House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2000, with 67% of the vote.
Department Of National Defence September 20th, 1996
-it was a collaborative effort on that particular score. In a parliamentary government the ministers and the ministers alone take responsibility. Those terms of reference are comprehensive, they are thorough and they will get the answers Canadians want.
Department Of National Defence September 20th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, I have great respect for the hon. member for Lethbridge. He should know after all his years in government something about parliamentary democracy in this country.
There is ministerial responsibility. We do not attack, we do not berate public servants on the floor of the House of Commons, no matter who they are.
Questions are asked of the government. The government is accountable for all of the actions within the respective departments.
I have answered the question two or three times. I, and I alone, take responsibility for the terms of reference on behalf of the government. I consulted cabinet colleagues and it was a collaborative effort in that particular-
National Defence September 20th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, these are the people who ask about ministerial responsibility. I am the minister. I take responsibility for those terms of reference.
They reflect the thinking of the government. They were drafted by officials in the department in conjunction with the judge advocate general on my authority and I take responsibility for them.
National Defence September 20th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, I answered the question fully in my first answer.
The terms of reference which I tabled in March 1995 were a reflection of the government's thinking in trying to get to the bottom of this. A number of people, a number of officials, worked on these terms of reference in conjunction with the deputy minister and the judge advocate general. The point is that these terms of reference belong to the government. They reflect the government's thinking clearly.
Somalia Inquiry September 20th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, it seems quite obvious that as the days go by, the hon. member is becoming more and more hysterical about this problem. We prefer to deal with things in a calm and rational way and let the inquiry do its work.
He talks about the people of Canada judging us. Mr. Speaker, if you look at the opinion polls, the people of Canada have judged his party already and they have found it totally wanting on just about every issue that affects Canadians and it will be the same thing on this problem.
Somalia Inquiry September 20th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, if anyone has been interfering with this process it is the hon. member and his colleagues. As I said yesterday to his colleague from Beaver River, they have reflected on evidence, impugned motives of individuals, and made all kinds of wild accusations in the House.
This demonstrates the reason why we had to have the inquiry in the first place, to take it out of the partisan atmosphere of the House of Commons, to put it in a judicial setting, an impartial setting so that everyone could be heard fairly and all the evidence could be examined clearly and thoroughly.
The hon. member is the best advertisement for the reasons why we set up the inquiry: to take the partisan aspect out of it. All the hon. member and his colleagues have done in the last number of months is to turn this into a partisan issue. I do not believe that the people of Canadian appreciate that very much.
Somalia Inquiry September 20th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, the terms of reference for that inquiry originated in my office in consultation with departmental officials.
They were amended by me at a late stage to ensure certain things were put in which I thought were germane to the efficacy of the inquiry. The terms of reference for the inquiry are mine and I take responsibility for them. I think they have been widely acknowledged as being comprehensive, all encompassing and they will get to the bottom of the matter.
The Somalia Commission September 19th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, the process of change in the armed forces is going on very rapidly. I am pleased that the chief of the defence staff and his colleagues have been at the forefront of bringing some very important changes to the armed forces.
Yesterday in a speech in Ottawa the general talked about some of the real accomplishments of giving commanders more control, of devolving more authority to base commanders across the country, of looking at terms of service for military personnel so that they can be assured of service depending on performance.
Lots of reforms are going on. It is a pity that people have become so obsessed with some events that they are overlooking the fundamental changes, the good changes, that are putting the Canadian military in the forefront of reforms of all military in the world.
Somalia Inquiry September 19th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows I cannot comment on any matter before the inquiry. Even if I could, it would be very difficult to cut through the convolutions and non sequiturs in his question.
Somalia Inquiry September 19th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, here is yet another example of the hon. member reflecting upon something on which he knows I cannot comment because of my obligations under the National Defence Act.
He has made reference to potential proceedings against one member of the armed forces and he wishes to have this debated in the House of Commons. We have a justice system within the military and the people in the military are subject to it. It is constitutionally sanctioned by the supreme court. It could, perhaps, be in need of some updating and I hope Parliament will help us in that.
I think it is grossly unfair for the hon. member to raise the cases of individuals knowing that I cannot reply because of the obligations I have under the National Defence Act.