Mr. Speaker, I think at this stage the debate might be on the wrong track. I was just listening to my Conservative colleague and several others before him. Fortunately the interventions suggest that there are inaccuracies in the Conservative party's proposal. My colleagues in the NDP noticed it earlier and I agree with them.
I heard my Conservative colleague say that improved defence requires more money. This remark has been made many times. We are told numbers need to be increased and money needs to be added. We in the Bloc Québécois are against the Conservative motion because it seems like an exercise in reverse. It puts the cart before the horse. Let me explain.
Instead of investing more in defence, we have to start by re-evaluating Canada's foreign policy; we have to read it and understand it better. It is very important to grasp the nuances.
During previous interventions, I heard Conservative members say that it was very important to have a better army with more money because, in fact, the purpose of the army is to raise Canada's status and influence.
I think we would need a lot more than an army to enhance the reputation, status and influence of Canada. First, we need a long term vision. It would also be a good idea to have a government from time to time. That could be what is missing in Canada and my Conservative colleagues might agree with me that we may not be addressing this issue the right way.
We, in the Bloc Québécois, think that we need to have a debate on the plans for the future of our armed forces. We like to remind people that we are committed to improving the living conditions of our troops. It is important, and we are not just paying lip service. We believe that a better army begins with giving its members their due. But please, let us not pour in more money right away without developing a comprehensive policy and examining the whole situation.
This brings me to a quick discussion of the missile defence shield. This is an option we absolutely have to avoid. It is probably more important to talk about it than to continue to fund it.
Let me conclude by making a comment and asking my Conservative colleague a question. To ensure peace and security, we certainly have to focus more on development assistance. Should that not start with peacekeeping missions?