House of Commons Hansard #70 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was community.

Topics

Rcmp
Statements By Members

11:10 a.m.

Progressive Conservative

Bill Casey Cumberland—Colchester, NS

Mr. Speaker, I wish to commend RCMP Constable Jodeen Cassidy and Corporal Al Ramey for their successful efforts to locate a 19 year old accident victim who spent a horrible eight days trapped at the bottom of a deep ravine in a badly wrecked car.

Constable Cassidy piloted her RCMP helicopter on a determined and persistent mission until she located the crash. Corporal Ramey volunteered as a spotter and between the two of them, surely saved the life of Joe Spring.

These two RCMP officers went above and beyond the call of duty and we commend them wholeheartedly. We all wish young Joe Spring a speedy recovery and we again thank Constable Jodeen Cassidy and Corporal Ramey for their extraordinary efforts in this lifesaving rescue.

The Environment
Statements By Members

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Aileen Carroll Barrie—Simcoe—Bradford, ON

Mr. Speaker, our government's sound economic planning is based on careful consideration of economic indicators like GDP and unemployment rates.

However these indicators alone are limited in their ability to assess our progress toward larger goals of environmental sustainability and health. That is why we strongly support the national round table on the environment and the economy and Statistics Canada in their development of environmental indicators.

The indicators will enable us to better establish a database to help us with our economic and environmental decisions.

As the finance minister has said, the existence of indicators compels decisions. These indicators will help us ensure that our children grow up in communities that offer clean air and water, are free of toxic chemicals and are open, natural spaces.

National Defence
Oral Question Period

June 1st, 2001 / 11:15 a.m.

Canadian Alliance

Grant Hill Macleod, AB

Mr. Speaker, the military says that it needs 35 helicopters to undertake its duties. How many will it get?

National Defence
Oral Question Period

11:15 a.m.

Haliburton—Victoria—Brock
Ontario

Liberal

John O'Reilly Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, the government is committed to the acquisition of 28 new shipborne maritime helicopters.

Through a competitive process that is fair, open and transparent, we will get the very best product at the very best price for the men and women of the Canadian forces to serve the country in the way we are committed to and the way they are committed to.

National Defence
Oral Question Period

11:15 a.m.

Canadian Alliance

Grant Hill Macleod, AB

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to note that the military asked for 35 and is now getting 28.

It also asked for helicopters that would allow them to be in the air for more than three hours. How long will these helicopters be able to be in the air under adverse circumstances?

National Defence
Oral Question Period

11:15 a.m.

Haliburton—Victoria—Brock
Ontario

Liberal

John O'Reilly Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, the requirements for this helicopter were written by Canadian military people, not by politicians.

The military is getting exactly what it wanted. Even in letters to the editor yesterday and today, vice-admirals have said these are the specifications that they want, not the 1960s dinosaur type tactics that the Reform Party is looking for.

National Defence
Oral Question Period

11:15 a.m.

Canadian Alliance

Grant Hill Macleod, AB

Mr. Speaker, that is a very interesting commentary. Military advisers said they wanted 35 helicopters. They wanted helicopters that could be the air for more than three hours. They are getting neither.

How does the parliamentary secretary explain the fact that political interference has intruded in what the military really needs and what it really wants?

National Defence
Oral Question Period

11:15 a.m.

Windsor West
Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray Deputy Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, there has been no so-called political interference. The military developed a statement of requirements. The government accepted the statement of requirements. Under the Minister of National Defence and the Minister of Public Works and Government Services the procurement process is now under way.

National Defence
Oral Question Period

11:15 a.m.

Canadian Alliance

Peter Goldring Edmonton Centre-East, AB

Mr. Speaker, cold war, hot war, no war, what is the difference when the chief of maritime staff says he cannot meet his domestic needs? Referring to reduced Sea King capability he says that it:

—will directly impact my ability to...maintain operationally ready maritime forces and to conduct surveillance and control of Canadian territory.

The end of the cold war is a poor reason to lower aircraft standards. Why are we not raising standards for our military?

National Defence
Oral Question Period

11:15 a.m.

Windsor West
Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray Deputy Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the chief of maritime staff made it perfectly clear in his testimony before the parliamentary committee that “Canada's navy is more combat capable today than it was a decade ago during the Persian war conflict”, and the vice-admiral made it clear in his testimony that “the navy has been provided the resources it needs to fulfil its mandate and maintain combat capability”.

National Defence
Oral Question Period

11:15 a.m.

Canadian Alliance

Peter Goldring Edmonton Centre-East, AB

Mr. Speaker, we now have a hat trick of Liberal procurement screw-ups. There were shipping contracts given without tender that now discourage shipping bidders.

A jeep-like vehicle contract went to a sole European bidder because the government drove away Canadian competition.

After 25 years a helicopter contract is to be given for a replacement with only 75% of the capability of 40 year old Sea Kings. Why is the minister allowing Liberal politics to manipulate serious military procurement?

National Defence
Oral Question Period

11:20 a.m.

Windsor West
Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray Deputy Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's premise is totally wrong. We are responding to the military's own statement of requirements.

I would think that a member of the Alliance Party is the last person in the world to talk about “screw-ups” unless he is looking at himself in the mirror.

Federal-Provincial Relations
Oral Question Period

11:20 a.m.

Bloc

Caroline St-Hilaire Longueuil, QC

Mr. Speaker, after more than two years, we finally got documents on the unity operation led by the Privy Council.

The purpose of the operation was to orchestrate the federal government's actions during the 1995 referendum held in Quebec. Several pages of the document were censored under the pretext that they could adversely affect federal-provincial relations.

Could the President of the Privy Council tell us how a document that was originally supposed to promote Canadian unity can now adversely affect federal-provincial relations?

Federal-Provincial Relations
Oral Question Period

11:20 a.m.

Glengarry—Prescott—Russell
Ontario

Liberal

Don Boudria Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, members opposite should have a more consistent approach.

Every now and then they complain; they claim that they do not have access to documents under the Access to Information Act. This is what they say. Of course that is rarely the case. In fact, it is never the case.

Today, they are claiming that they complied with the Access to Information Act, but did not have access to the documents that they wanted. There is something wrong with these questions.

Federal-Provincial Relations
Oral Question Period

11:20 a.m.

Bloc

Caroline St-Hilaire Longueuil, QC

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the government clearly did not understand the question and this is why it is addressed to the President of the Privy Council.

I am asking the President of the Privy Council, who boasts about clarity and transparency, to tell us: Is the document so bad and so much against Quebec that it still cannot be released six years later?