44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 27, 2023 11:00AM
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean for his speech. Every time he rises here in the House we see that humanitarian causes are very dear to him.
With respect to Afghanistan, we know that the needs are immense and that millions of people are affected.
My question may be a little redundant in light of the earlier question. Does this bill strike a good balance between sanctions on a terrorist state and the exceptional measures for humanitarian assistance? I understand that improvements need to be made. Is that tied to this aspect of the bill?
99 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I have to say I was a bit nervous there for a minute after the Conservatives made it so I was unable to give my remarks last week. I was worried that was going to happen again. I am quite happy they are just cold at the moment.
As always, it is my great delight to stand in this House and represent the people of Edmonton Strathcona. Today, we are talking about something that is very close to my heart and something that I have been working on for most of my career. While I am delighted to stand representing the people of Edmonton Strathcona, I am not delighted to be having this conversation at this moment in time.
In February 2021, six months before the fall of Kabul, I wrote to Mr. Garneau, the Minister of Foreign Affairs at the time, and I explained to him what was going to happen in August of 2021 if the Canadian government did not take action. I raised that again during question period in May 2021 and spoke about how people in Afghanistan needed Canada to stand up.
We all know what happened in August 2021. We all know how we failed the people of Afghanistan in August 2021. We know the reasons for it. I am not going to get into that here. We failed them on immigration. We failed them on humanitarian aid. We failed the people of Afghanistan in so many different ways.
Today, we are talking about a bill that is supposed to fix that failure. Today, we are talking about Bill C-41, which is a humanitarian carve-out. Let me correct that; it is supposed to be a humanitarian carve-out for humanitarian organizations.
We are in this place right now debating a bill that took 18 months to come to fruition, while so many Afghans suffered and starved. The government took 18 months. What we have right now is not even what the humanitarian sector asked for. It is not even what we have been calling for the past 18 months.
I stood in this House and asked for a humanitarian carve-out for humanitarian organizations so that Canadians who wanted to help in Afghanistan could do that and so that Canadians who have decades of experience working with the people in Afghanistan could do that.
I raised that in the House on November 30, 2021. I asked if the minister, at the time, was going to act with the urgency required to make sure there was a humanitarian carve-out in place so that Canadian organizations could work in Afghanistan and could help people in Afghanistan who were suffering so much under the current regime.
Instead, what we have now is a bill that will limit the abilities of humanitarian organizations. Let us make this very clear: This is not just about Afghanistan. This is about all humanitarian contexts. What we decide with this legislation will have impacts in Gaza and Yemen, and it will have impacts in all kinds of humanitarian contexts. While we are looking at it within the scope of Afghanistan right now, it is not just about Afghanistan and every single person needs to understand that.
I was speaking to experts. I am sure many of us spoke to experts within the humanitarian sector. MSF recently put in a published response to Bill C-41. It said:
Criminalizing Canadian humanitarian agencies or their staff for working in territories controlled by terrorist groups would be contrary to existing international norms and laws, most notably the Geneva Conventions, and might even be unconstitutional. There is legal precedent in Canada supporting the claim that, owing to the life-saving purpose of humanitarian aid, it cannot be considered criminal to provide it, even when a terrorist group may accrue some benefit from that aid.
MSF works in some of the most horrendous circumstances in this world. It is saying that this legislation does not meet the needs that needs to be met. I have heard some interesting things.
I have spoken to the Minister of Public Safety, the Minister of Justice and the Minister of International Development. I have spoken to all these ministers and asked, “Who is responsible, and when is it coming?” I have also listened to all three ministers tell me that it is someone else's problem, that it is someone else's fault and not to worry, that someone else is dealing with it or that it is too complex for them to undertake.
I want to tell members what some of the other countries have done. The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade announced that:
Australia [would implement] the [UN Security Council's humanitarian] exemption immediately relying [upon] the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945. Accordingly, assistance or activities covered by [the Security Council's exemption]...do not constitute an offence under Australian sanctions laws.
The United Kingdom amended its regulations to indicate that its financing prohibition does not cover the delivery of humanitarian assistance or other activities that support basic human needs in Afghanistan. There is also the U.S. and the European Union. They all amended their legislation. In fact, with respect to the United Nations, on December 22, 2021, the UN Security Council decided through resolution 2615, the drafting of which was spearheaded by the United States, “that humanitarian assistance and other activities that support basic human needs in Afghanistan” do not violate the council's sanctions regime.
The council also specified:
[T]hat the processing and payment of funds, other financial assets or economic resources, and the provision of goods and services necessary to ensure the timely delivery of such assistance or to support such activities are permitted.
That happened on December 22, 2021. Therefore, countries around the world that are our allies who also believe in the rule of law, humanitarian assistance and humanitarian law were able to make this humanitarian carve-out. However, Canada took 18 months and has not provided a carve-out. Let us be very clear: This law is not a humanitarian carve-out. Why is this so important and pressing? Why have I brought this up in the House and written to the ministers time and time again? Why has every party in the House raised this issue?
My colleague from the Bloc just brought up recently how long he has been calling for this. The Special Committee on Afghanistan was calling for this. Why have we all been acting for this? It is because a record number of people in Afghanistan need our help.
Hunger does not wait. It is not waiting for us to have time or for it to be convenient for the rest of us. People are starving to death in Afghanistan. I have to say, Canada has spent billions of dollars, and we have lost the lives of Canadian soldiers on Afghanistan soil. We have a relationship with Afghanistan. We have an obligation to the people of Afghanistan.
They do not need our support when things are going well. The people of Afghanistan do not need us to step up when all is well. However, when six million people are at risk of severe malnourishment, tens of millions of people are food-insecure and cannot have enough food to eat, the economy has failed, there are drought conditions and climate change has made it impossible for the people of Afghanistan to feed themselves is when they need Canada to step up. That is when we need to do the work to help the people of Afghanistan.
Do not get me wrong, Madam Speaker: The Taliban is a horrendous terrorist organization by all definitions. What the members of the Taliban are doing to women and girls in that country right now is so repugnant and disgusting to me. However, we cannot stop helping people because of that. We still have to help people who are there. I would like to have every single schoolgirl be able to come to this country because if they cannot learn in their country, I would like Canada to do everything it can. I would like to say that an unlimited number of Afghans should be able to come here and study.
I know that I am very angry right now, but I will say one thing. I give speeches in my community all the time. I go and talk to students. It is a really important part of our role as parliamentarians to be in our communities.
I was talking to a grade 6 class about the importance of being a parliamentarian and my role as the foreign affairs critic. I talked about how one of the worst things for me was knowing that women and girls could not go to school in Afghanistan. Teaching women and girls fundamentally changes a country; it is the best thing we can do to deal with climate change, to teach women and girls all these reasons.
This beautiful girl in the front row put up her hand and told me that she was a refugee from Afghanistan, and she was in Canada studying and learning. It was such an incredible and beautiful thing to see.
I will come back to Bill C-41. One of the things that I think is very interesting about this is the way our humanitarian assistance has developed in this country. We have an Official Development Assistance Accountability Act in law. There is a law in our country, put in place in 2008. I was thrilled to be part of the civil society groups that were pressing for some of the legislation back then.
We have a law in place, and it says that Canada's humanitarian and development assistance would go to those most in need and that we would support those most in need. Not only is it law; it is Canadian values. My goodness, every Canadian wants to support people who are most in need and who most require our support. How can there be a better case for providing humanitarian support? How could that be possible?
Over the past eight months, close to 10,000 Canadians have joined the Aid for Afghanistan campaign, calling on the federal government to remove barriers to life-saving aid and assistance in Afghanistan. It is absolutely clear that Canadians support providing this humanitarian assistance. This is what they have been asking for.
The restrictions that Canada has in place have prevented Canadian organizations from doing that, from getting life-saving assistance to the most vulnerable and actually living up to our obligations under international law.
This is a country that has a feminist international assistance policy and is supposed to have a feminist foreign policy. From what I have been told, we have one; it is just not written down. I do not know if the government knows how policies work. This a country that is supposed to be a feminist leader and that is supposed to be leading the world, but we know that the impacts are disproportionately felt by women and girls. The impacts of the poverty in Afghanistan are being felt by women and girls. The human rights abuses that are happening in Afghanistan are disproportionately happening to women and girls.
All the rhetoric that we use with regard to humanitarian assistance impacts women and girls more, and yet this carve-out does not help us. I am going to say why it does not help us. First, and I have mentioned this already, it is a registry. It is not a humanitarian carve-out. It is not a carve-out in the same way that the UN, the U.S., Australia, the EU or the U.K had carve-outs. It is not that.
It was also developed despite the expertise in our country. The government did not liaise with, listen to or hear the sector. The sector was clear on what they needed. The experts in humanitarian aid, those who are experts at what they do, told the government what was needed and what they needed to see.
That is not what this legislation is. For the life of me I do not understand why the government would not want to listen to the experts in the field, who know what they are talking about.
Another thing that is wrong with this is that because of the way it is drafted, it puts humanitarian organizations at risk. It does that by actually interfering with their ability to be neutral and to be seen as humanitarian.
I was quite concerned when the current Minister of International Development was appointed. Humanitarian and development organizations spend all their time making sure that they are not associated with the military or defence, that they have neutrality and the ability to do their work on the ground. This bill would limit that. That is why neither the International Committee of the Red Cross nor MSF supports this bill.
We do not know what the bill would look like in other contexts. Right now, the bill has been developed because of what we are seeing in the Afghanistan situation. However, as I raised earlier, it does not talk about what happens if we are talking about other terrorist groups or listed entities. What would the bill mean in northern Nigeria? Can we not provide humanitarian aid there? What about Yemen and Burkina Faso? All these countries have similar challenges, and the legislation would apply to those groups as well. However, we have not heard from the government how it intends to deal with that.
We do not know if the bill is just for Canadian citizens working for Canadian organizations. What about a Canadian citizen working for another organization? What if there is a Canadian citizen working for the United Nations? Do they need to apply to be able to do that work? All of a sudden, the clarity is not there, and organizations that desperately want to get into Afghanistan and provide that help do not know what the bill would mean. They do not know what those expectations would be. They do not know what they would be legally allowed to do, and for an organization, that is terrifying. It is very frightening for any organization to think that it may be forced to stop doing the important work it does because it has broken regulations the government has put in place that the organization does not even understand and that have not been explained.
We do not know how the bill would work with smaller organizations or diaspora organizations. For a long time I have called on the government to increase the support for small and medium-sized organizations and for diaspora organizations. These organizations on the ground know the context and the communities. They have long relationships with these communities, but the legislation before us would make it much harder for them to be able to provide support.
Canadian Women for Women in Afghanistan is a phenomenal organization in Alberta. Right now it is doing everything it can to get educational products to women and girls in Afghanistan. Despite not being able to receive funding and all the things that are happening right now, it is still trying so desperately to get education to women and girls in Afghanistan. As Canadians we should be proud of an organization like that, but the legislation would make it harder for Canadian Women for Women in Afghanistan to do the work it needs to do.
Then, we look at the processing piece of the bill. We have a situation right now where Global Affairs Canada is not able to process things as quickly as it promised. This is not a slight in any way on the overburdened bureaucrats at Global Affairs Canada. It is not able to move things forward as fast as it would like because it is understaffed and overburdened; moreover, the clarity from the Liberal government has not been there.
We can think about the urgent situation we find ourselves in, and then we have a situation where urgency is required and we are asking Global Affairs Canada to add another layer of burden to those who cannot keep up with the current burden. This is not a system that will work. A carve-out would mean that all humanitarian organizations would be free to go forward. The legislation before us would mean that we have just kicked that can down the road again; once more, we are failing Afghanistan. Once more, the Canadian government has failed to live up to its obligations to Afghans.
I, for one, stand in this place. I am happy to work with anyone to make the bill better so that it meets the needs it has to meet for the people of Afghanistan. I am ready to stand in this place and work with anyone to make sure Afghans are no longer being failed by the Canadian government.
2839 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I will ask a question of the hon. member.
She finished on a collaborative tone, as far as working together in this specific area goes. I do not believe any of us would disagree on what we need to do when it comes specifically to Afghanistan. However, my question is about the timing, the 18 months she and many other members referred to in terms of the bill.
How does she see this? Is this a miscalculation by the government or a delay in the calendar? Why has it taken 18 months to see the bill in the House of Commons?
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Edmonton Strathcona for her excellent speech. She is such a champion for human rights and international aid, and such an expert in it. It grieves me to think of how this could have been improved had the government listened to her all along.
I want to give her another opportunity to expand on the possible risks this legislation puts organizations and individuals at, because it is a registry and not a blanket carve-out for all organizations, and how that can affect the safety of people on the ground in Afghanistan.
98 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, to answer the member's question, the government has made it a priority, and that is the reason we have seen the co-operation and the push not only for humanitarian aid but also for ways in which we can assist those Afghan refugees once they can get out of Afghanistan to come to Canada. Canada has led the way on that particular issue.
Recognizing there are many different agencies and individuals in Canada today who are very supportive of us continuing to provide that aid, and that this legislation we are debating today is in fact going to assist in Canada having an ongoing and more stable—
111 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, my colleague just mentioned a very long time has passed since Canada was called on, in particular by my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean, to take action on this issue in Afghanistan.
In addition to the long delays, Canada has not done what it was expected to do to resolve this situation in Afghanistan. I am not the only one to have talked about this. Afghan citizens in my riding in Shefford and even Afghan members who I have met seem to find that this situation has dragged on.
With respect to its obligations, Canada has not done everything it promised to do, especially for the interpreters. We see how action on this file did not unfortunately live up to expectations. Canada could have and must do more immediately.
We will be there, ready to collaborate.
I would like the member to comment on that.
147 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, people in Afghanistan are suffering now. It is appalling that the opposition parties have been calling on the government for over 18 months to address this situation and the government just now is acting on it by presenting a piece of flawed legislation.
Timing is so essential because Afghans need help now. In this piece of legislation there is a requirement of 180 days. Does the member agree that we should amend this to reduce that to 30 days or eliminate it entirely because the help needs to be delivered now?
93 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is encouraging to see the all-party support, and it is important to recognize that the legislation goes beyond Afghanistan. We are talking about aid where terrorism is involved, and it is broader than just Afghanistan. Afghanistan amplifies the issue for us all, so we can better relate to it, but the federal government has a responsibility, and this is what I like about the legislation; it deals with the bigger issue. Afghanistan in itself is a gigantic issue, obviously, but this bill would deal with that in such a way that I think it would position Canada better, in some ways, than countries that have not brought forward such progressive legislation.
I wonder if my colleague would not agree that getting the bill to the committee stage, so that we could perhaps even get some of the questions he has put forward answered, would be a positive thing for all of us to see happen today.
160 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, we definitely are responding to the situation in Afghanistan, but I also look at Mali, and I also look at what is happening down in Haiti right now. There are a number of other failed states where we see gangs and terrorist organizations in control. I worry about Lebanon and the increasing influence that Hezbollah has there as the country continues to try to recover after the massive blast in Beirut, with all the damage and lives lost.
That is why I do like some of the parts of Bill C-41 that would provide flexibility to the minister and the department to do reviews more than every five years. They could do them as they see fit. I would hope the government would listen to parliamentarians, the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and the International Subcommittee on Human Rights. If they were to raise red flags, I hope the government would act upon them to ensure that, where we see dollars being diverted illegally into terrorist organizations or illegitimate governments, it can put a stop to any fundraising activities or dollars flowing to aid organizations to ensure we are not directly or indirectly financing terrorism.
198 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman for his speech.
My colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean said earlier that this bill is long overdue. We know full well that this has been going on for 18 months. What is the government waiting for? When will it help the men, women, and children who are being mercilessly killed in Afghanistan?
In my colleague's opinion, why did this take so long?
76 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I must agree it is disappointing that it has been 18 months since the fall of Afghanistan into the hands of the Taliban. It has been nine months since the Special Committee on Afghanistan brought forward its recommendations to the House, recommending these amendments.
For whatever reason, the government has dragged its feet. “Dither and delay” is the trademark of the Liberal Party of Canada when it is in government, so it is unfortunate that we are where we are, but at least we are moving it forward. I hope the bill gets through committee in an expeditious fashion so we can get back to the basics of saving lives. I just hope we have not lost too many lives because of the ongoing indecision by the government.
132 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, to my understanding, Haiti, right now, is not listed as a terrorist organization, so right now we can raise funds.
I know that one of the things talked about when President Biden was here with the Prime Minister was Canada's participating in a special mission to Haiti to bring and restore peace and security to the region. We need to do that for our aid workers who are there. Haiti is like Afghanistan, the second-poorest country in the world. If anyone needs help, it is the people of Haiti, and if anyone needs to go, it is the gangs that are right now running the government.
110 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to speak to the legislation that was introduced by my colleague, the hon. Minister of Public Safety. As the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, I know our team needs to work closely to keep Canadians safe while also responding to the humanitarian crisis and bringing people to Canada.
In response to the situation in Afghanistan, Canada has acted to support the many women and girls, members of the 2SLGBTQI+ community, human rights defenders, journalists, and ethnic and religious minorities who face oppression, persecution and violence from the Taliban.
It is not an overstatement to suggest that coming to Canada is a second lease on life for some of the world's most vulnerable people.
We made it a priority to resettle the Afghan nationals who supported the efforts of Canada and its allies during the mission in Afghanistan, along with their families. We are deeply committed to our goal of bringing at least 40,000 Afghan nationals to Canada by the end of 2023. We are proud to say that this is one of the most substantial commitments of any country in the world, and we are well on our way to meeting it.
Afghanistan represents one of the largest and most difficult resettlement efforts in Canada's history. The challenges of this resettlement initiative are unlike any other we have faced, starting with the chaos that ensued as the Taliban closed in on Kabul and the bombing of innocent women and children who gathered at the airport to flee the country.
The international withdrawal of military and diplomatic missions left little to no capacity to support the special immigration measures we had created for Afghans in Afghanistan. There are significant challenges in conducting immigration activities and finalizing applications in Afghanistan. That is why Afghans need to travel outside Afghanistan to neighbouring countries before their applications can be finalized. Once in these other countries, what we refer to as third countries, immigration processing can be completed and travel onward to Canada can be arranged.
There are also significant challenges involved in supporting Afghan movement, both to neighbouring countries and onward to Canada. Our government has been doing everything within our control to tackle these challenges head on. To mitigate against some of the obstacles, we have been working with NGOs and other organizations in the region to support these activities. That said, we have not let the barriers that the Taliban have thrown up to the international community stand in our way. To date, nearly 30,000 Afghans have been successfully resettled here in Canada.
These people are Afghan nationals who collaborated on our mission in Afghanistan by working as interpreters, or in other roles, and their families, women and girls who are under the threat of renewed oppression and members of other ethnic and religious groups who are victims of persecution.
In Canada, these Afghan nationals will be able to feel safe after experiencing horrible trauma. I have to say that this is one of the most difficult tasks I have undertaken in my career, but also the most rewarding. As a parliamentarian and a Canadian, I am proud of what we have accomplished.
While there are many people in Immigration, Refugee and Citizenship Canada and other departments working every day on this challenge, all members of Parliament could be proud of the role they play in supporting vulnerable Afghans and providing them with a new home. This can, in fact, be something that all Canadians can be proud of. Canada has stood with those who face oppression and persecution. We have worked to bring them here to provide them with a new home and support their transition to a better life in Canada.
I want to tell the House about one inspiring woman in particular. Her name is Maryam Masoomi. She grew up in Pakistan and Afghanistan, studying at a progressive school that championed education for women.
She worked in media and was the leader of an all-female music group called Sounds of Afghanistan in Kabul. Her songs about education, peace and women's empowerment put her life in danger when the Taliban seized control. If she had stayed in Afghanistan, Maryam would have faced a world where she was not permitted to study, work, sing or even leave the house without a male family member. As a member of the Hazara, an ethnic minority persecuted by the Taliban, and given her progressive education, she would have been the target of threats, abuse, forced marriage and possibly even execution.
She left her homeland, facing dangerous Taliban checkpoints, and she was able to escape with the help of the 30 Birds Foundation. Today, she hosts a radio show in Saskatoon called Kabul Jan, which features music from Afghanistan. She is able to once again perform music. She participated in a special day celebration in 2022. She is also a youth program facilitator at the Saskatoon Open Door Society, which helps other newcomers settle in and integrate into Canada.
Thousands of women like Maryam are given a second chance thanks to Canada's efforts. Canada has done a lot of good work and is still helping Afghans to come and settle here, but we are facing significant obstacles.
The language in the Criminal Code is very specific. As it is presently written, no one can make or authorize payments knowing that they may be used by, or benefit, the Taliban. To do so would risk contravening the Criminal Code's counterterrorism financing provision. As it is written, it is an effective tool for combatting terrorism, but it could impede the provision of much-needed humanitarian assistance and immigration services in a geographic region controlled by a terrorist group. This could involve anything from paying transportation costs, taxes, government charges or other fees.
Any Canadian or person in Canada making or authorizing such payments would risk contravening the Criminal Code's counterterrorism financing provision, given that these payments may be used by or could benefit the Taliban. As the Taliban controls the government, it is now benefiting from taxes, import tariffs and administrative fees. These fees are hard to avoid when supporting critical immigration processing and the movement of people out of Afghanistan.
The bill introduced by my colleague constitutes a reasonable and practical approach that keeps in place strong provisions to fight terrorism, while addressing one of the main obstacles to carrying out immigration activities within Afghanistan.
The proposed changes would facilitate the movement of vulnerable Afghans to a third country where it would be possible to continue the immigration process.
These changes would also give us the ability to respond to other similar situations that might arise, so that Canada's humanitarian response can be fully executed, no matter where in the world we find ourselves responding next. To do this, the legislation creates an authorization regime to facilitate the delivery of international assistance and immigration activities in geographic regions controlled by terrorist groups.
This authorization regime establishes a process whereby individuals and organizations, including Government of Canada departments, must submit an application in order to be authorized by the Minister of Public Safety to carry out specific activities. Accordingly, applicants will be protected from any criminal responsibility in the event that they carry out activities, including financial transactions, in countries or regions under terrorist regimes.
These efforts are aligned with the recommendation of the Special Committee on Afghanistan.
I would like to take, actually, a brief moment to thank all of my colleagues and all of the witnesses who contributed to the special committee work. These efforts led to important recommendations and the final report. More specifically, the report recommends that we “act immediately to ensure that registered Canadian organizations have the clarity and assurances needed–such as carve-outs or exemptions–to deliver humanitarian assistance and meet basic needs in Afghanistan without fear of prosecution for violating Canada’s anti-terrorism laws.”
The report also recommended, “Canada review the anti-terrorism financing provisions under the Criminal Code and urgently take any legislative steps necessary to ensure those provisions do not unduly restrict legitimate humanitarian action”.
Certain obstacles, such as Taliban exit requirements, access to Afghan passports, restrictions on the movement of women and girls, and entry and exit requirements in third countries, will continue to pose challenges. That said, the proposed legislation would provide an impactful tool to help Canada bring vulnerable Afghans to safety.
I hope that members of the House welcome this bill and work together to expedite it. We must come together so we can continue our efforts to help some of the world's most vulnerable people, such as women and girls who face oppression find a new life here in Canada, Afghans who helped us during our mission in the country, female judges who convicted Taliban fighters and need to flee the country, and former legislators and journalists who continued to stand up every day to bravely fight for the rights of women and girls.
1518 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, my hon. friend and members of the government have, in their remarks, tried to argue why this legislation is better than the status quo. I do not think there is much debate in the House that there is a massive problem in Afghanistan and that we need to make amendments that make the Criminal Code more nimble, so that is not really where the debate is.
The debate is around the specific provisions, the construction of this legislation and the concern expressed by all three opposition parties that this legislation would pile so much red tape on development organizations that it would be very challenging for them to use them and they will face significant delays. What we have heard from many is that we need to be holding the government accountable concerning the timelines they would live with under this legislation to ensure that they can actually deliver assistance in a timely manner, that these exemptions are reasonable and accessible and that they are available to all organizations doing this work, not just organizations that have more experience accessing government.
I wonder, in response to my question, recognizing that there is agreement on the principle of this legislation, if the parliamentary secretary could explain why the government chose the particular approach that it did. Why it is different from what our allies have put in place? Why it is so relatively bureaucratic and intensive? Would the government consider the kinds of amendments that all three opposition parties have talked about?
253 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, let us be clear. Essentially, Bill C-41 is about finding mechanisms to allow trustworthy organizations to go and help the local population.
A large part of the parliamentary secretary's speech was about the welcome that Afghans have received in Canada, but now we are talking about ways to help the locals. For example, under the current laws, the Red Cross cannot go into Afghanistan to help.
Does the parliamentary secretary really believe that Bill C-41 strikes the right kind of balance between sanctions against terrorists and exceptional humanitarian assistance measures?
Many organizations, as well as the opposition parties, have intervened to say that they are very concerned that the bill does not strike that balance.
122 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, again, to the parliamentary secretary, we are not disputing the significance and importance of making changes in this regard. The issue is that it has been 18 months since the fall of Afghanistan, nine months since the Afghanistan committee made these recommendations and I think four or five months since the foreign affairs committee adopted a recommendation that mirrored those by the special committee on Afghanistan. Now we have a proposal that is potentially unwieldy.
We need to study at committee how to make it work better and to make it work more effectively. I am hearing from stakeholders that it is better than nothing. However, we need to figure out how to make sure that not only the timelines for passing this legislation will be addressed but also the timelines that charitable organizations will be needing to get support to the ground.
I wonder if the member could share a bit about what amendments the government would be willing to support, especially when it comes to ensuring that all organizations will be able to access these exemptions on reasonable terms, in a reasonable time frame and that especially small diaspora-led organizations will be able to access this process in a reasonable way so that we are able to get aid to the ground in Afghanistan as quickly as possible.
223 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, one of the things that were deeply distressing to Canadians was that, when we were asked to step up to help the American war effort in Kandahar, we lost incredible young people in that fight and then it all collapsed. There were people who worked with Canadian NGOs and with the Canadian military who looked to us to get them out to safety and they were abandoned. It is not being partisan to say the government failed the people we left on the ground and the people who trusted that when they worked with Canadians that Canada would have their backs. Canada did not have their backs.
I dealt with people who were stuck over there. We dealt with midwives trying to get out and with interpreters trying to get out. People were calling our MP offices begging us, and the government failed them. I want to know what the government is willing to say to all those people who trusted that the Canadian maple leaf would stand for something in Afghanistan. When push came to shove, Canada was not there for them.
185 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
