Peter MacKay

[Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, June 11th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleague for his understanding of the far-reaching implications of this, and the fact that this is but one piece of a larger puzzle when it comes to Canada's international efforts vis-à-vis demining efforts and the use of this legislation to help implement the convention banning cluster munitions.

In his extensive travels, I know the member has on many occasions encountered representatives of nations around the world who are very grateful for Canada's efforts. Whether it be in some of the conflict zones in which Canada has been involved over the years, in Bosnia, Kosovo, and more recently, Afghanistan and Libya, we have seen the devastating effects and countries that are mined to the max, where the remnants of war have such grave implications particularly for schoolchildren.

It is something that we need to reflect on. The fact is there are many countries where the mere effort of going to school or playing in a soccer field or going out with friends to take part in the simplest of activities can result in death or grave injury because of munitions left in the ground.

Our country has in fact played a leading role over the years, internationally, in addressing this humanitarian impact of land mines. We continue to work with organizations, with other countries, to meet that standard and to play that type of leadership role on the international stage.

I mentioned some of the earlier commitments that we have made monetarily. Canada, for example, provided $16.8 million just two years ago to support victim rehabilitation, and clearance and capacity building in nine countries: Colombia, Afghanistan, Cambodia, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Libya, Jordan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Palau.

Dating further back, in 2007-08, our contribution was $51.4 million. That year we ranked third overall in our contribution.

These are just a few examples of how we remain deeply committed to this cause. We continue to elevate possible mine action projects that will deliver tangible results. Here at home, this is an opportunity for us to send a very clear signal of that commitment, by passing this legislation, by moving forward with the ratification of the convention. I would encourage all members to support that effort.

[Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, June 11th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the answer is no, but what I can say is that on this particular piece of legislation, we have a history that goes back to 2008. We have international commitments that we seek to comply with. This legislation would allow us to do just that.

This bill is very much in keeping with the intent for Canada to continue to play a leading role internationally in addressing the humanitarian impact of land mines and explosive remnants of war. This bill is also in keeping with Canada's commitment since 2006 to continue with the disarmament of these types of munitions that have such a devastating impact. Canada has contributed more than $200 million through 250 projects internationally to this global effort, which makes Canada one of the top contributors to this issue. That is, again, in keeping with the spirit of the legislation and the ratification of this convention.

We are deeply committed to this cause, as witnessed by this legislation and international contributions. The total amount of support by Canada continues toward the area of mine action and the issues that vary from year to year. We want to be consistent in demonstrating that, both to our citizens and those internationally who watch these issues very closely. That is why we think it is time for progress, it is time to advance the legislation, and advance this cause generally.

[Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, June 11th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the short answer to what it means for Canada is action, not words. It means we are actually implementing and moving forward on this important issue.

I note that the legislation would very much preserve Canada's ability to continue to work internationally, but, at the same time, it implements Canada's commitments to the convention, as is in line with our key allies. I note that Australia and the United Kingdom, and many of our NATO allies, many of the countries we have worked with abroad, are in fact taking the same steps.

My colleague from Ottawa Centre a moment ago mentioned that there are those who are critics of the legislation. That may be, but I also note that there are a number of NGOs calling on Canada to ratify the convention. They are calling on us to move forward and ensure that Bill S-10 is enacted as quickly as possible.

Let us not let perfection get in the way of progress on this. Let us allow Canada to move forward, to step out on the international stage, as we have throughout this process, as we have been leaders in this process, and move this legislation forward. That is what we seek to do. That is why we are taking this step. This legislation is important when it comes to Canada meeting its international commitments, protecting civilians, protecting those affected by cluster munitions, and allowing Canada to continue to play a significant role internationally.

[Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, June 11th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I have listened to my hon. friend, and I understand his point of view. However, the reality is that this effort to bring forward both the convention and now the accompanying legislation has been under way since 2008. The member has read the issue and has said it is a very serious one; it is one that has far-reaching implications and in which Canada has exhibited leadership. We were there in the early days of the negotiation to ensure that we were complying with both the spirit and the letter of the law. This is now the time to step forward, bring the legislation to fruition and allow Canada to go forward and ratify.

This prohibiting cluster munitions act would fully implement the legislative commitments that are there under the convention, which the hon. member mentioned. It would strike the balance between the humanitarian obligations, which are very real; we know the grave implications that come about with the use of cluster munitions. As well, it would preserve our national security and defence interests. I add that, because of the realities, that we work with other NATO allies, most notably the United States of America, in missions that very much have a humanitarian component as was the case in Afghanistan, to comply with some of the amendments and the position taken by the member opposite would prohibit that international contribution.

Therefore, as the Minister of Foreign Affairs indicated quite clearly in his testimony in the other place, this is an honourable compromise. This is the way to move the legislation forward, to move forward with a ratification of the convention, and allow us to continue to act interoperably with our allies.

[Privacy, June 11th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, as I have now stated a number of times in the House, CSEC is prohibited by law from directing its activities toward Canadians, or directing its activities at any person in Canada. The only targeting that is done, and the member, as a former member of the Canadian Armed Forces would know this, is on foreign intelligence. We work with our allies, but as I stated yesterday, we do not have access to the PRISM data and we use metadata to identify and collect international, not domestic, communications.

[National Defence, June 11th, 2013]

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I have already answered that question. In fact, all injured members are not released from the military until they are prepared to do so. Until they are prepared for release, they work with members of the Canadian Forces on their transition plans. When it is appropriate for their families and they are ready to make a shift into the private sector, there is a program specifically designed to help with that transition. That will be the case for Corporal Kirkland. That will be the case for injured members of the Canadian Forces on my watch.

[Privacy, June 11th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I can advise my hon., albeit paranoid, friend that, in fact, CSE does not target Canadians, and of course, nor do we ask our allies to do so.

CSE is also, of course, very much subject to the Privacy Commissioner, but we have our own commissioner, a former federal judge, who has said on a number of occasions that it highlights CSE's genuine concern for protecting the privacy of Canadians and that to date, all recommendations related to privacy have been addressed, and he has lauded CSE's ability to protect Canadians' privacy.

[Search and Rescue, June 11th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, we acted, and we continue to act. I remind the hon. member that our SAR crews frequently surpass their mandated response times. In fact, in 2011, 103 Squadron, based in Gander, in the member's home province, averaged a 21.3-minute reaction time in the 30-minute posture, and 58.7 minutes during the two-hour evening posture.

This is a remarkable accomplishment brought about by training, dedication and the willingness to risk lives in the service of our country.

[Search and Rescue, June 11th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, as I announced on May 2, in order to help the Canadian Forces optimize its SAR preparedness, its readiness posture, a comprehensive analysis of peak periods of seasonal, weekly and daily SAR activities across the country has been conducted. This was in addition to a number of measures we announced at that time to improve the ability of the Canadian Forces to respond to the largest search and rescue territory on the planet.

We are continuing to make improvements in that regard and are continuing to bolster and improve the ability of the greatest search and rescue technicians anywhere in the world.

[National Defence, June 11th, 2013]

I am pleased that he is pleased, Mr. Speaker.