“On the instruction of Harper’s Conservatives, the gun lobby has been imbedded in Canadian diplomatic delegations since 2009. On the other hand, peace and justice advocates for control of the global weapons trade have to content themselves with an observer status and watch negotiations from the sidelines,” said Green Leader Elizabeth May, Member of Parliament for Saanich-Gulf Islands.

“I call on the Prime Minister to include Project Ploughshares, Oxfam and Amnesty to the Canadian delegation negotiating the ATT,” said May.

The Green Leader was the first MP to raise the issue during Question Period. “When I raised the treaty issue in QP, I was shocked that Minister Baird managed to work the now cancelled Canadian Long Gun Registry into his reply,” said May.

“This international treaty is too important to be obstructed by Harper’s Conservatives’ fascination with the gun lobby. One person per minute dies as a direct result of armed violence. There is a critical need for a treaty that will finally enforce international regulation of the international trade in conventional weapons,” said May.

The post Arms Trade Treaty: Harper’s True Colours Are Showing appeared first on Elizabeth May.

“We know that Canada has only been a weak supporter of the Arms Trade Treaty negotiations to date,” said Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, MP Saanich-Gulf Islands.  “What the world needs is for Canada to play a stronger role in making this treaty happen – and soften some of its problematic positions.”

Violence fuelled by a poorly regulated global trade in arms – guns, rockets, anti-vehicle mines – and ammunition kills at least 2000 people a day globally.   It also causes millions more to live in fear of being injured, raped, or forced from their homes.

For 20 years, advocates have been lobbying for an international treaty that would regulate all weapons, ammunition, and other equipment used by the military and law enforcement personnel.

“I also urge the Conservatives to take every action possible to ensure that the minority of skeptical countries do not succeed in weakening or derailing the existing achievement of high standards during the upcoming negotiations,” said May.

The Conservatives must help broaden the scope of the treaty to include all types of conventional weapons and help expand the now-limited definition of ‘transfer’ which presently leaves out arms being supplied as gifts, loans, leases, or aid.

Other needed improvements include clearer language related to the prevention of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and gender-based violence; public reporting mechanisms and strong implementation measures; the exclusion of loopholes for ‘defence cooperation agreements,’ and strong criteria to assess the risk of human rights violations.

“Unfortunately, the positions Canada has taken on certain of the treaty’s draft provisions are inexplicable, and threaten certain aspects of the treaty,” said May.  “This is especially true in regard to corruption and brokering.”

The Conservatives recently improved rules relating to bribery by strengthening the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act and yet they are now against treating corruption as a central criterion for evaluating whether an arms deal should go forward.

Similarly, the Conservatives’ stance on brokering undermines Canada’s international commitments and threatens to forestall the adoption of a brokering provision in the treaty.  Their opposition to the extension of legal and judicial obligations to Canadians who broker arms deals outside of the country suggests there are more important considerations than the protection of human life.

On Wednesday, March 6, May asked Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird about these concerns in the House of Commons.   His response cited concerns related to the long-gun registry and duck hunters, further confounding observers.

May also delivered a letter to Minister Baird regarding the ATT.

The post Green Party Calls on Conservatives to Back Effective Arms Treaty appeared first on Elizabeth May.

6 March 2013

Dear Mr. Baird,

I am writing to express my hopes and concerns regarding the upcoming negotiations of the Final United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) to be held in New York from March 18-28, 2013.

As the second leg of the first comprehensive global effort to create rigorous, legally binding norms for the control of the international trade in conventional arms, this conference represents a unique historical opportunity.  Its humanitarian import and potential to save lives cannot be overstressed.

My first reason for writing is to commend you for the efforts you and your department have already made to support the success of ATT negotiations to date and to encourage you to take even greater steps to strengthen the provisions of the treaty, upholding the highest standards of transfer controls on arms destined for sites of conflict and armed violence.

I also urge you to take every action possible to ensure that the minority of skeptical countries do not succeed in weakening or derailing the existing achievement of these high standards during the upcoming negotiations. This will require a strong commitment from Canada to be a persuasive proponent of a meaningful and robust treaty that places global human rights above the narrow commercial interests of states.

My second reason for writing is to bring attention to the many flawed aspects of the existing treaty which Canada can improve upon.  In this matter, I would like to echo the calls for improvement already put forward by Ploughshares Canada, Amnesty International, Oxfam Canada, and Oxfam Quebec.  Among other things, these groups have demonstrated the importance of broadening the scope of the treaty to include all arms, their related parts, and ammunition, as well as all methods and types of transfers.  The current draft of the treaty does not include all types of conventional weapons and contains a limited definition of ‘transfer’ which leaves out the possibility of arms being supplied as gifts, loans, leases, or aid.

In order to effectively stop the flow of conventional weapons to sites of conflict and war, the treaty needs to be as comprehensive as possible.  Other needed improvements that these groups have highlighted include the institution of clearer prohibitive language related to the prevention of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and gender-based violence; the requirement of public reporting mechanisms and strong implementation measures; the exclusion of loopholes for ‘defence cooperation agreements,’ and the adoption of strong criteria to assess the risk of human rights violations.

Finally, I would like to comment on several problematic positions that Canada has taken on certain of the treaty’s draft provisions in the first round of negotiations.  Canada cannot act as a global role model and champion of human rights if its actions on the world stage fall short of its standards for measuring its own success at home.  Therefore, I am perplexed by Canada’s unhelpful and internally inconsistent stance on corruption and brokering.

Transparency International says that the international trade in weapons is rife with corruption.  In many poorer countries, corruption not only instigates conflict, it also undermines governments’ capacity to fight poverty.  The negotiations of the ATT offer an effective means to address this problem. Given that Canada recently improved its own rules on bribery with amendments aimed at strengthening the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act, why then is Canada against treating corruption as a central criterion for evaluating whether an arms deal should go forward?

Similarly, Canada’s stance on brokering in the negotiations is equally counterproductive to achieving rigorous global standards.  Canada’s opposition to the brokering provision undermines its international commitments to control brokering, including its recent effort to incorporate into regulations its obligations and commitments under the Wassenaar Arrangement on Export Controls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies. This opposition threatens to altogether forestall the adoption of a brokering provision in the treaty.  I am not certain of the principled grounds Canada has for opposing the extension of its legal and judicial responsibilities under the treaty to Canadians who broker arms deals outside of the country, but its reluctance to do so suggests that there are more important imperatives than the protection of human life that justify the exemption.

I profoundly hope that Canada will emerge from the ATT negotiations as a leader in getting the strongest possible treaty.

Sincerely,
Elizabeth May, O.C., M.P.

Member of Parliament for Saanich – Gulf Islands
Leader of the Green Party of Canada

The post Letter to Minister Baird Regarding the Arms Trade appeared first on Elizabeth May.

[35a35x5JPHA]

Hon. John Baird: Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for her thoughtful contribution on this issue. I can say that Canada has some of the highest global standards when it comes to the exports of munitions and that we do want to clamp down on corruption. We believe that any treaty negotiated should meet the high standards that Canada has already imposed.

We believe that after so many years of the wasteful, inefficient long-gun registry, the last thing we want the United Nations to do is target law-abiding hunters and duck farmers.

An hon. member: Quack.

The post Question Period – Arms Trade appeared first on Elizabeth May.