Evidence of meeting #86 for Veterans Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was monument.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Exactly. If we have more members who would like to talk about the motion, we're going to discuss it.
Are there any other interventions on the motion by Mr. Casey regarding Erin O'Toole? No.
Are there any objections to adopting the amendment tabled by Sean Casey to invite Erin O'Toole?
(Amendment agreed to)
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Casey Liberal Charlottetown, PE
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to make a few comments on the motion as amended.
I find it absurd that the opposition members opposed a request for production of documents that would have given us access to jury correspondence, and now they want something specific about the jury.
I want to give them the benefit of the doubt, but it seems that my opposition colleagues only want to have the documents that they think will support the narrative they're trying to fabricate. They don't want to hear about the veterans or even about the opinions that were in favour of the final choice—Team Stimson's design concept. And yet this is a monument that honours veterans.
The National Memorial to Canada's Mission in Afghanistan will recognize the commitment and sacrifice of Canadians who fought in Afghanistan, as well as the support provided to them by Canadians at home. The monument will also reflect Canada's deep gratitude for the sacrifices made by those who fought in Afghanistan, including those who lost their lives or were injured physically or psychologically.
The monument will serve as a public space to perpetually remember Canadians' selfless service to our country and will give future generations an opportunity to learn more about this particular moment of our military's history.
We know that the jury's decision was not unanimous, contrary to what my colleague said in the House. The jury did an incredible job in selecting the five design concepts on the final list. We all agree on that.
The role of Veterans Affairs Canada, as project leader, is to listen to veterans, and that is what was done. Veterans Affairs Canada received feedback from over 10,000 Canadians on the design concepts considered for this monument. The veterans, their families and others who took part in this mission were mainly the ones who shared their feedback.
Team Stimson's design concept best reflects the feedback received from veterans, their families, and other participants in that mission during our public consultation. Listening to veterans and honouring their choice is essential.
As a final comment before I cede the floor, Mr. Chair, I spent 17 years of my professional life practising law, primarily in the area of civil litigation. It is inevitable that this particular dispute is headed to the courts, and perhaps that's rightly where it should be. This exercise, in an attempt to go on a fishing expedition to try to pin it on the Prime Minister, is a further example of the Trudeau derangement syndrome. To the extent that this is to be prosecuted—the weaknesses in the procedure and the allegations of a failure to follow the rules—these are truly legal matters that are rightly dealt with in a court of law.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Thank you, Mr. Casey.
Committee members, it's approaching one o'clock, and once again I'd like to know the status of the witnesses who are to come on Wednesday, as they are making arrangements to be here. If I don't have unanimous consent, we will tell them that they cannot appear on Wednesday. That's the situation there.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
Can we try one more time for unanimous consent to carry on until two o'clock so we can get this dealt with, so that Wednesday won't be an issue?
12:55 p.m.
An hon. member
We have already done that.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
I'm asking for us to try one more time for unanimous consent. Maybe the Liberals have had time to reflect.
12:55 p.m.
Bloc
Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Mr. Chair, as I said earlier, I suggest that, unfortunately, the witnesses' appearance be postponed.
You will take the blame for that, esteemed colleagues.
I will repeat the same proposal as many times as I have to. We have to deal with this. A minimum level of transparency would be required. The motion that has been moved is not the end of the world. If the Liberals really want us to take care of veterans, to listen to what they have to say and to do the studies we have on the agenda, they should compromise a little.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm not speaking for all the folks on my side—they can speak for themselves—but I certainly want to get back to the study at hand and have witnesses appear. I think it's clear what the priority is from the opposition. If they want to continue to disrupt these meetings and the work of this committee, that's up to them, but I do not agree that we should cancel the witnesses on Wednesday. I think they should be here. We need to continue to do the work that folks sent us here to do and not engage in this deep-sea fishing exercise any further.
Thank you.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Thank you so much.
I'd like to know if I have unanimous consent to adjourn the meeting.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
I would like to ask for unanimous consent that we continue the meeting until two o'clock so we can get the matter at hand dealt with.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Once again, I'd like to ask members of the committee if they agree with the motion provided by Mr. Richards to go until two o'clock.
12:55 p.m.
An hon. member
No.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
There is no unanimous consent.
Now I'm back to you guys. Do I have unanimous consent to adjourn the meeting?
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
We have a motion to adjourn. We're going to take the vote.
(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)
1 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Do you want to suspend for a few minutes or come back to this on Wednesday?
1 p.m.
Bloc
1 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
After consulting with the clerk, I can confirm that it is possible to do this.
So I have to call the vote to suspend this meeting and come back on Wednesday to continue the discussion.
Before we vote, do I have unanimous consent to suspend this meeting and resume it on Wednesday at the scheduled time?
Everyone agrees.
[ The meeting was suspended at 1:03 p.m., Monday, March 18 ]
[ The meeting resumed at 5:15 p.m., Wednesday, March 20 ]
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
I call the meeting back to order.
Good morning, everyone. I'm very pleased to see you.
When we left off on Monday, we had suspended the meeting. That said, I would like to take a few seconds to remind the committee members that we have to finish our study on women veterans. It will take us at least three meetings to complete this important study. Since six motions have been adopted and more than 25 motions have been proposed, we should consider establishing a work plan.
I would also like to take this opportunity to say that we had to cancel our invitation to the witnesses to appear today. I do not know if they are listening to us, but we hope that we will soon be able to hear their testimony on the transition from military life to civilian life.
Mr. Richards, go ahead.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
Chair, when the meeting was suspended, we were in the middle of debate on the motion. Would we not be returning to that debate?
