John Baird

[Afghanistan, November 20th, 2009]

As I said earlier, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Colvin testified before committee and presented no specific evidence. He presented only hearsay, second-hand and third-hand information, information that came from the Taliban in some cases.

We have acted in the past when we have gotten specific evidence. We must have substantiated evidence. Look at what Rick Hillier has said. Look at what Lieutenant General Michel Gauthier has said, the actual commander on the ground. He said, “...why any of us in the military command would knowingly and deliberately ignore substantial evidence from the field that could ultimately implicate us...”.

[Afghanistan, November 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it is not a question of the messenger. It is a question of the message.

We are required in government to deal with facts before we make decisions. There has not been any evidence brought forward by Mr. Colvin with respect to the serious allegations that he has made. They are unsubstantiated. They involve hearsay. They also contain information that comes from the Taliban. We are required to act on a higher standard than that.

I should remind members opposite that there has not been a single, solitary proven allegation involving a transferred Taliban prisoner.

[Afghanistan, November 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, despite the loud voice of my friend from Ottawa Centre, he himself just said “truth or fiction”.

In regard to a public inquiry, this government is only going to look at specific, substantiated facts. We will not base our government's actions on hearsay, on gossip. We will not base them on unsubstantiated allegations and certainly not on information that comes from the Taliban.

[Afghanistan, November 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to not allowing people to come before committee, Mr. Colvin testified just this week before the House committee. In that testimony he did not present any substantiated, specific allegations of what he claimed.

We are required in government to act on fact, not on hearsay, not on second and third accounts and certainly not on information that came from the Taliban.

[Afghanistan, November 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear. When we get credible, substantiated and specific evidence, we act.

Look what former, well-respected diplomat Paul Chapin said, “I think that what set me back is how serious the allegations are and how flimsy the evidence”: flimsy evidence.

[Afghanistan, November 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, we have to deal with facts. We have to deal with specific allegations. We have to deal with substantiated charges. Regrettably we do not have them.

Mr. Colvin was asked why he did not raise this issue with the number of ministers who visited Afghanistan when he would have had the opportunity to raise it specifically with them. He said that while he met several ministers, he thought it would be a bit inappropriate to mention these issues because, “it would ruin a minister's visit”.

This certainly does not add credibility to the serious allegations he makes.

[Afghanistan, November 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, that is quite outrageous. In his testimony before the Common's committee earlier this week, Mr. Colvin confirmed, and let me underline this again, that he never witnessed abuse first-hand.

His allegations are nothing short of hearsay. They involve, sometimes, second-hand and even third-hand accounts and information. Even worse, some of the information could have come directly from the Taliban. He will not even name or identify his sources.

Even worse, when asked why he did not raise this with one of the number of ministers who came through Afghanistan during his tenure, he said he did not want to do so. He said, “I've met several ministers, but I did not raise these issues with them. It would be a bit—

[Afghanistan, November 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, when asked if the allegations could be trusted, respected former diplomat Paul Chapin said, “No. Until he comes forward with something rather more substantial for me to get into”, and I share that view.

[Afghanistan, November 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, if we look at the facts that are before us, there is an absence of evidence. This government requires credible, specific, substantiated reports from which to act, and none are before the House and none are before the government.

[Afghanistan, November 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I think what he would say is that when we get credible evidence we act, but we require proven, substantiated and credible evidence to act.

Again, there was no credible evidence in Mr. Colvin's testimony, not a shred of specific evidence. It is called facts and a government needs facts with which to act.