House of Commons Debates VOLUME 148 Ï NUMBER 021 Ï 1st SESSION Ï 42nd PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Friday, February 19, 2016 Speaker: The Honourable Geoff Regan CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) 1119 HOUSE OF COMMONS Friday, February 19, 2016 The House met at 10 a.m. little over the top at times, is that somehow or other, by keeping the jets in theatre, things will somehow or other work out and we will all be that much safer. Prayer I would just point out to the hon. members opposite that Paris happened while the jets were in theatre. Beirut, Jakarta, Burkina Faso, and California, all of those events that affected us all, GOVERNMENT ORDERS happened with jets in theatre, which leads me to the conclusion that this has to be a far more robust engagement than merely jets in Ï (1005) theatre. [English] It is clear at this point that if there is to be a complete degrading of CANADA'S CONTRIBUTION TO THE EFFORT TO ISIS, ISIL, Daesh, however one wishes to refer to it, there need to be COMBAT ISIL boots on the ground. Those boots on the ground need to be the best The House resumed from February 17 consideration of the trained boots on the ground that can be there. They need to be local motion, and of the amendment. forces, and they need to have the best possible intelligence available The Deputy Speaker: When the House last took up the question, to them. the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence The jets have done what the jets can do, and the only lines had five minutes, 45 seconds remaining in his remarks. between Mosul and Iraq at this point are the rat lines. The actual The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence. connections between those two centres of ISIS activity are in fact Hon. John McKay (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of controlled by the jets. Of course, the coalition, and we are in a National Defence, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am pretty sure I can cover coalition, has significant capability to maintain the gains the jets off the five minutes. The 45 seconds might be a bit more of a have achieved. challenge. The difficulty of having my speech interrupted halfway through is that in some respects, I will have to summarize what was I want to conclude with some observations from others with said. respect to what our new, and I would argue, more robust engagement in this conflict is. I would start off by referencing Col. Steve Warren, At the point at which we initially ran out of time, I was talking a spokesman for Operation Inherent Resolve. He says: about the NDP position, which was that the NDP supports the everybody likes to focus on the air strikes, right, because we get good videos out government's position on the upping of humanitarian aid. It certainly of it and it's interesting because things blow up—but don't forget a pillar of this supports the government's position on the welcoming of the refugees operation, a pillar of this operation, is to train local ground forces. That is a key here. By the way, more than 20,000 Syrians, possibly even 21,000, and critical part. are now sheltered here in Canada. The NDP also certainly supports the position with respect to enhanced diplomatic engagement. Then James Stavridis, dean of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander The NDP wants the government to engage in the interdiction of says: both arms and funds. However, there is a perception, at least as I Now I understand you're going to shift from doing training, which is...perhaps the understand the position of the NDP, that it can be done without most important of all. So I applaud the fact that our Canadian military and NATO military engagement. I would invite them to rethink that position, colleagues will be working on the training mission with the Iraqi security forces, because to do those interdictions, we certainly have to have robust potentially with the Kurdish Peshmerga in the north because we don't want to send intelligence capabilities. We certainly have to have robust training 100,000 troops or 150,000 troops like we did in Iraq and Afghanistan. and advising capabilities, because unless there are those boots on the ground, those local boots on the ground, the interdictions and the We want local forces to fight ISIS. We need to train, advise, and laudable goal of cutting off arms and funding will simply not mentor them. NATO can do that very effectively. happen. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to participate in this The Conservative position, on the other hand, is that they wish to debate. I would end by quoting an editorial by a national newspaper, keep the jets in theatre. The rhetoric I have heard, which has been a which said: “It's a sensible way to proceed”. 1120 COMMONS DEBATES February 19, 2016 Government Orders Ï (1010) Conservative government did not deploy Canadian CF-18s and Mr. Guy Lauzon (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, relied extensively on international air power, with good cause and CPC): Mr. Speaker, I am perplexed at the Liberal position. I cannot effect. As well, I do not recall the Conservative government ever for the life of me understand their position. On this side of the releasing or discussing casualty counts prior to operations. Perhaps House, we have a lot of folks who have served admirably in our the member can confirm those facts. Canadian Armed Forces, as they have on that side of the House. Hon. John McKay: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for answering the question from the previous member better than I When I go through my riding, I speak to veterans, and they are could. He has probably as much experience with the Canadian asking how the government can pull these jets out of the sky. There military, particularly in Afghanistan, as anyone in this House. His are 75 troops on the ground now, when there has been cover for experience is something we rely on this side of the House to give us them, but they will not provide any cover. That is incredible. The guidance when putting forward this kind of revised mission. Liberals are tripling the boots on the ground. That is their rationale. They will triple the boots on the ground, with no cover, which is I want to go to the point of interoperability. Just because it is an going to make the problem even worse. We are going to have so American jet up there, that does not mean they are not commu- many casualties as a result. nicating with troops on the ground, of whatever nationality, that are in the coalition. There is interoperability. There is intercommunica- I would like the parliamentary secretary to explain that contra- tion that worked quite well in Afghanistan, and as the minister has diction in the Liberals' position. said repeatedly, the intelligence gathering we are bringing to this Hon. John McKay: Mr. Speaker, I would encourage the hon. theatre of conflict is at a level of capability that possibly does not member to disabuse whoever it is that is speaking to him about this exist in other nations. contradiction. There will be air cover. It is not as if the air cover is going away. There are at least 10 nations providing air cover. I think I feel absolute confidence that there will be excellent coverage that at this point, 65,000 sorties have gone up. It is not as if the air while our people are in theatre. I feel absolute confidence that there cover goes away. will be interoperability. I feel confident that the communication will be there, and it does not necessarily mean that those have to be We are refocusing on what needs to be done in the next phase of Canadian jets in the sky. They can be American or Dutch or the mission. The bombers have done what the bombers can do, whatever. which is drive ISIS members into their hidey-holes. Our troops will (1015) be as well if not better covered while they engage in this mission. I Ï hope that the member disabuses his concerned constituents of the Hon. Andrew Leslie (Orléans, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, ISIL is an idea that there will be no cover, because that is simply not true. evil, brutal, and completely ruthless collective of organizations that specializes in the use of terror to accomplish its aims. ISIL seeks to Mr. Kennedy Stewart (Burnaby South, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I conquer and subjugate, with the interest and intent of establishing a always enjoy my colleague's speeches. I enjoyed them in the last quasi nation state. As such, it is an insurgency. The Canadian Armed session, and I enjoyed this one. However, I have some questions we Forces, indeed Canada, has learned many valuable lessons over the have been trying to get answered. We are being invited to change our last decades in counter-insurgency operations. position. The Minister of National Defence has said that there will be increased risk to our men and women in uniform. One essential piece Allow me to quote from the Canadian Armed Forces counter- of information I would like to know is whether they have a projected insurgency manual, published in 2008 under the authority of the casualty count they could share with us.