44th Parl. 1st Sess.
December 7, 2021 10:00AM
- Dec/7/21 12:31:15 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am a little more than fairly interested in the refugee file. I am deeply interested in the refugee file, because that is what we need to do. Humanitarian action is required.
On the issue of a special committee, the advantage of a special committee is that it would bring a number of different departments and ministries together to get the job done, because so far it is not working.
The government, unbelievably, called the election in the middle of this crisis, which it knew was coming. The day the election was called was the day the Afghan government fell. Then the government told the refugees not to worry, that it would bring them to Canada and that they should make applications and send their information to Global Affairs Canada. The government sent special emails to everyone, but those emails are just sitting there gathering dust.
I cannot say how many people have said they have not heard from the government even though it has recognized that they are indeed interpreters and told them their families should get to safety. They have had no response—
188 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:32:27 p.m.
- Watch
Questions and comments, the hon. member for Oshawa.
8 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:32:32 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, one of the things Canada leads in around the world is women's rights and child and maternal health. I was working with an Afghan leader to bring a project to Afghanistan when everything went wrong. He is now stuck in Turkey. These people have helped our initiatives and we are leaving them there.
The Liberal member said this is premature. I am sure my colleague has a comment, because this is a message for future missions. Canada needs to stand up for the people who support it.
Could the member please comment on the Liberal member's comment about this being premature?
105 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:33:22 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have to say that action from the Canadian government to support people and get them to safety is absolutely essential and urgent. It is not premature. In fact I would argue that it is late in the day for us to get going on this. This should have been done before the election. It should have been done even with the prior administration. The Conservatives created a program from 2009 to 2011, which required at least 12 months of service starting in 2007 for Afghans to qualify to get to safety, even though we knew the Canadian military faced some of the heaviest fighting between 2006 and 2007.
Successive governments have failed. It is not premature. We should have done this yesterday.
125 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:34:29 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of talk about stalling by the Liberal government. How is the Liberal stalling on this humanitarian crisis costing lives at this moment?
29 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:34:55 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is absolutely costing lives, because people cannot get to safety. The government made an announcement saying it would bring 40,000 refugees from Afghanistan, knowing that the refugee determination process does not enable them to get to safety and knowing they cannot get the documentation to get to safety. All of that is just words. It is meaningless and costing lives.
64 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:35:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is with a sense of duty and honour that I stand here today in the House to support this motion to set up a committee to review Canada's actions during the evacuation of Canadian personnel and civilians and our Afghan friends and allies from Kabul; those who got out.
As a former associate minister of national defence, I want to say that my heart goes out to those 40,000 Canadians and their families who served in Afghanistan, and to our ill, our injured and, most importantly, our fallen. They made the ultimate sacrifice for Canadians so that among other victories, little girls could go to school in peace in Afghanistan and not fear having acid thrown in their faces or being married off at the age of nine. Have we forgotten the attempted murder of Malala by the Taliban in Pakistan, when she spoke up for the education of girls?
Like Canadians who served during the Afghan mission, the Afghan war, I want to say how profoundly saddened I was to watch Canada strike her colours and run from Kabul, leaving many Afghan friends and allies behind, along with their families, for the Taliban to decide their fate. The victors of Vimy, the Hundred Days, D-Day and Kapyong, had they been able, would have cried out in rightful indignation at the scenes at the airport and at Canada's final retreat. For me and many friends and colleagues, it was a week of feeling frustrated, weak and sickened by the government's half-hearted approach, which can be summed up by “last in and first out”.
To be clear, I have nothing but praise for the professionalism of the Canadian embassy staff and our Canadian Armed Forces personnel, particularly our special forces, who were left to hold the bag for the Liberal government. I only wish they would get the love and support they need from the government in terms of modern equipment, but that is not the Liberal way. It apparently is not the Liberal government's way.
As a former minister, I get to see how decisions are made behind closed doors; I have an idea of the “battle rhythm” of a crisis and the response to it. Canada's response has been slow, overly bureaucratic, risk averse and without any real political leadership to get things done. We could see the dithering at the highest levels of the Liberal government, because we were in the lead-up to an election and then into an election that the Liberals thought they had in the bag. To put it simply, the government shamefully had its eyes on a majority government at a pivotal time and could not have cared less about the national interest or the human tragedy unfolding thousands of kilometres away in Afghanistan.
Canadians have the right to know what the government did in the run-up to the fall of Kabul and what it did afterward. The peace treaty with the Taliban was signed on February 29, 2020, and later, on April 14, 2021, the Biden administration announced its intention to withdraw from Afghanistan by September 11, 2021.
I will be splitting my time with the member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles.
If February 29 did not ring any bells in Ottawa at the Prime Minister's Office or the Privy Council Office or Global Affairs or National Defence or Citizenship and Immigration, there can be no question that alarm bells should have been ringing on April 14, with the clear end date set for September 11.
What did the Liberal government do when the United States administration announced its planned withdrawal? Did it strike an interdepartmental committee of deputies? Did it lay out plans for an all-of-government response? Did it send a reconnaissance team to Kabul to look at the logistics of getting thousands of Canadians and their Afghan allies out of the country? Did it lean ahead and start evacuations of, say, our Afghan embassy staff and interpreters, likely the easiest to clear, and get them and their families out?
It looks like the government was like a deer caught in the headlights and did nothing. Had there been any action, the government would no doubt have stood on soapboxes across the nation to announce the news. Instead, it chose to do nothing, and this is the point. It was a choice.
The government had months to plan, marshal its resources, lean forward and carry out evacuations with the Afghan government and U.S. military still in control of the country. It did not do it. Then between May and July 2021, the Taliban started to make predictable gains on the ground in Afghanistan. As U.S. forces started to withdraw, as money dried up for pay of the Afghan army, as America withdrew the logistics consultants that kept the Afghan air force flying and the Afghan army vehicle fleets moving, the Canadian government had access to the same intelligence as our allies and could have sped up its evacuation operations then.
Did we reach out to the Pakistani government or the military and ask them for assistance? Knowing that the tide was turning on the ground, what did the Liberal government do to get our people, our friends and our allies out? Where was our logistics hub? Why was there not a search capacity in place to process visa applications? Almost a month after, on July 23, the government announced its so-called path to protection; path to protection, indeed. Almost as soon as the path to protection was announced, the government was running in the opposite direction and jettisoned the 72-hour application deadline.
Let us look at timelines. Four months after President Biden announced the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the first evacuation flight out of Kabul landed in Canada. By August 10, the Taliban controlled 65% of Afghanistan and the second and third largest cities, Kandahar and Herat, had fallen. On August 13, Canadian officials announced a plan to resettle 20,000 Afghan refugees, including interpreters, activists, women leaders and members of the LGBTQ community. Two days later, Kabul fell to the Taliban and the Haqqani network. The death squads started to prowl the streets, going house to house to kill people who put their and their families' safety aside to work with Canadian diplomats, aid workers and soldiers. On August 17, two more flights got out with embassy staff and Afghan interpreters. While death squads were roaming the streets looking for our people, the Prime Minister said he would not give the Taliban diplomatic recognition. By August 20, Canadian officials managed to stop COVID testing and waive passports for refugees. On August 26, we witnessed two bomb blasts by suicide bombers at the airport and the Liberal government, in an election morass, pulled the plug; the evacuation ended. Our ambassador had gotten out 11 days previous.
Would it not be interesting to see the correspondence between Privy Council, Global Affairs and National Defence? Imagine what the Prime Minister's Office was saying to people about taking no unnecessary risks. All this time, innocent Afghans who took us at our word were seen falling from the landing gear of transport aircraft in desperation to leave and find safety. All the while, the Liberal government was playing for time with the media and the electorate.
Liberals said that we could stay after the Americans left, that we would get them out by land, that we would evacuate them from regional partner countries like China, Russia, Iran and Pakistan. It was all smoke and mirrors, all a great game to protect the Liberal Party of Canada and its interests over the national interests and, literally, human life.
Where are the Liberals' priorities? How many refugees did the Liberal government rescue? It was 3,600 with another 1,200 in transit. First, the target was 20,000 refugees, now it is 40,000. These are targets, not reality.
In 2006, during conflict in Lebanon, the Conservative government, with less time and warning, evacuated 15,000 Canadian citizens from that war-torn country. It acted with leadership, alacrity and dispatch; quite a contrast to the Liberal government.
As a former associate minister of national defence, I want to say that we simply cannot forget our allies in times of need. Words with no plan are useless and are costing lives. A special committee and its recommendations are absolutely necessary to streamline bureaucracy and show both compassion and agility.
Mr. Speaker, priorities.
1428 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:45:47 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech.
Since this morning, much has been said about this motion, whose purpose seems to be to score political points, rather than quickly producing tangible results to help the people of Afghanistan.
This morning, we heard several times that some people are now—just as we are talking together or going for a snack in the lobby—in so-called safe houses, or secret facilities. Those individuals are waiting for the people of a G7 country, whom they helped for several years, to go and get them. We have a duty, a responsibility, towards them.
My colleagues made some interesting suggestions this morning concerning changes to proposals and amendments to this motion. Given the current state of affairs, we unfortunately cannot vote in favour of the motion, as it is a dog and pony show.
For example, we talked about reducing the number of documents required, streamlining the process, giving the committee more power and focusing more on the present and the future.
What is being done to move forward and recruit the staff required to send humanitarian aid to those who need it now? Would my colleague support this set of amendments?
203 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:47:11 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I absolutely agree with my friend that we must act and we must do better. We are in a very serious situation and we need this committee and its recommendations. We need to take a closer look at this. As for our allies, our friends, the interpreters and those left behind, we need to get them out and we need them out now.
65 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:47:41 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, within the motion, the opposition is suggesting that members should be limited in terms of their ability to pose questions, I believe it is four hours, and to share their thoughts with this special committee.
Does the member believe the government putting in motions to limit opposition's ability to speak in committees is any more right than the opposition doing it to the government?
67 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:48:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, generally speaking, I would say that I am not a big fan of closure of debate and I know my hon. friend does not like it either because he often has a lot to say in this House, and we both welcome and fear those interventions sometimes. In any event, this is a very serious and urgent situation. The reason to get on it within certain parameters is to target our discussions and get the recommendations out as quickly as possible.
83 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:49:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I just had a question around some of the topics in the committee. I agree with the urgent need to help translators and allies get out of Afghanistan.
Will this new committee address with urgency the challenges for girls and women now and in the future?
48 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:49:24 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am particularly concerned about the fate of women and young girls in Afghanistan. We have all seen the videos of nine-year-old girls being sold off into what they are calling “marriage”. This is very serious. I mentioned the need for education of girls and the fact that our efforts allowed them to be educated. Recently, at an international security forum, there was a woman from the former Afghani Parliament there. She was articulate. She was educated. She was passionate and so concerned about the women and girls in her country. We should be just as concerned for them.
105 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:50:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, in recent years, Canada has shown that it is not a power with influence on the world stage.
Right now, we are following the example of other countries who are miles ahead of us. Canada has had multiple foreign affairs ministers since 2015. It takes stability to score points on the world stage.
In its deliberations, could the committee consider whether it would be a good idea to have some permanency at the Department of Foreign Affairs? If not, Canada will continue to be considered a minor player.
90 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:50:58 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we should not be considered a minor player. We were a major player in the efforts in Afghanistan. It is with shame, I would say, how we withdrew from Afghanistan and left people behind. We should continue to, in effect, punch above our weight and be integral to bringing those people out.
54 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 12:51:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think it is important I begin by providing some background so that people can understand why we are debating a motion today about what happened in Afghanistan.
Let us remember that exactly 20 years ago, Canada was part of an international military coalition seeking to combat terrorism in Afghanistan. At the time, in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks, Canada decided to join our partners from the United States, Great Britain and other countries in fighting the al-Qaeda forces that had gathered in Afghanistan and that were being harboured by the Taliban government in power.
The coalition obviously included the United States, Great Britain and Canada. Upon their arrival, they had one main mission, a combat mission. It was the first time in years that Canada was officially at war and that our soldiers were being called upon to fight al-Qaeda Taliban terrorists.
Many of the troops on the ground, many Canadians, engaged in direct combat. We never really saw any figures and so, even though the information exists, we never really found out how many terrorists Canadian soldiers killed outright and wiped off the face of the earth, something I see as a good thing.
It is also worth remembering that hundreds of Canadian troops lent a helping hand. Those who were fighting the enemy had an extremely difficult, complex and dangerous job, but there were also troops deployed there to help the Afghan people, girls and women in particular, to rebuild schools, and to repair drinking water sources and infrastructure that had been demolished by the Taliban, who are completely insane.
In the 10 years or so that Canada was directly involved, our troops on the ground devoted all their energy to fighting on the one hand and helping the Afghan people on the other. The Afghan people were under the total control of the Taliban and members of al‑Qaeda, some of whom even came from other countries to settle directly in Afghanistan, where they could have land and train as terrorists.
Let us not forget that 158 Canadian troops lost their lives in Afghanistan. Hundreds, if not thousands, of others were injured. A very good friend of mine blew up three vehicles by driving over improvised explosive devices. He walked away with his life, which is frankly a miracle, because most of the time, once is enough to be fatal. Fortunately, my best friend survived.
This shows once again, in addition to the 158 men and women in uniform who died either from explosive devices or otherwise, that there are dozens and hundreds of people, like my friend, who almost died for the cause and in order to help. They were there as good Canadians who were deployed on a mission. When Canada deploys on a mission, it is to help. Fighting is one thing, but helping people is what motivates us the most. That is what we did, and Canada’s military has never wavered.
I was in the military at the time. I personally had to train soldiers who were deployed to Afghanistan, here in Canada, and even in the U.S. The training was on counterterrorism response and how to go into villages and fight the enemy lying in ambush. I was also trained on how to go and inform a family that a soldier had been killed. I learned how to deal with the family of a soldier killed in action.
Canadians can be very proud of what the military has done and what Canada has done. Some 40,000 Canadian troops were deployed during those years, both the regular and reserve forces. These were moments of great pride. It was dangerous, but the troops who trained and deployed had the great honour of doing that job.
Canada stopped fighting in 2011 and left Afghanistan in 2014. We completed our mission. We did what we could with the resources that Canada had. It was very difficult and very demanding, even though it was a source of pride. However, it still seriously challenged the ability of the Canadian Forces to do what we did, and we stuck with it until the job was done.
The United States, Great Britain and other countries stayed longer to ensure that Afghanistan stabilized and that the government could remain in place. Unfortunately, as we saw this summer, the country collapsed. Everyone left Afghanistan on August 31, 2021, and the Taliban has taken power once again.
What happened over there? How, after 20 years of work, did we wind up completely losing control over the situation? After all of that, how did the Taliban regain power?
We need to investigate this and gather as much information as possible, but most importantly, we must look back to understand why Canada did nothing to help our allies on the ground, the Afghans who worked for us, people like Wali and Mohammed and their families. These people worked as our interpreters and cooks, putting their lives at risk.
Let us not forget that, during the 10 years that we spent there, hundreds of thousands of Afghans risked their lives to help us. As soon as an Afghan was associated with the Canadian Armed Forces, they were considered an enemy by the Taliban. These people helped us accomplish our mission, helped Canada and the allies save their country, at great risk to their own lives and those of their families.
We knew that this was coming. Months before August 31, 2021, we knew that there was a problem and that these people's lives were being threatened. The NGOs warned Canada and the coalition countries. Everyone was warned.
The Americans prepared to help the people of Afghanistan who helped them, but in Canada, there was complete radio silence. We were in the middle of an election campaign. Then all of a sudden, Canada realized that we had friends there and that we had abandoned them.
The Prime Minister thought the election campaign was more important. We got the feeling that he did not care about what was happening in Afghanistan, that he did not care about those people. Perhaps that is not the case, but that is the impression that we got from what the Prime Minister and the Liberals were saying. It did not seem as though they had any consideration for the Afghans who helped Canada for so many years.
However, warnings were issued. Everyone knew that the danger was coming and it was time to act. Of course, it is complex to intervene, but the time to act was when the Americans and the British were still over there. There is no sense in waiting until August 31, when everyone has withdrawn, and then arriving late and saying that it is complex to intervene, as the Prime Minister told me during question period. Of course it is complex, but what were the Liberals doing when it was time to act?
That is why the official opposition, hopefully with the support of the other two opposition groups, will get a special committee established. The purpose is to get to the bottom of this. I agree with my colleagues in the Bloc Québécois that immediate action is needed, and I hope the government across the way is moving on this. I hope that the Liberals are moving quickly and doing everything they can to help people like Wali and their families come here.
We need to investigate and find out why our government did not take more effective action, to understand what was not done and why it happened, so that it does not happen again. That is why we as parliamentarians have a job to do.
The special committee to be set up will be able to carry out the necessary investigative work to help us understand. If the government needs to be reprimanded, it will be. If there was no other possible action, we will find that out. The important thing is to get to the bottom of this, and that is why we are here today. In order to shed light on what happened, all parliamentarians have to vote in favour of this motion.
I agree with the Bloc Québécois that we must act now. However, it is up to them, on the other side of the House, to hurry up and get the Afghans whose lives are currently in danger out of their country.
1420 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 1:01:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative motion reminds me of the relationship that I have with my colleague from Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles on Twitter. Let us just say that my intentions are not always the best when we debate on Twitter, and I get the impression that what the Conservatives are trying to do is embarrass the government.
I would ask my colleague whether he would agree with me that there should be an amendment to the Conservative proposal to focus on the present and the future from a humanitarian perspective.
Would that not be a good way to untie this knot that perhaps leaves us with the impression that the aim of my Conservative friends is to make the government look bad?
123 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 1:01:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Jonquière for his question. We all like to poke fun at each other on Twitter from time to time.
In the first part of his question, he says that the purpose of our motion is to make the government look bad. However, if the government had done its job properly, we would not be debating this motion today, and we could have debated a motion about something else. If the government does not do its job properly, then it must answer for that.
With regard to the second part of his question, I was told that the Bloc Québécois has amendments to propose, which I think are quite acceptable. I cannot give the final confirmation because I am not the one responsible for this matter, but I think that the Bloc Québécois is raising some interesting points. The important thing is that we be able to adopt a motion that everyone finds acceptable in order to hold the government to account.
178 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 1:02:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have asked this question of others and would be interested in the member's response to it.
We have standing committees on foreign affairs, immigration and defence. They have been known to coordinate in the past. There would be more involvement by members of Parliament.
I am wondering if the member believes that our standing committees have a role to play in this. Should they be pushed to the side in favour of this motion?
78 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/21 1:03:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. It is good to see him in the House, so I thank him for being here.
The fact is, all the committees are already overloaded because they have to conduct their own studies on specific subjects or bills. For example, the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations had to be established because there were so many subjects that needed to be studied.
More recently, the Special Committee on the Economic Relationship between Canada and the United States was established. The reason we need to form special committees is that there are too many subjects to study and the existing committees do not have time. For example, if the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development were asked to do a study, it could take six months or even a year to complete.
We must act swiftly. I think that enough members would want to be on the special committees, so that is not a problem, because all of them would be happy to be part of these committees.
179 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
