the Security Council, Canada will not participate.

We have ships in the area as part of our participation in the struggle against terrorism. Our ships will continue to perform their important mission against terrorism.

[Ethics, February 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, when there was a file related to shipping it was the secretary of state in charge of financial institutions who carried the file in cabinet all the time.

As usual, I think the hon. member is just throwing dirt. He is so good at throwing dirt, but when he throws dirt he loses ground all the time.

[Ethics, February 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know the names of the people. I was informed that it was used by high officials of the previous administration. I do not know if they were ministers or not. I do not have their names.

If the leader of that party wants to give the names of the people, fine. That is why I was prudent and used the word “apparent”. I was informed that this system was developed by the previous administration and it is the system we have used.

So, give us the names of those who have used it and we would know if they were--

[Ethics, February 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, we could speculate on everything until we died. The reality for me is that an oil spill is a pretty serious incident.

[Ethics, February 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I do not have to comment on that. The rules are there. They have been followed by the minister. The Registrar General decided according to the agreement that it was a case to inform the owner of the company who happened at that time to be the minister of finance. It was a judgment of the Registrar General. He made that decision, not I. It would have been known within hours anyway. When we talk about CSL, anybody who knows anything about shipping would probably know that the former minister of finance was the owner.

[Iraq, February 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I said many weeks ago that it would be preferable to have a second resolution. I am happy that the Americans are proposing a second resolution. What is surprising is that some countries some weeks ago wanted to have a second resolution. France and Germany wanted a second one and now they are saying they do not need a second one. The Americans say there will be a second one.

Let us wait for the debate. I am happy there will be a debate. After 1441 there will be a realization by the members of the Security Council whether Saddam Hussein is in conformity or not with the resolution that was passed unanimously.

[Iraq, February 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member reads resolution 1441 carefully, he will see that it says Saddam Hussein must comply with the conditions set by the United Nations or face serious consequences.

Serious consequences mean more than just a little parade. That is why I keep saying that Saddam Hussein is the one who can avoid war, by complying with resolution 1441, and by showing respect for the United Nations and all the countries that have voted in favour of the resolution, which was adopted unanimously by the Security Council.