Tony Clement

[Military Contribution Against ISIL, March 30th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the hon. member's analysis. I would go further to say that through the use of social media and other means, the militant, terrorist, jihadist internationalists are using their propaganda methodology to dupe individuals and to train individuals to be part of this international jihadist movement. This is not only an issue of over there; it is also an issue of here and now as well.

[Military Contribution Against ISIL, March 30th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I am always interested in whatever day's evolution of the Liberal position is, so I thank the hon. member for today's position. However, I would say that it is important to understand that training cannot work if the enemy keeps increasing their territory without a degrading of their ability to do so. We cannot train in a highly kinetic situation where the enemy is on the offence and there is no response to that.

I would say to the hon. member that it is very good that we want to train the Iraqi army. I have no difficulty with that, but the Liberals' position is naive if they think that can be accomplished with any degree of success without having the RCAF and other special forces available for the general intent of the mission at hand.

[Military Contribution Against ISIL, March 30th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, there are certainly many challenges. It is important to have a partnership with all the countries in that region in order to win the battle.

However, I would say this to the hon. member at the same time. The hon. member says, why bother. I say, use means that are available to us to degrade their ability to utilize the methodologies they are using to expand the territory they seek to expand into.

When I look at the challenges that the hon. member has raised, I do not say why bother; I say, what if we do nothing? The response to that question is that the situation would be far worse.

[Military Contribution Against ISIL, March 30th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, it is certainly an honour to be in the chamber to address these very weighty and important issues for Canada and on behalf of my constituents in Parry Sound—Muskoka.

What I want to do with my brief time standing is try to give my perspective on four basic questions that frame the debate in the way it should be framed. This pertains to the Islamic State, ISIL, ISIS, or whatever moniker one wants to use. First, what is its purpose? Second, how is it doing? Third, how do we respond? Fourth, what if we do not? Answering those questions certainly encapsulates the reason I will be supporting the motion later on this evening.

First, what is its purpose?

The international jihadist movement has declared war on Canada, its values, its citizens and all westerners.

It is very clear that this international jihadist ideology was the first mover. They were the ones who declared that Canada was an enemy to their purposes and that our values were antagonistic to their purposes. This makes this a matter of national security here as well as of our humanitarian interests in the sphere of their operations in the Middle East.

What is their purpose? Quite frankly, they have stated their purpose quite clearly. They want to establish an international jihadist caliphate. One can only look at the example they are setting in the territory they currently control of beheadings, of murders, and of crushing minorities, particularly Christian minorities, but not exclusively, and other Muslim groupings as well.

We look to not only their words in identifying the national interest but to their deeds. Their deeds are contrary to humanity. They are contrary to our national interests and the safety of our citizens. That is their purpose. Their purpose is clearly enunciated by their leadership and by their ruthless actions to date.

Then we go on to step two. How are they doing? They are recruiting. They have money. They have organization. They have territory. These are things that are helping them in achieving their jihadist terrorist internationalistic goals.

I was here in the chamber when my friend, the hon. Minister of Justice, was explaining that we have had success to date in being part of a 60-member coalition that has had some success in degrading ISIL's ability to achieve their purposes. There is no doubt about that, and nothing I am saying detracts from that record to date. However, I think we all agree, and this is why we are standing in this place debating in favour of the resolution on this side of the House, that those goals are not completely accomplished yet. We have to stick to those goals, because they are still recruiting, they still have the financial means to project their terror, they still have an organization that exists and that in some parts of the region is growing, and of course, they still have their mission, which is not only within the sphere of their current influence but is an internationalist mission.

One hon. member from the Liberal Party mentioned ISIL's control of Mosul. That is the size of Vancouver. These are not individuals in tents in the desert. This is a large city they still control. We can only hope that it will only be for a short time longer. However, that tells us that this mission is still important and that it is yet to be completely accomplished. That is why we have to be part of that mission.

It is also because their mission is international. It extends to disrupting our way of life here in Canada. It is clear that this is not just a local mission in the Middle East. It is clear that part of their ideology extends to projecting their force, projecting their terror, and projecting their violence on our peaceable shores as well.

That leads to the third question: How do we respond?

First of all, I believe that we must respond with moral clarity. The fact of the matter is that because of the purpose this group of international jihadists have, and because of the means by which they are deploying against us and innocent civilians, both in this country and overseas, I believe that the moral argument is that we have to respond. We have to continue with the mission, and I believe that we have to extend the mission.

There is no point in continuing the mission in one region, which is to say within Iraq, and not be part of the mission in Syria. The two are interlinked. Certainly the jihadists, Islamic State, do not see any difference or differentiate between the borders. Therefore, our role and responsibility is to be part of this 60-member coalition in all areas of activity in Syria and Iraq.

The way we contribute is with the Royal Canadian Air Force, with the training we are doing with the peshmerga, and of course, and let me repeat, as has been endlessly repeated, through our humanitarian mission and aid to those who are in distress and are fleeing from these murderous individuals.

We do respond, and we will respond, and that is what this mission is all about.

This leads to me to the fourth and final question that should be on our minds and on our list. What if we did not respond? What if we took the advice of certain members of the opposition in this place and others who are helpfully providing their advice on the other side of this argument throughout the country?

Well, clearly what will happen is that we will not be part of a group of people, a group of nations, that is seeking to end the genocidal violence that is occurring overseas: the beheadings, the persecution of minority groups, such as Christians and other Muslims, and of course, the absolute deprivation that goes along with that. That is clear. However, it also probably means more attacks here. If we fail to degrade the terrorists' ability to project their violence, it means that the national security of our nation, Canada, is compromised. Why do I say that? I say that because they have made it clear that if they have the means, they will continue to attack us at home. That is their goal. That is part of how they see their millenarian mission.

For those who say that we are provoking them with our actions, I would reply that we would actually provoke them more with inaction. That is why it is important that we do something rather than do nothing.

Throughout our nation's history, brave Canadians have fought for what is right despite considerable difficulty. We will not turn our backs on that tradition now.

We should not renounce our enviable and honourable history of working with allies to preserve the values Canadians desire and expect and to preserve the national security of our nation.

For all of these reasons, for the questions I have posed and for the answers I have given, I intend to support the motion.

[Interim Supply, March 24th, 2015]

Mr. Chair, I can give a little more fulsome reply. The proportions requested in the bill are intended to provide for all necessary requirements of the federal public administration up to the second supply period in fiscal year 2015-16. In no instance is the total amount of an item being released by the bill. The form of this bill is the same as that passed in the previous supply period.

The passing of the bill will not prejudice the rights and privileges of members to criticize any item in the estimates when they come up for consideration in committee. The usual undertaking is hereby given that such rights and privileges will be respected and will not be curtailed or restricted in any way as a result of the passing of this measure.

[Interim Supply, March 24th, 2015]

moved:

That this House do concur in Interim Supply as follows:

That a sum not exceeding $25,776,976,948.58 being composed of:

(1) three twelfths ($15,713,127,306.75) of the total of the amounts of the items set forth in the Proposed Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 of the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2016, except for those items below:

(2) eleven twelfths of the total of the amount of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Vote 1, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Vote 1, Indian Residential Schools Truth and Reconciliation Commission Vote 1, Marine Atlantic Inc. Vote 1, Office of Infrastructure of Canada Vote 5, Treasury Board Secretariat Vote 5 and Windsor-Detoit Bridge Authority Vote 1 (Schedule 1.1), of the said Estimates, $892,687,978.43;

Schedule 1.2), of the said Estimates, $163,221,484.66;

(4) seven twelfths of the total of the amount of Canada Council for the Arts Vote 1, Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety Vote 1, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission Vote 1, Canadian Polar Commission Vote 1 and Public Health Agency of Canada Vote 10 (Schedule 1.3), of the said Estimates, $249,329,318.00;

(5) six twelfths of the total of the amount of Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs Vote 5, Employment and Social Development Vote 5, Health Vote 10 and Royal Canadian Mounted Police External Review Committee Vote 1 (Schedule 1.4), of the said Estimates, $1,696,722,693.50;

(6) five twelfths of the total of the amount of Agriculture and Agri-Food Vote 5, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Vote 1, Canadian Food Inspection Agency Votes 1 and 5, Canadian Space Agency Votes 5 and 10, National Arts Centre Corporation Vote 1, Public Health Agency of Canada Vote 1, Statistics Canada Vote 1 and Transport Votes 1 and 5 (Schedule 1.5), of the said Estimates, $1,370,857,681.24;

(7) four twelfths of the total of the amount of Administrative Tribunals Support Service of Canada Vote 1, Citizenship and Immigration Vote 5, House of Commons Vote 1, Indian Affairs and Northern Development Votes 1 and 10, Industry Votes 1 and 10, Library of Parliament Vote 1, National Battlefields Commission Vote 1, Natural Resources Vote 1, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Vote 5, Public Service Commission Vote 1, Public Works and Government Services Vote 1, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Vote 1, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Vote 5 and VIA Rail Canada Inc. Vote 1 (Schedule 1.6), of the said Estimates, $5,500,651,897.00;

(8) four twelfths of the total of the amount of Parks Canada Agency Vote 1 (Schedule 2.1), of the said Estimates, $190,378,589.00;

be granted to Her Majesty on account of the fiscal year ending March 31, 2016.

[Supplementary Estimates (C), 2014-15, March 24th, 2015]

Mr. Chair, the presentation of this bill is identical to that used during the previous supply period.

[Supplementary Estimates (C), 2014-15, March 24th, 2015]

moved:

That the Supplementary Estimates (c) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2015, be concurred in.

[Government Spending, March 23rd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure his constituents appreciate his sarcasm, but the truth is that we have an obligation to ensure that citizens are aware of government programs that may affect them in their everyday lives.

We will continue to advertise these excellent government programs, which are in fact increasing job opportunities, increasing infrastructure, and doing the right things for Canadians. We are proud of that, and we will advertise the details to Canadian citizens.

[Questions on the Order Paper, March 12th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the home equity assistance program administered by the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, the legal costs to the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat for the Federal Court case initiated by Major Marcus Brauer were $58,646.26. This includes $25,376.04 corresponding to Mr. Brauer’s legal fees and disbursements and $33,270.22 corresponding to the federal government legal costs. It is not possible to ascertain the staff costs attributable to this specific case.

The cost of the third party review of the Bon Accord real estate market order by Judge Richard Mosley was $5,998.36.

The proposed class action suit for home equity assistance in Dodsworth v. Her Majesty the Queen is still at a preliminary stage before the Federal Court.