John Baird

[Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, June 18th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the convention itself allows for interoperability. Obviously, we have important NATO obligations. We have to work with our closest friend and ally, not just in NATO but in Norad. The Obama administration has not signed on to this treaty. It is imperative that we work with the United States.

The government has been very clear that no Canadian service personnel have ever used these weapons. There are some stockpiles that have been in the possession of the Canadian Armed Forces for many years. They will all be destroyed.

There will be the odd person, perhaps we could count them on one hand, among our senior leadership who will have an interoperability training secondment with, for example, the United States, under President Obama, and we think it is important that the person benefits from the value of that training and experience. For example, Walt Natynczyk, a very distinguished Canadian general, would not have been able to assume that position if we had put that condition on.

We worry about the small legal liability. What if a member of the Canadian Armed Forces was fueling an airplane for the United States in Goose Bay? Would that member have to first confirm that none of these weapons were on board? We do not want to put the odd small number, very small, perhaps even a handful, of Canadian Armed Forces personnel at risk. No other government has raised any concern with me with respect to Canada's position on this, which certainly is contrary to what my friend opposite has said.

[Foreign Affairs, June 18th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, we are immensely concerned about Iran's nuclear program. We remain concerned about its abysmal and deteriorating human rights record and its material support for terror. Before these P5 +1 talks started, we were very clear, most recently this week, that Iran must give up 20,000 operating centrifuges. There is no reason for it to have them.

If it seeks nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, it is essential that Iran heed international calls, do the right thing and get rid of these 20,000 centrifuges.

[Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, June 16th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I do not want to put members of the Canadian Armed Forces at risk should they have some far away link to the use of these horrible weapons. The opposition has said that is not an issue, that it is not a problem and that we should not worry about it, but those of us in government have to worry about it. We have a responsibility to the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces to ensure they are not put in harm's way in an international judicial proceeding.

We consulted with the Chief of the Defence Staff. We consulted with representatives of the Canadian Armed Forces to get their best advice, to find out their practical operations on the ground. They were clear that they had never used these weapons, and they never would.

We have to follow one aspect of the convention that was negotiated in the convention on interoperability so we do not put someone who is not using these evil weapons in harm's way.

With respect to clause 11, the member for Tobique—Mactaquac, along with the members for Ottawa Centre and Westmount—Ville-Marie, pushed hard to get the bill tightened up a little so it would be a bit more clear. We were happy to work with the opposition to strengthen the bill.

I understand there is not agreement, but part of a debate is having a vote. We cannot debate bills forever. An important part of the debate is getting up and having a vote.

[Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, June 16th, 2014]

They are countries like the United States, Mr. Speaker. President Obama does not support this.

I visited Laos last year. There are some 80 million unexploded ordinances still in that country today. People are being killed every year in Vietnam because of these unexploded weapons. Children are losing their arms or legs, seniors are losing their life.

That is why, in addition to the amendment to the bill, we committed to come forward with additional projects to support countries in dealing with these horrific remnants of war. Long after the conflict ends, they continue to cause huge harm. I think we all agree with that.

I just do not want the Canadian who is working at a military base refuelling an American plane to be called before an international court because he or she did not check and confirm that there were no cluster munitions on board.

Cluster munitions should never have been used in Afghanistan by the Americans. Canada did not support the use of those cluster munitions. Nonetheless, some NATO countries do not support the bill. Let us try to convince them to do the right thing, to join us and ratify this important convention.

[Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, June 16th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has never used these despicable weapons of mass destruction. There are some stockpiles of them which, according to this legislation, would be destroyed. The Chief of the Defence Staff has been very clear that he will issue an order to ensure that if there is a Canadian flying a plane on a mission under foreign government, that individual will not be allowed to use cluster munitions.

The member opposite said that everyone agrees. Everyone does not agree. Some of our closest friends and allies have not signed on to this.

[Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, June 16th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, we have a different legislative framework in Canada, but our commitment to the prohibition of these terrible weapons of mass destruction is real and strong.

There is one small issue. For example, if a Canadian such as Walt Natynczyk, the former chief of the defence staff, were participating in a foreign mission that somehow might be complicit, or if a Canadian was refuelling a plane in Newfoundland that may or may not contain cluster munitions, for example, from the Obama administration's armed forces, that might be somehow illegal, we wanted to have a small provision, which is allowed for in the convention, to protect members of the Canadian Forces so they would not be brought up for international prosecution.

The bill is fair and reasonable. We listened at committee. I became personally involved. The member for Tobique—Mactaquac, working with some of the opposition members, came forward. He wanted it to be stronger, clearer in language, and the government's response was absolutely. We amended the bill to make it stronger. The member for Tobique—Mactaquac did a tremendous job on this. He made the bill even stronger after listening to witnesses, and we welcomed that.

I worked with the member for Ottawa Centre and the member for Westmount—Ville-Marie, putting politics aside, to make the bill better. It is a good thing when the committee process works that way. The bill should not be simply blocked because it is not absolutely perfect in the eyes of the official opposition.

[Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, June 16th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I have good news for my friend, the member opposite. We are not going straight to a vote. There will be five hours of debate at report stage and a further five hours of debate at third reading. That is ten hours of additional debate.

The member opposite said that there were only a few members on the committee who could participate, and that is wrong. The member for Saanich—Gulf Islands is not on the committee and, as is her right, she showed up at the committee. She participated in it. She presented amendments. Members do not have to be on the committee. If members felt this was important, they could simply show up and participate. There was no time allocation on committee. It could have gone on even longer if people had more amendments.

If the member opposite thought it was important, she could have showed up and participated in committee.

[Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, June 16th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, our legislation fully implements Canada's commitment to the convention and it is in line with key allies, including Australia and the United Kingdom. We regret that President Obama does not support the convention and the United States will not join.

We are, however, coming forward with legislation that is fully aligned with the convention. We have gone so far as to say that Canada has never used cluster munitions, ever. We will completely destroy the entire stockpile that exists within the Canadian Armed Forces. The Chief of the Defence Staff appeared before the committee and was very clear that his troops, when they were pursuing other missions, would never drop these munitions.

We are hearing an honest difference of opinion in one part, but for the most part there is agreement, we are 99.9%. There is just that one tiny example, which I do not believe will ever happen. That is why the convention was negotiated with this clause and that is why the legislation has been proposed.

I understand the member opposite has a reasonable difference of opinion, but that does not mean we can have a debate forever to try to stop something from going through. The Canadian people have elected representatives and part of a good debate is having a vote.

[Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, June 16th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, to have to compare the former government House leader with the current one is unfair to the member for York—Simcoe, the government House leader. Not everyone is as non-partisan and reasonable as I am.

The member opposite knows that when I was government House leader, we did not bring in time allocation motions. I was always willing to work with the opposition. However, we had a different official opposition in those days, not the crew opposite.

[Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, June 16th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, first, I totally reject the sexist allegation that the member has attributed to my House leader.

I have known the government House leader for probably 30 years. He is a distinguished parliamentarian, someone who always wants to reach across the party lines, and to work with people for the good of Parliament.

I am astonished, frankly, that a distinguished member of this House would suggest any nefarious attitude that the government House leader might have exercised or demonstrated. I am shocked.