David Collenette

[Minister Of National Defence, May 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we had better get our facts straight.

The hon. member accused me of unethical behaviour. I hope she withdraws that before I give the answer to the question.

[Minister Of National Defence, May 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad at my first opportunity to be back in the country to deal with these very troubling issues which have reflected on my reputation.

Yesterday the President of the Treasury Board outlined the general response to this question. As members of the House of

Commons we have budgets to hire staff. We hire them either as full time employees or for project work. That goes for the members of the Reform Party as well as other parties. Similarly ministers have budgets that can be used for project work or for exempt staff.

In the case of the arrangements that were referred to in the House, as the President of Treasury Board has stated, those arrangements were made within Treasury Board guidelines.

[Somalia Inquiry, May 16th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we dealt with this question a few weeks ago. The chief of defence staff is doing a very good job and is working extremely hard. At the appropriate time he will come forward to the commission to answer all of its questions.

[Somalia Inquiry, May 16th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I stated in the House some time ago-I think it was back in the fall of 1994 when this issue came up-that all members of the armed forces are not, as a condition of service, entitled to make public comments about their duties.

With respect to the incidents in Somalia, I advised the House that anybody who had anything to add to the situation, any evidence to give, should do so before the commission. That is consistent. That applies to everybody in the armed forces. It applies to the chief of defence staff.

However, the chief of defence staff has the unfettered right to communicate with his troops at any time. General Boyle exercised that right a few weeks ago but has since taken the position, the correct position and the one I directed in the House of Commons, that any commentary on Somalia should not be made in an external forum such as Parliament or in the news media but to the commission of inquiry.

[Somalia Inquiry, May 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I am not hiding behind any rules. I am obeying the law. The hon. member should

understand that. There is a law that governs the activities of the Canadian Armed Forces. It is quite explicit. Any minister, any member of Parliament and any Canadian citizen must obey the law.

[Somalia Inquiry, May 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should know that under the National Defence Act that was passed by Parliament in 1952, all the power over promotions, up to and including the rank of colonel, was delegated by order in council to the chief of the defence staff, not the minister.

This minister, as other ministers, does not interfere in the promotion process in the armed forces.

I understand that a number of promotions were held in abeyance while various legal proceedings were taking place. Subsequently, some of these promotions have been allowed to proceed while others are still in abeyance, which is in accordance with normal procedure.

[Somalia Inquiry, May 13th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I have stated in the House before that no one would suffer any reprisals for coming forward to the commission. That message has been sent loud and clear.

The hon. member asked for a clear message. What could be clearer than the Minister of National Defence publicly stating in the House of Commons that all members of the armed forces have an obligation to come forward and that there will be no reprisals?

However, the minister cannot and will not interfere in the judicial process which is taking place.

[Somalia Inquiry, May 13th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I was expecting to get this kind of question from the hon. member for Charlesbourg, but to get it from the hon. member for Saanich-Gulf Islands, a former colonel in the armed forces, who knows full well everything that should be known about the military justice system, is to me quite disheartening.

The fact is there is a military justice system. People are obliged to follow the rules. They are also obliged to come forward to give evidence to the inquiry. There is no incompatibility here.

[Somalia Inquiry, May 13th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, there are two messages to members of the Canadian Armed Forces. First, all of them, if they have evidence germane to the inquiry, are expected to come forward. The second is that as a member of the armed forces they are obligated to follow the rules and procedures of the National Defence Act. That is a condition of their service. There is no incompatibility between the two.

[Somalia Inquiry, May 13th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the answer I gave the hon. member for Charlesbourg last Wednesday and the answers of my parliamentary secretary on Friday are exactly the case.

There is no incompatibility with coming forward, giving evidence to the commission and also obeying the rules and regulations of the Canadian Armed Forces. There is no incompatibility. I am surprised the hon. member is continuing to raise this question.