Peter MacKay

[Afghanistan, March 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, this is a very revealing letter from Alain Préfontaine, senior counsel, civil litigation section, in response to concerns about disclosure. It states, “Based on our experience to date, it would appear that the Government's cooperative approach is working quite well”.

The letter also states quite clearly that the approach with respect to disclosure “places the Commission in the same position it would enjoy if it were to convene a public hearing into the complaints and in the same position as a superior court”.

[Afghanistan, March 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, as an agent of the government, I am sure that this particular commission, should it choose to pursue this avenue, which it appears it will, will get the cooperation with respect both to information disclosures and the funding necessary to have a full-blown hearing if this is the direction in which it intends to go.

[Afghanistan, March 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I know it predates the time in the House of the member opposite, but I suppose some might draw the same analogy to the failure to disclose during the Gomery inquiry that was going on in the country.

What I can tell the member opposite is that it is within the mandate of the police commission to hold such a public hearing, which it is entitled to do, and what I can also tell him is the Department of Justice has pledged cooperation. It is in a letter to the commission from February 22. We will see how things unfold.

[Afghanistan, March 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would invite the member to table that letter too.

All I can tell her is what I have said already. We are in compliance. We will continue to cooperate with the commission. We fully intend to. I know the member opposite will continue to rattle on as she always does throughout question period, but this letter is self-explanatory. It is on the table and the member can access it and see for herself.

[Afghanistan, March 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for her question. The government continues to cooperate with the commission.

I have a letter that was sent from the Department of Justice in response to the Military Police Complaints Commission. It states:

To facilitate the Commission's investigations to the fullest extent possible consistent with its mandate, I have been instructed to disclose to the Commission all Government records that it would be entitled to receive if the Commission was conducting a hearing into the complaints and had in fact issued a subpoena.

We will table it.

[Afghanistan, March 12th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I repeat that what the member said is incorrect.

We have made those disclosures. The Department of National Defence always takes these complaints and issues very seriously. We are in complete compliance. We have made those disclosures, and we are always prepared to work with this commission.

As the Prime Minister has noted, the Federal Court has now given a ruling with respect to the application of the charter when it comes to Taliban prisoners, and the charter does not apply. However, we will continue to work with all bodies and live up to our statutory obligations.

[Afghanistan, March 12th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, as usual, on this issue the member is not correct.

In fact, I would suggest that the Government of Canada has met a very high standard when it comes to disclosure and transparency on this issue. We have given the Military Police Complaints Commission as much, if not more, information than would have been provided had a public hearing, with subpoena powers, already began.

We will continue to cooperate with it. We have responded to it formally in a letter. Again, that information is public.

[Afghanistan, March 11th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague, the Secretary of State for Multiculturalism and Canadian Identity, for a very articulate and informed contribution to this important debate. I could not agree with him more and I would associate myself with the glowing comments that he made about the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence.

I want to go back to one of the important elements that he spoke of and that is the human impact and the human face of the issues that we are discussing here, the impact that it has on Canada and the impact that this debate and Canada's participation continues to have on the people of Afghanistan.

My colleague referenced the important memory of the 23 Canadians who lost their lives and the many others who were affected. He referenced as well the appearance here just last week of six courageous female Afghan members of Parliament. It was an unthinkable occurrence just a few years ago that women could be democratically elected, let alone even vote in that country. Yet, here they were, proudly representing their country, making representations to the Canadian people which could be summed up in one word: help. They wanted the continued assistance of the Canadian people so they could in turn continue to provide inspiration, hope and help to their people.

I have a simple question. I would ask my friend to elucidate further, for those tuned in to this debate, as to the actual human assistance and impact being imparted to Afghanistan and what that does for the children, the women and the men of Afghanistan, in empowering them with the ability to do more, to build their own country and to put their children and their children's children in a better place.

Canadians need to understand how much we have contributed to the building of a country to give it some of the very same rights and privileges that we enjoy in this country.

[Afghanistan, March 11th, 2008]

Seventeen.

[Afghanistan, March 11th, 2008]

Mullah Omar.