Email
PrintGrits willing to drop order to produce Afghan documents, want judicial inquiry
The move would allow both sides out of an impasse of historic proportions that if unresolved could lead to a divisive federal election within the next few months.
Liberal MPs say they are willing to relent on an unprecedented House of Commons motion ordering the government to produce secret documents about prisoner transfers in Afghanistan if Prime Minister Stephen Harper agrees to a judicial inquiry into the controversy.
The move would allow both sides out of an impasse of historic proportions that—if unresolved—could lead to a divisive federal election within the next few months over Prime Minister Harper's (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) refusal to cede Cabinet control over information the government claims could endanger national security if it is made public.
A judicial inquiry would allow Prime Minister Harper to retain a degree of control over information that will inevitably surface from allegations the government covered up evidence Canadian troops transferred detainees to Afghan police in 2006 and 2007 knowing they faced the risk of torture. It would also provide the legal setting required for confidential judicial testing of the government national security claim over the documents.
Such an agreement would give the Liberal Party a chance to claim victory in the standoff over the detainees while at the same time avoiding an election most observers agree it is not prepared to fight.
Despite widespread public rejection of Prime Minister Harper's decision to suspend Parliament two months ago, a recent public opinion poll suggested the Vancouver Olympics, Canada's response to the earthquake in Haiti and the passage of time has helped the government recover from the negative reaction, at least marginally.
The opposition is also aware there is no public appetite for a federal election as the country continues to recover from the recession that took hold little more than a year ago and the financial instability that accompanied it.
"I'm not inclined to want an election anytime soon, and I certainly wouldn't be attempting to provoke one," Liberal MP Ujjal Dosanjh (Vancouver South, B.C.) told The Hill Times. "In terms of the information that we're seeking from government through the motion in the House, our objective is not to create an impasse with government, our objective is to actually seek disclosure. The government can provide disclosure by way of calling a public inquiry; then there is no question of us demanding disclosure."
Mr. Dosanjh, a former NDP premier of British Columbia who was also the province's attorney general, is the Liberal defence critic and holds the party's senior spot on a Commons committee that was attempting to probe the allegations of torture when Prime Minister Harper asked Governor General Michaelle Jean to prorogue Parliament on Dec. 30.
Liberal MP Bryon Wilfert (Richmond Hill, Ont.), vice-chairman of the Special Standing Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan, said he would also be willing to back off the motion, on condition the mandate of any inquiry and its term would be acceptable to the opposition.
"My own view, as the vice-chairman of this special standing committee is that without the documents we're really going down the same [road], we've been ploughing the same field for a while," he told The Hill Times. "I think the committee has many other issues it needs to deal with, but on this issue, specifically the detainees, the only way we can get to the bottom of it is through an inquiry, and I would certainly favour and continue to favour that, because I think the committee needs to deal with other issues."
It was the government's refusal to provide uncensored information about detainee transfers to that committee that led to the passage of the House motion from Mr. Dosanjh last Dec. 10.
The motion ordered the government to produce a sweeping array of papers about the Afghan mission, including everything related to claims by diplomat Richard Colvin, who sparked the controversy when he told the committee senior government officials ignored his internal warnings about likely torture and instructed him to restrict his comments about the topic. The government invoked national security elements of the Canada Evidence Act to prevent Mr. Colvin from testifying at a separate inquiry launched earlier by the Military Police Complaints Commission or disclosing secret information at the Commons inquiry.
But the Liberal Party appeared divided on the issue even as the opposition parties passed the motion from Mr. Dosanjh. It passed narrowly, 146-143, and 10 Liberal MPs were among the 18 opposition MPs who did not vote. The party's foreign affairs critic, former Ontario NDP premier Bob Rae, was among them, although he was out of the country at the time. Liberal MP Rob Oliphant (Don Valley West, Ont.), the party's critic for veterans affairs, did not vote, nor did Liberal MP Dominic LeBlanc (Beauséjour, N.B.), the son of a former governor general who is one of the party's major figures in Atlantic Canada and a onetime leadership hopeful. Liberal MP Albina Guarnieri (Mississauga East-Cooksville, Ont.), a former Liberal veterans affairs minister and one of the party's senior Toronto MPs, was also absent.
Grits willing to drop order to produce Afghan documents, want judicial inquiry
The move would allow both sides out of an impasse of historic proportions that if unresolved could lead to a divisive federal election within the next few months.
Liberal MPs say they are willing to relent on an unprecedented House of Commons motion ordering the government to produce secret documents about prisoner transfers in Afghanistan if Prime Minister Stephen Harper agrees to a judicial inquiry into the controversy.
The move would allow both sides out of an impasse of historic proportions that—if unresolved—could lead to a divisive federal election within the next few months over Prime Minister Harper's (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) refusal to cede Cabinet control over information the government claims could endanger national security if it is made public.
A judicial inquiry would allow Prime Minister Harper to retain a degree of control over information that will inevitably surface from allegations the government covered up evidence Canadian troops transferred detainees to Afghan police in 2006 and 2007 knowing they faced the risk of torture. It would also provide the legal setting required for confidential judicial testing of the government national security claim over the documents.
Such an agreement would give the Liberal Party a chance to claim victory in the standoff over the detainees while at the same time avoiding an election most observers agree it is not prepared to fight.
Despite widespread public rejection of Prime Minister Harper's decision to suspend Parliament two months ago, a recent public opinion poll suggested the Vancouver Olympics, Canada's response to the earthquake in Haiti and the passage of time has helped the government recover from the negative reaction, at least marginally.
The opposition is also aware there is no public appetite for a federal election as the country continues to recover from the recession that took hold little more than a year ago and the financial instability that accompanied it.
"I'm not inclined to want an election anytime soon, and I certainly wouldn't be attempting to provoke one," Liberal MP Ujjal Dosanjh (Vancouver South, B.C.) told The Hill Times. "In terms of the information that we're seeking from government through the motion in the House, our objective is not to create an impasse with government, our objective is to actually seek disclosure. The government can provide disclosure by way of calling a public inquiry; then there is no question of us demanding disclosure."
Mr. Dosanjh, a former NDP premier of British Columbia who was also the province's attorney general, is the Liberal defence critic and holds the party's senior spot on a Commons committee that was attempting to probe the allegations of torture when Prime Minister Harper asked Governor General Michaelle Jean to prorogue Parliament on Dec. 30.
Liberal MP Bryon Wilfert (Richmond Hill, Ont.), vice-chairman of the Special Standing Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan, said he would also be willing to back off the motion, on condition the mandate of any inquiry and its term would be acceptable to the opposition.
"My own view, as the vice-chairman of this special standing committee is that without the documents we're really going down the same [road], we've been ploughing the same field for a while," he told The Hill Times. "I think the committee has many other issues it needs to deal with, but on this issue, specifically the detainees, the only way we can get to the bottom of it is through an inquiry, and I would certainly favour and continue to favour that, because I think the committee needs to deal with other issues."
It was the government's refusal to provide uncensored information about detainee transfers to that committee that led to the passage of the House motion from Mr. Dosanjh last Dec. 10.
The motion ordered the government to produce a sweeping array of papers about the Afghan mission, including everything related to claims by diplomat Richard Colvin, who sparked the controversy when he told the committee senior government officials ignored his internal warnings about likely torture and instructed him to restrict his comments about the topic. The government invoked national security elements of the Canada Evidence Act to prevent Mr. Colvin from testifying at a separate inquiry launched earlier by the Military Police Complaints Commission or disclosing secret information at the Commons inquiry.
But the Liberal Party appeared divided on the issue even as the opposition parties passed the motion from Mr. Dosanjh. It passed narrowly, 146-143, and 10 Liberal MPs were among the 18 opposition MPs who did not vote. The party's foreign affairs critic, former Ontario NDP premier Bob Rae, was among them, although he was out of the country at the time. Liberal MP Rob Oliphant (Don Valley West, Ont.), the party's critic for veterans affairs, did not vote, nor did Liberal MP Dominic LeBlanc (Beauséjour, N.B.), the son of a former governor general who is one of the party's major figures in Atlantic Canada and a onetime leadership hopeful. Liberal MP Albina Guarnieri (Mississauga East-Cooksville, Ont.), a former Liberal veterans affairs minister and one of the party's senior Toronto MPs, was also absent.
In response to Prime Minister Harper's refusal to cave in to the demand, the opposition insisted the supremacy of Parliament was at stake and some MPs warned that the Commons could summon Cabinet ministers to the bar of the House for breach of Parliamentary privilege.
Mr. Dosanjh, emphasizing his opposition to the prospect of forcing an election at this time, said that was not part of the plan when the opposition parties passed his motion last December: "That's not the purpose, and I want the whole world to know that."
He said he also wants the Special Committee on Afghanistan to continue its work, with an expanded mandate, and expects more information about the government's handling of detainees through leaks from various sources to the news media.
"There is maybe a flood of information that we may receive through the newspapers and the electronic media that various journalists are working on," he said.
NDP Whip Yvon Godin (Acadie-Bathurst, Ont.) said he was unaware of any negotiations or discussions that might be taking place between the opposition and the government.
A spokesperson for Prime Minister Harper said only that "the government has been clear: officials have and will continue to provide all legally available documents.
news@hilltimes.com
The Hill Times
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
