I want to first of all compliment Mr. Spengemann on his intervention, on the brilliant idea of the suggestions from other militaries that have solved these problems. The fact that the committees and the reports came up with recommendations that were actually implemented makes it much better information for us, to look at recommendations in the time we have available and on a very complex issue. It's always better when someone has tested the water first. I would like to thank Mr. Spengemann for really adding to this committee.
I would also like to thank Mr. Baker for his continued emphasis on the survivors. I think the military can best be improved by listening to their input and showing that we take it seriously. I can't think that any member of the committee would not want us to do that.
Thanks to Mr. Robillard for his motion in the House, and discussion of the history and importance of women in the military, which is fundamental to coming up with recommendations.
I was quite disappointed in Mr. Barsalou-Duval's intervention. I thought that after weeks, as he said, that the Bloc would finally put their attention on the survivors, on the cultural issue, which I'm going to speak to at length later today, on the cultural issues related to the military, and on the fear of reprisals that survivors have.
He raised an important point about the golf game, which is under investigation now. However, he talked about bitter disappointment, weeks and months of filibustering, basically by the opposition presenting motions that were counterproductive, first of all, for going week after week, month after month, since February, calling witnesses on an email that was anonymous. We didn't even know what was in it. We weren't allowed to know what was in it. This is when we have all these major problems and courageous, real-life victims from the military from Quebec and the rest of Canada whose situations we should be discussing, and the major, very complicated problems that we have brought up a number of times.
Then there was a motion that caused the opposition to continue to have effective filibustering, a motion that any member of Parliament who has served on committees would think unreasonable: that you only have two minutes. I mean, a serious issue that a survivor from Quebec brought up and whether it would or wouldn't be included as a recommendation, that a person would only have two minutes for input for or against, or to improve a recommendation on something that would have such a devastating effect on someone's life, is very disappointing.
I was of the hope that the Bloc would be the first party that would come on side to ask for the removal of the unproductive recommendations, so that we could get on with the major issues related to culture, to reprisals, to the issue of the chain of command.
It is really perplexing that the Bloc, the NDP and the Conservatives would not want a government response to help the men and women in the military through the recommendations that we, as a committee, came up with after so long looking at and identifying the major problems.
I don't think anyone in the opposition would disagree that the major problems are the culture, the fear of reprisals, the chain of command. Why have we gone to all this work if the Conservatives, the Bloc and the NDP do not want a response from the government to show the victims that they were actually listened to and to put some moral persuasion on the government to take action on the recommendations we come up with?
I have more to say on that, but I see Mr. Garrison wants to speak, and I don't want to prevent him from having that opportunity. I'm not sure where he is on the list, but I have a lot more to say on the culture and also the lack of ability to move forward because of unproductive motions on the table.
I will stop now so that hopefully Mr. Garrison gets a chance to speak, and then I'll come back with the other much longer interventions that I have.
Thank you, Madam Chair.