Iraq  Last night, Mr. Speaker, the weakest presentation made in the debate on Iraq was made by the Minister of National Defence. He said nothing had been ruled out, nothing had been ruled in, and had nothing much more to say. If the American secretary of defence appeared before the Congress the night before committing forces to an action and had nothing more to say than that, he would be fired by the next morning.

Iraq  Speaker, some have expressed the view that Canada really has no choice but to respond favourably to American requests on Iraq, given the significant integration of our economy with the U.S. that has taken place since free trade. Indeed the Liberals, pathetically, now seem to accept and even defend the very restrictions on Canadian policy they once joined with the NDP in warning against.

Middle East  It calls for assistance from our allies. I know to date this government has not made that commitment to action in Iraq and is still contemplating that matter. I think it is important that the Canadian government stand up and voice its support to take action against Saddam Hussein. I recall from the 1991 situation where Canada stood behind our NATO allies to approach that conflict in an aggressive manner.

Iraq  Suddenly, less than a week later, the minister felt confident enough, and before checking with parliament, to tell the prime minister to commit Canadian troops and equipment to a U.S. led military strike on Iraq. What information does the minister have today on our state of readiness that was not available just last week?

Iraq  Mr. Speaker, a number of resolutions since 1991 have called into account Iraq for a breach of the agreements made under the ceasefire. In particular cases the latest one was November last year when security council again registered a breach or a violation of the agreement, which could lead to a threat to our national security.

Iraq  Speaker, for more than a week now my party has been calling for a proper debate to be held in the House of Commons on the Iraq question, not a group therapy session but a debate based on the known position of the government and the information it is prepared to give to the House. I want to know why the government has waited a whole week and why the President of the United States is the one behind a debate in the House and not the members of the Canadian Parliament, who are entitled to the respect of this House and to an opportunity to hear the government's position, not group therapy.

Iraq  Secretary of State announce Canadian support for use of substantial military force against Iraq. My question for the Prime Minister is, is that true? If so, why this contempt of Parliament which has not yet debated this serious matter? And if it is not true, will the Prime Minister lodge an official protest with the U.S. government for its misrepresentation of Canada's position?

Iraq  When I talked yesterday with President Clinton and when I talked this morning with the Prime Minister of Great Britain, they told me that they still believe there is a possibility of a diplomatic solution and that in order to achieve it, we must be ready to act if Iraq does not accept that solution. That is exactly this government's position which is the same as the position of the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Great Britain.

Iraq  Can the Prime Minister tell us whether he intends to urge his principle allies to seek a diplomatic solution to the crisis in Iraq?

Iraq  Speaker, two weeks ago I had discussions with Mr. Primakov, the foreign minister of Russia, in which we discussed the issue of Iraq extensively. At that time he expressed the need for a diplomatic solution. The Prime Minister has said exactly the same thing. It is the hope of all of us that we can find a peaceful resolution to a very difficult situation.

Iraq  Speaker, the fact of the matter is that a number of Canada's allies do not support a military intervention. France, Italy and Belgium continue to oppose a military solution to the conflict with Iraq. Did Canada, a member of the OSCE, have discussions with these three countries, which all continue to believe in a negotiated solution to the conflict?

Iraq  Mr. Speaker, in 1991 when Canada decided to support military action to halt aggression by Iraq against Kuwait, the House debated the issue for three days, not just a few hours. It debated a motion on a position put forward by the government reaffirming our support of action by the United Nations followed by a vote.

Middle East  The importance of the debate is not necessarily for us to answer those questions but rather to ensure those questions are posed and fully explored as part of the decision making process. Ms. Alton is utterly opposed to any military action. She stated in her fax: “While Iraq's leadership continues to resist full compliance with a security council order for inspection and destruction of its weapon sites, at the same time, its civil society has no voice in the matter”.

Iraq  Speaker, Canada seems to be the only country that has declared no position whatsoever on the crisis in Iraq. This is both unacceptable and irresponsible. Every other country in the world has declared a position, whether asked or not. Will the minister finally tell us what will be Canada's role, if any, in exposing and destroying weapons of mass destruction that Saddam Hussein is hiding?

Iraq  Mr. Speaker, we have made very clear our position that the problem in Iraq can be resolved by Saddam Hussein complying with the security council resolutions. At this stage diplomatic negotiations are going on. Other action may be needed, but I can give the prime minister's assurance that any action involving Canadian commitments would be preceded by a debate in parliament.