Madam Speaker, I appreciate the hon. member's question and the interest of where he is coming from.
He is out to get support for the hundreds of workers in his riding. As somebody who has over 6,000 fishermen and plant workers unemployed, and it looks like they will be for the next five years, I can certainly identify with the thrust of his question.
I responded to the first part of his question the day he asked it in March. What gave rise to his question was one of the recommendations made by the Canada 21 report. The Canada 21 Council submitted a very thought provoking report which is still being reported on in the media and is among the first of many submissions the government hopes to receive over the course of the defence policy review.
The hon. member's question concerned the recommendation that the planned acquisition of three submarines be cancelled and replaced by the purchase of three peacekeeping support multi-role replenishment ships, that he so adequately describes, from domestic shipyards. His proposal of course is to give MIL Davie a mandate to develop these ships.
The Canada 21 recommendation is a very complex one. The report is complex, and this particular recommendation prompts questions abut the need for peacekeeping and more specifically the future of Canada's defence policy.
As I stand here this evening the special joint committee is meeting in an adjacent room. They are addressing the future of Canada's defence policy and precisely this kind of question.
As the Prime Minister suggested and indeed stated in November when speaking of the defence review it is on the basis of the conclusion of such a review that the government will best determine the long term requirements, including equipment, for our forces.
There are some recommendations in the report that simply must await the outcome of the policy review and this is one of them.
Certain things about the report are of a different nature. For example the government was in total agreement that a defence policy review was necessary and indeed had embarked on it before the recommendation was made. There are some other recommendations, for example in the case of the defence infrastructure and the reduction of the headquarters staffs where the government is in basic agreement with the council and has already taken action.
The response to the hon. member is that I can understand where his suggestion is coming from, but he will have to wait until the defence policy review is completed by the end of this year. I would say there will be decisions forthcoming in the new year after the review.