Okay, thank you, Mr. Chair.
I just want to come back to a couple of things that have been mentioned in the course of the debate.
First of all, Mr. Ruff, allow me to add my thanks to you for your service.
One of the things Mr. Ruff said is that he knows what veterans want, and so do we. It was reflected in the survey, and it has guided the decisions that have been made in connection with this matter. It has been referenced on numerous occasions by the minister that this was the paramount consideration, because this is, or should be, about veterans.
Ms. Blaney talked about Veterans Affairs having a more veteran-centric communications strategy. I would suggest that this is being respected in the manner in which the survey was utilized in the decision-making process.
I would also like to say that I agree entirely with what she said when she indicated in her intervention that she'd like to get on with witnesses on Wednesday. That's the reason I sought unanimous consent at the outset of the meeting, so we're certainly on the same page in that regard.
Mr. Chair, the minister has come before this committee three times since October, and every time, regardless of the topic that she was here to discuss—and it wasn't exclusively the Afghanistan monument—including estimates, the conversation quickly turned to the Afghanistan monument, and on each of the three occasions when she came before this committee, she clearly indicated that Veterans Affairs chose to listen to veterans, and that it was Veterans Affairs Canada that made the decision.
As for the conspiracy theories about alleged political interference by the Prime Minister, there is absolutely nothing to substantiate that. There is nothing to justify going way beyond what every other standing committee has done with respect to any probe they might be involved in to take the extraordinary measures that are being proposed by the motion.
Mr. Chair, teams of professional artists, landscape architects, architects and other urban design professionals were invited to submit their credentials and examples of their prior work on similar projects as part of the request for qualifications that closed on February 27, 2020. Five teams were shortlisted by a jury of experts in the fields of art and urban design, as well as representatives from key stakeholder groups, to develop design concepts for this monument. The design concepts were evaluated by the same jury made up of experts in the fields of visual art and urban design and representatives from key stakeholder groups, including a veteran of Canada's mission in Afghanistan, a representative of the families of the fallen, a non-veteran representative of the mission in Afghanistan, and a military historian.
Those individuals included Dr. Stephen Borys, director and CEO of the Winnipeg Art Gallery; Virginia Burt, landscape architect and principal at Virginia Burt Designs; Master Warrant Officer Steve Chagnon, veteran of Canada's mission in Afghanistan; Reine Samson Dawe, representing the families of the fallen and 2019 national memorial silver cross mother; Arif Lalani, Canada's ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan during the height of Canada's military and civilian mission; Talbot Sweetapple, architect and partner at MacKay-Lyons Sweetapple Architects; and Dr. Lee Windsor, deputy director of the Gregg Centre for the Study of War and Society at the University of New Brunswick in Fredericton, named for Brigadier Milton Gregg, VC.
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, and will be a permanent place for Canadians to reflect on their service. The monument will ensure that future generations have the opportunity to learn more about the mission and Canada's efforts in helping to rebuild Afghanistan.
We all appreciate and respect the work done by jury members in evaluating the design concepts, their professionalism and their personal experience.
The process to reach this stage of the project was lengthy and included jury deliberations on several design concepts, as well as public opinion research that generated over 10,000 responses, including from the Canadian Forces and mission veterans and their families. All of those things factored into the decision ultimately arrived at by Veterans Affairs Canada.
The team Stimson design was the one that veterans of the mission and their families felt best represented the bravery, sacrifices and losses of those who served there. The results of the consultation, which are public, are clear.
Mr. Chair, it is our responsibility, as it was the minister's responsibility, to listen to veterans. That is at the heart of where we should be focused.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.