House of Commons division over IS mission a rarity in Canadian politics

The official House of Commons debate over Canada’s mission to Iraq ended on Tuesday evening with the Conservative majority voting to join the U.S.-led airstrikes against ISIS.

The NDP voted against the motion citing a lack of clarity and no U.N or NATO resolution backing the mission. The Liberals, like the NDP, touted a more humanitarian role.

The question now turns to how those two parties should proceed.

[ Related: Airstrikes against Islamic State group force them to withdraw from parts of Syrian town ]

The fact that Parliament is divided about going to war is a rarity in Canadian history.

According to Duncan Cameron, the President of the left-wing online newspaper Rabble.ca, “Canada has not sent military into a war zone without support from the Official Opposition party in the House of Commons” ever before.

"In World Wars I and II, Korea, all UN missions, the first Iraq war (1993), Afghanistan, and Libya," he wrote, "Canadian military action had bipartisan support. "

Internationally, there’s an unwritten rule that parliaments and legislatures come together and ‘support the troops’ regardless of their reservations about war.

On Wednesday, Opposition Leader Thomas Mulcair said he has respect for the Canadian forces but will continue to speak out against the combat mission.

"Of course we have the greatest respect individually for the brave women and men who serve in our military but that doesn’t mean…that we now agree with the government’s decision on this mission," Mulcair said in a post-caucus press conference.

"We firmly and continue to disagree with the mission they’ve put forward."

As for the Liberals, they face some other challenges. Four members of their caucus didn’t show up for the vote on Tuesday evening. One of them, veteran MP Irwin Cotler released a statement noting that he’s personally advocated for an international combat mission for some time but that the “Government’s motion lacks clarity about what the strategic nature and limits of Canada’s mission will be.”

Trudeau responded on Wednesday saying the party is united.

"The Liberal Party has been very clear, we feel Canada does have a role to play in the push against ISIL, however we could not support the government’s plan last night.

"The Liberal Party voted clearly against the government’s motion last night. And Mr. Cotler who is a friend and a valued member of the Liberal team is in the position where for three years he has been calling for air strikes in Syria," Trudeau told reporters.

"At the same time his statement was unequivocal — he cannot this government’s approach on this. And he made his decision."

The Conservative Party PR machine will undoubtedly be on the attack against Trudeau. They’ve already begun with two tweets from cabinet minister Jason Kenney.

Tweet

Like Mulcair, however, Trudeau says that his party does stand behind Canada’s men and women in uniform.

"We disagree wholeheartedly with this government’s approach," Trudeau said.

"But that takes away nothing from the the valour and the strength of the Canadian forces and the Liberal Party will always support our troops.

[ Related: Debate over Canada’s role in ISIS fight may prove a litmus test of Trudeau’s leadership ]

Both the Liberals and the NDP are in a tough spot: currently public opinion seems to be onside with the Tories.

Things could get even tougher for them on Wednesday afternoon when Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney will address a committee along side RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson and CSIS Director Michel Coulombe on Wednesday afternoon to discuss the threat of ISIS on Canadian soil.

According to CBC News, that discussion will include an analysis of last month’s Public Safety report which suggested 130 Canadians had travelled abroad to join in terrorist activities while of 80 of them have returned to Canada.

Are you a politics junkie?
Follow @politicalpoints on Twitter!