Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member of Parliament for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman for his continuing support for veterans, both in his riding and across the country.
I have some very serious concerns about how this particular debate has been unfolding. Let us start with how we got to this point. In this case, when citizens learned that a man convicted of murdering a female police officer was receiving veterans benefits and then learned that this particular man was not a veteran and has never served, it created a strong level of outrage. Let us also be clear that these concerns came first and foremost from the family of the victim. I mention that so we can be perfectly clear that this was not something dreamt up by the opposition party. These are legitimate concerns raised by the family of a murdered police officer, concerns raised by veterans who know full well that this was never what post-traumatic stress disorder benefits were created for and finally, concerns raised by everyday Canadians.
Even the Liberals' own veterans minister has conceded and stated in this place that “there are many of us who are uncomfortable with the decision that was made.”
What happened next? Well, we know that the Prime Minister was asked about this. What did he have to say? This Prime Minister demonstrated an unaccountable level of arrogance when he told Canadians that he would not answer questions on this subject, that for some reason, he should not be held accountable for this decision. It is all part of the same pattern of a Prime Minister who has one set of rules for everyone else but a very different set of rules for himself and his inner circle. He says that these questions are playing politics with tragedy and he will not answer them. He even called these questions “disgusting political games”.
What happened next? The minister did his usual tap dance, and of course, the go-to Liberal talking point was to blame Harper. This, of course, is how Liberals try to cover for their ongoing failure, despite the fact that they are three years into their own term. Keep in mind, it was not previous prime minister Harper who set Liberals' own performance standards on serving veterans, which we learned recently has resulted in the Liberal government failing to even meet its own veterans service targets.
Despite these failures to serve actual veterans, somehow the government found a way to provide veterans benefits to a cop killer who was never a veteran. Now, this outraged the family of the victim. As well, we have cases where veterans are in court fighting the Liberal government to fulfill its promises made to veterans. Veterans see a convicted murderer, who is not a veteran, receiving the benefits they fought for, and in some cases are still fighting for. That creates a level of outrage, and people are going to ask the Prime Minister why it is happening under his watch.
This Prime Minister may not like the question, but to call it a disgusting political game and then refuse to answer? Would this Prime Minister seriously pick up the phone and accuse the family of the victim of playing disgusting political games because they are outraged by this decision by his own government? That is what this is about: accountability. This family wants answers. This family deserves answers.
Earlier today, the minister joined this debate, and I followed his comments closely. Only at the very end of his speech did he actually address the issue we are debating. The minister told us that if veterans services are being received by a family member of a veteran when they are not related to the veteran's service-related illness or injury, the case will be reviewed by a senior official before a decision is rendered. Let us fast forward to this afternoon when we were in question period. While in question period, the CBC released a report that entirely contradicted what the minister told this place this morning. CBC now reports that Veterans Affairs Canada will no longer “pay for benefits for incarcerated relatives of veterans in the wake of the Christopher Garnier case.”
While I believe that many Canadians will strongly support this new policy, it does raise a few troubling questions. Why did the minister tell us something completely different this morning? Why was the minister in this place during question period arguing in favour of the do-nothing approach? Why is it that we only learned of this important new policy from the CBC and not from the minister during question period? Seriously, is the minister even running his own department?
On the weekend, we witnessed a minister responsible for border security who clearly has no idea what is going on in his department, and now this today. This, of course, all comes back to what I view as the core problem here. Let me recap first.
When this subject first arose, the Prime Minister called it “disgusting political games” and refused to answer it, yet here we are. Not only has the question been validated but the department has actually changed its policy because of it.
Let me quote again. CBC now reports, “Veterans Affairs Canada will not pay for benefits for incarcerated relatives of veterans in the wake of the Christopher Garnier case.” I repeat, “in the wake of the Christopher Garnier case.” It was never a foolish political game. Those were real concerns from real people. For the Prime Minister to simply blow them off with his usual habit of trying to shame anyone who dares to expect accountability from him is getting tired.
It also points to a pattern with the Prime Minister. In the past, when the Prime Minister did not like uncomfortable questions, he would often accuse the opposition of throwing mud. Many of those uncomfortable questions led to the Prime Minister and members of his own cabinet being found guilty of ethics violations. In other words, I am seeing a bit of a pattern. When the Prime Minister hits the mass outrage button over a question he does not like, all too often it is because he does not know the answer. He just does not want to reveal it. Generally, this only applies to the Prime Minister and his inner circle, one of which is the Veterans Affairs minister. This matter has shown us that the Prime Minister needs to be more accountable to Canadians.
Now I will go back to the topic at hand. We can commend the department for changing this policy, thanks to the concern raised by the opposition. I say thanks to the department, because the minister clearly knew nothing about it. Otherwise we would have learned about this policy change from him instead of from the CBC during question period today.
That leaves only one important unanswered question. We know that Veterans Affairs will no longer pay for benefits for the incarcerated relatives of veterans. What we do not know is whether the Liberal government will stop providing veterans benefits to Christopher Garnier. We have asked this of the minister repeatedly. He has refused to answer, and he hides behind his department. In fairness to the minister, perhaps like this most recent policy change, he does not know. Maybe he is waiting for his department to tell the CBC, so it can tell us. Whatever the answer is, the minister has had ample opportunity to provide a simple answer, and he refuses to do so.
This is not ministerial accountability in this place. Everyone in this place knows that. We can all send a message to the minister, who is a BF to the Prime Minister. We can vote to stop these benefits. That is what I am asking all members in this place to do: join with the Conservatives in saying “no more” in this case. That is what this motion is about, and that is what it should remain when we stand in our places today and vote as hon. members.