Bill Graham

[Canadian Forces, April 12th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know what the hon. member is basing his information on, but I have to tell him that I was recently in Esquimalt speaking to members of our Canadian navy and they are thrilled with the pay raise. I have spoken with members of the army and they are very pleased with the pay raise, as are members of the air force.

The hon. member may not like it, but the fact of the matter is that members of our armed forces are very grateful for it and it is improving their quality of life. I am thrilled with the fact that we can show how the government appreciates the tremendous service of our armed forces.

[National Defence, April 7th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I can tell the hon. member where the government has been in respect to the Dutch and the British, and every other foreign government that has been training at Goose Bay. The Prime Minister himself intervened when we were at NATO. I have intervened with every foreign defence minister in respect of this file. Personally, we have taken this to their air forces.

We expect to convince many to come back to Goose Bay. We have changed, with discussions with the Goose Bay residents themselves, the way in which we charge fees to those who come to Goose Bay. We are working with the community. We are working with the foreign countries who come here to train. We will continue to support Goose Bay, not just play politics the way the opposition is doing.

[National Defence, April 6th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, this government and this Prime Minister take policy decisions for the good of Canadians and for the good of Canada. Our government is committed to providing the correct defence posture for our country.

We will work with our American colleagues in defending North America, but we will work with them in our way, under our conditions, with our priorities, under the direction of our Prime Minister.

[National Defence, April 6th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I hope Canadians will believe the accurate reporting of what I actually said before the committee. What I said was that we are participating with our American colleagues in providing information about what is going on around space and around Canada and the United States because we are their partners in the defence of North America and that is a natural thing for Norad to do.

That does not make us participants in the ballistic missile delivery system. What it makes us is participants in the defence of North America as a great colleague with the United States. We are building stronger ties every day and we will continue to do so.

[Committees of the House, April 4th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member made the point that at one time there were helicopters there. I explained to the House that this was looked at, and in terms of the terrain, it was the logical reason to remove the helicopters. In fact, access by road made a much better solution to the problem. In this case, the response time, as the hon. member himself admitted and stated quite rightly, was excellent.

I have told him that, if the board of inquiry in the investigation of the accident reports something that would show us that we need to re-examine that decision, I will re-examine it. We should certainly wait for that accident investigation report. We should not act just because of speculation, but rather look at what has been planned well by our military to deal with this situation.

[Committees of the House, April 4th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Palliser for his comments and his question, which is extremely important given the tragic accident that occurred.

Over the years, the Snowbirds have embodied the bravery, professionalism and teamwork that is displayed by all of our military personnel here in Canada and throughout the world.

The Snowbirds are excellent ambassadors for Canada and the Canadian Forces. The discipline, skill and commitment to excellence that they demonstrate on a daily basis can be found in all of the men and women who serve in the Canadian Forces.

Millions of spectators across North America have seen the Snowbirds perform over their 35 years in existence and can attest to the inspirational qualities of this impressive unit.

However, the tragic accident that took the life of Captain Miles Selby on December 10, 2004, was a reminder of the risks that the men and women of the Canadian Forces face on behalf of their country, as the hon. member has pointed out to the House this evening.

I would like to again take this time to express to the family of Captain Selby the condolences of the Government of Canada, as well as the appreciation of all Canadians for Captain Selby's dedicated service. He was a fine young man. He had a great wife and it was a great opportunity for the two of us to meet. I also met with his family and shared with them their sadness at the funeral.

The Canadian Forces try to train their personnel as well as possible in order to minimize the risk of accident. The Canadian armed forces are, in fact, among the best trained in the world, and we can take pride in their performance in Canada and abroad.

The Canadian Forces also make every effort to maintain the highest search and rescue standards in order to keep loss of life to a minimum if there is an accident.

The most appropriate rescue response depends on a number of important factors, including terrain, weather and the quality of local infrastructure.

The hon. member has raised in the House and with me the appropriateness of the use of helicopters in these circumstances. I want to assure him that the force has looked at this option.

Helicopter rescue is not always the best option. For example, an ambulance can travel by road in weather that would ground a helicopter. Helicopters must also identify safe places to land while road vehicles can negotiate through rough terrain.

In southern Saskatchewan, local topography and northwest flows of cold Arctic air make winter flying conditions unreliable at the best of times. This is not to say that helicopters do not make good rescue vehicles, but rather that their use must be evaluated based on all of the factors involved.

In 1994 the air force wing in Moose Jaw conducted a thorough examination of its search and rescue requirements. It took into account factors such as the nature of flying being conducted, common types of accidents, the distance of most crashes from the base, common weather conditions and terrain. The study concluded that the wing did not require the support of a dedicated search and rescue helicopter fleet which explains to the hon. member for Palliser why that was discontinued.

This is an area of training that has very good road access as the member pointed out and civilian infrastructure, unlike other more remote training areas such as Cold Lake and Bagotville.

The study determined that within a 100 kilometre radius of the wing, there were more than 600 kilometres of provincial highway open for the entire year, and more than 6,000 kilometres of municipal roads that were designated as all-weather roads.

The decision to rely on ground search and rescue in Moose Jaw was validated by the fact that in this case civilian rescue responders arrived at the scene within minutes, well before medical assistance could have arrived by military transport either by air or by road.

We are satisfied with the search and rescue response to this incident. The crash site was accessible by road and the rescue team acted immediately. In fact, the commanding officer of the Snowbirds said the response was entirely appropriate and that he was extremely impressed with the reaction time.

As the hon. member mentioned, an investigation is presently going on. If any recommendations come out of that investigation, we will look at what additional measures should be taken on the base.

[National Defence, March 24th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I have already assured the hon. member and the House that it is, obviously, a concern of the Canadian Forces to have as efficient an organization as possible. No decision about Bagotville—the organization of Bagotville—has been reached that would threaten the number of jobs there in any way.

I hope that the hon. member will not call into question our activities in other parts of the country, where investments are necessary in order to ensure the protection and security of Canadians.

[Government Contracts, March 22nd, 2005]

At any rate, Mr. Speaker, as I said, an announcement will be made in the future about who received this contract. But in the meantime, I can assure the House that, for this contract as for all our contracts, the overall process has been fair, open, just and totally proper.

[Government Contracts, March 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, it would not be appropriate for me to comment today on a contract that has not yet been awarded and about which an announcement will be made in the future.

However, I can assure the hon. member and the House as a whole that, in this matter as in all contract awards by our department and the government, the process has been just, fair and open.

[National Defence, March 11th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I am going to repeat my answer for the hon. member. In fact, the armed forces, like the rest of this government, are reorganizing to improve their efficiency and ability to defend Canada. I hope that he agrees with me.

However, personnel and equipment on the Bagotville base will not be affected by this reorganization. According to our plans, the Bagotville base remains an important asset to the armed forces.