Debates of May 17th, 2007

National Defence—Main Estimates 2007-08

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Chair, I simply want to know how much it costs the taxpayers in terms of equipment. I know, for example that the minister has made an announcement about the tanks. I gave him as an example Operation Archer with all of the lists. Since I want to ask several questions, I will not go over that list again because he knows it.

At that time, in 2005, the requirements were estimated at $280 million. In terms of equipment, if we put aside the operating budgets, how much did it cost for the equipment?

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

Mr. Chair, 2005 was during the Liberal government's time. However, if the member wants to talk about the procurements that we have talked about recently, we have four C-17 aircraft. Both the capital and the support costs for 20 years are $3.4 billion.

There are 17 tactical aircraft. Again, the acquisition costs and the 20 year support are $4.9 billion. There are 16 medium to heavy lift helicopters. The acquisition and service for 20 years is $4.7 billion. There are 2,300 medium trucks at $1.2 billion and three joint support ships at $2.9 billion. There are 100 Leopard C2 tanks. The capital acquisition is $650 million and the support for 20 years is about $650 million, about the same range.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Chair, I know that our time is being counted. I thank the minister for his answers.

On the subject of the Chinook helicopters, the amount of $4.7 billion is mentioned. It is clear in our minds, on this side of the House, that the Chinooks were purchased for the mission in Afghanistan. So the amount of $4.7 billion will fluctuate because it seems that this transportation equipment will not be adequate. Boeing has been asked to provide additional shielding and to add equipment, as a result of which this equipment will not be ready before 2011 or 2012.

Can the Minister of National Defence tell us whether the amount of $4.7 billion is the total budget and that there will be no increase? Does he expect that when this question comes up again the budgets will greatly exceed $4.7 billion given the requirements of National Defence?

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

Mr. Chair, just to clarify the issue, these equipments were not necessarily bought for Afghanistan. They are for restructuring the armed forces in the long term. That is why we are talking about 20 year support. At the moment our estimate for capital and support for 20 years of the 16 heavy lift helicopters is $4.7 billion. That is 20 years into the future.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Chair, is the minister, therefore, confirming that the Chinooks are not necessary for the mission in Afghanistan?

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

Mr. Chair, the minister is confirming that they certainly could be used in the Afghan mission. They are important for the Afghan mission, but they can also be used in Canada. If, for instance, an aboriginal village is flooded or something like that and we have to move lots of people, we can use these helicopters. We can also use them to move troops elsewhere in the country or offshore if we have another engagement. These helicopters also lift artillery guns. They lift 15 or 20 tonnes, so they are used everywhere.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Chair, in another vein, can the minister tell me what is the most useful item for a soldier, after a rifle?

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

Mr. Chair, there is no single piece of equipment that is the most important for a soldier. It is part of a whole spectrum of equipment, depending upon what function one has within the battle group. Artillery need guns. Armour need tanks and reconnaissance vehicles. Infantry need APCs and trucks. There is a whole range of equipments.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Chair, I was speaking of a soldier as such. In my opinion, what is most useful to a soldier after a rifle are his or her boots.

It seems that the soldiers in Afghanistan are obliged to pay for the boots they need out of their own pockets, and even to look to our British allies to buy them. I have also learned that there will be a delivery but not until October.

What does the minister intend to do to ensure that our soldiers have proper boots?

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

Mr. Chair, there is no requirement for any soldier to buy any boots in Afghanistan. There are sufficient boots for all soldiers.

There is another order of additional boots coming in, and when they come, that will just mean that they are more plentiful, but at the moment there is no shortage of boots.

If someone chooses to buy boots, it is their own decision

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Chair, I think he should reply to Mrs. Clarke.

She said that it is unfair that soldiers are buying their own footwear and why should a military man have to pay for his own gear.

Her son is working right now in supplies, so she knows what she is talking about. I hope that the minister will take a look at that.

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

Mr. Chair, I did notice that and yes, I did check and the answer is there are enough boots for everybody.

[John Cannis, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, I want to pick up on what the member for Bourassa said, that this exchange be respectful. First and foremost, our men and women in the past, present and future have done their jobs so admirably. No matter how tough the questions are, it has nothing to do with our men and women in the military.

I want to ask the minister with respect to our heavy lift, what type of aircraft are we using now to transport our heavy equipment?

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

Mr. Chair, at the moment heavy equipment can be moved by sea. It can also be moved by heavy lift rented from the Ukrainians or the Russians, I am not sure which country.

[John Cannis, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Both.

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

Both. Also the American air force use C-17s to move most of our equipment in when it gets close to Afghanistan.

[John Cannis, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, I want to ask the minister, are we not using any of our Hercules C-130s?

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

Mr. Chair, it is how we define heavy lift. The C-130 Hercules, I believe, is limited to about 17 tonnes. Anything that is heavier than 17 tonnes, we have to use another means.

[John Cannis, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, have we used the Hercules C-130 at all for the Afghan mission?

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

Mr. Chair, yes, we have. In fact, I think we keep three on line for the Afghan mission. They operate out of one of our bases and they rotate equipment and people in, but they do not carry the heavy equipment. The heavy equipment, as I said, is carried by--

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The hon. member for Scarborough Centre.

[John Cannis, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, could the minister give us a brief description why they are able to use them today and he feels that they are safe today, when while in opposition he felt they were endangering our men and women? Could the minister give me an explanation, please?

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

Mr. Chair, I do not quite understand the thrust of this question. Are we talking about C-130s?

[John Cannis, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, that is correct.

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

Mr. Chair, I think there is a C-130 that arrives in Kandahar airfield every single day, so we use them, but we do not use them for heavy lift. They are incapable of doing heavy lift.