National Defence Committee on Dec. 8th, 2009

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Absolutely.

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

One casualty is too many. It's always been difficult when you have a reinforcement and more soldiers, sailors, and airmen and airwomen coming into the south, and you see the levels, the indicators, the metrics of violence going up, and the indicators are normally an attack against the ISAF forces--IEDs and so on. So that is a real challenge.

As one ambassador once told me on a visit to Kabul, when the allies hit the Normandy beaches violence went up in France. So the very fact that we are there with a significant presence, because there are so many more people there, there will be a lot more violence happening, no doubt.

At the same time, and by having some experience in other theatres, you get to a critical mass of soldiers, sailors, and airmen on the ground. You turn the tide. If we have the right kind of assessment, the right kind of strategy working, then we're able to deny the Taliban from moving into the region and we will see a reduction in violence in the area.

With regard to 2011, again, it's an issue of my direction to the commander of CEFCOM and to the commander of Operational Support Command saying that we will end our military mission, we will move our Canadian Forces from the combat mission in July 2011, and now it's General Lessard's responsibility to get on with a workable plan.

Marc.

[LGen J.G.M. Lessard]

Again, it's very clear to me that in July we cease our operations, which means everything. It's not just the battle group, it's the PRT, it's the trainers.

With respect to your second question or third component--What about the forces between July and December?--well, that's most probably the personnel part of the mission, the termination task force that General McQuillan talked about. We have over 1,200 vehicles, thousands of sea containers. The majority of these people will be the people refurbishing the equipment and sending it back to Canada.

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

Can I also say that we're not going to wait until July 1 to do things? If you can believe it, we actually have snow and ice clearance equipment in a desert in Kandahar, because when we were in Kabul we needed to have snow and ice clearance equipment. So we actually have containers with snowplows. Some of the material could actually be moved much earlier.

I'll just ask General McQuillan to--

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Before you start, General McQuillan, I understand that if there are 1,200 vehicles and whatever, there have to be people around to get them ready to go and put them on the ships and exit a plan, and that's doesn't turn on a dime. My question was about the flexibility of the ending in the sense of relief in place.

What you're telling us, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that this is not flexible. It is ending in July, and we can expect that very soon thereafter at least the combat troops will be on their way back to Canada. I'm assuming that's correct.

General McQuillan, maybe you could explain some of the issues in terms of getting your gear home.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

Could you answer briefly?

[MGen Mark McQuillan]

I can. Sir, it's quite simple. At the end of operations, we will start in full tempo in terms of withdrawing equipment. You're quite right, it's time and space based on the magnitude.

The chief has already highlighted that our intent in doing the detailed planning now is to do the planning on what materiel can potentially be thinned out while at the same time acknowledging that operations will continue. Sustainment of current operations will be maintained to the last point. There is a clear intent to thin out to the extent possible, to cease operations, and then to put the bulk of our effort in terms of moving that materiel in the timeframe provided.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

Thank you.

Mr. Paillé, you have a short question?

[Pascal-Pierre Paillé, Bloc, Louis-Hébert, QC]

I will take this opportunity to check a number of pieces of information with you.

Could you tell me if you have received a mandate for a major financial restructuring?

In the case of the Quebec City Armoury and the Sainte-Foy military headquarters, reservists will be joining the members of the armed forces in place. Last week, we were told that a category of reservists would be laid off temporarily. The Sainte-Foy military headquarters are being restructured. There are rumours of a land sale. There is also the lingering uncertainty with regard to the future of the Quebec City Armoury.

Is there a financial restructuring underway in the Quebec City region? Has a clear mandate been given to that effect?

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

The land forces commander could give you details about that. As far as I know, the assessment study of the Manège militaire Voltigeurs in Quebec City is ongoing. I think that the idea of another armoury for the Combat Engineering Regiment in the Sainte-Foy area is being considered. I will ask the land forces commander, or the department, to provide you with information on that.

[Pascal-Pierre Paillé, Bloc, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

Thank you very much.

I will give the floor to Mr. Hawn.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

General, at the risk of picking fly poop out of pepper—some seem intent on doing that—I want to go back, once again, to the incident that has seized many. I want to clarify that the notes from the military policeman, which appeared in The Globe and Mail, were after we had taken control, after the Afghani in question had become a detainee. The treatment, the beating with a shoe, happened not to a Canadian transfer detainee, but to a person who had been detained by the Afghans themselves, and that person did not become a Canadian detainee until after that beating with a shoe became apparent and Canadian soldiers took control of the situation.

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

That's correct, Mr. Chair.

My understanding of the event, again, not having been there, and one of my staff actually contacting the military policeman.... He was not at the event where the Afghan police arrested the individual. He was called in after a Canadian soldier had removed this individual from Afghan police custody. That's when he was being beaten with a shoe. Our policeman came on scene and went through a thorough process.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

So this was not the abuse of a Canadian transferred detainee.

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

That's my assessment.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you.

I don't know how it could be any more clear than that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

Thank you very much.

I want to thank all of our witnesses for being with us today. General, Major-General, and Lieutenant-General, thank you for being with us.

Committee members, we'll stay together to discuss our future work. It will take two minutes.

I want to inform the members that I'll be going before the liaison committee to present our budget for our study on Arctic sovereignty this afternoon.

Also, we don't have any witnesses ready to appear before us this Thursday, so if you agree we will postpone that to our next meeting in January. Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

Okay. We won't have a meeting this Thursday. The next meeting will be in January 2010.

Thank you very much. Have a nice day.

Have a Merry Christmas.

That will end our work for meeting 44.

The meeting is adjourned.