Debates of Nov. 7th, 2006

National Defence—Main Estimates 2006-07

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Mr. Chair, before I answer that, I am going to answer the Excalibur question. Apparently we are going to receive three rounds for trial. We have no rounds. That is correct. We have none. We are going to receive three rounds for trial in the next few weeks, and the plan is, in February 2007, to acquire 27 more rounds if these three rounds work out. It is correct at the moment that we have no rounds.

With respect to the cost of the mission, as I said before, the incremental cost of the mission to date is $2.1 billion for the military. I cannot speak for the other parts of the mission. Every soldier we have sent there and every piece of equipment that we have put there is part of the military inventory. They are to be employed elsewhere. So when the member asks me the cost of mission in Afghanistan, the member gets what it costs us to do the mission in Afghanistan, which is $2.1 billion to date, since the beginning of the mission back in 2002.

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, I thank the minister for his answers.

I have raised the issue of danger pay at the committee level and in the House. That is the pay meant for the military when they are in Afghanistan. The issue is that if they are injured and sent home, they lose that danger pay. When we spoke about this before, I thought we could just call it something else and soldiers would continue to get it. It seems absolutely bizarre that a person is injured in combat in Afghanistan, comes back to recuperate in Canada and loses that amount of money that is danger pay. We should ensure that injured soldiers are not penalized when they return to Canada.

I know the minister has a commitment to change this. He told me last week that he wanted it corrected within a few weeks. I would like to ask what progress has been made on that issue since we raised it at the defence committee.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Mr. Chair, as I told the hon. member, the committee and others publicly, we will ensure that our soldiers who are wounded are not in any way deprived of the allowances that they would otherwise get, but what we cannot do is mix up high risk pay or high risk allowances with this other initiative, because we have to stay constant. If they are in a high risk area, they get the risk allowance. If they are not in the high risk area, they do not get the high risk allowance. We have to stay firm with that. Otherwise, it opens up an endless appeal process.

What I had promised to do and what we will do is that we will ensure that every wounded soldier, if wounded before the time that they were normally to return to Canada, will be compensated. We are just trying to determine the best way to do it.

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, I know the minister is sincere in what he is saying. I would only urge that the department get on with it. I am sure that it cannot be so difficult to call it something different and ensure they get the money they were meant to get while they were serving in Afghanistan, once they are injured and home.

I would like to ask the minister a further question about support for wounded soldiers who come back to Canada. I know that he wants to provide as much support as possible for those who are wounded. We know that they go through trying circumstances, and I am sure that everyone here in the House wants to provide as much help as possible. Once a soldier who has been wounded is sent out of Kandahar, is the first stop always Germany? What sort of help does the department provide for the family if a soldier is in the hospital in Germany?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Mr. Chair, before I answer that question I want to note that today is the 106th anniversary of the battle of Leliefontein. My regiment, in the year 1900 in South Africa, was awarded three Victoria Crosses on this day. I want to note it before the evening passes.

With respect to the question about wounded soldiers, not all wounded soldiers go to the American hospital in Germany. Many of them come home if they are in a condition to come home. Only the most seriously wounded go to Landstuhl to make sure that they are stabilized and are in a good enough condition to return to Canada.

As for when they return to Canada, as I said before, and I gave out statistics earlier today, the great majority of soldiers return to duty after medical treatment, but even those who return with medical treatment may have a disability, so we have two categories: some of them do not return to duty and some do return to duty who may have disabilities. They receive disability pay. They also receive lump sums of money depending upon the extent of their injury or their wound. We also have programs to look after them, to make sure they are cared for and to get them either returned to duty or returned to civil life. We look after them right through the process.

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, when does the government expect to make a decision as to whether it will be extending this mission past 2009? I know that many of us in the House were not happy with the process that was followed last spring for obtaining Parliament's approval. Obviously more consultation would be important in the future.

I want to ask the minister if he will commit tonight to a full review by Parliament before another extension. I know that the planning takes place six to nine months before an extension is planned. I would like to ask him if that consultation would take place well in advance of any extension of the mission.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Mr. Chair, there is no ongoing process at this time in the sense of reviewing what we will do at the end of February 2009, not at this moment. That is the decision of the Prime Minister and the cabinet.

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, are the U.S. pilots who are providing air cover for Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan operating under rules of engagement that meet or exceed the standards required by Canadian pilots under the first additional protocol to the 1949 Geneva Convention?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Mr. Chair, off the top of my head I cannot recall what the protocol is, but I can assure the member opposite that all pilots are following the rules of engagement as approved by NATO.

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, I wonder if the minister has some concern about Canadian soldiers who are calling on U.S. pilots for air cover and who might in some circumstances inadvertently come into violation of the first additional protocol as a result of the actions of a U.S. pilot, for instance with respect to the selection of targets that may, because of their location or nature, place civilians at excessive risk.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Mr. Chair, the member opposite, by implication, is trying to say somehow that American pilots are evil or something like that. American pilots are part of NATO. They follow all the rules of NATO. We have complete confidence in them and in the British pilots, the Dutch pilots and all the other pilots there who follow NATO rules.

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, are any anti-personnel landmines that were laid by the Soviet forces in the 1980s still being used as part of the perimeter defence of Kandahar airfield?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Mr. Chair, my understanding is that there are no mines whatsoever around Kandahar airfield. The British airfield regiment defends the area, plus there are, at any one time, a thousand or more troops in the area so it tends to keep the Taliban away.

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, I wonder if there is any indirect reliance of Canadian soldiers on landmines in Afghanistan, and if there is, is it consistent with the spirit of the 1997 Ottawa landmines convention?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Mr. Chair, I am not aware of any use of mines on our side. However, as the member knows, the Taliban use Soviet mines to blow up and attack our forces on a regular basis. The only people using mines right now are the Taliban.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Mr. Chair, I will be splitting my time with the member for Egmont and the member for Oakville.

As our leader said earlier this evening in quoting General Richards around the issue of the locals in Kandahar and the importance of hunger and having support in determining which side of this fight these people will work on, I would like to know in terms of our government policy of three Ds if the minister would tell us in terms of estimates how much is spent in each of the three Ds, defence, diplomacy and development, in the Afghanistan mission.

When our leader was the minister of foreign affairs, he met weekly with the other three D ministers. I would like to know if the minister meets with these ministers and whether they are able to sort out the mission in Afghanistan in that way. If he does, how often?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Mr. Chair, the only number I can provide right now is for the defence department. Our incremental costs for defence are $2.1 billion. The member opposite would have to approach the Department of Foreign Affairs and CIDA to determine what their amounts are.

I meet these ministers every day. In fact, I meet every minister every day.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Mr. Chair, I would suggest that maybe the minister should ask the other two ministers how much their budgets are for Afghanistan and then have a proper rebalancing of this mission instead of this militarized version.

We believe that if the people in Kandahar are hungry, they are tending to fight with the Taliban instead of helping us. I would suggest that at tomorrow's meeting, minister, you actually ask the other two ministers how much their budgets are for Afghanistan and report back.

In terms of supporting our troops, I would also like to further the conversation that you and I had during committee--

[The Assistant Deputy Chair, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I would remind the hon. member for St. Paul's to address her comments through the Chair and not directly to the minister.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Mr. Chair, I would like to further the conversation that he and I had in committee on post-traumatic stress disorder. When I visited the Edmonton base a number of years ago, there were tremendous concerns that each soldier was not fully screened for post-traumatic stress on return from theatre.

I am heartened to hear from the minister that he is not wanting to redeploy soldiers who have been there. I would like to know whether he had that point of view when he or his government agreed to extend the mission to 2009.

Can he tell the House that every soldier is screened for post-traumatic stress, the finest kind of screening, upon return to Canada and that every soldier who is redeployed to Afghanistan is screened before leaving?

Can he tell me the divorce rate of soldiers compared to the national average, the suicide rate compared to the national average, the domestic violence rate compared to the national average? Then could he explain why it is that our military families are not treated as families in order to find the details of those troubles early? Why are military families waiting two years in town and not being treated on bases with their spouses?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Mr. Chair, before soldiers go overseas they are screened not only physically but psychologically. They are given a test. When they return they are given another psychological test.

While a soldier is in the mission in Afghanistan, he or she gets a chance to come home on a holiday. That breaks the tension. Also, when units are rotating back to Canada, they also have time to lose stress over three or four days. Right now I think they are going into Cyprus, although I am not sure. They go to Cyprus to remove their stress.

As I said, they are evaluated on their return. They are also observed over time to see what kind of reactions, if any, the soldiers have. The families are involved. I could go into the whole process of how we look after soldiers with stress, but at this moment I will not.

The other part of the question had to do with family health care. As I said in the meeting the other day, the health care of civilians is a provincial responsibility. It is not a federal responsibility. The member can shake her head, but it is a federal--

[The Assistant Deputy Chair, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I apologize to the minister but the allotted time has expired.

The hon. member for Egmont.

[Joe McGuire, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Mr. Chair, just to follow up on the question from the member for St. Paul's, the minister knows that the committee has been to Petawawa. He probably has a report from the members on the government side about what we learned on that very interesting trip to the base.

As the member for St. Paul's stated, the number of personnel to take care of our soldiers when they return from Afghanistan, Bosnia, or wherever they may have been, at this particular base seems to be very inadequate. I believe there are nine mental health people in Petawawa, whereas Valcartier has 35 and Edmonton has 29, and yet most of the returning soldiers are going into Petawawa. Why would those numbers make any sense? Also, the amount of domestic violence, divorce, and so on, the readjustment that our soldiers have to make coming out of a theatre of war and re-entering a domestic situation in this country can be quite traumatic and could take a lot of time. Yet the personnel do not seem to be there.

When we were talking with the padres and the caregivers and so on at the base, they seemed to be overworked, understaffed and really stressed out themselves because of the huge workload that they have in dealing with our returning soldiers.

Why have the resources necessary to take care of our returning soldiers not been provided on that particular base?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Mr. Chair, I do not want to point out too harshly that the member's party was the government until the end of January this year. I could ask why they did not do something about it.

However, the reality is that we have five operational trauma and stress support centres across the country. One of them is in Ottawa. The Ottawa trauma and stress support centre services Petawawa.

As I pointed out before, not only does this centre look after them--and the member pointed out there are some people up in Petawawa--but it is part of a whole program of decompression on the way home and onward care. We have a program called operational stress injury social support. There is a support program also out there for people with stress. So in fact we do have a program.

[Joe McGuire, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Mr. Chair, that view is really not shared by the people on the ground who are actually asked to do the work. They are saying themselves that they are overworked and they do not have enough support to deal with the problems that are coming back from the theatre of war.

On a different question, we know the Afghan national army is in the process of being trained to take over from NATO forces, as are the police forces in that country. We hear very good reports about what the Afghan army is doing alongside our soldiers in the Kandahar region. We have read some emails from our soldiers and they point out that the Afghan contingents are really doing yeoman work in helping us clear out the Taliban. However, on the police side, there appears to be a lot of corruption and a lot of inadequate service by the police. Whether it is because of training or not, I am not sure.

Could the minister give us an update on how long it may take to have the Afghan army and the Afghan police be in a situation where they can take over from us in those particular regions that we, the British and the Dutch are--