Mr. Chair, six months ago the House voted to extend the mission. At that time the Prime Minister said that he would extend the mission anyway, regardless of the outcome of the vote, for at least one year.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister said that NATO was requiring a force commitment the following week after the extension if one was granted. The fact is that the Minister of National Defence, when he was asked about what the troop commitments were at NATO, said that he would table the troop commitments, that he did not know. Obviously that was one of the questions that one should have asked at the time of the extension of NATO since NATO was asking us for a force commitment.
At the time of extension it is clear that the government had no plan for the extension. The military is scrambling to accommodate the extension now. “Scrambling” is the minister's own word. Why did the government not ask for and have enough troop commitments and workable caveats before the extension was granted by the House? Why not, since the government says the sacrifices of our soldiers give us the influence, why not appropriate caveats and troop commitments?