Ujjal Dosanjh

[Afghanistan, December 7th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, in January 2008, Brigadier General Deschamps confirmed under oath that in December of 2006, a Canadian detainee who was turned over to Afghan police was severely beaten.

The Minister of National Defence has claimed repeatedly that there has not been a single proven allegation of detainee abuse. Brigadier General Deschamps and Colonel Noonan are no Taliban dupes.

Will the minister now apologize for misleading the House? Will the government now provide the complete, uncensored documents regarding abuse of Taliban detainees?

[Afghanistan, December 3rd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, in mid-2006, the Red Cross met with Canadian officials in Kandahar, in Geneva and in Ottawa. In Ottawa, the head of the Red Cross for the U.S. and Canada attended that meeting. Red Cross officials made a point of raising the issue of treatment of Afghan detainees and told our officials of a lack of judicial safeguards and that all kinds of things were going on.

Why is the government covering up the fact that it did absolutely nothing? For at least one year it continued transferring detainees to torture in Afghan jails. Why do Conservatives not stand up and answer honestly? Why is a cover-up going on?

[Afghanistan, December 3rd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, in the spring of 2006, the Red Cross was sufficiently alarmed about Canada's transfer of detainees to meet with our officials at least four times to warn us of the danger of detainee torture in Afghan jails.

The government took no action for at least one year after these warnings. The Red Cross, of course, must not have been credible enough in the eyes of the government.

The government is covering up the fact that it continued to transfer detainees to a real risk of torture for at least one year after those warnings. Why the cover-up?

[Afghanistan, December 2nd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I am not surprised by that answer because the government has covered up the details of detainee transfers in Afghanistan from the moment it took office. Even the stoppage of transfers in November 2007 was not shared by the government until it otherwise became public.

Bearing in mind the witnesses appearing before the committee on Afghanistan today, does the Minister of National Defence still maintain that until November 2007 his office received no specific and credible allegations of torture of Canadian detainees?

[Afghanistan, December 2nd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, between March 2006 and October 2007, the government continued to assert in this House many times that it had not received any specific and credible allegations of Canadian detainees being tortured in Afghan jails.

Can the Minister of Defence say with complete certainty that in his current position or as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, his office did not receive any specific and credible allegations of Canadian detainees being tortured from May to July 2007, inclusive?

[Afghanistan, December 1st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary committee on Afghanistan has not received any documents from this government, although these have been made available. The government has no problem leaking them to a few chosen journalists. I guess the members of the Special Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan may be somewhat of a security threat to this country.

Will the government stop the stonewalling, produce the documents, stop the spin and call a public inquiry? If it has been doing such a good job, what does it have to hide?

[Afghanistan, December 1st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the government ignored reports on torture in Afghan jails from the U.S. state department, the UN human rights commissioner, and its own partner, the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission.

Then the allegations of torture hit the press. It suddenly became concerned, not because of human rights or international law, but because the Prime Minister is always more concerned about his own image than the reputation of Canada.

It is the reputation of Canada that demands a public inquiry. Why will the government not call one?

[Business of Supply, December 1st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, that was the member's interpretation of whatever may have happened.

Could the government stand up and say, with absolute honesty, that no laws, international or domestic, in Afghanistan have ever been violated?

[Business of Supply, December 1st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it is government incompetence. It is deliberate ignorance and deliberate wilful blindness.

The fact is that this sentiment has been expressed on the other side many times. We heard it this morning from the words of the Minister of National Defence. He referred to them as Taliban prisoners. The sentiment is that an Afghan life, when in prison, pursuant to this mission, somehow has less value. That comes right through the way the Conservatives attack anyone who ever questions their conduct.

Canada is my country of choice. I chose it. I was in Britain for three and a half years. I came here because I think it is a wonderful place. It provided high moral leadership in the world. Under the leadership of the current government, there is now a stain on the name of Canada. There is now a question mark on the name of Canada. We want that question mark removed. We want the government to do the right thing by Canada and call a public inquiry.

[Business of Supply, December 1st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that between 2006 and 2007 there were over 130 detainees transferred and the government had no way of monitoring or tracking. There was absolute wilful blindness and a deliberate ignoring of the facts.

The issue is that there were no Afghan detainees transferred to Afghan jails prior to the current government taking power. It needs to actually stand and take responsibility for the period for which it is responsible. It is not about we did this and they did that. It is about the conduct of the government from March 2006 to November 2007 as to what it ignored. It ignored the warnings of Mr. Colvin. Mr. Colvin was told to shut up. It ignored the warnings from international organizations.

Where does the government stand? Does it condone torture? Did it allow the detainees to be transferred v at risk of torture? That is the ultimate issue. Let us not change the channel here. We will not allow that to happen.