John O'Reilly

[National Defence, May 14th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the Americans have yet to decide on the details of the future system. Therefore speculation and the implication for NORAD are very premature. When a decision is made Canada will be consulted, as has been promised.

[Income Tax Act, May 2nd, 2001]

Madam Speaker, the government is committed to obtaining fair market value for surplus government assets in a manner that respects taxpayer dollars and the laws of our nation.

Treasury Board disposal policy calls for the utilization of private sector disposal specialists when it is cost effective to do so. To this end, in June 1997 a competitive contract was awarded to Lancaster Aviation Inc. for surplus aerospace assets disposal. Lancaster's bid met the mandatory experience, resource and financial requirements, and it submitted the lowest responsive bid. It won the contract fair and square.

The government held this competition because it wanted a centre of expertise capable of marketing and selling a wide range of surplus DND aviation assets. It was always intended that the surplus aerospace assets disposal contract include the disposal of surplus aviation assets such as aircraft.

The contract specifically included, under the provisions of special project sales, unique project sales which may include high dollar value items. It was under this provision that surplus Challengers were reported to Lancaster Aviation, the winner of the surplus aerospace disposal contract, as available for sale.

The sale of this surplus equipment was completed to the letter of Canadian law and with the interests of Canadian taxpayers in mind, meeting both treasury board and Canadian export control regulations.

In accordance with the surplus aerospace assets disposal contract, commission rates were negotiated for the disposal of the surplus Challenger fleet. The commission paid to Lancaster Aviation for its marketing efforts was reasonable. This was the sole manner by which Lancaster was compensated for its services.

The government received fair market value for the Challenger aircraft. The eight aircraft were sold as a lot for a selling price of $30 million U.S. to DDH Aviation of Fort Worth, Texas. The sale price reflected the fact that the Challengers were not certified for civilian use and would require modifications to make them suitable for civilian use.

The government has conducted the sales of the Challenger aircraft in accordance with treasury board and Canadian export regulations. Furthermore, the commissions paid to Lancaster Aviation for its marketing efforts were reasonable and the sale price represented good value to the crown.

If the member opposite has information to the contrary I invite him to table it in the House. Otherwise I fear he is wasting the time of the House, much like the leader of his party, trying to find a scandal where none exists.

[Emergency Preparedness Week, May 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, in our day to day lives disasters may seem a distinct possibility. Yet natural disasters like floods, tornados, technological or environmental accidents such as chemical spills or disruptions to power and telecommunication services can strike anywhere and at any time.

That is why the Government of Canada through the office of critical infrastructure protection and emergency preparedness works in co-operation with other government departments, provincial and territorial governments, the private sector and non-governmental partners to promote the first full week of May as Emergency Preparedness Week in Canada.

The theme for this year's Emergency Preparedness Week is “Reducing the Risk: Toward Safer Communities in the 21st Century”. In marking this special week from May 7 to May 13 emergency preparedness partners throughout Canada have organized a wide range of activities.

Being prepared starts with each and every one of us. I therefore urge my colleagues in the House of Commons and all Canadians to explore ways to help their families and their communities to become better prepared.

[National Defence, April 25th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the member's question is a good one.

Over $5 million has been invested in health and safety repairs for married quarters over the last two years at CFB Esquimalt. The health and safety of all members of the Canadian forces is our first priority. We intend it to continue to be our first priority.

[Division No. 76, April 23rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, on February 5, 2001, the hon. member asked the Minister of Industry whether he would make a commitment to table as soon as possible a bill providing the country with a true shipbuilding policy.

The minister responded that he was pleased that colleagues on all sides of the House had discussed shipbuilding in Canada with a view to identifying ways to improve the situation of this sector. Most important, the minister noted that he was waiting for the report of the national shipbuilding and industrial marine partnership project, which was recently released on April 5, 2001. This was a private sector task force which the minister established to provide views to the government on practical and workable approaches to improving the shipbuilding industry.

The report, which was tabled earlier this month, sets out a range of possible measures. It identifies a wide variety of policy recommendations and options for the federal government as well as for provincial governments and other stakeholders, including industry and labour, to improve the quality and productivity of the shipbuilding industry. The report is being carefully analyzed, and the minister is consulting with his federal colleagues and provincial counterparts so he can respond to the report's recommendations within the next few months. I assure the hon. member that the minister will be giving the report very careful consideration in the coming months.

[National Defence, March 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for the question. The government puts the needs of Canadian forces members first. That is why the money is being spent in the following manner.

Forty per cent of this money or $250 million is earmarked for increases in pay and benefits for Canadian forces members. Another $214 million will toward clothing, vehicles and other tools our men and women need to do their jobs.

This money, plus the $2.5 billion received by DND in the last two budgets, proves the government's commitment to the needs of the Canadian forces.

[Supply, March 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I am certainly glad the member for Saint John is tabling Liberal documents. Obviously the Conservative Party does not have any of its own. I would be more than happy to see them tabled and to deal with them. I am sure that if she had checked with some of the people she had dealt with in the past who are now Liberals, they could probably get her some more really good numbers that make perfect sense for any government to follow.

[Supply, March 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I am more than happy to include the numbers I gave in my speech. I know the Conservative Party does not think about dollars. If it thought about dollars it would still be the ruling party. It wanted to spend millions of extra dollars on cadillacs so their members could run around in armour plated vehicles. That is why the party was reduced to two people in the House of Commons.

One of those two saw the light and is now the leader of the Liberal Party in Quebec. The member for Compton—Stanstead saw the light and came over, and is now the vice-chair for defence and veteran's affairs. It is a step up when one becomes part of a government.

We are very concerned. Our first concern as a government is to make sure the men and women of the Canadian forces are properly supplied, properly trained, have the right equipment, operate in the safest environment and still save the taxpayers money. That is what this government is all about. That is what we are doing. The Conservative Party will be down to two again if it keeps talking about spending taxpayer money lightly and loosely, as it has in the past.

[Supply, March 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak to the motion before us today, the maritime helicopter project.

I commend the member for Compton—Stanstead. The party saw enough support for this member to nominate and elect him as vice-chair of defence and veterans affairs. I remind the member for Saint John that at one time when she was sitting over there with Jean Charest, who was a Conservative, he also left to excel in the Liberal Party. It seems that if one leaves those benches over there, one tends to move up in the world.

I want to deal first with the facts that are before us. We have heard a lot a numbers coming out of the opposition party. I think they found them somewhere in a comic book. This deal will save $1.5 billion over the former government's helicopter purchase.

The contract that involved the EH-101 was $5.7 billion. The contract for the helicopter purchased is at about $2.9 billion, plus the helicopter purchased for search and rescue brings it up to $3.7 billion. This is a difference of $2 billion, even adding in the $500 million in cancellation costs, not with the numbers they are throwing around. In cancelling the EH-101, the government is still saving Canadian taxpayers $1.5 billion dollars.

I know my colleague across the way, the member for Saint John, is concerned about the men and women of the Canadian forces and about making sure they have the tools and the support they need to do their job. This is a priority for the government also. It is why I am pleased to have this opportunity to speak about the helicopter project.

The decision to proceed with this acquisition demonstrates the government's leadership in ensuring that the Canadian forces are properly equipped for their missions. As members know, over the past two years, the government has reinvested more than $2.5 billion in defence. Additional new funding was announced this morning when the supplementary estimates were tabled. As stated in the recent Speech from the Throne, these increases will help ensure the forces are equipped and prepared to respond quickly to calls for help at home and abroad.

In the defence white paper, the government made it clear that modernizing the Canadian forces required several key equipment purchases, including the maritime helicopter. The government is delivering on these commitments.

Our navy has taken possession of the first of four Victoria class submarines. The army has acquired new state of the art light armoured vehicles. The United States has followed suit and is buying some of these vehicles, as is New Zealand. These vehicles are made in London, Ontario. The air force will be receiving 15 new search and rescue helicopters and upgrading the CF-18 fighters and Aurora surveillance aircraft.

In August of last year, the government granted approval for the Department of National Defence to begin the process of acquiring 28 new maritime helicopters. As the Minister of National Defence has said, acquiring a suitable maritime helicopter to replace the aging Sea King is his top capital acquisition priority. A modern, robust and capable maritime helicopter is vital for maintaining multipurpose combat capable forces. I might also, as a side note, say that the United States is still flying Sea Kings and swear by them.

While the Sea King has performed admirably as our maritime helicopter, we must ensure that the Canadian forces are equipped to meet the demands of the future. The maritime helicopter is a vital component needed by the Canadian forces to carry out the range of tasks that the government may ask of them.

The maritime helicopter plays a wide range of roles, including surveillance and control of Canadian territory and approaches, search and rescue, peace support operations, defence of North America, NATO, collective defence, international humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, among others.

The statement of operational requirements for the maritime helicopter clearly describes what kind of helicopter we need to carry out our maritime activities. For example, it explains why we need 28 maritime helicopters to meet our current defence commitments. It explains how much the maritime helicopter must be able to carry in order to accomplish an assigned mission and the airborne time required to conduct the mission.

It also explains what kind of mission systems, for example, communication, sensors and radar, will be required to ensure the helicopter's versatility and interoperability with our allies. The statement of operational requirements is strong and coherent. It is consistent with current defence policy and supported by thorough operational and statistical analysis.

A lot of work has been done to identify what kind of maritime helicopter the Canadian forces need to carry out their defence missions. I am sure the member for Saint John will be pleased to hear that the process to acquire a new maritime helicopter for the Canadian forces is being done with the best value for Canadian taxpayers in mind.

As all members know, if someone has to borrow money to buy something, whether it is a house or a car, one makes sure that every penny spent is used wisely. One would not buy more than what is needed. One would not want to pay a nickel more than one had to. The government understands that the money it has is borrowed from the taxpayer and that the taxpayer is entrusting the government to spend it wisely. That is what the government is doing with the maritime helicopter project.

The government will acquire what the Canadian forces need at the lowest cost to the Canadian taxpayer over the long term. We will get what is the best possible price, compliant with our requirements, over the full life of the helicopter. In other words, we are being smart about it and our approach is very simple.

We will acquire off the shelf, non-developmental equipment. We will not spend more than we have to spend. We will buy only what we need. We will make sure the combined cost of acquiring and maintaining the helicopter is the lowest possible. This will save taxpayer money over the long term. If this is not getting the best value, I do not know what is.

The government will have saved Canadian taxpayers $1.5 billion compared to the former government's EH-101 project. This is after including the costs associated with cancellation and the investments the Department of National Defence had made to ensure the continued airworthiness of the Labrador and Sea King helicopters.

It is not only about saving money. It is also about ensuring the Canadian forces get the equipment they need at a price we can afford. By launching the process to acquire new helicopters the government has done just that. The government is committed to ensuring that the men and women of the Canadian forces have the tools they need to get their job done. Acquiring a new maritime helicopter is part of this commitment. We are doing this in a way that is right for the Canadian forces and right for Canadian taxpayers.

When I was in Kosovo visiting with a quality of life report follow-up, I flew in a Griffon helicopter and found that it was a state of the art piece of equipment. We flew in very heavy traffic and in an area that was consistently dangerous. The operational people on this mission were highly trained and technically aware of what was going on. They were the most professional people I have dealt with.

I take this opportunity to commend the men and women of the Canadian forces for the work that they do on our behalf and on behalf of all of Canada.

[Immigration Act, February 26th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I know you will give me the same time tonight that you give all parliamentary secretaries so that I can go through all of this.

The hon. member raises concerns and questions about the operational readiness of the Canadian forces. The government is committed to ensuring that the Canadian forces has the people, equipment and training it needs.

In fact, we have undertaken a new far-reaching program aimed at preparing the Canadian forces for the 21st century, including an investment of $2.5 billion in new funding in the last two budgets. To this end, a number of initiatives are underway to ensure that the CF can fulfil its mandate into the future.

To continue our investment in people, equipment and training, we must identify the essential capabilities needed to perform the CF's core tasks and missions, and this is what we are doing.

I believe all Canadians should take great pride in the work performed by the men and women of the air force at home and abroad. Every day Canadian forces aircraft operate throughout the country and around the world, performing various and demanding missions.

One of their most important roles is performed here at home, patrolling the world's longest coastline, maritime approaches and territory, a tall order that requires an aircraft with a tremendous endurance. This task is fulfilled by the CP-140 Aurora, a long-range patrol aircraft able to fly over 9,000 kilometres without refuelling.

The CF-140 fleet procured in 1980 is based in 14 Wing Greenwood, Nova Scotia and 19 Wing Comox, British Columbia. In classic mythology Aurora was the goddess of the dawn, the goddess of light. From surface to subsurface surveillance, the Aurora plays a dynamic role for the Canadian forces.

Designed originally for anti-aircraft warfare, the Aurora is also capable of assisting in a wide variety of government tasks, including: surveillance of Canada's airspace, territory and maritime approaches; search and rescue; disaster relief; and assisting other government departments in areas such as fisheries protection, environmental surveillance and drug interdiction.

An excellent example of the capabilities of our Auroras and their crews with respect to this latter role was witnessed just this past Wednesday, when an Aurora from 19 Wing Comox played an integral role in assisting with the U.S. coast guard arrest of a suspected drug smuggling vessel on the west coast.