Kevin Sorenson

[Terrorism, November 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, police have arrested another man suspected of supplying fake documents that ended up in the hands of one of the hijackers of flight 93. The list of suspects apprehended in Canada and abroad with ties to Canada continues to grow. Yet the solicitor general refuses to admit that there may be a Canadian connection to the September 11 attack.

Now that the minister is openly sharing information, will he finally admit that documents forged in Canada were used by terrorists in the September 11 attack?

[Terrorism, November 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government has failed to do anything with the CSIS warnings regarding the 50 organizations and 350 individuals with terrorist links operating here in Canada.

It should now come as no surprise that Canada may have been used as a staging ground for the September 11 attack.

I ask the solicitor general, in the face of mounting evidence will he finally admit that there may have been or there still are groups or individuals here in Canada that assisted those responsible for the atrocities in the United States?

[National Security, October 31st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, that is a lot different response than what we heard when he was parading around like a puffed up peacock in front of the scrum yesterday.

It was wrong for this solicitor general to brag about this operation. It was wrong for this solicitor general to compromise the source and methods of our intelligence gathering efforts. According to a high ranking CSIS official, revealing such top secret information is clearly a breach of national security.

Does the Prime Minister support his solicitor general divulging top secret information?

[National Security, October 31st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, we have been asking about past arrests and information that may affect the security of Canadians. Repeatedly the solicitor general has hid behind his briefing books and a series of canned answers. Now in his drive for headlines, he may have divulged top secret information.

The former solicitor general was fired because of a slip of the lip during a private conversation. Now we have a solicitor general publicly broadcasting confidential information.

How can the solicitor general possibly justify his decision to brag about Canada's role in an ongoing investigation?

[Terrorism, October 30th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, CSIS has told the federal court that it believes there are supporters of bin Laden and his terrorist network here in Canada now. A proper and more thorough investigation of Al-Marabh in June may have revealed this fact and exposed key evidence regarding the September 11 attack on America.

Our Prime Minister says that there is no imminent attack but we know that bin Laden's terrorists are here in Canada now.

Given the glaring evidence of CSIS and the RCMP, why should Canadians trust the solicitor general with their security and their safety?

[Terrorism, October 30th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the Prime Minister just told the House, police authorities say that Toronto is a staging ground for al-Qaeda terrorists and that they have a stunning amount of evidence to prove it, including five suspects and more to come.

I would ask the solicitor general, in the face of intelligence information showing terrorist activity, such as fundraising, recruiting and counterfeiting of documents taking place in Toronto, how can he still deny any Canadian connection to the attack on America?

[National Security, October 26th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the minister talks about the money that was put in since the budget. The budget was so long ago, we cannot remember.

SIRC reports that CSIS is so overloaded with work that it can take years to determine if potential newcomers to our country pose a security threat. This was occurring long before September 11. Since then its workload has increased dramatically.

Again, I ask the solicitor general this. When will CSIS receive the necessary funding to hire more agents so no one slips into this country who poses a threat to the safety and security of Canadians?

[National Security, October 26th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, first the solicitor general claims the RCMP and CSIS are adequately funded and staffed. Then he jumps on his soapbox explaining why there is a need to throw more money into the security forces. The fact is he is the one who gutted them in the first place. Now police and CSIS investigations are being sidelined because the RCMP does not have enough manpower.

Will the solicitor general stop playing a shell game with the RCMP and immediately ensure that it has adequate personnel so nothing is put on the back burner?

[National Security, October 25th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, how can the solicitor general brag about his paltry increases to the RCMP? The reality is the RCMP has faced a decade of cuts and lost personnel. He is the solicitor general who gutted its resources. The remaining members are spread too thin and are left begging for adequate resources.

With the responsibilities expanded, does the solicitor general not understand that stable, long term funding is essential, especially with the added threat of terrorism?

[National Security, October 25th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the RCMP under the Liberal government has suffered unprecedented cuts, with $175 million slashed from its budget and 2,200 job losses. How can the solicitor general boast about his new funding when RCMP detachments across the land are left begging for more money and adequate personnel?