Evidence of meeting #25 for National Defence in the 39th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was back.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Canadian Forces Surgeon General, Department of National Defence
I would be a bit cautious on that. Some amputees have gone on to full careers in the Canadian Forces, but it's true that—
Canadian Forces Surgeon General, Department of National Defence
It's a very difficult rehabilitation, and the more you lose, the more challenges you have to overcome.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you for that.
I will move on. We know there are some allies that are using depleted uranium as part of their munitions delivery, and I'm wondering if you have an opinion on how that may affect our troops.
Canadian Forces Surgeon General, Department of National Defence
First of all, I'm not sure that any of our allies in that particular theatre are in fact using depleted uranium, but I'd have to leave that aside for the operators to confirm, should that be an issue.
Other than the devastating impact of a depleted uranium penetrator, in terms of its physical effectiveness as a weapon, I personally have no particular concerns with the use of depleted uranium. What's depleted out of the depleted uranium is radioactivity. It's less radioactive than natural uranium, and all of the studies done to date--and there have been extensive reviews of soil contamination in Iraq, of soil contamination in the Balkans--have not concluded that it represents a significant health hazard going forward.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Would you be kind enough to forward even just the latest report that speaks directly to this issue? Perhaps you would take that under advisement.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you.
My colleague Ms. Black raised here at this committee the issue of whether or not this mission is of an international character so that it falls under common article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. Apparently that's different from if it had been worded differently. If it were of an international character--and I'm talking about detainees now--then they would be treated as a prisoner of war under article 5.
What's the difference in terms of any medical services that they may be given under one declaration versus the other? Would you know that?
Canadian Forces Surgeon General, Department of National Defence
I think you're asking a legal question that's beyond my scope. I do know we treat detainees as we would any of our members. In fact, if you speak to the people who are at the hospital in Kandahar, there is essentially nowhere else for these patients to go; there is no Afghan hospital to transfer them to, and the people we have kept the longest at the hospital in Kandahar have been detainees.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Again, I'd be comfortable if you take this under advisement. Perhaps you would take a look and see whether there is a difference in the medical service that would be provided, and if so, perhaps you could provide the distinction. And if it's not applicable, then it's a moot point.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rick Casson
That's a good point. We have legal people coming to talk to us about the detainees and how they're treated, so if it doesn't fall under their—
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I understand. That would be whether or not it is. You can even take it as a generic question. If you had one declaration versus the other, what would be the difference in the medical treatment that's afforded to detainees? The question of whether or not it falls under which article I grant you would be a legal question, but this would be the difference between medical services between the two.
Commander of Canadian Forces Health Services Group and Director General of Health Services, Department of National Defence
We practise a standard of health care, and it doesn't matter whether you're a coalition member or whether you're a detainee, we give you the same standard.
Canadian Forces Surgeon General, Department of National Defence
The difference is, do we have any place to transfer them to when—?
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Right. Will you check that for me to see if there is a difference? If there isn't, then it's just a simple no. A word back would be fine. If there is, I would like to know what the difference is in the medical.... Obviously, I have a reason for asking the question. You'll give me the expert answer as to whether that has merit or not.
Commander of Canadian Forces Health Services Group and Director General of Health Services, Department of National Defence
I said we can't give you the answer on the legal part because we're not lawyers.
Commander of Canadian Forces Health Services Group and Director General of Health Services, Department of National Defence
Medically speaking, there's one standard. It doesn't matter whether—
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Okay, I am not asking you, though, to make a legal determination which it is. Is there a difference--it's just a generic question--in the health services provided to detainees, depending on whether it's a declaration under article 3 or under article 5?
I'll just leave it with you.
Commander of Canadian Forces Health Services Group and Director General of Health Services, Department of National Defence
I thought I already said no.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rick Casson
I believe you answered the question that you have one standard of treatment. The other question would be legal, and hopefully we can get that answer from the other folks. Thanks.
Go ahead. You still have a minute.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Recruitment...we've had this come up in the public accounts committee. We've dealt with the general recruitment. The issues around recruitment for medical personnel...?
Commander of Canadian Forces Health Services Group and Director General of Health Services, Department of National Defence
We are actively recruiting medical personnel from just about every occupation of the 19 that I mentioned. We have shortages in almost every occupation we have in the Canadian Forces health services. On the medical side, the dental part of the health services is in a little better shape with personnel than we are on the medical side. Some of them are relatively significant. We're significantly short of physicians. Pharmacists are actually the worst of all. They're small numbers, but on a percentage basis, they are in the worst shape. We're short of nurses, we're short of medical technicians, we're short of just about everything, and we're actively recruiting all the time.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Under previous questions to a former officer, we asked about the ability to take on another commitment like Darfur. There's a point where a lot of people would like to see it, but we're told that one of the greatest limiting factors to us being able to go anywhere else is medical services. Would you like to comment on that?
Commander of Canadian Forces Health Services Group and Director General of Health Services, Department of National Defence
Our limitations in personnel make it difficult for us to meet all of our demands, whether it's the current one or another mission, whichever the case may be. We are strapped for personnel at home and overseas and we're always looking for creative ways to meet all our commitments with our personnel demand.