Evidence of meeting #2 for Veterans Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was veterans.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
NDP
Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I go back to my previous comments, Mr. Minister, and I say this with the greatest respect, as always. We can only go, in opposition, by what you say and what your Prime Minister says. The Prime Minister said that immediately upon forming a government, those would extend to all widows of the Second World War and the Korean War. And you just said in testimony that if a World War II veteran you met passed away, his wife wouldn't qualify. You're the minister. Your Prime Minister made the promise that all of them would qualify. As a minister, you shouldn't have any difficulty ensuring that she would get that benefit. But the problem, sir, is that many widows do not qualify because of the restrictions that are placed on it. Your government promised for all and they delivered for some. This is why we voted against it.
You also said in your comments before that all victims of defoliant spraying would be covered from 1956 to 1984, not some of them from 1966-1967. I remember when you went after the former minister. I was in the room when you attacked her--quite well, I may say--and I was rooting for you because you were right.
The Prime Minister also said it, and I would assume the Prime Minister, who has all the advisors in the world around him, would not make a promise on television with Polish veterans unless he knew the facts. He must have known, first of all, how many veterans of the Commonwealth and allied forces there are in the country. He must have known that before he made the promise. And he must have known that they were going to do it right away when they formed government. They're 86 years old. They don't have much time to wait. I'm sure if you came tomorrow with a motion that said these funds will immediately go to war allowances for Commonwealth and allied veterans there wouldn't be one member of Parliament on this committee or in the House of Commons who would vote against that or even oppose that. In fact, we'd probably stand on top of the monument and salute you. But the reality is, sir, it's not done.
So I just wanted to let you know that you have a chance to redeem yourself and your party. In November 2006 you voted against the veterans-first motion, which included the clawback of the pensions at 65, the SISIP clawback, the VIP for all, the marriage after 60 act, and the amount of money a veteran can leave to their spouse going from 50% to 60%.
But having said that, I have a question for you: When will the allied and Commonwealth veterans war allowance be done? We don't have any time. Every time we wait, another few of them pass away.
Lastly, on a more serious note, you've had the honour and distinction of seeing Mr. John Babcock, and I want to thank your assistant, Madam Desjarlais, for the beautiful photo and signature that he gave me. And as you know, a motion was passed in the House of Commons that at the passing of his time, the country would honour not just him but all those--that entire generation--who served in World War I. I'm just wondering, sir, if you have any details on what preparations would be made in order to have a commemoration, not necessarily national, of all in that generation who served in World War I. As you know, we failed to do anything in that regard when the last person from the Boer War passed away. I'm just wondering what the government is planning to do in preparation for the passing of Mr. Babcock.
Thank you very much for that.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Greg Thompson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
Thank you.
How much time do I have for that question, Mr. Chairman?
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Our policy here is that you can respond as robustly as you like. It's only the questioners who are limited, sir. But I think your schedule would limit you here.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Greg Thompson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
Okay, well, I can hardly wait.
This is the hypocrisy of the New Democratic Party. They talk a good line, but when it's time to stand up in the House of Commons and actually support veterans and our men and women in uniform, they hide under the furniture—and you, Mr. Stoffer, have done that consistently.
Let me give you some examples. We were talking about operational stress injury clinics, a big financial commitment by the Government of Canada. What does this guy do? He stands up in the House of Commons and votes against it. We would not have that important service for our veterans had we depended on Jack Layton and the NDP: they voted against it.
On the bill of rights for veterans that we brought in, which veterans had been asking to have for years and which other governments wouldn't deliver on, they voted against it. How much more fundamental can it get?
They voted against an ombudsman and the resources to set up that position, and I don't have to go through what an ombudsman does and how important it is to our veterans community. That's the type of hypocrisy that we have to put up with from this guy.
That type of hypocrisy was actually identified by the Prime Minister, basically on our first day back in this session, where these people, the NDP, under the leadership of Jack Layton, came right into the House of Commons fresh from their aborted attempt to seize power with their coalition and said, without any hesitation, that no matter what the Conservatives brought in, they would vote against that budget; no matter what we did, they were going to vote against it.
So this is basically hypocrisy at its highest level. Here's a man who actually disagrees with his leader on that approach. But I'm telling you that if I disagreed with my leader to the degree this guy does with his, and if he truly believes in veterans and our men and women in uniform, which I don't question he does, I think I and he would be forced to leave our parties, because the truth is that at some point the rubber has to hit the road. You can't stand in the House of Commons and say whatever you want to say and divorce yourself from your party and pretend you're supporting the veterans and our men and women in uniform when your vote reflects that you don't support them. You've never supported them.
Do you remember the heart-wrenching exercise we went through in terms of our Afghanistan mission and the consensus that was arrived at on the floor of the House of Commons? They just divorced themselves from all of that stuff.
Let's go through some of the specifics. We had an election in October of 2008 and we've only been back here a few weeks. We made a commitment to our allied veterans—and he forgot the burial program as well, which was another commitment that we made to our veterans. That is a commitment that we will honour, Mr. Stoffer.
When we're talking about our VIP program for our widows, the truth is that the man in the House of Commons who did most of the work on this was Mr. Cuzner. But this is a guy here who loves to piggyback and tailback on the hard work of others on the floor of the House of Commons. He can say anything he wants, because he's never going to form government; he'll never be on the side of government if he's with the NDP. So they can basically live in Disneyland and pay taxes in Canada; that's basically where these guys are coming from.
So what I do as the Minister of Veterans Affairs, and what we do in a responsible manner.... I think we are getting there much faster than many expected us to, but the fact of the matter is that for our allied veterans and some of the other commitments in the last election, the normal life of a government would be four years. In a minority Parliament, the NDP says they're going to come into this thing with the sole intention of defeating the government on the first day they're back.
How in God's name could you deliver on any promises or commitments that you made to the veterans or to any other sector of this country we call Canada, if you're going to defeat the government on the first day back? It's not even realistic, Peter. You have to stop dreaming in technicolor and accept the world for what it really is, because at the end of the day, governments have to make deliberate decisions on where money is going to be spent.
The fact is that the money we're spending at Veterans Affairs is significant. I went through the numbers with Roger. You could argue that it's not enough, that $3.4 billion is not enough, that you should be able to do more. It's all true. But at the end of the day, you have to manage through each and every one of these.
The truth is that we have made progress. For you to sit there, Peter, and pretend that the world would change remarkably and everything would be done tomorrow if you formed government, well, that just ain't believable. I mean, the world doesn't work that way. It doesn't. And when you publicly disagree with your leader, it's time that the public disagreement is reflected in your vote on the floor of the House of Commons.
5 p.m.
Conservative
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Minister Thompson, just for dignity and protocol, perhaps you could address your comments through the chair.
5 p.m.
NDP
Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS
Would you like to take this chance to answer the Mr. Babcock question with regard to the memorial?
5 p.m.
Conservative
5 p.m.
NDP
Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS
No, we moved a motion last year that if he passes away, Canada would have a national remembrance for all of those--not just him, but all of those who served in World War I.
5 p.m.
Conservative
Greg Thompson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
Again, I have been down to see Mr. Babcock a number of times. I think it would be great if every member of Parliament could get down to meet Mr. Babcock. He's a remarkable Canadian, the only World War I soldier left, the only survivor.
On this, Peter, he does have his own personal requests that he's asked for and that we will honour. But it will mark the passing of a generation of Canadians, a special generation, often referred to as Canada's greatest generation. It will be significant. On the personal side for Mr. Babcock, it will be in keeping with his wishes. We're not going to violate his wishes. At the end of the day, I think it will be something that even an NDPer and a Conservative will both stand up and say is pretty good.
5 p.m.
Conservative
Greg Thompson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
And thank you for changing the tenor of the meeting.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Thank you, Mr. Minister. I understand your timeline was five o'clock.
Yes, Madame Guarnieri.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Albina Guarnieri Liberal Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON
Mr. Chair, was there ever a bill of rights? Did I miss something? Did a piece of legislation go through the House on a bill of rights? Perhaps the minister could clarify.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
First off, we've reached the time limit of 5 p.m., and I don't know if that's a point of order.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Albina Guarnieri Liberal Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON
It's an important point, since the minister has belaboured the point.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
I understand; it is a point of information.
There is a veterans bill of rights--
5 p.m.
Liberal
Albina Guarnieri Liberal Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON
There's the charter of rights, but a bill of rights....
Did I miss something when I was on this committee?
5 p.m.
An hon. member
I'm thinking you missed quite a bit.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Albina Guarnieri Liberal Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON
Actually, I never slept.
What's the bill number, Minister?