National Defence Committee on Nov. 15th, 2022

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Good.

Now we have....

Hang on. He's on for a second motion.

A phone is ringing. If that's the whip's office calling, tell him to ditch the whip.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

I want to move the motion I moved at the previous meeting:

That in the committee's current study regarding reports that former Royal Canadian Air Force pilots have undertaken employment to train members of the People's Liberation Army Air Force, the committee invite CanLink Aviation, who operate Moncton Flight College, and other flight schools in Canada who may be training pilots from the People's Liberation Army to appear.

I'll just speak about that motion. We're talking about CANLink Aviation and the Moncton Flight College because reports about the company in South Africa that has employed former fighter pilots from Canada and other nations who are training members of the People's Liberation Army Air Force have said that CANLink Aviation is engaged in similar activities.

Based on that, and knowing that there are other flight schools in Canada that do test flight training as well as fighter jet training, we should look into having others appear as well. I would just say that this builds upon a very big concern that we have, I think, as members of this committee, that former staff of the Royal Canadian Air Force are violating both the National Defence Act and the Security of Information Act as well as their non-disclosure agreements, and possibly trading away secrets of how our air force operates to an adversarial People's Liberation Army Air Force.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Okay. Great.

If we continue this, we'll just run out of time, and I'll have to adjourn.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Can't you get consent?

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Well, translation will stop and the meeting will stop.

Go ahead, Mr. May.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I've had conversations with my colleagues on this side, and the concern we have is this: What are we expecting to hear? We've asked the department to respond. We've had that meeting. Quite frankly, it was incredibly repetitive, with not a lot of information.

A lot of what this motion is asking us to do is to go off speculation. I agree that if there is something here, if Canadian pilots, former CAF members, are doing something illegal, we want to address that, but there has been no confirmation that I've seen on any of these reports. We're now asking for a Canadian company that isn't the company that's responsible in these articles; it's just speculated that they might be doing the same thing.

I just think we're fishing, and I'm not sure that this is a good use of our time. If there is a situation that we can identify that this committee can deal with, then we would agree.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Do you want to speak to it, Ms. Normandin?

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Yes, I’d like to make a quick comment. Along the same lines, I don't want us to invite people to appear and end up hearing the same things for an hour.

Before we vote on adding a meeting, would it be possible as a first step to instruct the clerk of the committee to contact the CANlink Aviation representatives to see if they want to come, since they would have the option of declining the invitation?

Before we vote on adding a meeting, the committee should at least send the invitation. I don't know if that makes sense.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I'll recognize James afterwards, but I want to hear what Jennifer has to say.

Ms. Mathyssen, go ahead.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

My concern is that I didn't really hear a lot from our previous meeting. We didn't get very far, and this company might have obligations of privacy protection for their clients that mean they couldn't share anything, so I would agree with Madame Normandin in terms of that ability to get anywhere with this. I'm not seeing it.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We have Ms. O'Connell and then Mr. Bezan.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Mr. Chair, my concern is that even sending an invitation based on this motion is an implication that this company has done something wrong. This is a Canadian company. If it hasn't been verified....

Frankly, if there are companies operating that are breaking the law, that is a role for police. It's not up to the defence committee to go on an investigation. Inviting them, if there is no wrongdoing, puts it in the public sphere that we think there's wrongdoing, and I am very uncomfortable with that without a more credible source or anything to back it up.

I'm not comfortable. I appreciate the compromise, Ms. Normandin, but I'm not comfortable sending that in the context that we're assuming that they've done something wrong when there's no real proof.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

You have the final word, Mr. Bezan.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

First of all, when National Defence was here, the testimony was completely not helpful. They just pass the buck all the time to the Department of Justice and the RCMP, who refuse to attend.

We know that CANLink has been named by the company in South Africa, so if there is anything that is libellous in that, they can take legal action against that company for slander. I would just say that if they wanted to appear, it would be their chance to clear their name if there is false information.

Let's dig into this knowing that there is credible evidence in the reporting that's been done by multiple news agencies from the United Kingdom and here in Canada. I think it is our responsibility to dig in on this.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Seeing no further wish to debate, do I call the motion?

[An hon. member]

It should be recorded.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)

With that, thank you very much.

The meeting is adjourned.