Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
We've heard today that this is all about veterans. There is what I would call “Trudeau derangement syndrome”, where individuals who have another agenda, an agenda that isn't aligned with veterans and that is purely political, seek to smear the Prime Minister without foundation and without reason. I think that's what we're dealing with.
Mr. Chair, I'll refer to some of the evidence from the meeting on October 19, 2023. It supports the position that I just described. It concerns a discussion between Mr. Desilets and the Minister of Veterans Affairs. Mr. Desilets accused the minister of dodging questions put to her. Mr. Desilets said:
I'll come back to the issue of veterans. As you know, for the past four years, I've been working very hard for veterans. But this issue isn't about veterans…
It's quite clear, and it helps explain the current situation. This isn't about veterans. It's about politics. This explains the lack of acceptance. That's why we'll be voting against the amendment regarding the documents relating to discussions between the Prime Minister's Office and the Privy Council. That's really why we're here.
I find it absurd that the opposition members refused to provide the documents that would have helped us obtain the jury's correspondence. Now they want something specific concerning the jury.
I would like to give my opposition colleagues the benefit of the doubt. However, it seems that they want only the documents that align with the narrative that they're trying to build. They don't want to hear from veterans or any opinions that support the final choice, meaning the Stimson team concept. Yet this is a monument to veterans.
The National Monument to Canada's Mission in Afghanistan will recognize the commitment and sacrifice of Canadians who served in Afghanistan, and the support provided to them at home by Canadians. The monument will also reflect Canada's deep gratitude for the sacrifices made by the people who served in Afghanistan, including those who lost their lives or who were physically or psychologically injured.
The monument will provide a public space to serve as a perpetual reminder of Canadians' selfless service to our country. It will give future generations the opportunity to learn more about this particular period in the history of our armed forces.
As we know, the jury's decision wasn't unanimous, contrary to what my colleague told the House. The jury did an incredible job selecting the five concepts that made the final list. We all agree on that. As project leader, Veterans Affairs Canada's role was to listen to veterans. Even though Mr. Desilets said otherwise, this is really about veterans. We must listen to them.
Veterans Affairs Canada received feedback from over 12,000 Canadians on the concepts considered for this monument. Veterans, their families and other people who participated in the mission were the main contributors.
The Stimson team's concept best reflects the feedback provided by veterans, their families and other mission participants during public consultations. The veterans' choice must be taken into account.
Mr. Chair, I'll close with this. What we have here is a political smear campaign that has far exceeded the partisan attacks and the partisan manoeuvres we have seen in this place in other committees.
In order to get to other committee business, in order to be able to do the things that are important to people, and in order to be able to do the things that are for veterans.... For example, in other committees we have seen similar motions seeking the production of documents from the Prime Minister's Office and the Privy Council Office, but the following committees have actually adopted motions without the inclusion of PMO and PCO. The ethics committee had several motions about Chinese interference that included the PMO, from which the committee agreed to remove the PMO. There were also the foreign affairs committee, the public accounts committee, the citizenship and immigration committee, and the health committee.
There is a way to resolution of this impasse, and I would encourage everyone, in the interest of veterans—which seems to be a bit of a novel concept—to put some water in their wine and to try to get through this impasse in a reasonable fashion.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.