Debates of Dec. 9th, 2019

Supplementary Estimates (A), 2019-20

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Mr. Chair, it would be my pleasure to do so because it is an issue that is important to a very large number of Canadians. I will remind all of us here that after the federal, provincial and territorial ministers of transport met last January, we decided to create a task force to look specifically at ways we could improve safety in school buses. This included looking at a whole number of factors, some of which are outside the bus and some of which are inside the bus, such as safety belts.

These are things that we have been working on. We have now produced a report with recommendations that will be discussed early next year at the next gathering of the ministers from the provinces and territories. We want to look at ways that we can improve this.

Having said that, going to school in a school bus is the safest way for a child to get to school. Statistically, it is far superior to any other method, but if there are ways for us to improve the safety of children in school buses, then we, as ministers of transport, must look at those, and that is what we are doing.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, it is an honour to rise today in the 43rd Parliament.

In the last four years the government has made good progress on family reunification and reducing the processing time for immigration applications, specifically with regard to spousal applications, the parents and grandparents category, and the caregiver program. Can the minister please expand on the important work that has been done in this regard?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Mr. Chair, with respect to the caregiver program, there is a high demand for caregivers in this country, and one of the things we want to do is process the applications for caregivers as quickly as possible. We have some challenges bringing caregivers into this country because in some cases it means a separation from their families who are living abroad. One thing we have looked into is finding a way to bring their families with them and to give them work and student permits so that they can be unified with the caregiver who has come to Canada to work.

We think this is a good approach to attracting more caregivers and potentially, in the case of caregivers who may eventually become permanent residents, bring new Canadians into the country and provide strong caregiver capability across the country.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Chair, it is a pleasure to rise tonight to debate supplementary estimates (A). I will ask questions.

Under the Department of National Defence, vote 1a, regarding operating expenditures, is where we pay for the care and well-being of the Canadian Armed Forces. We recently learned that the Minister of National Defence callously cut health care funding for our troops if they require more care than what we can provide on a military base and need to go to public hospitals that are funded through the provinces. This cut was made without consultation with the provinces or with us as parliamentarians.

My question for the Minister of National Defence is this: When was this decision made to change the way hospitals are paid for the care of our troops?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Chair, we had a discussion on this outside the House. I explained that all Canadian Armed Forces members will get the appropriate support and, importantly, they do not pay for that support. That comes from the Canadian Armed Forces. However, at the same time, all Canadians should be paying for the same type of health care. They should not be charged more just because they wear a uniform. We are making sure there is a thorough and equitable discussion with the provinces as we move forward so that Canadian Armed Forces members can get the appropriate care.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Chair, this is a long-standing social contract that exists between the Canadian Armed Forces and our provincial governments in the delivery of health care across this country. Members of the Canadian Armed Forces are paid for out of the national defence budget. The cost of taking care of people who are not within the public health insurance programs that we have across this country is the cost that it is. That is how hospitals reach the decision of how much they pay for visitors who are not Canadian and do not pay into our health insurance programs. However, neither do those under national defence, because they often require greater care. We try to take care of them as best we can within the military hospitals on base, but when they require extra services, special attention and specialists, it is in the military's best interest to get those from the public hospital system.

What date was this decision made and when was it implemented? Will there be any opportunity to see savings that come out of this go back to our troops or is this just another way to get cheap on the backs of our soldiers?

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

Mr. Chair, the member opposite knows in the discussion I had with him outside of the House, I explained the details, which he is also using as part of his question.

First of all, I stated that every Canadian Forces member who requires medical support at a civilian hospital will get top-quality support. More importantly, they will not pay the costs themselves. This is paid for through the Canadian Armed Forces. However, as of right now, depending on the province, a Canadian Armed Forces member is charged three to 10 times more than a Canadian civilian.

We have started a discussion with the provinces so that we can come up with a fair and equitable solution, and then the funds for this will be used further in looking after our Canadian Armed Forces.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Chair, Manitoba is saying that it is already out $1 million from the lack of funding from the Department of National Defence in taking care of our troops. The Province of Ontario is out over $10 million, and we have heard some concerns that some hospitals may deny service to members of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Has the minister secured an agreement with the provinces to ensure that none of our troops fall through the cracks while he is going through this negotiation process?

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

Mr. Chair, I can assure the member opposite and all Canadians that every Canadian Armed Forces member who requires support will get it. We are having a discussion so that we can come up with a fair and equitable solution on this. Canadians can also look at the fact that Canadian Armed Forces members should not be charged, depending on the province, three to 10 times more. We will have these discussions and make sure that Canadian Armed Forces members are looked after, and that hospitals are as well.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Chair, I will change gears here a bit.

Yesterday Vice-Admiral Aleksandr Moiseev, who is head of the Russian northern fleet, said in the Daily Mail, “In the near future, we should expect a further increase in the military presence of the combined armed forces and, as a result, an increase in the likelihood of conflict,” and that Russia “considers building up its military potential in the Arctic zone as a necessary measure to counter possible threats and create favourable conditions for protecting national interests.”

Our adversaries are definitely challenging our sovereignty in the Arctic. It is more disturbing now than ever before, and we need to make sure that there is a plan to defend our Arctic. First and foremost, one of the things we have to do in defending the Arctic, Canada and North America, is the north warning system. Does the minister have plans to upgrade and replace the current detection system that we have in the Arctic?

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

Mr. Chair, I am glad the member opposite raised a very important topic when it comes to our Arctic sovereignty.

This is something we looked at very closely when we did our defence policy consultations, along with what is going to be needed to be strong in Canada and to work with our closest partner, the U.S. This is one of the reasons we made sure that the entire defence policy is now fully funded. This now allows us, when it comes to our naval shipbuilding strategy, to purchase five offshore patrol ships, plus we are now able to purchase a sixth one as well. Just last year the government announced that the Coast Guard will also be getting an additional ship. We have put three additional satellites up that will operate in the north Nanisivik refuelling station.

When it comes to looking at further aspects of the north warning system, work is being done on this. However, we are going to be looking at threats not only from all the way up in the air, but also from space, surface water and underwater.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Chair, the question was when, and we do not have a date or a time. Meanwhile, we have adversaries like Russia building up their military presence.

First, we have the detection north warning system that has to be replaced. Second is interception, and we do that with our Canadian CF-18s. When are we going to replace the current fleet of CF-18s? Does the minister have a firm date on that?

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

Mr. Chair, replacing the CF-18s is a top priority for the government, and I am actually very happy to hear that the member opposite and his party have agreed that the competition is important for replacing our CF-18s.

The competition is going extremely well. In fact, when we did the analysis and talked about our Arctic sovereignty, we realized we actually need more aircraft, hence the reason we have decided on 88, which is fully funded.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Chair, the minister always talks about a capability gap, which does not exist. If the whole idea is we want to fly NORAD and NATO missions simultaneously, the question that comes to the minister is when can we, as a nation, actually fly NORAD and NATO missions simultaneously, and do we have enough pilots to do so?

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

Mr. Chair, absolutely. This is a very important topic, making sure that we live up to our obligations as a nation when it comes to our NORAD commitments and NATO as well. This is one of the reasons the competition for this project is extremely important. It is also the reason we are flying interim jets as well.

We need to be very clear. Our obligations are very important. Our reliability as a partner on the world stage matters as well. We are putting investments into the right places to make sure that we live up to those obligations.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Chair, the minister mentioned earlier the Arctic offshore patrol ships. Commissioning of the Harry DeWolf is way behind schedule already. We do not know when the entire fleet is going to be ready to go and be combat-ready. We have these ongoing delays.

How are the minister and the current government going to finally get things back on track so that we can get the Arctic offshore patrol ships built, protecting us in the north, and get on with the surface combatants, because that program is way behind schedule as well?

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

Mr. Chair, I am glad the member asked a question about our AOPS. In fact, I was on the Harry DeWolf as it was conducting sea trials. It has a tremendous capability. There is a second AOPS in the water, and third and fourth ones are being built at the moment.

This project is moving extremely well. As we build the first ones, those lessons are being transferred into the other builds, which is creating a much greater efficiency.

When it comes to our Arctic defence, it is far more than just ships. We have to look at our satellites. Three new satellites under the control of the Canadian Space Agency were put up last year. Putting the right research and development money into those key areas for surveillance is equally important.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Chair, we know that the RADARSAT constellation was originally supposed to be six satellites, but we only got three.

It is no wonder Canadians are a bit cynical with everything the Liberals have been saying about defence spending. We know that in the first two years, they allowed $12 billion to lapse or go unspent, and now we have just learned that another $7.79 billion in capital investment into our military has not been spent. Why is the current government always falling short when it is buying the kit that our troops need?

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

Mr. Chair, I am very proud to stand up to say that for the last two years no money has been left on the table. In fact, one of the things that was very important when we talked to Canadians, the Canadian defence industry and parliamentarians was making sure that we continually improve our procurement system. That allows us to now move some projects faster, and we are able to move projects sooner. For example, the LAV support projects have moved forward.

In some cases we need to spend a bit more time on projects. We have the flexibility to move that money around, but that money stays within defence to make sure that every project in the defence policy gets completed because it is fully funded.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Chair, I can say that Canadians are still somewhat skeptical whether or not the money will ever get out the door. The Liberals say it is there, but it has not been spent. If it is not spent, then it has lapsed. If they get to the point that they want to make cuts for other reasons, like a downturn in the economy, it will be the first money to go, because it has not been allocated and used.

NATO said that we are supposed to be spending more, yet we just went to the NATO conference and the summit in London and heard the Prime Minister tell the NATO leaders in a press conference that Canada was spending1.4% on GDP. I ask the minister this: Was that truthful?

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

Mr. Chair, when we launched our defence policy, to make sure it was robust, we made a commitment that it was going to be fully costed and fully funded. That is exactly what this policy does. It is a plan with 333 procurement projects in place for capabilities. With the right investments, we are making sure we provide the right financial support for our defence and investing in the right capabilities and making the right contributions. Our defence spending will be going up to 1.48% by 2024.

Our contributions to NATO are equally important. We are back in Europe. In Latvia, we have a policing task force right now, and a naval task force that we are commanding. We are also commanding the NATO training mission in Iraq for the second year.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Chair, the correct number of spending this year is not 1.4% or 1.48%. It is 1.31% of GDP. Of course, as the economy grows and if money is not rolling out the door, that means that those percentages are going to continue to drop. Right now we are fifth from the bottom in NATO for the amount of spending that we are doing as a percentage of GDP. We are not making investments in our capital infrastructure, according to NATO as well, so there is much work for us to do.

Is it any wonder that President Trump called the Prime Minister “delinquent” when it comes to investing in our military and that ultimately what we are saying is “two-faced”?

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

Mr. Chair, I was in that meeting and our defence relationship with the U.S. could not be stronger. I am glad the hon. member mentioned that there is more work to be done, absolutely. We also have to look at where we started, with the significant cuts that were made with the strategic review and the deficit reduction action plan when the member was in government previously.

When we started, our defence spending with NATO was around 1%, so we have substantial increases that we have made. Yes, there is a lot more work to be done, but we want to do it in a smart manner so that we can get the right capabilities for our Canadian Armed Forces.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Chair, as we know, in the last Parliament, we learned about Vice-Admiral Mark Norman getting treated very horribly by the Liberal government. Of course, it had to make a settlement and apologize for the way that it treated the vice-admiral. Under Vote 1A, there is a program called “Funding to better transition Canadian Armed Forces members, Veterans and their families to post-military life”. Is that where the money to settle out of court with Mark Norman came from?

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

Mr. Chair, supporting the families of our Canadian Armed Forces members is extremely important. That is one of the reasons why we put the families of our members in our defence policies, so that they can actually get support. That policy allows us to give the right support and this is something that is extremely important because we ask our Canadian Armed Forces members to do very difficult things on our behalf, even when it comes to training. Therefore, we want to make sure that their family life is well looked after.

Seamless Canada is another initiative, as is making sure that when members deploy overseas they are tax-free, regardless of the international operation.

We are very proud of the work and we look forward to working with all members and all provinces in support of our Canadian Armed Forces members' families.