Debates of May 7th, 2002

Supply

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Chairman, we are talking about the program that comes into place on October 1, 2002. In Norad there is a Canadian deputy commander. Is there any similar role anticipated in the northern command?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

No, Mr. Chairman. At this point in time the northern command is an internal United States command.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Chairman, since this will be a double or a triple padding on the American side, is there any anticipated change in the existing responsibility of the Canadian deputy commander of Norad?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

No, Mr. Chairman, there is not.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Chairman, does the commander of the northern command in the United States have any responsibility in the U.S. missile defence program?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Mr. Chairman, that has not been signed yet.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Chairman, I will resist the temptation to say that perhaps the minister has not been briefed.

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Maybe your briefing needs to be better.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

I heard the click, Mr. Chairman. I wonder if the minister could give us any reason why he would not come before the House of Commons this month and present a rather detailed statement of the nature of discussions now being pursued between Canada and the United States with respect to the shape of the northern command and any implications it might have on Canada?

Is there any reason not to trust this parliament and the people of the country with the details that are being discussed now by his own admission between officials of his department and the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade and their American counterparts? Is there a reason not to trust parliament?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

No, Mr. Chairman, there is not. As soon as the government is seized with the matter and there is a recommendation, a proposal to make, then the right hon. member and all the members of the House will have an opportunity to express their views on it.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Just to be clear on this, Mr. Chairman, the House of Commons would have an opportunity to express its views on a fait accompli presented by the Government of Canada to the House without any communication to the people of the country as to the details of issues that may well affect our sovereignty, the costs we face and our ability to perform other missions in the world. The minister has no intention to bring parliament into his confidence before a decision is taken. Am I correct in understanding that?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

No, Mr. Chairman, I did not say that. I think the right hon. member is far too worried about it affecting our sovereignty because it will not affect our sovereignty. It will not have the kind of dire consequences that he is pretending that it will.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Chairman, the minister does not know what it will cost Canada. He does not know what its implications will be for any of our equipment or other requirements. He does not know if we will be invited or not. He does not know if the invitation will require a formal agreement or will require anything else and he tells us not to worry about Canadian sovereignty.

There was a question asked by my colleague from Dartmouth earlier about the Arctic. Does the northern command proposal have any implication at all for Canadian jurisdiction over our Arctic? Is that the reason he is taking some of the actions that he discussed in response to my colleague from Dartmouth?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Mr. Chairman, that has not entered into the discussion at this point in time. There are long outstanding issues with respect to the north that will have to be dealt with.

What the northern command of the United States is indicating is that the continental United States plus the areas of Canada, the areas around the north are areas of interest to it. Ultimately in discussions those matters will have to be dealt with.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Chairman, on another matter, did the minister recommend to cabinet the purchase of secondhand submarines?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Mr. Chairman, I did recommend the purchase of the four older submarines from the U.K. It is a terrific bargain. We are getting four of these submarines for about one-quarter of the price it would cost for new ones.

These submarines were in the service of the royal navy which has a great deal of expertise with respect to them and their capabilities. There are some items that need repair but these are not items that will make them unworthy of being part of the service of Canada. They are still a very good buy. The repairs will be made and they will be put into service and will serve us for many years to come. Much if not all of the repairs will be done under warranty with the company and with the U.K. which sold them to us.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Chairman, it certainly would be a goodbye to the Canadian seamen who went down in those used submarines in the condition the minister bought them.

Since the minister has said that he recommended the purchase of these secondhand submarines, did he personally ask to see the logbooks with respect to each of those submarines before the $750 million expenditure by Canada was approved?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Mr. Chairman, I think the right hon. member is most irresponsible in what he is suggesting about these submarines.

We are not going to put such submarines in service until they are safe. They have been certified previously by the royal navy which has expertise with respect to certification for their ability to operate and to dive. When we purchased these submarines all of the necessary examinations were made. The trials were done to ensure that they were worthy boats and would serve us well and that we got a good deal.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Chairman, the minister is telling us that he had the assurance of the seller that the secondhand submarines he was buying were valid.

He missed my question about the logbooks. Did his officials look at the logbooks? Did he as the minister who made the recommendation that we buy these secondhand submarines look personally at the logbooks to make sure that what we were buying was safe and would not require extensive repair? It is a simple question, yes or no?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Mr. Chairman, everything was examined that needed to be examined. It was not a question of taking the word of the purchaser although the royal navy is a very respected navy. Remember the royal navy bought these submarines from the private sector. It certified them and went through considerable inspection and trials.

Our Canadian navy has done the same thing. We have examined everything that needed to be examined. The agreements cover everything that needs to be covered to ensure that this is a good buy. It is a good buy. There are some repairs needed but the right hon. member is exaggerating and distorting the truth on this matter, as usual. When the repairs are made we will get many years of very good service for the Canadian navy.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Chairman, if these logbooks make such a compelling case for purchasing the submarines, would the minister agree to table them in the House of Commons?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Mr. Chairman, I do not think the right hon. member would know what to look for in the logbook to start with. The Canadian navy does. The Canadian navy knows what it needs to examine. It has done all the necessary examinations. Whatever we can table here that is going to be helpful we will attempt to do that.

I might add it was the right hon. gentleman and his party who had the hare-brained scheme when they were in government that they were going to buy something like 15 nuclear submarines. They eventually abandoned that hare-brained scheme which would have cost much more money, billions of dollars more than the submarines we have that will well serve this country and the needs that it has.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Chairman, I look forward to having those logbooks tabled in the House of Commons. I can find someone who can help me interpret them. It will not take three times to be told and I am sure it will click on the first reading.

I have one last question on this matter at this stage. The Australians looked at these subs and chose not to buy them. Did the minister know that the Australians had decided not to buy these subs when he recommended that Canada buy them? What was it that caused him to believe that the Australians, who proved to be right, were wrong in their assessment in turning down this bargain basement opportunity?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Mr. Chairman, the Australians decided to head into their own submarine program and build their own. They ended up spending more than five times what we spent. At the end of the day it took them 13 years to get them into service because they had so many different problems with them.

In fact I can remember when visiting Australia they considered that to be one of the biggest jokes, trying to get the Collins Class submarine into service. It took them a far longer time, more than double the time it will ever take us to get these submarines into service at a fifth of the cost.

[The Chairman]

That concludes this round. We now give the floor to the hon. member for Renfrew--Nipissing--Pembroke.