House of Commons Hansard #40 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was asbestos.

Topics

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Conservative

James Moore Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC

Mr. Speaker, the only person who had trouble with the question was the Liberals in taking three tries to spit it out.

However, the answer is that we are going down the road to ensuring that the Canadian Forces have the equipment that they need. As we have said time and again, the reality is that the greatest threat to the health and safety of the men and women of the Canadian Forces should never be their equipment. What we saw under 13 years of Liberal rule was a constant degrading of the Canadian Forces' budgets, and that can never happen again. If the leader of the Liberal Party does not like the process with regard to the F-35s, all he has to do is look to his left and look to his right, because it is his party that started it.

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Liberal

Bob Rae Toronto Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I clearly heard a personal insult directed at me. Frankly, I am astonished that the minister would stoop so low. I am not going to return the minister's insults; instead, I am going to ask him a question.

If the use of a fairness officer is good enough for the ships, why is it not good enough for the planes? It is a very simple and direct question.

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam
B.C.

Conservative

James Moore Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages

Mr. Speaker, the answer is the same whether the question is asked in French or in English. Our process has been clear from the outset. We will ensure that the men and women of the Canadian Forces have the equipment they need to do their job—the job that Parliament and our government is asking them to do. That is what we have done here. The F-35s are a success for these women and men, and we are going to continue with our process.

Afghanistan
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

David Christopherson Hamilton Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, New Democrats joined all Canadians in mourning the tragic loss of Master Corporal Byron Greff on Saturday. Master Corporal Greff and 16 others were struck by a suicide bomb on the outskirts of Kabul.

Will the Prime Minister give the House an update on his current view of the security situation our troops are now facing in Afghanistan?

Afghanistan
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Central Nova
Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, like the hon. member, I think all members present would share in expressing our condolences to the family of Master Corporal Greff, who gave his life courageously in Afghanistan.

It is a reminder of the unlimited liability assumed by members of the Canadian Forces and our allies in that mission. No one would suggest that the risks will ever be zero in that country, given the current security climate.

Afghanistan
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

David Christopherson Hamilton Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, last November the Prime Minister assured Canadians that this new training and aid mission in Afghanistan would involve “minimal risks to Canada”. Now, tragically, we see that just is not the case.

We still have 950 troops stationed in Afghanistan. Their families need an honest assessment about the true risks of this new mission.

Why has the Prime Minister not been more clear and straightforward about the real risks our soldiers are facing in Kabul?

Afghanistan
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Central Nova
Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay Minister of National Defence

Let us be frank, Mr. Speaker. The reality is that this training mission is in a different configuration. It does not involve combat. It does not involve searching and engaging the enemy. It involves training in a static base form in and around Kabul.

There is no way to eliminate all risk, given the reality of that country. Given the security climate there, we can never mitigate that risk to zero, as I just said, but we certainly want to support our men and women in uniform with equipment. We want to support them morally, and that is what this government--

Afghanistan
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Andrew Scheer

The hon. member for Beaches—East York.

National Defence
Oral Questions

October 31st, 2011 / 2:25 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Kellway Beaches—East York, ON

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the F-35s, the Minister of National Defence seems now to be at odds with everyone.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer sees cost overruns of $53 million per plane. U.S. Senator John McCain sees a train wreck coming. Last week reports surfaced that the minister's friends in cabinet and the Prime Minister's Office are questioning the minister's ability to manage this file.

When will the Minister of National Defence admit he has botched this file and send the contract out to tender?

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Vaughan
Ontario

Conservative

Julian Fantino Associate Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, in 2001 Canada participated in the extensive and rigorous U.S.-led competition process where two bidders developed and competed prototype aircraft--

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Stéphane Dion

Observer--

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Conservative

Julian Fantino Vaughan, ON

Excuse me.

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Andrew Scheer

Order, order. If members use up all their time when a minister is giving an answer, they may find themselves short of a question.

The Associate Minister of National Defence.

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Conservative

Julian Fantino Vaughan, ON

Mr. Speaker, partner nations were engaged during the competitive process, and this led to the selection of the Lockheed Martin and its partner agencies as the joint fighter manufacturer for our needs at this time and well into the future.