Randall Garrison

[Canada's Contribution to the Effort to Combat ISIL, February 17th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister why it is that we have not gone after the sources of funding and the arms sales to ISIL. We know that $1 million to $3 million a day in oil is still being sold on the world market, and this is what allows it to pay its troops and buy arms. We know that it is getting arms and ammunition.

Is it because it would embarrass some of our allies and friends that we have not actually gone after the arms and the funding? Can the minister tell the House why not?

[Canada's Contribution to the Effort to Combat ISIL, February 17th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for his speech today. It was much more clear than some of the other information we have had. I would also like to thank him, of course, for his service in the Canadian Forces in Afghanistan.

As someone who also worked in Afghanistan as part of a training mission on international human rights in 2002, I share some of the doubts that the minister expressed about the ultimate impact of our mission in Afghanistan, as we saw the government of Afghanistan lose control of the Kandahar airport on December 15 of last year.

I guess my question to the minister would be this. How is what we are doing now all that different from what we did in Afghanistan, where we had both air and ground campaigns and training missions, and yet we did not really succeed in uprooting the Taliban? Would we not be better going after the sources of money and arms for ISIS than the program we are actually pursuing?

[Canada's Contribution to the Effort to Combat ISIL, February 17th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Prime Minister for brining this debate to the House. We all welcome the chance to talk about something that is so important and such a great threat to world peace and security.

If we are going to have a really good debate in this House and, as the Prime Minister said, talk about what it is that Canada can do that others cannot, we are going to be making the argument forcibly on this side that Canada could be providing a leadership role in cutting off the funding, the arms, and the flow of foreign fighters to ISIS. However, instead, the Prime Minister has left us wondering whether this is or is not a combat mission.

In question period yesterday, the Prime Minister compared this situation to World War I and World War II where we had very high Canadian casualties.

Does the Prime Minister have a casualty estimate for this new and much more dangerous role he has assigned to Canadians? That will tell us something about whether this is or is not a combat mission.

[Justice, February 17th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, communities across the country are working hard to tackle this problem and so many other public safety challenges, but despite all the talk from the previous government, police forces across the country still do not have the resources they need. To make matters worse, in 2013 the Conservatives cancelled the police officer recruitment fund. The NDP has consistently called for the restoration of this fund so that communities like Halifax, Montreal, Winnipeg, and Surrey have the police officers and the resources they need to keep their communities safe.

Will the Liberal government now restore the police officer recruitment fund?

[National Defence, February 5th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, on page 71 of their platform, the Liberals promised that if they became the government, they would “end Canada's combat mission in Iraq”.

Unfortunately, not only has the government failed to end the bombing missions, it has refused to tell the House what its plan is and whether it is actually planning to extend the military mission.

Canadians deserve answers and Canadians deserve to have their say.

Will the government commit now to hold a debate and vote on our military's future role in Iraq and Syria, yes or no?

[National Defence, February 3rd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the government promised to end the bombing mission in Iraq, yet it is still continuing. The government said it would come up with a new plan, and again Canadians are still waiting. When the Minister of National Defence was asked a simple question about whether there will be a vote in the House, yesterday he said, “You can't just answer yes or no”.

Actually, we think that it should be possible, so let me ask this of the minister again. Will the Minister of National Defence confirm that the House will hold a debate and a vote on the government's new mission in Iraq, yes or no?

[National Defence, February 2nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, theMinister of Foreign Affairs is in Rome today to discuss the coalition's campaign against ISIS. In the 2015 campaign, the Liberals promised to end the bombing, yet it is 2016 and the bombing is still continuing. Today, the Liberal government is discussing its plans with our allies in Rome while at the same time refusing to tell Canadians anything.

The media is now reporting that the government is planning a new, expanded mission on the ground in Iraq. Can the Minister of Defence confirm that he is considering expanding the number of Canadian troops on the ground in Iraq, yes or no?

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, January 25th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I have not heard a better and more comprehensive statement of the challenges faced in a riding by any MP who has stood up on the throne speech.

I had the opportunity of meeting the new member for North Island—Powell River in her capacity as a community development worker. She has now listed all of the challenges in her riding. I wonder if she could tell us something about the innovative ways that communities in her riding are meeting those challenges.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, January 25th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I salute the community work the minister did before coming to the House.

I want to quickly ask her two questions.

First, as she may be aware, I put forward a bill to provide equal protections for transgendered Canadians, transgendered Canadians being some of the people who are quite often forced to use shelters and who are subject to some of the worst violence in the country. Would she join with me in urging the Minister of Justice to bring that forward as a government bill?

My second question has to do with the situation of those who are involved in sex work in Canada. Under the previous government, the Supreme Court decision that decriminalized sex work was, in effect, overturned by Bill C-36. Now many people, for whatever reason, involved in the sex trade are being subjected to discrimination and to a great deal of violence as a result of that bill.

What is the minister's position is on the recriminalization of sex work?

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, January 25th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I, too would like to congratulate the Minister of Democratic Institutions on her election to the House. I had the privilege of working as an international human rights observer in Afghanistan and I know the great distance that she has come, both physically and culturally, to be here in the House. I certainly salute her and her family for their accomplishments.

I also want to congratulate her on her concern for those who have been marginalized in terms of democratic reform. I want to ask a question that New Democrats feel was missing from the Speech from the Throne and that is about the commitment to fight poverty. There are a few individual measures that the Liberals have talked about, but no overall plan. One of the things that was put forward in the last Parliament was the federal minimum wage and re-establishing that, something that the previous Liberal caucus voted for, but then tended to ridicule in the campaign. There was nothing about a boost to GIS for low-income seniors, to make sure that those who built this country do not end up living in poverty. Also, there was no commitment to close probably the biggest tax loophole there is and that is the tax loophole for CEOs who are investing in stock options and avoiding taxation.

I would like to ask the minister, with great respect, with her commitment to marginalization, where is the commitment from the government to actually systematically tackle poverty in this country?