Jack Harris

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps I could move the member to the other coast, to Newfoundland and Labrador, where there is a bay called Placentia Bay. It is a very large bay that is subject to fog and other environmental weather hazards. There is also a refinery at the head of the bay, as well as a transshipment port.

A recent study by Transport Canada has indicated there are about 8,200 vessel movements per year there, including tankers bringing oil to the refinery and refined products out, as well as all of the transshipment for oil from the Grand Banks.

One of the criticisms in this study is that there is not really an effective method of dealing with any potential oil spill which could occur and that there is a lack of coordination by Transport Canada, the official responder, as well as the fact that oil response equipment is centrally located outside of Placentia Bay, in St. John's, and not in the bay where it is mostly likely to be an opportunity for a response.

If this review were to take place, is that also the kind of examination that would be done, which could potentially change these regulations to make them tighter so we could have an effectively oil spill response?

[Business of Supply, May 27th, 2010]

Mr. Chair, I see on the next page, on the other hand, a projected contribution of $2.6 million in last year's main estimates to the Pearson Peacekeeping Centre contribution program. These items are indicated as “Items not required”. In other words, I assume that the money was not spent. Some of the other items are indicated as being ones for which authority will be sought for the renewal of the transfer payment programs in 2010. However, that one item does not seem to be on that list.

Can the minister explain why that is?

[Business of Supply, May 27th, 2010]

Mr. Chair, I am looking at the budget numbers directly here. In particular, on page 18-8 of the main estimates document, I see that the contribution to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the NATO military budget, is up by nearly 50% to $126 million.

Is there a particular reason for that increase of about $40 million on an $87 million budget?

[Business of Supply, May 27th, 2010]

Mr. Chair, it may be difficult to separate it out. Perhaps the minister can advise me on this, but I believe that when reservists are serving overseas with the regular forces, they are still part of the reserves' budget. Or do they become part of the regular forces' budget at that point in time?

[Business of Supply, May 27th, 2010]

Mr. Chair, of course, these post-traumatic stress disorder treatment centres are also part of the joint project of DND and Veterans Affairs, so the minister obviously has some influence on that as well.

With respect to some specifics on budget dollars, we had talked generally about reservists earlier and we know there are always adjustments made during the year. Nonetheless, can the minister give us the budget allocation for reserves and break it down by services, the navy and army, et cetera, for the last year and what the budgeted amounts in the estimates were versus what the actual budget turned out to be, so that we can see whether there has been a decrease in expenditures based on the estimates. Then, what is the budget for this year?

The minister may not be able to do that now, but if he cannot do it, can he undertake to provide that to me in the future?

[Business of Supply, May 27th, 2010]

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the generalities and the support and sentiments expressed.

However, I want to ask the minister, can he undertake to see that these criteria for treatment complained about by Stéphane Grenier are in fact fixed? Can he ensure that the people who present PTSD symptoms get access to treatment? This is the problem that has been recognized. Will he undertake to seek a solution?

[Business of Supply, May 27th, 2010]

Mr. Chair, there has been a significant investment already by the Government of Canada in the joint strike fighter program and I understood the minister to say that it was from that program we would acquire our new jets. Perhaps we have to go over the transcript, but I take the minister's comments at face value that there will be a tendering process taking place.

The member for Richmond Hill asked questions about PTSD and, of course, the defence committee did a major study on that, as urged by my predecessor, Dawn Black, who I understand is watching these proceedings tonight. I want to ask some questions about it, because some significant progress has been made. There is no doubt about that, although we are not there yet. I had one constituent complain that it took 10 years for him to get recognized as having a 100% disability with respect to post-traumatic stress disorder. So we are getting there, but we are not there yet.

Earlier this week we had a report from the CBC that the military special advisor on mental health injuries, Stéphane Grenier, was concerned about the entry criteria for the PTSD treatment program at Ste. Anne's Hospital. He said that the program criteria were such that almost no soldier could meet the test for admission, that soldiers with anger problems or substance abuse problems, or who were managing medications, were among those excluded. He said that what we are doing right now is that we are excluding those people from care for these types of reasons. He think it's neither responsible nor appropriate nor acceptable.

I share those concerns. These are the facts, and given that anger and substance abuse are often among the difficulties faced by those living with PTSD, we have some serious concerns.

Can the minister respond to these concerns? If that is in fact what is happening at Ste. Anne's or at other places across the country, will he do something to fix that? We do know that PTSD is a multi-faceted disease and syndrome and that these other aspects come into play and must be recognized as part of the symptoms that need treatment.

Can he assure us that he can do that?

[Business of Supply, May 27th, 2010]

Mr. Chair, did I take the minister's earlier comments in my last round of questions to mean that the government has already decided to purchase planes from the joint strike group fighter program?

[Business of Supply, May 27th, 2010]

Mr. Chair, how many are there?

[Business of Supply, May 27th, 2010]

Mr. Chair, I am glad to have a second opportunity to ask some questions. Fifteen minutes go pretty fast.

I will pick up where I left off on the F-18 fighter program. First of all, the minister said that we just finished, in March of this year, a mid-life refurbishment and upgrading of the existing jets, but yet they only seem to last for another seven years. I wonder if the minister could explain that, since we have had these going back to 1980.

The other question is, are we still looking at the replacement of 65 new jets? That number has been bandied around before. Is that still the number we are talking about?