Core 1..168 Hansard (PRISM::Advent3b2 6.50.00)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 139 Ï NUMBER 042 Ï 3rd SESSION Ï 37th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Tuesday, April 27, 2004 Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire´´ at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 2425 HOUSE OF COMMONS Tuesday, April 27, 2004 The House met at 10 a.m. First, it must be balanced, ensuring that civil liberties and individual rights are not unnecessarily compromised in the pursuit of Prayers improved domestic security. In other words, it must reflect Canadian values. Second, to be effective, our national security policy must be ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS integrated across the Government of Canada and with key partners, ranging from first responders to provincial and territorial govern- Ï (1000) ments and our allies abroad. [English] Third, the policy must be flexible so that it can continue to evolve NATIONAL SECURITY as we learn from past experiences and adjust to emerging threats. The government will invest more than $690 million over five years Hon. Anne McLellan (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of from the security contingency reserve to implement key measures Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Lib.): Madam outlined in this framework. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to table in the House, in both official languages, a document entitled “Securing an Open Society: The tabling of this policy fulfills a commitment in the Speech Canada's National Security Policy”. from the Throne. More important, it directly addresses the core Ï (1005) responsibility of any government, which is to ensure the safety and security of its citizens. Since the tragic events of 9/11, the Government of Canada has implemented positive and progressive measures to improve Canada's The government needs the help of all Canadians to make its national security environment. approach to security effective. It also needs the support of the House. We have invested more than $8 billion in additional security I would ask hon. members to carefully review this policy measures. document. I invite them to share their views and those of their constituents with us. We have strengthened our legislative base. Ï (1010) On December 12, the Prime Minister created the portfolio of Mr. Kevin Sorenson (Crowfoot, CPC): Madam Speaker, on Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness to further close security behalf of the official opposition, I welcome this opportunity to gaps and ensure that our national interests and our people are respond to the announcement by the Minister of Public Safety and protected. Emergency Preparedness regarding the government's national Clearly we have demonstrated the leadership Canadians expect of security policy. their government, but we also know that more needs to be done. Unfortunately, I have not yet had an opportunity to read the Today, we are taking another important step forward with the document, “Securing an Open Society: Canada's National Security tabling of Canada's first comprehensive national security policy. Policy”, and therefore cannot comment on the specifics of the government's proposed blueprint. “Securing an Open Society: Canada's National Security Policy” articulates, with specifics, our national security interests, identifies However, as I stated last month in the House, the flurry of security the current threats facing Canadians, and provides a blueprint for announcements in the wake of the Prime Minister's announcement of action to address these threats. This new system will be capable of a visit to Washington cannot deflect the Auditor General's most responding not only to the obvious threat of a terrorist attack but also recent criticism. It cannot hide the fact that for over a decade the to other incidents of national significance that can undermine government has failed. It has failed in its most fundamental role: the Canadians' health and our economic stability, including natural protection of its citizens. disasters, health pandemics and the activities of organized crime. On top of Ms. Fraser's revelation that there are significant gaps The government's national security vision reflects some funda- and errors in our national security, former presidential adviser mental principles. Richard Clarke said yesterday: 2426 COMMONS DEBATES April 27, 2004 Routine Proceedings For the last many years, Canada has not been making much of a contribution at all Allow me—and this is my last point—to question the cost [on the military]...most people in the national security business in Washington think estimate for these new security and public health initiatives: some Canada is getting a free ride in terms of military contribution. $690.4 million. We know that the cost of gun control alone was This extends, as noted by Mr. Clarke, beyond the military into our estimated at $2 million and has now reached $2 billion. We have policing agencies, the RCMP, and also into the intelligence agency reason to doubt that for something as broad as security, CSIS. $690.4 million—which does not include money for health—will be enough. To summarize what was said by this former counterterrorism adviser to the United States, both for President Bush and for his We have some questions. We asked those in charge of security predecessor, Bill Clinton, Canada is not pulling its weight in the war whether some of the costs involved in marine security, for instance, against terrorism. I would therefore once again conclude that the could be assumed by users. We have been burned in the past by this minister's announcement today is too little too late. government in having to share ice-breaking costs in particular. As the minister so rightly pointed out, the core responsibility of any government is to ensure the safety and security of its citizens. In conclusion, allow me to say that we will closely scrutinize all For over 10 years, this government has neglected its military, this bills pertaining to this new public security policy to ensure above all government has neglected our security, and this government has that fundamental freedoms are respected. neglected our intelligence forces, tearing them down to such unprecedented levels that it will take years to rebuild. For over a Ï (1015) decade, this government has failed in its most fundamental role: the safety and security of Canadians. [English] [Translation] Hon. Lorne Nystrom (Regina—Qu'Appelle, NDP): Madam Mr. Yvan Loubier (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ): Madam Speaker, I want to endorse some of the things said by my friend from Speaker, the government's new security policy raises some the Bloc Quebecois in terms of being concerned that we do not step questions. The first one relates to civil liberties. The minister said on individual freedoms, that we have a national security policy and that we must ensure, and I quote, “that civil liberties and individual the like. rights are not unnecessarily compromised in the pursuit of improved domestic security”. Does this mean that if, ultimately, this must be done, the government will do it? I want to say from the outset that what I see in the paper from the briefing this morning is that it looks good on paper. It is a matter of Second, the new security policy includes a rather extraordinary how it is implemented and how much money is committed to it to number of agencies, committees and groups. However, let us not make sure that we have a security policy that will protect the safety forget that, in her criticisms, the Auditor General alluded primarily to of Canadian people. That is paramount. the exchange of information. Will this proliferation of agencies, committees and groups of all kinds ensure that the exchange of We need money, for example, for community policing around the information is more efficient? country. We need enough money for emergency response. The SARs issue is a good example of that. That is very key in terms of how this Third, I hope it is not just to please the United States that, this policy is actually implemented. morning, the government is making this statement on a new security policy. Earlier this week, when the Minister of Finance met his American counterpart, John Snow, and presented this security policy We already have the new Department of Public Safety and to him, before presenting it to Parliament and to Canadians, Mr. Emergency Preparedness. Now there will be a government Snow said that he was satisfied and that the United States would be operations centre, a national security council and then a parliamen- satisfied, because the policy looks very similar to what the tary committee that will be advising on national security. I hope all Americans themselves are doing regarding national security. these things come together and they provide a top-notch security system. This new security policy is being tabled—and this is my fourth point—in haste without any consultation with Parliament or the I also want to make the point that I do think in general our security public. And they talk about partnership. in the country is on par with anywhere in the world. I really wonder Some partnership. This is my fifth point. The policy states that the sometimes when I hear Conservatives who quote their friends in the partners will have to apply measures that are decided here. That is an United States talking about how superior the security system is in the odd partnership for starting this new security policy. It is quite United States. I am not sure there is any evidence of that except for disconcerting to see in this new policy statement on security, the the odd quote from the odd person in the United States of America.