Debates of June 17th, 2021

Opposition Motion—Censure of the Minister of National Defence

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that is a really important question. People are being held accountable. As we have seen, people are under investigation and people have lost their positions. There are consequences.

Survivors are coming forward for things that happened years or decades ago. They are becoming more comfortable with coming forward because we are putting in place the changes that are needed to make sure they are supported and have the systems in place to find a just outcome, which they absolutely deserve.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in the private sector, much like in any even remotely serious institution, when leaders no longer have the attention and the respect of their colleagues, when responsible leaders can no longer serve as they should, when blunders pile up, as is the case here, when nothing changes after many years, I think something must be done. A bit of fresh air could make all the difference.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I disagree with the premise of the question. I believe that the Minister of National Defence has tremendous respect and has, in fact, made sure that the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are front and centre in everything we do.

Colleagues can see that through a number of the things he has done. We have put the SMRC in place. We have put in legislation, through Bill C-77, to create a victims' bill of rights. We have done a review of all unfounded cases. We have created the path to dignity and respect. He commissioned the Fish report on the military justice system. We have settled the Heyder Beattie case instead of dragging it out in court. We have created Seamless Canada to make sure that the families of people in our military are taken care of.

This is a minister who has spent his career serving and protecting, and he has always put the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces first.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to follow up on the question that the member for Sarnia—Lambton put to the member for Ottawa West—Nepean.

Here we have a Minister of National Defence who for years was hearing allegations of sexual misconduct. He has said numerous times in the House that he immediately passed on those allegations, those serious concerns, to higher offices, whether it was the Privy Council Office or the Prime Minister's Office.

I wonder if perhaps this motion has been framed incorrectly. Who should bear the responsibility for this inaction? Should it be the Minister of National Defence, or should it perhaps be the Prime Minister?

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the people who should bear the responsibility are those conducting this bad behaviour in the first place. It is the perpetrators.

As we have seen under the minister, every action that has been taken has been done following the proper processes. In fact, what we are seeing right now is that more and more people are coming forward, and there are more and more consequences. People are losing their jobs, and there are people under investigation.

I believe we are going to see more of this. We are in a very difficult period of time, but I believe it is a period we have to go through in order to see the end of impunity and see the kind of culture change that we need. The minister is leading the charge.

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have a quick question for the parliamentary secretary.

Why will the Liberal members of the defence committee not even vote on their own motion at the committee?

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask why, even though we have asked to adjourn the debate over 20 times so that we could go directly to reviewing the report, the opposition has refused to adjourn debate.

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge.

I am actually very torn to be speaking today. As most members in the House know, I spent 25 years in the military. I am actually speaking from a level of disappointment. I am not going to attack the minister's record of service. In fact, I respect his record of service, both as a police officer in British Columbia and as a reservist with our Canadian Armed Forces. He has done three tours in Afghanistan. If I had to go back out on military operations in the future, I would trust him to be beside me.

There is a lot of talk here about politicians and civilian oversight, which nobody in the military would ever disagree with. We need that. We live in a democracy. However, and I hate to burst the bubble of some of my colleagues, the rank and file of the military do not really care too much about us in the House of Commons. They respect what we do, but they serve the country. They are not serving us: They serve all Canadians.

One serving member, as they followed some of this unfortunate situation with the sexual misconduct allegations and the state of the Department of National Defence and the military right now, said this just drives it home. They think they are political pawns for the government and that all decisions are being made based on keeping votes versus what is right.

For the rest of my speech, I am going to speak about the leadership and accountability of this minister, or lack thereof, since he became the Minister of National Defence.

In times of crisis, militaries rely on leaders to provide focus on the priorities that matter. They bring energy and determination and demand that standards are met. In a democracy, militaries are led by elected officials who must set the tone, give direction and follow up on that direction.

None of this has happened, in the last three years in particular. Platitudes and evasion of accountability are the exact opposite of what is expected, and indeed what is demanded. Leaders must not only lead, they must be seen to lead. They seek and accept accountability in themselves and others. Canadians expect more. Canadian Armed Forces members need more.

The solution is not to express surprise and disgust, but to actually provide detailed, specific expectations, a path to meet those expectations and consequences when those expectations are not met. Accountability starts and stops with the Minister of National Defence.

I am going to focus on three of the sexual misconduct allegations currently ongoing within the Canadian Armed Forces. Let us talk about the former chief of the defence staff, General Vance, going back to 2018. I have discussed with the minister in the past my own frustration with and disappointment in the current Prime Minister for his interference in the independence of our judiciary and our prosecution system tied to the SNC-Lavalin affair.

In this case, the minister says it is not up to politicians to interfere in an investigation. I would totally agree. However, as the CDS and the ombudsman report to the Minister of National Defence, he is at the top of their chain of command. He is clearly accountable for the performance of the Chief of the Defence Staff and he is the steward of the Canadian Armed Forces.

When he was duly informed of a potential breach of Op Honour, an allegation of sexual misconduct by the former chief of the defence staff, the minister failed to take appropriate action. He could have initiated an investigation, or at least ensured one was initiated by the appropriate authorities. However, once he was made aware of that breach, he actually became complicit in allowing the breach to continue by not taking that appropriate action.

Had the minister still been a serving member within the Canadian Armed Forces, he could have been held accountable for failing to act. The minister knows this, and knows that it is the honourable thing to step down.

Further, as a former police officer, he knows that initiating an investigation or demanding that one be conducted is not tantamount to interference. Interference with an investigation can only occur if one has been initiated. The minister, as a former police officer, cannot argue that he was unaware of that fact.

Now I will talk about Admiral McDonald. During testimony at the defence committee, Lieutenant-Commander Trotter talked about how he attempted to report the allegations against Admiral McDonald. He was eventually placed in contact with the chief of staff to the department assistant. This is an office that supports the Minister of National Defence, but reports directly to the deputy minister. These DND staff mishandled this complaint, initially suggesting that Lieutenant-Commander Trotter report the incident to the sexual misconduct response centre, which has no mandate to handle sexual misconduct complaints. Trotter was then referred to the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service, but only after the military police liaison officer to the SMRC was brought into the discussion.

This incident further reinforces my point that even now, three years after the minister was first made aware of allegations of shortfalls within the department, under his lack of leadership the department is still incapable of properly handling a sexual misconduct complaint when it involves higher ranks. This is clear evidence of sustained and systematic failure within the department.

More recently we heard about General Fortin. I am not going to get into the details because the only information I have is what has been made available to the public. However, what has been reported in the media suggests that DND and the Canadian Armed Forces are not even following their own policies involving General Fortin. He was directed to step aside and take leave when he was accused of historical allegations of misconduct. From the media reporting, General Fortin is now attempting to deal with this in court because the department and the military failed to follow the removal from command process that was established in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

This is a mess. Based on the public information available from General Fortin's lawyer, it has been suggested that senior Liberal leaders are directly engaged in these decisions affecting the employment of the Canadian Armed Forces senior leadership. Of the first two examples, the minister is refusing to take action on one under the auspices of not interfering, yet the Liberals are not following the proper processes on the other and are actually interfering in a potential sexual misconduct allegation.

I would like to conclude with some feedback and commentary that I have received from the rank and file and recently retired members of the Canadian Armed Forces: their opinions about the current government and the lack of leadership by the minister. One said, “I had no intention of framing or hanging my certificate of service because it has the current Prime Minister's name on it. Now I think it might make a very good fire starter.” When I talk to victims and people I know who have testified at committee about sexual misconduct allegations, and I ask what they think about the Liberal filibustering going on at the defence committee, the word they use is “brutal”. A former senior military officer said, “This Minister of National Defence enjoys no confidence from any part of either the department or the Canadian Armed Forces due to his lack of leadership.”

This is why, unfortunately, Conservatives had to move this motion today calling for the minister to be censured. As my regimental slogan goes, never pass a fault.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth and to the Minister of Canadian Heritage (Sport)]

Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I want to thank my friend and colleague for his years of honourable service. I know that he has lots of experience and a tremendous amount of insight into the military and that he represented our nation honourably. I also want to thank him for not joining the apparent chorus and pile-on effect in attacking the Minister of National Defence and his record. I have been disappointed in this House over the last couple of weeks by some of the unwarranted personal attacks.

Given the degree of experience my friend across the floor has, his background and service, it is not impossible to imagine a universe in which, if the Conservatives formed government, he would become the minister of national defence. By the same token, the current leader of the Conservative Party was the minister of national defence when this came to light in 2015.

If the member were the minister of national defence, how would he have dealt with this differently, and why would that achieve a different outcome?

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will correct the member. The Leader of the Opposition was not the Minister of National Defence at the time of the previous incident. He was the Minister of Veterans Affairs and was not the one accountable or directly responsible. In fact, he took the appropriate action by reporting an allegation or rumour he heard to the appropriate authorities, which was then investigated by the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service. Obviously, based on the information it made available, it maybe did not highlight the shortfalls with the previous chief of the defence staff.

As for answering the member's hypothetical, if I had been the Minister of National Defence when the former ombudsman brought that allegation forward, I would not have hesitated to look at it and make a determination to get an investigation started, then I would have stayed out of it. Once I had initiated that and ensured it was done, I would need to turn it over to the proper authorities. We cannot turn our backs. As the Minister of National Defence, the CDS reports to him.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am listening to the debate, and I cannot help but think that this is a sad time for women. One woman a day in Quebec is a victim of domestic violence. All these women want somewhere to go for help, but they have nowhere to turn because of a lack of resources. I assume the situation is similar across Canada.

According to the Regroupement québécois des centres d'aide et de lutte contre les agressions à caractère sexuel, only 5% of sex crimes are reported to the police. This means they are almost never reported. Some cases do go to court, but only three out of every 1,000 sexual assault complaints result in a conviction.

For years now, we have been witnessing a sad spectacle as the government, including the Prime Minister, his chief of staff and the Department of National Defence, have tried to cover up this sexual misconduct, which is documented. On top of that, according to a report from six years ago, action could have been taken if we had an independent office.

Does my colleague not find this sad spectacle, and the message being sent to the women of this country, to be absolutely shameful?

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is really sad. When we had the take-note debate a while back on gendered violence, it was based on the tragic killings in Quebec. I spoke up then about the need for more resources.

Specifically within the Canadian Armed Forces, when the first report by Madame Deschamps came out I was still in uniform. I was shocked. In fact, I will even admit I almost did not believe it until I started talking to a number of my female colleagues who are still serving, and they started telling me stories. I got so disgusted and mad that I almost got mad at them, because I had obviously failed if they did not feel they could use me as a colleague or peer, as we were lieutenant-colonels at the time. They could not come forward and tell me what was going on regarding the behaviour of some general officers. That is on me. That is on every senior officer, male and female, within the Canadian Armed Forces who is allowing this to be perpetuated and not fixing it. Yes, independence is required. Everybody needs to step up. That is why I go back to my comment about the failure of the minister with respect to accountability and leadership. When something is reported, we have to do the right thing.

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, Public Safety; the hon. member for Bow River, Canadian Heritage; the hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith, Small Business.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I wish that we did not have this motion before us today. This is not something that is great for Canada or for our armed forces, but at the same time it is necessary. I am a bit frustrated and a little angry to be speaking to this today.

The Canadian military forms an integral part of who I am, as an individual and as a Canadian, as is true for so many other Canadians. My father enlisted in the Korean War in the 1950s. He was 17 years old. His father would not sign his papers unless he joined the Royal Canadian Air Force. He actually was in the process of signing up for the Princess Pats. This unit went on to Korea and fought in the battle of Kapyong, where we had many casualties.

This battle was really a key battle. The Princess Pats regiment was given a presidential citation for bravery for facing overwhelming odds against Korean, North Korean and Chinese troops as they were swarming over and invading South Korea at the time. The PPCLI was there to protect the retreat. They were the rearguard for South Korean and American forces and troops, putting their lives at stake, and there were deaths. As a matter of fact, it got so bad that they called on artillery to be fired upon their own positions because they were being overrun.

This measure of bravery is what Canadians are known for, and they have been for over a century. Members can think of the First World War and Vimy Ridge. Canadian soldiers got the job done. There were thousands of casualties. They advanced in the face of fire and lay their lives down.

Over 100,000 Canadian troops, men and women, have laid down their lives for our country and for our freedoms, and we honour them. We honour their memory for what they have done, not just those who have lain down their lives, but all those who have served in the military and who are serving the military. We are proud of them.

I can imagine being at the mess hall table or in the barracks and having these conversations. I am sure it is frustrating to hear about how many generals have had to resign. This is at the top, and the onus and leadership needs to be taken. We have actually seen a lack of leadership and a lack of accountability, and it is shameful. It is not right. It is not appropriate for our troops.

We live in a critical time. I will talk more about that in a few moments.

My dad went on to serve for 36 years. We lived on bases. I was born in Germany, at 4 Wing in Baden Soellingen. It was West Germany at that time. The Berlin Wall was built when I was there. I am kind of aging myself. I know I look very young, but I was born at that time, in the 1960s.

My dad later told me that when I was born he wondered what type of world he was bringing his child into. He did not know, with nuclear bombs all over. I remember growing up later on, having air-raid sirens and preparing for the potentiality of a war, but the Canadian troops were there. They served in great strength and numbers. We were a very serious partner.

We still are. We have great troops. They have been reduced over the years, but we have fantastic troops. One thing Canadian soldiers are noted for is their quality. They are great professional soldiers who do their job and are not trying to get glory.

I talked to my father before he died and asked about stories he had not told me before. He started in the Air Force working on the ground crew putting munitions on aircraft, bombers and fighters. He was serving somewhere in Alberta at the time, and he said a Lancaster bomber landed and crashed into the hangar at the air base. It was fully loaded with bombs.

My father took no thought to his life, and he ran in with an extinguisher. He saved the airmen and put the fire out. He dragged out the pilot and did not make a big fuss about it. The pilot actually gave him $20. In those days that was quite a bit. He did not get a medal. He was not trying to get the glory, and that is what our soldiers are like. They are not necessarily trying to get the glory. They are there to do the job.

I want to pay my respects for what the men and women in uniform do day in and day out on land, sea and water serving our country. They deserve our applause. We applaud them. I think of various battles. I think of the First World War and Vimy Ridge. That had been assaulted numerous times by other troops, but the Canadians went in there and they took it over. They are soldiers known in the past, and now, for their valour, intelligence and commitment.

They were also the shock troops in 1918. Even in 1918, there was the risk of losing the war, and they were first in line.

My wife and I were at Juno Beach in 2017. While I was there I had the realization that, during the Second World War, Canadians had spilled their blood there. Hundreds of young soldiers. I ask members to imagine the sacrifice they made.

We have a strong peacekeeping tradition. I am from a family of six children raised, as I mentioned, in a military home in Chibougamau and Valcartier, Quebec, and Holberg, British Columbia, all these different bases. My first memories are of men in uniform and what they did, and of being proud to see my dad. I had the opportunity to also serve in the military, along with my brothers and sisters. I was proud to serve Canada, proud of the uniform and committed to the country. Honestly, I really feel that this is beyond politics. I know the Liberals will say this is politics.

This is also about our military and, in the face of great looming dangers with China and Russia, we cannot afford to have our military demoralized. We cannot afford this. The minister needs to do the right thing, even if he thinks he is innocent. Members have heard why we do not think he is so innocent, but that is not the point. The point is he needs to do the best thing for Canada.

He needs to step down. He does not have to wait for the Prime Minister to say he needs to leave. He just needs to tell the Prime Minister he needs to step down because this is not good for Canada.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for sharing his life story and his birth date. I was born a couple of decades after he was, but I can assure him I share those same sentiments about how much our Canadian Armed Forces have continued to support us, to work for the safety of Canada and Canadians here and abroad.

I want to pick up on one point the member talked about. He said we cannot afford to demoralize the military. I wonder what these polarizing motions do to the morale of our Canadian Armed Forces, those women and men in uniform who are working so hard to protect our country. How does he think it makes them feel when we are questioning the integrity of the men and women who have served?

We are playing partisan games to prevent any combined and collaborative action that could address the very real issues that exist within the Canadian Armed Forces.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we should not be in the position we are in today. There should not be a motion. We should not have to be speaking about this today. This should have been dealt with a long time ago.

We should not have been in this situation three years ago with General Vance. There was knowledge of his improprieties and the sexual misconduct. To knowingly place him in that position was wrong. There are so many misleading statements that the minister agrees to, yet he is still in this position. We should not be in this position, and I put the onus on the Liberal government and the Prime Minister.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his very moving speech.

In light of the facts before us, which were reported by the media, and from what we heard in committee, the minister flatly refused to meet with the ombudsman 12 times. Obviously, he was trying to protect General Vance, and that is unacceptable. It is unacceptable for all of the women who were brave enough to file a complaint. That is unacceptable because we would not let that happen if we were talking about our daughter or sister.

Why does my colleague think that we are still allowing the Liberals to protect each other?

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for her question. I agree with her. It is unbelievable that we are in this situation.

The minister said that he was not aware, but the other witnesses had proof that he was. It is therefore really unbelievable that he is still in his position.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I do want to recognize this is about correcting mistakes. I know that the hon. member was not here at the time, but the Conservative government did close veteran offices, including mine in Windsor West, where we actually had to fight to bring it back to life.

Is that something that the Conservative Party now believes was a mistake, or is that something that would happen again? We have the Essex and Kent Scottish regiment here. Many recruitment agencies have come through here and made attempts in the past. We also have many veterans. I would like a sincere response to this question: Is this about correcting mistakes for our veterans?

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am a member of the Royal Canadian Legion in Maple Ridge, and I believe it is the largest in Western Canada. I certainly personally support our veterans, as I am a vet myself. It is very important, and I know the Conservative government will look after our vets. We are committed to that.

[Kenny Chiu, Conservative, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge for providing us a glimpse of what honour in our military has been in the past. Although it is being impacted, we still carry that honour in our Canadian military.

In the Chinese culture, there is a saying that the leader sets the example. If the upper beam is crooked, it will cause the entire building to crumble. I would like to ask my hon. colleague for his response.

In 2018, the Prime Minister responded to an accusation of groping a journalist by saying that everybody understands things differently. In 2019, in the SNC-Lavalin incident, he mentioned that he would take responsibility. Would that have anything to do—

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

I am afraid we are out of time there. We will ask the hon. member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge to respond.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it has become very evident that there is a tremendous amount of virtue signalling from the Liberal government and from the Prime Minister. We heard comments yesterday from the leader of the Green Party. This has been ongoing, the pretending to be against harassment, sexual harassment, and yet they continue to allow these sorts of things to continue. It is embarrassing and it is a shame.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kingston and the Islands.

I want to rise in the House today to speak about the Minister of National Defence in light of this very unfair opposition motion. I want to talk about who he is as a person and what he has done to serve Canada alongside so many others.

Like so many of our friends and neighbours, the Minister of National Defence came here as an immigrant. His mother came to our country in the hopes of building a better life for the minister and his sister. His parents left India because Canada was a place where they believed they could find the opportunity and that success. They left behind their family and their community.

This story is likely familiar to you, Mr. Speaker, and to many others here in this House. It is a story of countless immigrant families from across this country. It is a story of sacrifice. Unlike the Leader of the Opposition, the Minister of National Defence's father was not a politician who served for almost two decades in the provincial Legislature. Instead, the Minister of National Defence stood beside his mother as a child in the blueberry, raspberry and strawberry fields, from Richmond to Abbotsford in British Columbia. He would wake up at 5:00 a.m. and join his mother and his sister, packed in a van with 30 other field labourers, for a long day of work.

It was in these fields where the Minister of National Defence realized that racism could be met with deadly consequences. As the minister said last year in an interview with CTV, one of his co-workers, a man in his 20s, did not show up to work one day.

Later on, we found out that it was actually an attack based on race – and he was killed.

The minister has spoken many times of his experience with racism. He has worked his entire life to end this discrimination. Unlike the Leader of the Opposition, the Minister of National Defence had to work in a country that was hostile, is still hostile, to Black and brown bodies. It is a fight that he has had to endure his whole life. It is a fight that he continues to endure.

In fact, the Leader of the Opposition and many others from the opposition still do not bother to pronounce the minister's name correctly. Maybe I will take a moment to say that the minister is “Sajjan,” which means honourable, respectable in Punjabi. For over six years, the Leader of the Opposition and the members opposite have had the opportunity to learn how to pronounce his name, and they have chosen not to. People who are visible minorities know what this is. These are microaggressions, and they are not mistakes. These microaggressions are racism, pure and simple.

The Minister of National Defence has devoted his life to service, service to his community, service to Vancouver and service to Canada. He served over a decade as an officer in the Vancouver police force, working in the riding that he represents today, Vancouver South. He fought against the scourge of organized crime and drug trafficking, protecting the community that he still serves and protects today.

Like thousands of other Canadians, he put up his hand and served this country in the Canadian Armed Forces. While he served in uniform, he experienced discrimination there as well. Let me quote again from the minister's interview with CTV.

I remember one person…saying to me “I let you join my military.” Just that position of power and privilege that he was throwing in my face, it just upset me so much.

Despite the racism that he has faced, he still served. He served in Bosnia. He served three tours of duty in Afghanistan.

He has been awarded numerous military medals for his service, including the Order of Military Merit, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Canadian Forces' Decoration, the South-West Asia Service Medal, the General Campaign Star, the commendation medal, the NATO service medal and the Canadian Peacekeeping Service Medal. Now, the opposition has the audacity to question his service by bringing up questions about the Minister of National Defence's service in Afghanistan.

Why do we not hear from the people who actually worked with him in Afghanistan, like Colonel Chris Vernon, chief of staff to the Coalition Task Force Headquarters who led Operation Medusa? He stated:

[The minister] was a major player in the design team that put together Operation Medusa. He was able to put together an intelligence picture of the Taliban and the tribal dynamics west of Kandahar, without which we probably wouldn't have been able to mount Operation Medusa. So that's what he did. Pretty significant stuff.

Why do we not hear from Major-General David Fraser, then head of NATO regional. He described the minister as having “remarkable personal courage...often working in the face of the enemy to collect data and confirm his suspicions, and placing himself almost daily in situations of grave personal risk.” He also went on to say, “I must say that [the Minister of National Defence] is one of the most remarkable people I have worked with, and his contribution to the success of the mission and the safety of Canadian soldiers was nothing short of remarkable.”

The opposition members sit there and continue to question the minister's commitment and his service record. That is shameful. They question his work as the Minister of National Defence.

Why do we not take into account the opinion of David Perry, a senior military analyst at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute? He said, about the minister, “In terms of actual results that have been delivered for defence since he's been a minister: on that front I think it's pretty fair to say that he's done very well.” He went on to add that, “Under [his] time as defence minister the government has committed to spending more money on the military in real dollars than at any time since the Korean War.”

This opposition day motion is very troubling. It ignores the fact of the minister's service to his community, to Vancouver and to our country. I know and Canadians know that, time and again, the minister has stepped up and served his country. Despite the opposition's attempts, Canadians will remember this motion as exactly what it is: a petty, personal attack on Canada's first Minister of National Defence of colour. It is an attempt by the Conservative members to whitewash the actions the Minister of National Defence has taken to support those who serve Canada each and every day.

The members have heard my colleagues speak of our investments into the Canadian Armed Forces after a decade of darkness because of the cuts from the Harper Conservative government. Members have heard my colleagues speak of our commitment to building a more inclusive and diverse Canadian Armed Forces, and they have heard my colleagues speak about our commitment to building a Canadian Armed Forces that is free from sexual harassment and assault.

The Conservatives might stand up and say they have been champions for women and for minorities. Nothing can be further from the truth. When the Leader of the Opposition had an opportunity to stand with our friends and neighbours in the Muslim community—

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

We will have to leave that there for the moment as time has expired, but we will now go to questions and comments and perhaps the hon. member will have the opportunity to pick up those last thoughts in the course of the next five minutes.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton.