Bill Graham

[Veterans Affairs, June 23rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I totally reject the premise of the question. We have not predetermined anything. I have been very clear with the House. These are events that took place a long time ago. We do know for a fact that these events took place over three days in one year and four days in another year, 1966 and 1967. There were a limited number of acres that were sprayed with agent orange and agent purple.

We are working with the communities. We will work with all Canadians who risk having been affected by this. We do not minimize it. We recognize this is an important issue. We want to make sure that Canadians are dealt with properly in this and we will do so.

[Veterans Affairs, June 23rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot speak to decisions, to which the hon. member refers, that were taken over 20 years ago, but I can speak to the decisions that are taken today.

This government is determined that the individuals in the region will understand the facts, will know what took place there and will be able to judge for themselves what they should be searching for as a way to enable them to have their rights dealt with.

I can assure the hon. member that we will provide the information and we will provide a solution to this very difficult problem.

[Veterans Affairs, June 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, my precise point is that we are not ignoring medical science as I have assured the House. The hon. Minister for Veterans Affairs has ensured that her department is examining carefully anyone who was exposed to agent orange. In those cases where that has been proven, pensions have been awarded.

We treat this very seriously. Our officials will be down there now explaining to the local population that we want to get to the facts. I can assure the hon. member we are not minimizing it. We will give those people who have been affected by agent orange what they need and what they require and that--

[Veterans Affairs, June 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, we are not denying the link. What we are trying to do, despite the efforts of the hon. member, is to get some facts into this debate so we can understand exactly what happened some 40 years ago.

We know there was a limited amount of testing over seven days, over the course of two years, in certain areas within Gagetown. We are seeking to find out exactly all those who were exposed.

As the hon. member said, the Minister of Veterans Affairs has ensured that anyone who shows their exposure has been compensated with pensions. We are working on this. We do not minimize anything. We will find solutions and we will work with everyone to find the proper solution.

[National Defence, June 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, as I said before, the selection process was open, transparent and fair. Everybody who wanted to apply was able to apply and we selected the best person we could.

Having the people who know something about the system comment on what they think is a good way to get the best possible result. We do not necessarily have to follow all advice. However, I ask the hon. member not to ask the government to ignore the advice of people who know what they are talking about in order to get some blind decision that does not respond to reality.

[National Defence, June 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I can assure members of the House that the selection of Mr. Côté was made after a fair and open process. Applicants were heard and we selected, in our view, absolutely the best applicant.

I have heard the objections of the members of the committee and I will consider them. However, I have to tell members of the House that this is a gentleman who has served Canada well and who has been an exemplary public servant.

I do not think it helps either what we are trying to do as a government or what we are doing in the House to attack him for his personal qualifications, which I suggest are quite impeccable as a public servant of our country.

[Veterans Affairs, June 21st, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, as I have said on several occasions in the House, these events happened 45 years ago. We are making every effort to determine what happened.

This morning, experts appeared before the committee to answer members' questions. This week, some people will be going to Gagetown, New Brunswick to inform the public and to try to determine all the facts and find out who was affected. We will then be determining what compensation can be offered to those affected by these dangerous products.

[Health, June 21st, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, the Canadian Forces are not participating in the health care system with the provinces.

We get our health care where we can in conjunction with the needs for those services. We acquire them from the public health care system, but we do use private facilities when necessary to meet our unique occupational needs.

We have done that and we will continue to do that as we are not a part of the health care system of this country. We have unique characteristics and unique needs.

[An Act to Authorize the Minister of Finance to Make Certain Payments, June 20th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, it may be because it is late at night, but this is one of the rare times that I have heard references made to people such Marcus Aurelius, Hobbes and de Tocqueville and I would like to congratulate the hon. member for referring to these people. However it seems to me that when the member brought these historical figures forward and seemed to suggest that all the problems he was talking about were problems of today's world in Canada, did he realize that those great people of the past were talking about a balance in their civic life?

Everyone of us in the House are anxious to develop democracy. We all want, as he suggested, some sort of balance. Why does the hon. member not recognize that everybody in the House has a knowledge of history? Everybody understands that the history of Canada is all about bringing the strains of everything that he talked about together and that we wish to make this country work together. Why does his party not try to come together in the dying hours of this Parliament, at this time, to make this House work for the benefit of Canada and get our budget through in a compromise in a sense of what Canada is all about, not what the collapse of the Roman Empire was all about but what Canada is all about in making compromise and being tolerant and respectful of one another's work so we could get Bill C-48 and Bill C-38 through and move on so that next fall we can come back together here and achieve what the Canadian people want us to achieve?

[National Defence, June 20th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, as is the case with the use of agent orange and other practices by the department in the distant past, we are prepared to examine each case where products were used which caused problems and had harmful effects. We are, of course, concerned with the case of agent orange which, as I have said, was sprayed seven days a week for two years over Gagetown's lands. We will continue all our investigations on all our bases to determine whether other agents have been used.