Veterans Affairs Committee on Oct. 31st, 2024

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Yes, sir. However, again, in our common usage of the term, there's also a legal definition of the term, the threshold of which was not—

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

I understand that, Minister.

According to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, she said that her definition of war was different from the legal legislation. I asked the minister what legal legislation she was referring to. She said she didn't know, but that she would forward it.

The minister was referring to the Emergencies Act, something that your government is very familiar with.

There are two points there, but I'll read one of them:

war emergency means war or other armed conflict, real or imminent, involving Canada or any of its allies...

Minister, in your opinion, was Kuwait an ally of Canada?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

It was a UN mission. We served the people of Kuwait and protected them. Our members went there and helped the people of Kuwait. However, at that time, I would not, in my understanding of that conflict, have necessarily defined Kuwait as any ally. We used the term, I think, advisedly and carefully.

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Thank you. I understand your point there.

Were the United States, Britain, France, and Saudi Arabia our allies during that coalition operation?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

The United States and Britain are allies.

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Thank you.

They were involved in the conflict, and they recognized the Gulf War as a war.

Minister, when I look at this definition, and I think about the Korean War, I ask myself, and I'm going to ask you, was Canada at threat during the Korean War?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Again, under the Pension Act passed by Parliament, they included the Korean conflict as a war. That was done through Canadian legislation and it was designated as a war for the purposes of that act in a similar way in which the First and Second World Wars were designated.

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Well, Minister, I don't think that we declare war or we go into a conflict based on the Pension Act. I think we go based on the Emergencies Act and we decide as a nation, and the Pension Act reflects that. I don't understand why the associate minister for national defence and you are referring to the Pension Act when we should be looking at the Emergencies Act and deciding whether this is a Gulf War or not.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Yes, and, respectfully, I was speaking in the context of the support that we provide to the veterans and the subject of this committee's debate. The discussion on how a nation declares war...it is actually an executive decision for a decision to enter into a war, but it also requires going to Parliament, and that has not happened since the Second World War.

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Well, I understand that there was a paradigm shift right after the Cold War and that Canadian forces were in Europe and prepared for a different kind of war, and we've gone from that nuclear posturing to limited conflicts. I'm very familiar with that, but there seems to be a problem with authority here. There seems to be a problem with interpretation when it comes to implementing the Emergencies Act and recognizing that this was a Gulf War.

The associate minister agrees that this was a war, in her terminology. You agree that it's a war in this terminology. You've said to my colleague Mr. Desilets that you have the authority to make this change. Why don't we go out, make an announcement, call this a war and let's get it done—done and dusted? This committee can go on and do some good work dealing with other challenges that Veterans Affairs is dealing with.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Sir, I would point out that when Canada entered into the Afghan conflict, where 500 and, I believe, 28 Canadian Armed Forces members...or 158 Canadian Armed Forces members lost their lives, the government of the day did not declare a war in that circumstance, but our people were fighting in battle. They were dying and being injured in battle—

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Minister, excuse me—

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

—but we did not declare a war in those circumstances.

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Chair, through you, the veterans just want recognition at Remembrance Day. We can do it. We've got the time. It's only 10 days away.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

You have 15 seconds if you'd like to reply, Minister.

Okay.

Let's move to MP Sean Casey for five minutes, please.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome to our witnesses.

I want to come back to the issue raised by Mr. Dowdall, someone for whom I have tremendous respect. He indicated—and I think the use of the word “fudged” was unfortunate—that the Parliamentary Budget Officer's report that was issued in the last couple of days did indicate some concern with the GDP numbers that were used as the base for the calculation to get to the percentage.

I don't think you had a full opportunity to explain or to address Mr. Dowdall's concern, but I do think it's of interest to the committee and to the public, so if you could, Minister, talk about the concern raised by the PBO in connection with the 2% of GDP NATO spending target and the allegation that somehow the numbers were fudged by the department, please.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thanks very much, Mr. Casey. I think it's an important opportunity to clarify that, and I'm happy to be able to do so.

In 2014 at the Wales NATO summit, the Government of Canada committed to reach two per cent. It was a difficult challenge at that time because we were spending less than one per cent of our GDP on defence. Since then, we've more than doubled it. We've reiterated our commitment to meet the two per cent ratio, and at the NATO summit in Washington most recently in July, the Prime Minister outlined a plan to reach that target by 2032. It is going to require a significant increase in defence spending, which is absolutely required.

The target that we have agreed to meet is NATO's target. It's a NATO spending metric, and they've said that in establishing their two per cent metric, they would apply exactly the same calculation of national GDPs to all 32 members of NATO. It's based on the OECD projections to report on defence spending across the entire alliance. That's the target that Canada has committed to, reaching two per cent of what NATO defines as our GDP projection based on the OECD report.

Now, the PBO has used different projections for Canada's future GDP. Quite frankly, I'm encouraged by his optimism, and I think the projections reflect some great work that has been done to position Canada for future growth and increases in productivity and in our GDP.

I was also encouraged when he said that such expenditures are possible without unduly impacting the government's deficit-to-GDP ratio. That's all good news, but the only point I would make to the Parliamentary Budget Officer—whose work I'm always grateful for because it's always useful to help us get an understanding of this—is that the target that Canada has committed to is two per cent of the GDP as set by the OECD numbers that NATO has relied upon right across the alliance. I'm encouraged by the Parliamentary Budget Officer's more ambitious projections about our future. I also think that might give us an opportunity to make even more investments in national defence. Those investments are needed to meet the challenges of the current threat environment, the new technologies, climate change and all of those things that require much greater demands upon the Canadian Armed Forces. We must do more. We must invest more in defence and in their capabilities.

Certainly we are committed to meeting it, and I've been able to go to NATO and articulate, I think, a very clear and verifiable plan to our NATO allies on how we're going to get to the NATO spending metric of two per cent, but we also recognize that there's a lot of work to get that done, and Canadians are just going to have to put their heads down and get this done.

If there are future opportunities as a result of more growth in Canada, then we will, I think, benefit from being able to do even more.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Thank you, Minister.

There has been some discussion at this committee about prayers at Remembrance Day services and other commemoration events. I know that this is something that resides within DND, as opposed to Veterans Affairs, in the office of the military chaplains.

Can you provide us with some clarity around the directive and how it will impact Remembrance Day ceremonies this year?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I appreciate the opportunity to clarify this as well, because I've heard it suggested that I somehow made that order. That doesn't really show much understanding of how my job works. I don't issue orders to the Canadian Armed Forces. I work very closely with the CDS and her team, but this was a decision made by the chaplain general.

I've asked how this came about and what the intent was. I've been assured that the directive that was issued by the chaplain general last year in no way bans prayer. I will tell you that I've attended an awful lot of Remembrance Day ceremonies. I used to host one myself at my police headquarters for over a decade. Prayer is an important part of that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Minister.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Perhaps I can come back to it another time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

The time is up.

I now invite Luc Desilets to ask his questions for two and a half minutes.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, I sense the sincerity in your remarks and I also sense a certain openness, which I greatly appreciate. If you were a sovereigntist, I might vote for you.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

We could be friends.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!