Mario Silva

[April 16th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, many Canadians have been at the forefront of advocating for human rights in Iran. Among the most prominent is Teamsters Canada. Alongside Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch they have taken an extremely active role in promoting human rights in Iran. Their work to free labour activists Mansour Osanloo and Mahmoud Salehi has significantly amplified the debate surrounding Iranian human rights violations. Their efforts have been recognized across the world, and earlier this month Mr. Salehi was released from prison.

With labour groups such as Teamsters Canada managing such effective campaigns for human rights in Iran, the government would be well advised to follow their lead. What is the government doing to ensure the release now of Mr. Mansour Osanloo?

[April 16th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, over the course of world history, many different political systems have emerged. Like all human developments, none are perfect, but there is little question that for those who have benefited from it, democracy is truly the most equitable and responsible of all systems of government.

The reality is the world is full of nations that put on a show of democracy, but in actuality those democratic outcomes have been predetermined by a ruling group intent on maintaining its power through oppression if necessary. Nowhere is this more evident than in Iran.

While the supreme authorities of Iran have gone through the democratic motions once every four years, the reality is all candidates have all been hand selected by an unelected and unaccountable group of clerics. Simply put, Iran is a theocratic state shrouded behind a mask of democracy.

The egregious natures of the Iranian government's human rights abuses include a broad swath of violations, all intended to reinforce the domination by the leadership over every aspect of Iranian life and to ensure that all social interactions are controlled by the government.

The Iranian government has time and again arrested union leaders and responded to peaceful strikes with deadly violence. The right to withhold one's labour is an important one. People must be able to advocate for better working conditions, otherwise the reality for working people would be unbearable.

The arrest of Mansour Osanloo, as well as hundreds of other labour organizers, is an affront to human rights, and this kind of behaviour must stop. Canadians can be proud of labour organizations, like Teamsters Canada, that are working to keep this issue on the forefront.

Similarly the treatment of religious minorities in Iran, including Zoroastrians, Christians, Jews, Baha'is and many others, is abysmal. These groups are regularly targeted for rioting, mass arrest, terror and intimidation. They are used as scapegoats to vent the fears and frustrations of the population and their rights, while technically guaranteed, are constantly trampled by the Iranian authorities.

The violations of that government, however, are not limited to minorities. The oppression of women under Iranian law is extensive. Everything from schoolrooms to ski slopes to public buses is strictly segregated.

In the first year after the revolution, females who did not cover all parts of their bodies, except their hands and faces, were subject to severe punishment. This suppression of half of Iran's society is further evidence of this disregard for human rights.

The Iranian government even violated the few human rights agreements that it does sign. The public execution of Mahmoud Asgari, a 16-year-old gay youth, not only violated his right to enter into a private relationship, but was also a contravention of a United Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child, which states that no person under the age of 18 will be executed.

All those violations of human rights are designed to keep the population subjugated and impose the government's will on even the most basic of social interactions. These Orwellian tactics continue to be used as a mechanism for Iranian rulers to maintain their power.

Canada has historically been a leader at the United Nations on the issue of human rights. The previous Liberal minister of foreign affairs was responsible for introducing a number of United Nations resolutions condemning the violation of human rights in Iran and demanding that Iran comply with international law. It is vital that Canada finds a way to ensure that the United Nations becomes a more vocal force for human rights in all nations across the world.

What is the government doing to address human rights violations by the Iranian government?

[Petitions, April 11th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by many people in my city of Toronto, as well as by my constituents of Davenport, who are asking that the Government of Canada to remove Canadian soldiers from Afghanistan immediately.

[Interparliamentary Delegations, April 11th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present the report of the Canadian parliamentary delegation to the Canada-France Interparliamentary Association, on the second round of legislative elections, held in Paris, France, from June 13 to 18, 2007.

[Cluster Bombs, April 11th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has historically been a leader in advancing peace around the world. This was clear on March 1, 1999, when the eyes of the world were on Canada as the Ottawa convention was reached banning the manufacture and use of landmines.

It is now time to make history again by banning cluster bombs. These are horrible weapons which do not differentiate between civilian and military targets. They injure and kill civilians long after they have been deployed.

When is the government going to show leadership by demanding a ban on the production and use of cluster bombs?

[Petitions, April 9th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, my second petition is on the war resistor support campaign.

The petitioners ask that the Government of Canada demonstrate its commitment to international law and treaties to which it is a signatory by making provisions for U.S. war objectors to have sanctuary in this country.

Back in 1965 to 1973, 50,000 Americans came to Canada when they said no to the Vietnam War. Many people are saying no now to this illegal war that is taking place in Iraq.

The petitioners ask that the Canadian government provide whatever assistance it can to those who are resisting the war in Iraq.

[Petitions, April 9th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I have several petitions. The first petition calls upon Parliament to immediately respect the long-standing policy advocated for Canadians around the world who have been sentenced to death, that the Government of Canada clearly reaffirm Canada's position on the death penalty.

The death penalty is a cruel and inhumane punishment and was abolished in 1976 and is inconsistent with Canadian values.

The petitioners ask the government to stand up to that proud Canadian tradition of saying no to the death penalty around the world and provide clemency, in any way possible, to Canadians who are in jails abroad.

[Business of Supply, April 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, one of the recommendations that I thought was very striking in the Manley report, no matter how people felt about the report, was the whole issue that the government was certainly not communicating and being transparent enough with Canadians about this mission.

Part of the reason we are trying to force the government to in fact be more transparent and accountable is because we know that the success of this mission depends on transparency and accountability. We need to ensure that Canadians are aware of what is happening there and we in Parliament must put everything in place to make sure we are accountable.

It is because Parliament has done it and the opposition has put forward a motion. It is not because the government has done anything about accountability and transparency when it comes to this mission.

[Business of Supply, April 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I quite agree with my hon. colleague from Scarborough—Guildwood that it is kind of sad that we have a government that speaks about accountability and transparency but in fact does the exact opposite.

We in the opposition have to force the government constantly to be accountable and transparent to Canadians on an issue as important to Canadians and Parliament as the Afghanistan mission. We have to make sure we send clear signals to our men and women in uniform that we have a clear direction of where we are going.

Accountability is of great importance and the formation of this committee as soon as possible is extremely important to make sure that the government is in fact living up to the commitment it made to both Parliament and Canadians. I would hope it will do that with the unanimous support of the House because it is a motion that is worthy of support from all members, no matter where they stand on this issue.

[Business of Supply, April 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the mission in Afghanistan is clearly a matter of great concern for most Canadians. Any time we as a nation send our courageous men and women into harm's way, it is essential that we undertake such a mission only after a full and thorough process of review and consideration.

All views, all opinions and all possibilities must be considered. There are many different things to consider when debating the mission in Afghanistan. A measure of the importance of this matter to our constituents across the country is the sheer volume of emails, letters and telephone calls we have received from those we represent.

I have personally met with many constituents who have deep reservations and considerable concerns about the mission in Afghanistan. I share many of these concerns. I am of course particularly concerned about the decision to extend the mission in view of the concerns that have been expressed about the success of this undertaking to date.

There have been 82 Canadians who have lost their lives in Afghanistan since the beginning of the mission. The financial cost of the mission has also been considerable. In May 2006, when the issue of extending the mission was put before Parliament, I voted against the extension because I truly believed it was the right thing to do. I did not vote in favour of the latest extension.

Regardless of the positions that members of Parliament took during the previous debate, a consensus has emerged which maintains that, if the mission must continue, it must also change. Canadians have made it clear that if we are to continue in Afghanistan, then our focus must be on reconstruction and humanitarian aid.

The debate as to when our troops will return home appears to have been settled, at least for the moment. We know that a date of 2011 has been set though I must confess to being somewhat concerned by the apparent wavering on the part of the Prime Minister at the Bucharest NATO summit regarding a specific end date.

Indeed, this very question was asked by my hon. colleague from Etobicoke—Lakeshore of the Prime Minister just yesterday and his only reply was that our allies did not need to ask. Canadians have now been told that the end date is 2011 and we hope we are not now hearing the beginning of wavering on the part of the government.

Nonetheless, it has been decided that they will come home in 2011. While some members may claim the troops can be brought home tomorrow, the Government of Canada has made international agreements which cannot be abandoned lightly. However, that does not mean that we should extend carte blanche to the government.

Given the continuing operation of our soldiers in Afghanistan, Parliament has an obligation to ensure that the mission is being conducted in accordance with the will of Canadians and there simply must be a better framework of accountability. Indeed, the recent Afghanistan motion made reference to the need for more oversight and the transition from a combat mission to one focused on reconstruction.

As my colleague, the member for Toronto Centre and our party's foreign affairs critic, has stated, “The key thing to recognize is that an outright military victory in traditional terms is hard to achieve”. I believe my hon. colleague is absolutely correct and I further believe that most Canadians and reasonable observers fully agree with his contention.

Therefore, it is, I believe, essential that we have enhanced oversight and accountability for the Afghanistan mission that is fair, constructive and responsive. The government owes it to this Parliament and to Canadians across the country to commit itself to greater accountability and oversight regarding the mission in Afghanistan.

As noted, the motion passed by the House calls for the formation of a committee to oversee the mission. The Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs has not yet set up such a committee and it is essential that the government facilitate the movement forward on this commitment in the committee.

Today's motion is not about whether the mission should or should not have been extended. That issue, rightly or wrongly, has already been decided. Today's motion is about ensuring that the government lives up to its word and follows through on its commitment to the people of Canada and Parliament.

It is about showing Canadians that Parliament can work together for the better of our society and on an issue of such importance. It is about ensuring that our brave men and women in uniform are only asked to put their lives in danger for a mission that is consistent with the will of the Canadian people.

Finally, this motion will allow parliamentarians and Canadians the opportunity to better understand the mission in Afghanistan and to reassess how our resources are being allocated. There is no greater obligation for parliamentarians and government than to ensure that members of the armed forces who are put in harm's way are committed to such service with objectives that are attainable. These must also be circumstances that are productive within the context of a mission that is clear and understood.

Greater accountability and oversight will, at the very least, provide for this opportunity. Accountability, oversight and transparency are the hallmarks of the democratic system of government. If we are not prepared to apply these principles to the mission in Afghanistan, then we are doing a great disservice to our country and to Parliament.