Debates of May 16th, 2016

National Defence—Main Estimates, 2016-17

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Chair, I want to make it very clear that our government is not making any cuts. We have had a pretty good conversation from a non-partisan perspective, but at the end of the day, our veterans, regardless of party, need to know that Canada has their backs. They do not care which government is in power. We need to keep working to improve. I can assure the member that we are extremely focused on veterans. There is not a day that goes by that I do not think about some of the veterans we have lost.

This government has put it as a priority. That is one of the reasons I actually got into politics. We are fully committed to supporting our veterans. It is one of the reasons the Prime Minister made a unique position for the Minister of Veterans Affairs to also be my associate minister to work on this point, ensuring that the transition for our Canadian Armed Forces members is done in a manner that works well for all members as they transition into civilian life.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Mr. Chair, I do not think there is any question that we all want the best for our veterans. The question is this. Why is there not any new money, from a government that is going to spend billions, toward the purposes that are so important to us all?

I know that a great deal of time and money is invested in conditioning our soldiers for combat, and I understand why that is necessary and how important it is that they function really well, doing things that, believe me, I am so grateful they are willing to do.

I just wonder if there is any way that we have an ability to also assess the time and, especially, the amount of money from the department that is invested in decompressing them from combat conditioning, because a lot of them whom we are hearing from, before they are being released to VAC services, are facing very difficult and serious mental health issues, as we have talked about already today.

Does the department have a clear commitment of funds and time to say that, no matter what, we are going to make sure these people are healthy before we hand them over to VAC?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Chair, there is $4.6 billion set aside by the government for veterans in new money.

As I said, we are working in a manner that will ensure the transition is done well. There are a lot of programs. There are a lot of challenges. I know exactly what challenges they are facing. I have seen the impact upon some of our members. We need to ensure that transition goes well. The one big example that comes up is that if people are injured while in the military, why should they have to explain to a Veterans Affairs doctor that they have been injured?

These are the challenges we are working on right now. I just encourage the member not to turn it into a partisan thing, because there are many aspects I can start bringing up.

However, at the end of the day, what we need to be working on is that we all are going to work toward ensuring that our members are going to be looked after and that we give confidence to our veterans, because one thing our veterans do need, in addition to all the services, is to know that Canada has their backs, and Canada means us all.

We are committed to supporting our veterans, because I am also one of them, and there are members from other parties who are also veterans. I have never talked about my injuries. I was actually injured in Afghanistan. I have been through the process myself, so I do know how they feel. However, there are some serious injuries on the mental side of things. It is also unique. We cannot look at it very broadly. We need to be able to cater right down, sometimes, to the individual member. That is what we are trying to do with this transition.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Mr. Chair, I do not think coming across strong means I am partisan. I want the same things the minister wants. I just want to make sure we have what we need to actually succeed.

There is something close to my heart, and the minister talked about it already tonight. I am from Saskatchewan, and we have this wonderful thing called CFB Moose Jaw, which is a huge part of our economy and sense of pride. I just want to hear from the minister, again, that this base is not in any way going to be compromised in the future.

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Chair, I think Moose Jaw is where some of our NATO pilots were also training, and it supports an important function.

At this time, I have no intention of closing any bases. I want to make sure we look at all the infrastructure, especially as we go through the defence review. We need to look at all the access we have, as we move forward, so that we can make sure we can respond to all the challenges our nation has currently, and will have in the future.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Chair, before starting my prepared remarks, I want to make a very quick clarification for the record.

There was discussion earlier, led by my colleague opposite, the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, that may have created the perception that we are somehow talking about the closure of bases. I just want to assure everybody here that it was never discussed. The discussion was around the potential relocation of airborne sovereignty assets, alert assets, not the closure the bases, and that is to better meet an asymmetric threat. There was no discussion about base closures.

This evening, as we discuss the important work of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, let us remember that at this very moment, more than 1,360 Canadian troops are taking part in 15 operations around the world.

We have witnessed first-hand the support these men and women offer to Canadians, as they did during the recent events in Fort McMurray. We must also remember that our men and women in uniform have had a positive impact on the lives of many people outside Canada and beyond our borders in places like the Middle East, Africa, Europe, and the Caribbean.

The Canadian Armed Forces are flexible and adaptable. They are able to react quickly and decisively. Thanks to their unique expertise, they can overcome the most complex security problems. They can also collaborate effectively with other departments, non-governmental organizations, allied nations, and coalition partners to do the work they are asked to do.

Our troops have an excellent reputation and are held in high regard both at home and abroad.

This is being demonstrated right now in Iraq. As we all know, ISIL has killed thousands of innocent civilians and has displaced millions more. In fact, ISIL's advance triggered one of the largest refugee crises the world has ever seen. ISIL is undermining the stability of this and surrounding regions, and has posed a broader threat to international security.

That is why since 2014, Canada and the Canadian Armed Forces have assisted Iraqis in their fight against ISIL as part of an international coalition led by the United States. From August to September 2014, the Royal Canadian Air Force delivered more than 1.6 million pounds of military supplies to Iraq. From October 2014 to February 2016, our CF-18s conducted nearly 1,400 sorties and over 250 air strikes. This air operation successfully struck hundreds of ISIL fighting positions, military equipment, and vehicles.

Thanks to coalition efforts, ISIL has suffered significant losses in terms of fighters, assets, and territory. By the beginning of this year, the coalition forces had helped halt ISIL's progress and compromised its ability to fight.

Now the Iraqi military is able to take on a more offensive role in battle. They are reclaiming territory and pushing ISIL fighters back into hiding. While ISIL remains a threat, the international coalition is undermining its momentum.

Against this backdrop, there was a need earlier this year to reassess Canada's contribution to ensure it remained meaningful and continued to respond to the most pressing needs of the coalition effort.

In February, the Prime Minister articulated a redefined and refocused Canadian contribution that reflects a more comprehensive and whole-of-government approach and more particularly, that reflects the changing realities on the ground.

This refocused approach was abundantly debated in the House. During the five-day debate, no less than 98 members of Parliament had an opportunity to voice their opinions. This refocused mission, representing a $1.6-billion commitment over three years, was designed to maximize Canada's unique capabilities while complementing the efforts of our partners.

The Canadian Armed Forces remain a central pillar of this new approach, with a commitment of approximately 830 military personnel. The military is shifting its focus toward the training mission on the ground by tripling the size of the train, advise, and assist mission in northern Iraq.

The Canadian Armed Forces have already begun deploying the additional troops required for this training mission. We are also bolstering our intelligence capacity in support of this mission. This intelligence is informing the coalition's operational decision and is improving the coalition's ability to target and defeat ISIL.

In fact, less than two weeks ago, on May 4, the Minister of National Defence met with other defence ministers at a coalition meeting in Germany, and many of them spoke very highly of Canada's intelligence contribution. We also have personnel working in coalition headquarters and with the Iraqi government.

A Canadian general officer has been selected to lead the global coalition's ministerial liaison team which is intended to provide strategic support to the Iraqi ministry of interior and the ministry of defence.

We are expanding our medical presence, to serve Canadian and coalition needs and also to mentor local security forces.

We are supporting capacity-building efforts in both Jordan and Lebanon. We are maintaining the refuelling and surveillance aircraft, and have deployed tactical air support, which began operating in Erbil earlier in May.

Canada's new approach has been very well received by our coalition partners, particularly the United States. The President of the United States, Barack Obama, recently said that our training mission and the expansion of our intelligence resources have made us an extremely valuable member of the international coalition against the Islamic State. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry acknowledged that Canada is enormously invested in the fight and is making an important contribution. We can be extremely proud of our soldiers.

As the Minister of National Defence said himself during a debate in the House in February of this year, the Canadian Armed Forces are composed of highly trained and experienced men and women. They train in order to carry out their missions and get things done.

The chief of the defence staff recently visited northern Iraq, where he saw first-hand the real results the Canadian Armed Forces are achieving on the ground.

The new mandate for this mission was not approved early enough to be included in the main estimates that we are examining today. However, the Department of National Defence will seek to obtain up to $207 million in the supplementary estimates later in the year. I would like to mention, however, that this amount is not at all representative of the contribution of the Canadian Armed Forces to maintaining security in the Middle East.

We see that history is repeating itself when we look at other international military operations. Overall, the Canadian Armed Forces are fulfilling their international obligations thanks to the strategic use of their limited resources and the most effective use of their unique expertise.

In Operation REASSURANCE, the Canadian Armed Forces provide vital support for NATO assurance measures and our allies in Europe, whether on the ground, at sea or in the air.

As part of Operation UNIFIER, more than 200 Canadian instructors are providing much-needed assistance to Ukrainian forces.

During Operation PROVISION, the Canadian Armed Forces played an instrumental role in helping Lebanese and Jordanian refugees enter Canada and also helped with the processing and preliminary examination of applicants abroad.

The Canadian Armed Forces are also taking part in five UN missions, namely in the Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan, the Golan Heights, Haiti, and Cyprus. They also contribute to a peace support operation in the Sinai Peninsula, in Egypt, with the multinational force and observers. In many of these missions, Canadian troops hold important key positions and show extraordinary leadership and professionalism.

Again, the operating expenses in this budget provide only an overview of the tremendous contribution of the Canadian Armed Forces to maintaining stability and security in the world.

A former UN under-secretary-general for peacekeeping once aptly reflected that one could not stand as an island of stability in an ocean of turmoil. We are truly blessed to live in Canada. We are far removed from much of the turmoil and violence that plagues so many parts of the world.

However, we cannot become complacent in our isolation. Despite appearances, we are not an island. We are intricately connected to a global network of forces, some positive and some negative. We are also a nation that embraces humanitarian values and prides itself in being a positive force on the world stage. Therefore, we must think about how we can continue to be responsible and engaged international citizens.

Going forward, the government is undertaking a comprehensive defence policy review. This process will take a fresh look at the current strategic environment, consider the defence needs of Canada and Canadians, and set the future direction for the Canadian Armed Forces.

While the policy review is still in progress, with Canadians submitting their views from across the country, I expect that international partnerships and operations will remain an enduring thread of Canadian defence. This year's activities prove that Canada's military women and men stand ready to continue this proud legacy of international engagement.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The hon. member still has five minutes remaining. I do not know whether he wishes to pose questions.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Chair, my first question is about international engagement and, in fact, the United Nations, which many of us hold dear in the House and across the country. Canada has a proud history of engagement with the United Nations. This is about sophistication, building relationships, conflicts that are changing rapidly, interoperability and governance, which are concepts that are new to the nature of conflict.

Could the Minister of National Defence update the House on his mandate letter priority to renew Canada's commitment to the United Nation's peace operations, including helping the United Nations respond more quickly to emerging and escalating conflicts? Are the Canadian Armed Forces members ready and prepared to undertake peace operations under the United Nations?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Chair, I have been working very closely with the Minister of Foreign Affairs on this topic as we look at the greatest threats around the world. We have started the conversations at NATO as well on how we look at engaging in different parts of the world. The United Nations has many missions. How do we start integrating on the level of support?

We need to look at a much wider perspective than just from the military. We need to look at the vacuum that a lack of governance creates for radical groups. We also need to look at early capacity-building that can hopefully prevent conflict. We want to ensure that with anything that we do, we understand the conflict of the regions, not just one country but the wider region, and that we look at the problem from not just a military perspective, but from a whole-of-government perspective. I am happy to state even the coalition to counter ISIL, which we are part of, started to look at the whole problem of Daesh from a much wider perspective as well.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Chair, if I could ask a quick follow-up question on the reply from the hon. minister?

As coalitions change, as coalitions broaden and new members are introduced with very different military cultures, political backgrounds, and conflicts that these members of their armed forces have gone through, could the minister comment briefly on the extent to which the Canadian Forces are equipped, in light of their experiences, cultural sensitivities, and sophistication, to take leading roles in these broader coalitions that may include members who have not been part of these coalitions in past conflicts?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Chair, there is a very unique perspective that the Canadian Armed Forces can bring from our various experiences from the early days, from Bosnia to most recently in Afghanistan, and now in Iraq. However, we also have an additional uniqueness that Canada brings to the table, which is our diversity and understanding of different cultures, which provides a very unique capability for the military. It is something that other nations just do not have.

Therefore, there are many aspects that the Canadian Armed Forces can contribute from our experience and from the uniqueness we have. I also want to point out that our troops from Quebec having that language skill and being able to build that rapport in the francophonie area is another aspect of a skill that can be brought to the table.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Chair, I was very privileged and proud to serve in Iraq under the flag of the United Nations as a civilian officer. While I disagreed strongly with the 2003 intervention, nothing gave me more pride than our decision not to intervene in 2003. I am now very proud of the role the Canadian Armed Forces is playing in Iraq, especially in the fight against the scourge of ISIS, or Daesh.

Could the minister take a moment to review the different missions that are going on around the world at the moment, including Iraq, in which Canadian Armed Forces personnel are engaged?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Chair, as members know, our current commitments in Iraq and Syria are the ones getting notable attention. However, we do have members also as part of Operation Reassurance. In Europe, we have a company in Poland that does training and capacity-building all across Europe. We have a frigate as well as part of the operations. We also have troops right now in Ukraine. We got to visit them and the wonderful work that they are doing. We conduct operations of counter-narcotics with tremendous success in the Caribbean, which is Operation Caribbe. There are a number of other operations I can list off that may not have a large number of troops but have a significant amount of impact. Our operation and the support we provide in the Sinai is one example of this, where we have another Canadian general being charged with that very important mission.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Mr. Chair, it is my privilege to rise today with questions for the minister. I would like to begin by thanking the minister for his service. Certainly I respect the career he had in the Canadian Armed Forces. That experience is formative for someone serving in the capacity of Minister of National Defence. I want to thank him and recognize that at the outset.

I want to present a brief speech first before I get into my questions.

Many members of the Canadian Armed Forces, while very happy and proud of the minister's service, are indeed very worried about the future of the Canadian Armed Forces. They are worried about the capability, operations and equipment, and they have good reason to be. The parallels between the last majority Liberal government seen in this place and the current one are stark and startling.

In 1993, the election was dominated by the delay and eventual cancellation of the maritime helicopter replacement, which the minister is still talking about replacing because, quite frankly, of the misguided move in that election by former prime minister Chrétien in cancelling the Sea King helicopter. The year after the Liberals were elected, in 1994, they had a defence white paper to basically set up the future cuts to the military. I will quote the lines from that 1994 white paper. It ends by saying:

Indeed whatever the future brings, the new defence policy will enable Canada to respond and adjust as necessary to deal with the range of challenges to our security that could arise, now and into the next century.

We fast forward to the present government. The F-35 became the large procurement project that was used as a political football in a campaign. Then, a year after the current government assumed office, we will have a defence review, again setting up the circumstances for future cuts. In the launch of that review, the minister said:

The strategic security environment in which the Canadian Armed Forces operates has changed significantly.

That sounds very familiar. He continued:

I look forward to hearing from Canadians from coast to coast, as they help inform the...modern defence policy that will support the [Canadian Armed Forces] to effectively respond to a full spectrum of challenges--now and into the future.

It is the same language.

Of course, the road map to cuts is already there for the minister, because the chief government whip outlined in his transformation report, before he joined this Parliament, a guide to cuts to the Canadian Armed Forces. It is basically a 50% cut to class B reserves and cost-cutting measures.

With this comparison in mind, how can the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces trust that we do not see the beginning of another decade of darkness?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Chair, first, I too want to thank the member for his service, and in particular the empathy that he brought to the file when he was minister of veterans affairs. It was greatly appreciated by veterans.

I can assure the member that our government is committed to supporting our troops and ensuring that they have full capability, and it is working diligently.

Talking about previous governments, we are facing capability gaps. We should have had a fighter replacement by now, rather than trying to extend our CF-18s. When it comes to a transformation report, there were a lot of cuts that were done in the past.

However, instead of my getting into the laundry list on that, I want to give confidence to Canadians and to the opposition that our government is fully committed to supporting our men and women, ensuring that the money that has been reprofiled for the future is strictly reserved for the Canadian Armed Forces so it has all the capabilities that it needs for future threats.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Mr. Chair, the minister mentioned the fighter replacement project. I would ask the minister if he knows which government started the process for the F-18 replacement.

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Chair, that was under the previous government. However, instead of talking about starting it, we should talk about finishing it. At the end of the day, it is our responsibility to have a replacement for the F-18, and we are committed to doing that.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Mr. Chair, respectfully, I will correct the minister. It was the Chrétien government that brought the joint strike fighter participation, along with countries like Australia and other allies, into what became the F-35 acquisition project.

Would it be fair to say that when procurement processes are changed midstream, it essentially delays receiving that equipment for a generation?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Chair, yes, I stand corrected on the particular government. However, I can assure the member that right now we need to replace the current CF-18s, and we need to do it quickly to make sure the men and women in the air force have the aircraft they need to carry out all their missions.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Mr. Chair, given their track record, as a former Sea King guy myself, we are flying these into their fifth decade of service. Would it not be best to choose a fighter not just for today but one that would allow for a broad range of capabilities 30 years from now?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Chair, not only should we be picking an aircraft that is going to take us into the future, but we need to be investing potentially into our industry, looking at one to two steps beyond, into future capabilities.

I am happy to discuss many other aspects of the various programs, but we need to look even further in making sure of there is adaptability in some of our procurement.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Mr. Chair, if I could summarize what the minister is saying, it is that we are not sure of the operation in, say, 2030, so we need a versatile, interoperable aircraft that is potentially a dominant aircraft 20 years from now. Does that not sound like the F-35s, as opposed to an updated version of a 1970s or 1980s fighter?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Chair, as I stated, we are committed to replacing the CF-18s. In terms of the F-35, I encourage the member to read a lot of the independent reports that are coming out, from the U.S. government as well, with some of the challenges. These are some of the things we are taking into consideration.

However, at the end of the day, we need to make sure we fill this capability gap, and we will get a fighter that is going to meet the needs and is going to extend much into the future.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Mr. Chair, as a maritime helicopter guy, I should stop all this focus on a fighter and move on.

The minister, in his estimates and the budget, has outlined capital cuts to the Canadian Armed Forces of $3.7 billion, an estimate reduction of $300 million, and specific cuts to combat and support operations of $59 million. That is the information we are looking at today. Why has the minister made such significant cuts before the defence review has started?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Chair, our government has not made cuts. As I stated, the money is re-profiled for the future. In fact, we have actually increased our budget. We kept the planned increases of 2%, which is $361 million that goes to operations and allows our men and women to operate. In addition, we are putting in another $200 million for infrastructure. Plus, the Operation Impact mission is $360 million. We are investing into the operations of the Canadian Armed Forces.