David Collenette

[Canadian Armed Forces, March 22nd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I remind the hon. member that in these cases there are ongoing investigations. There has yet to be a resolution in one particular matter. It would be very wrong for me to comment in any way on the substance because I may prejudice the examination and the judicial process.

My parliamentary secretary really hit the nail on the head yesterday in answering a similar question from the official opposition. All manner of procedures can be put in place, all manner of regulations can be put in place, but people sometimes commit errors of judgment.

The issue here is to make sure that when errors of judgment occur, when offences occur, they be investigated thoroughly, promptly and that disciplinary action be taken where warranted.

[National Defence, March 20th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the regiments, squadrons and ships of the Reserve Force are very important. They are a mirror of Canada's history and Canada's values. It is very important that they be maintained.

The traditions of our reserve force must be kept. Later this summer, I shall be reflecting on this matter, on the commission, on the House report, on the Senate report. In doing so, I should be mindful that the disbandment of units must be kept to a minimum, that control of the local armouries must be given back to the militia units and that there should be more people in the reserve and not less.

[Chatham, New Brunswick, March 19th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, no other member of the House has dealt with the very devastating blow of the closure of a military base in such a professional manner as the hon. member for Miramichi. It has been difficult for the region and for the province.

I know the premier and my colleague, the Minister of Human Resources Development as regional minister for New Brunswick, have worked exceptionally hard with the local member to see if we can apply those moneys that were announced to mitigate the closure of the base in 1994 in a way that will help job creation in that area.

The province has come up with a very novel way to apply the money which is by taking over the base as it closes this spring. In that way, the full responsibility for continued operations and hopefully the attraction of jobs and economic prosperity to that region will result.

My colleague, the Minister of Human Resources Development, and the premier will be making a more formal announcement later this day with the details of this agreement.

[Government Aircraft, March 19th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, there are very strict guidelines for the use of the executive fleet. We changed the regulations after some discussions and quite frankly after some criticism by the auditor general a couple of years ago.

We have reduced the fleet from six to four planes. We are very assiduous in determining when ministers make bona fide requests that there are no commercial arrangements that could get them where they are going.

The point made by the Prime Minister about the 40 per cent reduction is something that can be examined at committee when the estimates of the Department of National Defence come forward.

[Canadian Armed Forces, March 18th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, allegations have been made by the hon. member for Charlesbourg and now he is not so sure that what he alleged on Thursday is actually true.

Any member of the House can make any statement. That does not mean to say the armed forces or any department has to launch an investigation. In this case the hon. member can rest assured that Parliament will deal with the matter through committee. All of the questions he has asked today should rightly be asked at the committee, not of the government but of the hon. member for Charlesbourg.

[Canadian Armed Forces, March 18th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I would not want to insult the House of Commons.

There is a motion now being debated which could send this entire matter to a parliamentary committee. Certainly, the allegations made by the hon. member on Thursday are linked with the letter that he sent before the referendum.

I want to respect Parliament and let Parliament decide whether or not the matter should go to committee. If the matter goes to committee, the burden of proof is on the hon. member for Charlesbourg to name names, give minutes and tell us the truth.

[Canadian Armed Forces, March 18th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I said on Friday that chief of defence staff General Boyle had consulted with his predecessor about the allegations by the hon. member for Charlesbourg to the establishment of a joint Quebec army or alternatively two separate armies. There were no such studies conducted by the Canadian Armed Forces or by the Department of National Defence. The chief of defence staff also consulted with other senior generals and is continuing those discussions with other senior officers.

We are assured that all of the officers of Her Majesty's armed forces are loyal Canadians and execute their duties faithfully.

[Canadian Armed Forces, March 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member was a very distinguished general officer in the armed forces. He knows that the role of the Canadian Armed Forces is to support the duly elected Government of Canada and the Constitution of Canada. I am confident that the men and women of Canada's armed forces are doing exactly that.

The burden of proof about any actions of members of the armed forces as alleged by the hon. member for Charlesbourg is on that member to come forward and give us that proof. Only at that time will we launch a greater investigation other than the one I have in a sense launched in the last number of hours with the chief of the defence staff who has assured me that these allegations are unfounded.

[Canadian Armed Forces, March 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we should view this in perspective.

During the referendum campaign there were lots of assertions and accusations made and a lot of emotional debate. The hon. member for Charlesbourg had sent a letter to certain officers in the province of Quebec. The matter was of such gravity that you, Mr. Speaker, ruled that the House debate a motion by a member of the Reform Party, my opposition critic. The matter is now before the House.

Any accusations or suggestions made by the hon. member for Charlesbourg on the latest accusation or on the letter is something that has to be dealt with by the committee. If the hon. member for Charlesbourg has any evidence to substantiate this kind of allegation, he has a duty as a member of this House to bring it forward to that committee so that it can be examined.

[Canadian Armed Forces, March 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I noted the comments of the hon. member from Charlesbourg which have been in the press. Certainly those kinds of allegations are quite serious. I agree with my friend opposite on the gravity of such an accusation.

The chief of the defence staff has consulted with his predecessor, General de Chastelain, and other senior officers in the last number of hours. I can assure the House that there have been no plans drawn up. There have been no discussions authorized by the leadership of the Canadian Armed Forces for the eventual creation of two armed forces or the integration of a Quebec-Canada army. That would be totally inappropriate and unacceptable.