Debates of May 14th, 1998

Supply

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

The hon. member's time has unfortunately expired.

[David Price, Progressive Conservative, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, the hon. member for Chicoutimi. The government complained today that we show only the bad side and do not make any practical suggestions.

I thought I had made one this morning, and I would like to hear the hon. member for Chicoutimi on this. The problem is that proper training is not provided. Individuals who leave the armed forces after a 20 year military career have no training. There should be an education system. Perhaps we could share the costs: we take a little off their pay and the government could chip in. This way the costs would be shared.

When their service engagement is over, they could go back to university, college or training school. I know this is an area my colleague knows well. Perhaps he could comment on this.

[André Harvey, Progressive Conservative, Chicoutimi, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his comment.

Indeed, after my defeat in 1993, I had the opportunity to work with base authorities in certain areas of training. It was one of the positive sides of my defeat, since it allowed me to get closer to businesses and to work somewhat like in the private sector.

Another proposed measure is the creation of a well trained rapid reaction corps. I want to go back to this. It is also recommended that an ombudsman be put in place, because our military are afraid to speak up. We need an ombudsman in the Canadian Armed Forces. It would allow us to improve military operations on a day to day basis.

[An hon. member]

It is necessary.

[André Harvey, Progressive Conservative, Chicoutimi, QC]

Based on all that information, we think the government has no choice. It must make a statement on the state of our armed forces and their ability to fulfil their mandate.

This is precisely what the auditor general asked of this government. Over the last five years, in addition to scrapping the helicopter deal, the government has been scrapping the whole of the Canadian Armed Forces, both in terms of their equipment and in terms of the pride that our military used to have. These people feel that the authorities, and particularly the government, never listen to them.

This is why we must set up a rapid reaction corps and have an ombudsman who will listen to our military on a daily basis because, as I said, they are afraid to speak freely. They were very pleased to appear before the committee, but afterwards the issue will be completely forgotten.

We must have effective means of protecting the lives of our military, and this affects not just tens of thousands of citizens, but hundreds of thousands of them. I am convinced that we could then implement all the recommendations made by the standing committee on national defence.

I agree that the work being done by the committee members from all the political parties is positive and effective. But the government must act immediately, because our military are leaving the forces. This is unprecedented. They are leaving. It is unbelievable. I see it in my region, on the base in Bagotville. Our best specialists, our best pilots and our best technicians are leaving the military, because they do not feel that they are considered as valuable individuals in Canada.

This is why we want to take action. Today is Armed Forces Day in Canada, and it is an opportunity to show greater respect for our military.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Madam Speaker, my hon. friend from Chicoutimi spoke very eloquently. He mentioned the helicopters. We heard from the minister of defence this morning. He talked about how this was actually a good deal for Canadians. Somehow he expects Canadians to accept that receiving half the helicopters at a loss of over half a billion dollars, a helicopter that has only half the capacity of the one we would have purchased under the previous government, is a good deal.

I wonder if my friend might respond to that.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

The hon. member for Chicoutimi has 15 seconds to answer the question.

[André Harvey, Progressive Conservative, Chicoutimi, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will use my 15 seconds to thank our colleague, who is on the standing committee, for the very positive work the committee has done for all of Canada.

The matter of the helicopters is another scandal of the present government. They wanted to win. They won by promising Canadians that they would scrap the matter, knowing full well that financially and technically the matter—

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

I apologize to the hon. member, but his time is up.

[Sue Barnes, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Revenue]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Waterloo—Wellington.

It is a pleasure to speak to this motion because the examples of leadership this government has shown with respect to the Canadian forces are demonstrated day in and day out by the very pride we have for the dedication, the skill and the professionalism of Canada's soldiers, sailors, airmen and airwomen.

Pride in the Canadian military has very deep roots and today's Canadian forces draw inspiration from the courage, commitment and accomplishments of the hundreds of thousands of their countrymen and women who served before them for this country in war and in peace.

This government has proudly demonstrated the great honour of being the custodian of the distinguished military heritage we have. I believe the need to maintain Canadians' pride in their military tradition is a responsibility which we must and do take very seriously.

I know that the men and women of the forces also take that tradition very seriously. They are currently experiencing a period of intense operational activity and they continue to perform every mission with great skill and courage.

The mission of the Canadian forces is to defend Canada and Canadian interests and values while contributing to international peace and security.

As we all know, the world is in the midst of incredibly dramatic changes. One example is that NATO will expand to include former members of the Warsaw Pact. We are full, active partners in collective security organizations like NATO and NORAD because Canadians believe their security is indivisible from that of our allies, old and new. We continue to contribute to UN peacekeeping missions and other multilateral operations because Canadians believe they have a duty to promote stability and alleviate the suffering which is often caused by armed conflict.

Canada has participated in virtually every peacekeeping mission ever organized, with more than 100,000 women and men posted all over the world during the last half century.

Peacekeeping also requires patience and discipline, as well as innovation and courage. We have made some mistakes on our peacekeeping missions, and some serious ones, but we have also achieved some remarkable successes and, on balance, we have as a nation done a great job.

The Canadian forces in the former Yugoslavia helped to prevent fighting from spreading to other parts of the region. They saved countless lives by assisting in the delivery of humanitarian supplies and preventing more massive assaults on civilian populations.

Peacekeeping and peacemaking are proud and dangerous undertakings to which the army, navy and air force all contribute.

The responsibilities of the Canadian forces also include the surveillance and control of Canadian territory, air space and maritime areas of jurisdiction. They include the securing of borders against illegal activities, fisheries and environmental protection, the protection of Canadians from all manner of disaster and, when required, aid of the civil power.

There is no way of knowing what the 21st century holds for Canada, nor what the challenges and tasks will be for the Canadian forces. The totally unforeseen changes that have occurred on the international stage in the past 10 years are a guarantee of that.

The question is: How will the Canadian forces prepare for the challenges of the 21st century?

In the government's view the choice is clear. We must retain multipurpose, combat-capable forces to carry out the essential mission of defending Canada and contributing to international peace and security.

If the Canadian forces are to meet the challenges of the 21st century and carry out the roles provided by the government, roles which Canadians support, they must be flexible, well equipped, thoroughly trained and able to fight if necessary.

Throughout the 20th century our allies have depended on Canada as a reliable contributing partner to the preservation of international peace and security. The courage and the commitment of the men and women, along with our equipment, our training and our skills, have enabled Canada to participate with the most modern and professional armed forces in the world.

We have made a choice to maintain Canada's historic role and stature as a nation in NORAD and NATO. To do this we must continue to provide the Canadian forces with the tools to do the job.

The government has announced over $1 billion in equipment purchases. We have an obligation to spend the taxpayers' money wisely. That is why, wherever possible, we are choosing to buy off the shelf commercial technology to upgrade the equipment now in our inventory, or in some cases to consider purchasing used equipment.

The government is also restructuring the forces, downsizing headquarters, reducing infrastructure and improving management practices to enhance operational efficiency and to provide Canadians the best value for their defence dollars.

Numerous initiatives are under way and we are seeing excellent progress. In 1994 we had 52 bases and stations, far too many for the size of today's military. Today the number has been reduced by more than half to 24.

In my childhood I lived in PMQs in Zweibrucken, Germany; Centralia, Ontario; Bagotville, Quebec; and Trenton, Ontario. My father was a proud member of the RCAF and I am very proud of him and others who serve.

The Canadian forces need our support and they need our understanding. They must be given missions that are clear, realistic and achievable. They deserve our respect and our gratitude. No matter what challenges we face, no matter what choices we make, we must ensure that we do what is best for our men and women of the Canadian forces and for Canada. That is why the government has embarked on an examination of quality of life issues which face our military personnel and their families.

We have asked the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs to undertake an extensive comprehensive examination of the people issues so important to a modern military. This committee has been travelling across Canada and has visited our troops serving abroad. They are hearing firsthand what we need to hear, the very concerns of the Canadian people serving us.

The committee is planning to present the report in the fall and the government will at that time again demonstrate the leadership necessary by taking concrete action as required and I am confident it will do so.

Our vision of the future is that of a revitalized Canadian military made up of multipurpose, combat-capable troops, both regular and reserve, ready and able to carry out any of the operations entrusted to them.

In my city of London, Ontario we are extremely proud of the 1st Hussars, a most decorated reserve unit with a sterling and long history. In the last month I had the very real honour of being able to inspect the quarter guard. That was a very proud and memorable moment.

Also within the last month I was pleased to address the men and women graduates of our Canadian military colleges who reside in southwestern Ontario. I know that these leaders are willing to accept their mantle of leadership. They understand that service is before self.

The Canadian forces of tomorrow will continue to be a streamlined command and control structure that will be capable of producing the best possible combat forces in the most efficient and cost effective manner possible. We will be proud of them.

Our defence policy is founded upon our hopes for and understanding of a changing world and the values Canadians wish to protect, promote and perpetuate. At its heart is the example set by these thousands of men and women who for over 130 years have provided loyal and courageous service to Canada and the world.

It is very important to thank them as we stand in this Chamber today and on those occasions when we deliver ourselves in service to our country. I would like to thank them on the basis of my knowledge, understanding and appreciation of the commitments of the men and women who serve in our Canadian Armed Forces.

[Ghislain Lebel, Bloc, Chambly, QC]

Madam Speaker, I was very interested to hear the remarks of the hon. member opposite. Unfortunately, I have not reviewed the guard of honor. I guess he was accompanying the Prime Minister or some minister. I was more involved with the lower ranks, with enlisted personnel, with the people we never see but who live in a submarine in a room the size of a toilet. I listened to these people. I certainly did not inspect the boots of the military standing at attention on Parliament Hill or anywhere else.

But I can tell you that I saw the terrible things that partisan politics, no doubt—it cannot be from anything else—prevents the hon. member from criticizing, like the member for Nepean—Carleton, who sits on the same committee as I do.

Earlier, I mentioned a francophone in Trenton who has a young quadriplegic child. The child is three and a half years old and does not speak yet. The name of the person is Denis Paquette. He is at the Trenton base. All he wants is a transfer back to Quebec so his child may be taught to speak. This is all the child will be able to do.

I contacted Corporal Paquette in Trenton, as the hon. member was starting her speech. He said he is getting nothing but reprisals for complaining to the committee when it visited Trenton and is being told that he might be encouraged to leave. He has been told that, if he is transferred to Quebec City, it will be for compassionate reasons, but they will not pay to move him or his family. That is the member's wonderful Canadian armed forces.

It is time a look was taken at the army's human resources. I could almost believe that the soldier who wrote Une armée en déroute was right. Our soldiers are poorly paid and poorly outfitted. They travel in style, on lovely big vessels, leaving the Sea Kings aside, but they do have new equipment. Everything has been spent on equipment and very little on human resources and soldiers' well-being.

I do not think that the member would agree to live in the so-called PMQs, the houses soldiers are provided with that are not fit for a modern family, where the stoves do not even have hoods to vent cooking odours. Is this what the member thinks makes our army so wonderful right now and contributes to the well-being of soldiers? I think not.

I call on members to have a bit of compassion and to listen to soldiers' complaints, such as that of Denis Paquette, about the insurmountable human problems they are up against. And to think that the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party has just been told that the army is wonderful, that there are no problems and that she is making it out to be worse than it really is.

We spent three weeks on the ground. Some of the committee sessions lasted from 1.00 or 1.30 p.m. until midnight. Like the member for Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, we heard soldiers tell us that they were not even allowed to see their own medical file. The excuse given was national security. This is wonderful?

It is time that members examined their conscience, that for once they set aside partisan politics, that they set the record straight and admitted that our soldiers are badly paid and badly outfitted. A soldier came to tell us that he had been waiting six months for boots and nobody believed him until his colonel came to tell us it was true. He had no boots. For six months, the man had been wearing the boots of another soldier who had retired last year. What does she have to say to the soldiers in Bosnia who buy kevlar suits from the Americans? How are we going to send them over? Wearing loincloths, like the Indian tribes of old?

[Sue Barnes, Liberal, London West, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to stand here and correct the hon. member. I did not travel with any minister. I was not with the Prime Minister. I was doing the work as an everyday member of parliament in my riding. Whenever I had the opportunity over the last five years I talked to the men and women who serve with the reserve units.

In my unit I have talked to people who have served in Somalia. I have talked to people who have served in Bosnia. In my city we are going to send people in the 1st Hussars to Bosnia again this June.

When this speaker makes derogatory comments not founded in fact, I must correct him because it is far from the truth. It is the men and women. Maybe this—

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but her time has expired.

[Lynn Myers, Liberal, Waterloo—Wellington, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to address this motion on the government's leadership with respect to the Canadian forces. I believe the government has shown tremendous leadership in this area. I am pleased to report that the residents of my riding of Waterloo—Wellington also believe the government has shown outstanding leadership in this area.

The examples of leadership this government has shown with respect to the Canadian forces are demonstrated day in and day out by the very pride we all have in this House, and all Canadians, for the dedication, skill and professionalism of Canada's soldiers, sailors, airmen and airwomen. That pride is demonstrated by people in my riding and all Canadians support our military.

Pride in the Canadian military has very deep roots. Today's Canadian forces draw inspiration from the courage, commitment and accomplishments of the hundreds of thousands of their countrymen who served before them in both war and peace. This government has proudly demonstrated the great honour of being the custodian of a distinguished military heritage, something we as Canadians can be proud of. The need to maintain Canada's pride therefore in military tradition is a responsibility we as government take very seriously, and rightfully so.

Canada has participated in virtually every peacekeeping mission every organized. That is a great feat and certainly reflects well on this country, with more that 100,000 men and women posted all over the world during the last half century.

If the Canadian forces are to meet the challenges of the 21st century and carry out the roles both in peace and in war provided by the government, roles that Canadians support, they must be flexible, well equipped and thoroughly trained and be able to fight if and when necessary. I reiterate the government's record in preparing the Canadian forces for the 21st century speaks for itself. The government has taken action. This is what leadership is all about.

I will highlight some of the actions the government has taken in this very important area. Immediately following coming into office, the government fulfilled its commitment to cancel the EH-101 helicopters ordered by the Conservative government. They were simply too expensive for what was needed. Also the government made a commitment to significantly enhance the role of parliament in stimulating informed public debate on defence issues. The parliamentary committees reviewing Canada's defence and foreign policies conducted extensive and unprecedented numbers of public consultations in 1994. The government has also held a number of parliamentary debates on major foreign policy and defence issues, including Canada's role in multilateral peace operations in Haiti and most recently in the Arabian gulf and the Balkans.

Canada's defence policy as introduced by this government charts a new course for the Department of National Defence and the Canadian forces. Priorities were set out and some tough decisions have been and will continue to be made in this regard. The Department of National Defence and the Canadian forces have fundamentally changed the way they do business. A program of extensive institutional renewal was introduced and is currently being implemented across the entire defence organization. That is important to note.

The process of reform is ongoing. In March 1997 the report of the Minister of National Defence to the Prime Minister on the leadership and management of Canadian forces and the progress outlined in the commitment to change document released last October demonstrates that much has already been achieved in terms of improving training, education, morale and leadership.

The Minister of National Defence has established a monitoring committee on change to monitor change initiatives and their effectiveness. An independent ombudsman to enhance fairness within the Department of National Defence and the Canadian forces is in the process of being established.

The Department of National Defence and the Canadian forces are committed to gender integration and the Canadian forces are world leaders in terms of the proportion of women in the military in the number of areas in which they can serve. That too is a source of pride for residents in my riding and across Canada.

The government remains committed to maintaining multipurpose combat capable forces to carry out a range operations both at home and abroad in the fulfilment of its commitment to multinational institutions such as the UN and NATO. Resources are focused on maintaining the core capabilities of the Canadian forces.

The government is also committed to ensuring that the Canadian forces have the tools they need to do their job. This is a priority, and rightfully so. Over the last year there has been significant progress on important capital acquisitions, including the purchase of 15 new search and rescue helicopters, four Upholder class diesel-electric submarines, armoured personnel carriers, maritime coastal defence vessels and the tactical command control and communications system. All these are important acquisitions that we need to have in place for the Canadian forces.

The government has introduced amendments to the National Defence Act to modernize and strengthen the military justice system and to more closely align it with Canadian values and legal standards. This is an important move and one that underscores the commitment of the government in terms of this important period.

The government is also committed to improving the quality of life of the members of the Canadian forces and their families.

The Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs is currently examining the social and economic needs of Canadian forces personnel. The government looks forward to its report and recommendations. We will certainly await that report and the importance it will carry.

The government is committed to informing Canadians about the good news in the Canadian forces. Steps have been taken to improve communications both within the department and with the Canadian public. It seems we should always say thanks for the tremendous work the Canadian forces do on our behalf. It is important that we do so in order to show them our ongoing gratitude for the tremendous work they do on our behalf.

The Department of National Defence and the Canadian forces have accomplished much over the last number of years. The government has provided the necessary leadership. It has made the right decisions and followed through on its commitments.

Through the government's leadership, the Canadian forces are prepared for today's challenges and especially for those of tomorrow. It is important to underscore and ensure that all Canadians understand we are preparing for the 21st century.

The government has shown outstanding leadership and commitment when it comes to the Canadian armed forces. It has demonstrated the leadership required and the ongoing commitment necessary to ensure the Canadian Armed Forces are considered to be one of the best in the world.

[Roy H. Bailey, Reform, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague from the Conservative Party for putting forth this motion. It is very deserving at this time. The House would do well to listen to what the opposition has to say concerning our military.

The major problem in this decade, particularly since 1993, has been that this government has chosen to run the military like it runs one of its departments. It has chosen to run the military with the same secrecy. If it wanted to look at one of Canada's success stories, it is when the military looked after itself and the politicians stayed out of it. But the government has not done that.

As a case in point recently, within the least year, the military had a conference in Winnipeg. The theme of the conference was efficiency and accountability. Now the auditors are being asked to look into this $2 million conference which lasted only four days. It was attended by Canada's top military officers and their guests. If that does not sound like a department of this government, nothing does. That is exactly what it is.

According to military documents obtained by my colleague, the hon. member for Lakeland, food and alcoholic drinks for the conference cost $74,000. It sounds like a department to me. Furthermore, this conference included $8,000 in tips to the staff. It sounds like a department to me. The defence minister has now confirmed that the auditors are going to examine this four day conference.

The success of any country's military and particularly that of Canada and the glorious past to which the government has been referring took place when the military ran the military. If we tried to run the RCMP like this government is trying to run the military we would have no national police force.

The Liberals since coming to office in 1993 have done nothing but tear the guts out of the military. While they talk about all the purchases, they have chopped the military budget by $3 billion.

I have talked to some of these people in the military. I congratulate my colleague from the Conservative Party who said do we ever need an ombudsman. In the military today as with this government there are a minister, deputy ministers, political hacks and all the rest of it and then at the bottom we have the real troops. That is what has been wrong with our military. The soldiers, the people in the front corps, are telling this government on every trip they make that is the problem with the military.

I do not know whether these people have read the auditor general's report, but he says the military is rusted out. It is like VIA Rail, it cannot replenish its stock. Only recently have the Liberals moved to do something about that.

I hope the committee travelling across Canada right now looking at the quality of life in the military stopped at the base in Moose Jaw. I hope the members of the committee talked to some of the people I talked to. I hope they were as shocked about the conditions in which the military families were living as I was. I hope they saw the squalor of some of the houses. I guess as long as we are going to have a department with a military being run as a political organization, that is exactly what we can expect to achieve.

On the search and rescue helicopters it took four years to end up with the same EH-101 Cormorant that the Liberals had scrapped in 1993 at a big price. It took four years for the Liberals to sign a deal with the British to buy four used submarines. It sounds like a department to me. It does not sound like the military.

We still do not have the maritime ship borne helicopters. We are told we are going to buy them. I would like to say this as a positive note and offer a suggestion to this House. Everything I have said has been positive but it will be received by members opposite as being negative. That is the problem. I just spoke the truth. I realize members opposite do not like that.

The opinion in this country of Canada's military is not negative. It is the government's handling of the military that is looked on negatively. We could do a poll on the Somalia inquiry should no one believe me. That would tell us what is thought of politics and government.

Right now we could do a lot to improve the image of the military. In the area where I live it is impossible for young people to become part of the militia because they are not encouraged and they would have too far to travel as there is no military establishment nearby. Many of the young people whose grandfathers served in the famous South Saskatchewan Regiment have to drive all the way to Regina to become part of the military.

I would encourage the Minister of National Defence to go out and sell a program with the cadets of the three branches. I truly believe that if we could sell the cadet program in our schools and in organizations within our communities, not only would that help children with a number of problems and give them something to do but it would also be a real source of recruitment into the military when the time is right. If someone enters and stays in the cadet program until they have completed high school, it may well be that they will want a career in the military. This is a program we should give serious attention to.

I hope this country is never again disgraced with the government's closing down of the Somalia inquiry. When this inquiry was going on and then was cut off it reminded me of a cat making a deposit on the pavement and trying to cover it up. You just cannot cover it up. You cannot cover up the Somalia inquiry.

The government should take some real steps, and I hope it will during this tour, to bring Canadians' image of our military up to where it once was. Our military image has really gone down. It has really fallen in the last 10 to 12 years. That is what my hon. colleague's motion is all about and that is what every member of this House and myself want to see.

My parting words are to get the military out of the politicians' back pockets and let it run as a true military force.

[Lynn Myers, Liberal, Waterloo—Wellington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I was listening to the hon. member opposite and his reference to the secrecy in terms of what the government and the military are doing. I could not believe I was actually hearing what he was saying. It is incredible to think he would make that kind of statement.

Surely my hon. colleague should know, and in fact I hope he does, that the defence committee has been listening very carefully to what the military has to say. In fact the committee has taken soundings in terms of what is being said at various places across Canada. Might I remind the hon. member that the committee has done so in Yellowknife, Vancouver, Comox, Edmonton, Cold Lake, Esquimalt, Valcartier, Bagotville, Kingston, Petawawa, North Bay, Trenton, Gagetown, Goose Bay and Halifax. In fact I do not think he realized that hearings were held in Moose Jaw as well.

I would remind the member that this is a government intent on listening very carefully and very closely to what the armed forces personnel and people in this area have to say. I think it is very important that we go on record to note that is in fact the case.

My question is really simple. Why would the hon. member downplay the tremendous hearings that are being held across Canada in order to get the kind of feedback, in order to open up the process that we need and think is appropriate? Why would he downplay that? I think that is really appalling.

[Roy H. Bailey, Reform, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that the hon. member was not listening. I was not condemning the present fact finding tour.

The hon. member knows very well that I talked about the secrecy shrouded around the Somalia inquiry and the shredding of documents, that is what Canadians thought of the military. I am not condemning talking to people, listening to the rank and file and not just the officers and the politicians. You got it wrong. I did not say that and you know I did not say it.

[The Deputy Speaker]

I know the hon. member means to address the Chair.

[André Harvey, Progressive Conservative, Chicoutimi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first of all allow me to thank my colleague from the Reform Party, who supported this morning my motion to create in the armed forces a position similar to that of the auditor general and commonly called ombudsman.

I think that this would indeed provide an answer to all the serious problems our military personnel and their families are confronted to.

I wonder if our colleague could share with us two or three of the most pressing recommendations this government and its defence minister should implement immediately instead of waiting for the report on which the standing committee on defence is working on, to at least show all our troops that we listened to what the auditor general has been saying for the past two, three or four years. I would like to hear my colleague on this.

[Roy H. Bailey, Reform, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the question.

Absolutely, there should be the same procedure in place within the military which I know exists within the RCMP and police forces. Even the lowest recruit has a right to issue a complaint. In doing so they know full well that the complaint will reach its proper source and they will not be penalized for putting their reasoning forward. We found out in the Somalia inquiry that when they got to the touchy political part that is when the problem started.

The member is right and it is a good question. We should get the politics out of this and let the military run it and reach solutions without the politicians getting into it.

[Derrek Konrad, Reform, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the Tories for their motion today.

It is entirely right to condemn the government for what it is not doing with the military. It is condemned for its failure to provide strong political leadership to Her Majesty's Canadian forces. Political leadership. Nobody is asking the government to provide leadership in the field. We expect from this House that it will provide strong leadership to the military, to the forces in total.

What do the military do for us and what have they been doing in the past? They fought alongside the armed forces of a lot of other countries in many wars over the years.

In World War I they fought in the trenches. They fought heroically. They fought with self sacrifice. They were completely selfless. Some of the worst things that could happen to a soldier happened to soldiers in World War I. They did everything that could be done to help win that war. They fought in trenches. They had a fledgling air force. They fought at Vimy Ridge. They fought at Maple Copse, the Battle of the Somme. Those are the words that define the heroic history of Canada in World War I.

In World War II there was Dieppe, the Normandy landings on D-Day. I am proud that my wife's father was at Normandy on D-Day. My mother-in-law, a war bride, did everything she could to help in the defence of Britain during the war that encompassed that land.

There were the London air raids, the battle of Britain and the battle of the Atlantic. That was only the European theatre. Our people fought everywhere on this globe in the second world war. There is probably not a member in this House whose family was not affected by the wars.

We had the Korean war. I have known and employed veterans of the Korean war. They suffered. They suffered not without meaning. They suffered because they believed in what Canada stands for, democracy.

These people should be looked after in the way we would expect someone who has sacrificed for us would be looked after. They should not be left lying on the sidelines somewhere. We have picked them up off the battlefields but have we looked after them once they have returned home? They have trouble getting pensions and any number of things.

It is not only in declared wars that our people have fought. They have been there for peacekeeping missions around the world. They work in disaster relief in Canada, just recently during the Winnipeg flood and the Quebec ice storm. Our soldiers were there as volunteers, not because somebody picked them up. They went of their own accord.

In the past our military have been shot at, gassed, bombed, shelled, sunk in ships and crashed in planes. They have been made prisoners of war, taken hostage and more. They have served in temperature extremes. They have practised in the Arctic and have served in the deserts. One would think with all of that it would be enough suffering. Is it? Not according to the Liberal majority government.

The pay is ridiculously low for what I just listed as the things they do. We have seen on television and committee members have heard the military give testimony on the dismal housing conditions. And the equipment. I know a man in the navy who served on a wooden ship. It is almost the year 2000. What kind of things are we handing these guys to defend our country?

These people are responsible for our national defence. They help out in times of national disaster. They keep peace around the world. We would think that they would be accountable to parliament and the Minister of National Defence. But we also think that the Minister of National Defence, this parliament and this country is responsible for their well-being. The way they have been treated is unacceptable.

In reading “Dishonoured Legacy: The Lessons of the Somalia Affair” we find that with respect to peacekeeping they have been at it for 40 years. In 1992 what did they find? There was no comprehensive training policy based on changing requirements. There was an absence of doctrines, standards and performance evaluation mechanisms. That does not speak to a government that is responsible for looking after the military.

The Department of National Defence military activities are ineffective in respect of parliamentary oversight. I am just reading a little bit again from “Dishonoured Legacy: The Lessons of the Somalia Affair”. A 1994 examination by a joint committee of the Senate and the House of Commons was unanimously in support of the view that there is a need to strengthen the role of parliament in defence matters. That would increase the morale of our people. They obviously do not envision parliament having a day to day role in things but they say it needs to be effective in promoting accountability when it receives, examines and publicizes reports. That is when parliament is most effective.

Leadership in matters of accountability and an accountability ethic have been found seriously wanting in three areas, the upper military, bureaucratic, and what we are discussing today, political echelons.

There was material tabled by the Minister of National Defence in 1997 which has only been some meagre talk about changes on accountability and the desirability of it.

In 1994 the Liberals had a white paper calling for a combat capable defence force, multipurpose. What do we have? We have had years to get helicopters which were cancelled as a political ploy. What have we got now? The same helicopters.

Does that make sense? It does not make sense to me, not to Canadians, not to other members of the House. What are they spending nowadays? It is $9 billion. What was it in 1993 when the Liberals took over? It was $12 billion. Let us not discount the effect of inflation on those types of things.

Our military has not been looked after. We have used submarines, but it only took forever to get them. West Edmonton Mall had more submarines than the Canadian navy for goodness' sake and probably better ones than the navy has had up to date. It just is not right.

We do not think that is what the government should be about. It needs to have a purpose. We need to decide what it is to do. We expect the armed forces to support our political, economic and environmental sovereignty. We think that should be happening over Canada's territory.

We want to continue to participate in NATO, NORAD and any other defence organization that may be developed in the future. It is still an issue as recent events show worldwide that things can quickly fall apart which we thought were together.

We need fast response. We do not need to send our people overseas and expect them to wait around in the mid-Atlantic while we decide whether or not they are suitably outfitted to go into a war theatre or a peacekeeping operation. That is outrageous. We need to provide these things now. We definitely need to have our military prepared for any event. We need them to be prepared on a variety of facets.

I am in complete agreement with the motion to condemn the government for the way it treats our military personnel. I trust that as a result of the motion before the House it will review what it is doing and will make the decision to do the right thing.

[Jerry Pickard, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, this weekend I had a marvellous opportunity in my riding. We had inspection of our cadet corps of young people. It was lovely to watch. I was at an air cadet inspection on Friday and an army cadet inspection on Saturday. I watched the pride. I watched the skills. I watched the talent that was brought forth in these young people in my community. I found it pretty amazing.

The reserves are working with these young people and providing a fabulous opportunity in each of our communities for them to participate and to see firsthand the value that military training can bring to them.

I found it remarkable to see young people who when they became involved were not nearly as focused as they might have been otherwise. They developed pride, skills, excellence and moved forward. This is something our military people are supplying in every community across the country. Our military people are there when they are asked to be.

It does not matter if we are talking about the flood in Manitoba and the tremendous work the military did there. We can talk about the ice storm in eastern Canada, Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick, and the service it provided and the praise people gave. We can talk about the recent fire in Alberta. Our military went there.

We have a very proud, a very strong, a very viable military that is doing a job of which we all have to be very proud. We need to thank the military for everything it is offering our communities.

Quite frankly I find that year after year the condemnation of the military and its plans and movements is wrong. It does not take very long to think who was in power from 1984 to 1988 and on to 1993. It seems to me it was a Tory government.

I do not remember the Tories bringing forward the issues they are bringing forward today. I do not remember them dealing with the problems in the military. I remember them as a very different group: see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil. Three blind mice could probably have given a better scenario of what was happening than the people who sat there and did nothing to enhance our military bases during the nine years they ran government not very many years ago.

In 1997 we commemorated the 80th anniversary of the Canadian victory at Vimy Ridge, one of the greatest allied victories of World War I. Superb leadership, meticulous planning, and the courage, determination and spirit of the Canadian soldier won the day. The qualities that led to a stunning victory at Vimy Ridge have characterized the efforts of Canadians in uniform for more than 100 years. The Canadian military ethos is the heart of a proud traditional service and the heart of great sacrifice. Through two world wars, Korea and 50 years of peacekeeping it is what we define as excellence in the Canadian forces. That distinguishes our forces as a great institution.

This military ethos is based on strong, principled and effective leadership. Leadership is a good word to define the action taken by the government with respect to the Canadian forces.

One example of leadership is the government's proposed amendments to the National Defence Act, Bill C-25. Discipline is the lifeblood of any military organization. Whether in peace or war it spells the difference between military success and failure. It promotes effective and efficient qualities. Its foundations are respected for leadership, appropriate training and a military justice system where equity and fairness are unquestionably clear at all times.

However, in recent years the capacity of the military justice system to promote discipline, efficiency, high morale and justice has been called into question by a number of incidents. The government looked closely at these events and acted decisively. The government has taken leadership. It responded to the report of the Somalia commission of inquiry very aptly titled “A Commitment to Change”. We are implementing about 83% of the recommendations in the commission's report.

In December 1996 the government commissioned a special advisory group under the Right Hon. Brian Dickson, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, to assess the military justice system and military police investigative services. It reported on time and under budget. The minister of the day supported its recommendations in his report of March 25, 1997 on the leadership and management of the Canadian forces. The Prime Minister endorsed early action on recommendations and work began immediately to pursue the implementation.

The special advisory group on military justice and military police investigative services was also asked to examine the quasi-judicial role of the minister of the military justice system. Chief Justice Dickson's recommendations are now being implemented.

When the government saw that the military justice system was one of the key areas in which change was needed, it took action and demonstrated leadership. The government sought advice within the military and from the public at large, from distinguished Canadians who specialized in the knowledge of the military.

The amendments contained in Bill C-25 are a product of that process. The amendments proposed in Bill C-25 are the most comprehensive in the history of the act. Bill C-25 addresses a broad range of provisions in the National Defence Act. It will modernize the provisions with respect to the board of inquiry. It will clarify the legislative authority for the performance of public service duties by Canadian forces members such as the actions during the ice storm of which I spoke earlier.

However Bill C-25 is primarily about the modernization of the military justice system and has four principal thrusts.

First, it will establish in the National Defence Act for the first time the roles and responsibilities of key figures in the military justice system and will set clear standards of institutional separation for investigation, prosecution, defence and judicial functions.

Second, it will enhance transparency and provide greater structure to the exercise of individual discretion, investigation and charging processes.

Third, it will modernize the powers and procedures of service tribunals including eliminating the death penalty under military law.

Fourth, it will strengthen oversight and review of the administration of military justice.

These changes are made because it is absolutely essential for a military justice system to be rigorous, transparent and fair. The system of military justice is designed to meet operational requirements particular to the armed forces. It is intended to promote discipline, efficiency, high morale and justice in the armed forces.

On two occasions the Supreme Court of Canada has confirmed the need for a parallel and distinctive system of courts to meet the special requirements of military discipline. Indeed our armed forces must have portable courts which, by using procedures that are both speedy and fair, are capable of operating in conflict or in peace.

To better understand the special needs of the Canadian forces in respect of justice and discipline, one need only consider a variety of tasks they perform in such a professional manner. From the Golan Heights to Bosnia, from the floods in the Saguenay and in Manitoba to the recent catastrophic ice storm that occurred in Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick, to the actions that I mentioned in Alberta they perform very direct services to all people throughout the world as well as to Canadians.

There is no question that they perform very specific functions and need to have opportunity to carry out those functions, but the justice system must be in place to help as well.

Bill C-25 will make it possible to modernize the code of service discipline so that it will meet the particular needs of the armed forces while reflecting the values and expectations of Canadians. It will make the system of military justice, to the extent that military requirements permit, more in keeping with legal standards that currently exist in Canada.

These measures will greatly enhance accountability and transparency, increase confidence in the military justice system and certainly give everyone a better understanding of our system. They will provide a more modern, effective statutory framework for operations of the department and the forces. They will enhance transparency and accountability. They will increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the Canadian forces and enable men and women of the forces to do so much to make the country a better place.

These changes to the National Defence Act demonstrate strong political leadership on the part of the Canadian government. The Canadian forces will benefit from the movements with which we are going forward.

I mentioned when I first started where my colleagues in the Progressive Conservative Party had been. They were here some eight or nine years in order to bring forward plans and changes in the military. It seems to me that during the election campaign the Tories admitted that the strength of the military was critical to our sovereignty. Yet the heart of their election plan was to weaken Canada by slashing an additional $2.6 billion from the national defence budget over four years. This government's restructuring and downsizing of DND has already produced a leaner military. Do they actually expect us to believe that they can find $650 million in savings by privatizing private property management and food services? Some of the suggestions they made are very questionable and certainly not well studied.

At the same time I have heard some different viewpoints from the Reform Party. From what I have seen from the Reform Party over the last few years I have some questions. The Reform Party claims to strongly support a well equipped Canadian force. Its fresh start election platform made no mention of any plans to improve national defence or international security. The only time the words “national defence” were ever mentioned in its election platform was in the list of government areas that would be targeted for cuts and spending reductions. That is what I heard from the Reform Party during the election. That is what I have heard from the leader of the Reform Party. That is what most Canadians have heard from the Reform Party day after day.

The Reform Party has consistently called for major cuts in defence spending. In 1993 its zero in three plan would have cut $1.8 billion from the defence department's budget. In 1994 it wanted an additional $1 billion cut from national defence on top of a 15% cut across the board that it was planning for all departments.

During the Somalia affair the Reform Party stood and criticized day after day the fact that the military was not performing the Reform Party goals and objectives. Yet today it comes in here and suggests that it is supportive of military actions.

All Canadians remember the stinging attacks, the budget cuts, the crunches that it was suggesting. Now it has changed its mind on most of the policy that I see coming forward. I ask members of this House how many times they have heard the Reform Party talk about cuts. It is always more money here, more money there. It has totally turned its whole position around. To me it is very ludicrous.

I do not think that we should be playing politics as much as we do with these issues. It is clear that we need to be decisive. We need to put in place decisive measures. We need to move the agenda forward. We certainly need to show the respect that the Canadian military has and should have. We need to make certain that this process is in place so that we will have a service that defends this country not only at home but abroad. We have to make sure that we can move in a direction that is consistent with our allies. We have to move in a direction with the pride which these forces show.

It is clear, in my opinion, and I believe in the opinion of most Canadians that our military is a very proud institution, one that has served this country extremely well and one that continues to serve this country well. We have to look at the experts and suggestions that are coming forward. To stand and condemn day after day is a pretty bad role that our opposition has taken toward military, toward government and toward what is going on in this country.

[David Price, Progressive Conservative, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will touch on one point that the hon. member mentioned. He started off by speaking about cadets. I will speak about air cadets in my riding.

I was a member of the air cadets several years back. In the last two years they have had to close down. Granted, the cadet system is a non-profit organization, but it does work usually under reservists who help out.

That brings up the other point of what has happened to the reserve over the last four years. They have cut the hours out of the reserve. They only have 32 days a year to train.

This government talks about making the reservists a good, solid force, yet it is cutting the feet out from under them. It is taking equipment away from them. It is cutting their hours.

How can they possibly work with 32 days a year? Besides that, now they say no more summer exercises. They are all being cut out. This is where we get our young people involved. They get out in the summertime, get jobs with the reserves and get to do summer exercises. Maybe the member could comment on that.

[Jerry Pickard, Liberal, Kent—Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the air cadets, on Friday night I saw the most exquisite drill team that I have seen in years. As a matter of fact, they were among the leading drill teams across Ontario.

There is no question that the reserves are working in my area. They are doing the job with young people that really needs to be done.

There is no question that these young folks are looking forward to all kinds of other opportunities as they go from the base level of training up through the air cadet level to experimental flying preparation and that type of thing. The army cadets are in a very well structured program.

I believe it could well be that in the hon. member's area that may not be happening. However, it is not the same scenario across Canada. In my area there is a well functioning group that is carrying on these activities with young people.

[Howard Hilstrom, Reform, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take hon. members back to about 1955 or 1960 to see the wonderful armed forces we had at that time.

I have sat here today and listened to these comments about being the great supporters of the armed forces, about being the ones taking care of armed forces personnel around the world and in Canada. What have I heard? It is the Reform Party that does not have all the big plans that should be written down.

I say to this House that this Liberal government is responsible for low morale, underpaid personnel and more generals and servicemen than our allies.

Reform at least has a chance in the future to write a page of history that will make the armed forces much better. What we see from the Conservatives and the Liberals in this House is a history of destruction of our armed forces, particularly with respect to unification, underfunding and the low morale that we see today.

What does the member have to say about that Liberal record which is really disgusting?