Tories Hope For Afghan Docs Deal By Friday; Progress ‘Step-By-Step’
Posted May 3, 2010 1:42 pm.
This article is more than 5 years old.
Government and opposition parties are inching closer to a deal that would allow at least one representative from each party to scrutinize sensitive and potentially explosive documents on Afghanistan detainees.
They are also considering employing the Speaker of the House of Commons to mediate disputes that could arise over the disclosure of information that might jeopardize national security.
While nothing has been nailed down, all parties emerged Monday from their second round of negotiations saying the mood was positive and amicable. And they expressed cautious optimism a deal is within reach by Friday.
“I think the negotiations are open, there’s no bottom lines,” said government whip Gordon O’Connor.
“We’re hoping that maybe by the end of the week we have a solution.”
Speaker Peter Milliken last week ruled that MPs have an absolute right to see all uncensored documents related to allegations that Afghan authorities routinely tortured prisoners captured by Canadian soldiers. He gave all parties until May 11 to find a compromise that would allow full disclosure to parliamentarians without risking national security.
If they can’t resolve the matter among themselves, that would set the stage for opposition parties to move a contempt of Parliament motion against the government – which could trigger a court challenge or even an election.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper last week issued a veiled election threat and continued to insist the government has a legal obligation to protect national security – notwithstanding Milliken’s ruling that Parliament’s right to know trumps all other concerns.
But opposition negotiators said they’ve seen none of that rigidity during their meetings so far with O’Connor, government House leader Jay Hill and Justice Minister Rob Nicholson.
“There’s obviously no agreement at this point but we are feeling positive that the government is interested at this point in finding a solution and not putting up roadblocks to a solution,” said New Democrat MP Jack Harris.
The four parties appear to have ruled out any role for an independent arbiter to vet documents.
“The critical question is who gets to decide. And the Speaker was very clear: Elected members of Parliament get to decide,” said Liberal House leader Ralph Goodale.
Harris said all parties are “on the same page” that parliamentarians themselves must be the ones to view all documents and determine which are safe to release publicly.
He said they’re talking about having a small group of “at least one” MP from each party, who would be sworn to secrecy, and entitled to pore over the documents.
Hill conceded “that’s one of the things being considered.”
There has been only preliminary discussion thus far about what happens if the sworn MPs disagree about which documents can be safely released.
“That’s obviously one of the areas where we need to do a little bit more work,” Harris said.
He noted that Milliken, in his ruling, offered “his services to assist if there’s any issues, and that may be the way to go.”
Goodale said “we all need to reflect” on the idea of Milliken as mediator. He added: “It’s not a role, I’m sure, that he would be thrilled to embrace but no conclusions have been arrived at.”
Bloc Quebecois House leader Pierre Paquette said the government has estimated there are some 20,000 to 40,000 documents related to the detainee issue.
But all opposition representatives pooh-poohed suggestions that it will be an onerous task for a handful of MPs to spend potentially months poring over the papers.
“I’m not caught up with the mounds and mounds of documents. I’m not intimidated by that,” said Harris.
Harris said the process won’t necessarily be lengthy. He said many of the documents have already been released and the chosen MPs will focus strictly on those sections that were blacked out by government censors.
