National Defence Committee on Jan. 29th, 2024

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Thank you.

As I said, I wondered whether she might move to adjourn debate if that's what she really wanted to do, but....

The motion has tremendous merit, and I think it's extraordinarily relevant to many of the MPs at this table for a variety of reasons, including the Halifax members and including the other members who have raised this issue. I'll let the floor go now in the hopes that we may just come to a vote and approve this, and then we can resume our questions for witnesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Kelly.

I have Ms. Lambropoulos, Ms. Mathyssen, Mrs. Gallant, Mr. Bezan and Ms. Normandin.

Ms. Lambropoulos.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you, Chair.

I just want to say that I agree with parts of the motion. Of course, it is an extremely important issue, and nobody who is a member of the CAF should be experiencing homelessness. Let's just get that out there. If there are people who are experiencing that, then we absolutely need to look at this issue.

I just wish that the member did not raise it in such a partisan manner. I really don't believe that the Prime Minister has anything to do with the situation. I know that our economy is struggling worldwide, and it's due to geopolitical reasons.

I can't support it the way it's written, obviously, but I would be happy to see it amended so that we can still take care of the issue of the CAF members who are experiencing homelessness, as that in particular is something that we should look at and find a solution for.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Ms. Mathyssen.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I, too, am disappointed that we won't have additional time to speak to the witnesses. Even after experiencing the derogation from my colleagues, I did have further questions in terms of the security status around the world.

Regarding the motion, I, too, am okay with parts of it. I am certainly unsure and would love to have a further discussion about this at our subcommittee, where this actually belongs, to maybe expand the motion we are currently studying—the study on housing—to include some of these witnesses. That would be absolutely acceptable to me.

However, I would question the members' continual tactics, which seem to be a continuation from last year. Unfortunately, the new year hasn't brought anything new on that.

I would also question the member who brought this forward. I understand that he has the best of intentions. However, during the discussions of a 106(4), the honourable member from the Bloc and I suggested that we put forward an all-opposition letter to the minister directly. We asked the honourable member to sign on to said letter, which he delayed and then refused to do.

If he truly wanted all the answers, then maybe he could have signed on to that letter, but if this is the tactic that he wishes to use in terms of getting a clip that he can use, so be it. I hope that we can continue this conversation in the subcommittee where it belongs.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mrs. Gallant.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

All that's in this motion is that it's asking for extra witnesses. Many times, the clerk is unable to get the witnesses for a given time. This furnishes him with a list of extra witnesses. We're asking for that in advance, should there be a blank or a hole where we have to cancel committee because we don't have witnesses.

If they want to deny the fact of what is going on with homelessness in the military, that is quite something else.

Let's get the witnesses on the list. Call the question.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I've had a request to call the question before we hear....

Mr. Bezan.

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

I'd just respond to some of the comments that have been made.

First of all, national defence, Canadian Armed Forces housing and compensation for our serving members are all the responsibility of this government under Justin Trudeau. The out-of-control housing crisis, the hyperinflation that we're seeing and the housing crisis in Canada, especially in places like Halifax, Toronto, Vancouver and Victoria, have skyrocketed because of what has proven to be created by this Liberal government and its policies.

We need to address this now. The reason I never signed on to the letter is that all it did was give time for the minister to maybe respond in the next six months. This is a crisis that's happening today. We have witnesses who have appeared in front of the Nova Scotia Legislature who said that there are members living in tents, couch surfing and putting themselves in harm's way.

I can't believe that we would sit around this table and try to delay this, that we would not bring this forward now and not expand our study and have these witnesses appear so that we can further drill down and make sure we get answers sooner than later. It keeps putting our members of the forces at risk.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I have Normandin, Fisher, Fillmore and Lalonde.

Madame Normandin.

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

Thank you very much.

I would like to apologize to the witnesses for the hiccups we are experiencing. I find that particularly unfortunate, as we had excellent witnesses to whom I would also have liked to put more questions.

That said, on the substance of the motion, I agree with the list of witnesses to be called. This is an important issue that needs to be looked at. However, I do not agree with the wording as a whole, which I find unnecessarily partisan. However, I would still have been prepared to vote in favour of the motion, in the interest of time.

That said, I think this is the kind of file that should be sent to the subcommittee. I understand that this may not be the approach that the people who moved the motion want to take, but I still recommend that we discuss this matter in subcommittee, so that in the future we don't waste the witnesses' time unnecessarily.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Fisher.

[Darren Fisher, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

We have all agreed that the topic of housing is hugely important, which is why when the Conservatives, under James, moved a motion to study housing, we agreed. We're in the middle of a housing study right now. Bring these topics up during our housing report. Ask for extra meetings. The committee has been very supportive of your request for a housing study.

We think about the exorbitant costs that people may have, and then we see the Conservatives, after a 30-hour marathon, vote against an increase in pay for our DND members. Let's have those conversations.

This is something that we can do within the study you've asked us to do, which we are currently doing. I'm all for talking about these important issues. We can do them within the study that we're on now.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Fillmore.

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Thanks, Chair.

I just want to underline what Ms. Lambropoulos said. Homelessness is unacceptable for anybody. I think that everyone on this committee and every one of us in this room probably carries a specific sensitivity for those in uniform who are homeless.

In DND Halifax, which Mr. Bezan raised, there are 10,000 CAF members. Three-quarters of those are members who serve in uniform. I would say it is understandable that those numbers are reflected in the 200 to 300 or so folks who are living rough in Halifax right now. It's statistically going to happen, but it doesn't mean that it's at all acceptable.

Halifax in particular is experiencing this housing crisis in a way that is more acute, perhaps, than some other places. That's for the reason that our city has been the fastest growing in population in the country for a couple of years. We are surprised by this growth in a way. We're a victim of our own success. The growth in housing has not been able to keep up with this sudden explosion in population. I'm highlighting this because it's specifically a Halifax thing relative to some of the other cities.

There are many efforts under way, by three orders of government, to solve this in Halifax. The way this order of government can best address this is through the housing study that this committee is already undertaking. I don't understand why we need to stand for people making political hay out of what is a tragic situation when we already have a study under way to address the very issues you raise.

Mr. Chair, with that, I move to adjourn debate on this question.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I'll call the vote.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

That closes the debate. We have six minutes left. I don't see there's anything useful that can be accomplished in six minutes. I suppose we could go back to the speaking order. That would give Mr. Collins five minutes.

May I say, colleagues, my anticipation is that on Wednesday, we will hear from Brookfield for the first hour. Then we are to consider our report on our trip to Europe last summer, which I don't anticipate to be controversial. It may be that we could carve out a bit of time to deal with this issue and others as to where we want to go for the next few weeks and months.

Anyway, I would encourage you not only to speak to each other but also to speak to the chair so that we can possibly do this in a collegial way as opposed to other ways.

With that, Mr. Collins, you have the final five minutes.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

My first question is for Major-General Smith.

You emphasized in your opening remarks the importance of partnerships. You talked about Canada being a reliable partner. You used words like “collaboration” and “co-operation”. I'm interested to hear your take on what role the U.S. plays in terms of that partnership in fulfilling our goals and objectives in the region as part of the plan.

[MGen Gregory Smith]

The U.S. is an important partner—obviously it's the biggest partner in the region—and we do a lot with it. We can talk about the Taiwan Strait transits. Those are done with the United States of America. We're doing a lot in the region, and the United States is a very important part of that.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Then I will just ask a follow-up on that. Former president Trump has very strong opinions about NATO and the partnerships and alliances that have been formed historically over the last several decades. He's pulled out some of those quotes and some of those opinions again in his quest to become the Republican candidate for the presidential election in the U.S. this year.

What do we do, as a partner of the U.S. and as part of that alliance, to prepare for the eventual or possible return of former president Trump and those opinions, and by extension, policies that facilitate and accommodate the same opinions?

[MGen Gregory Smith]

Mr. Chair, I like to emphasize the fact that we work very actively with the U.S. in the region, and this Indo-Pacific strategy shows Canada doing some really good things in the region. Again, it's the first year. This is not to get too celebratory about it, but I think we're doing good work and we're showing Canada's effort in the region to reinforce the international rules-based order.

Beyond that, the U.S. is one ally in the region. I talked about ASEAN and ADMM-Plus. Those are the kinds of organizations we're really trying to do more with, and that will equally better embed us in the region and show what we do to contribute.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

At this point, Mr. Chair, I cede the rest of my time to Ms. Mathyssen.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Are we splitting it between Ms. Mathyssen and Madame Normandin?

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

I can try to do it as quickly as possible.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Okay.

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

In terms of what happened during that whole surveillance balloon or two last year, we know that it increased tensions and there was a lot going on. How can Canada ensure it continues that key communication channel to protect not only our commercial assets but also our military assets within the Indo-Pacific, despite the cutting of some of those communication cables and ties that happened, as an example, between the U.S. and China during that period of time?