House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2000, with 67% of the vote.
National Defence March 3rd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member mentioned two countries in which their armed forces are structured somewhat differently with respect to the way the general officers are apportioned in their tasks. However, he did not mention other countries in the NATO alliance in comparison with which we have a better ratio.
National Defence March 3rd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I am very
glad that the Reform Party is supporting what we are doing in terms of streamlining the Canadian Armed Forces from top to bottom. I welcome that.
The previous government did announce a reduction at the general officer level by 20 per cent in 1991 and that has now gone through the system. We announced, consequential to the white paper and from the budget, that there would be a further reduction of 25 per cent at the general officer level and 20 per cent of the colonels.
Contrary to what the hon. member said, this does bring us more into line with our NATO allies with respect to the officer to general ranks ratio.
Contents Of The Budget March 3rd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I do not think the hon. member listened to the answer.
I have been around for budgets before in other governments. The fact is that the Minister of Finance followed the true parliamentary tradition in terms of developing the budget in secrecy but did consult widely with all Canadians.
In no way did the comments of the hon. member on this side of the House conflict with what the Minister of Finance brought forward last week.
Contents Of The Budget March 3rd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the comments of the hon. member for Guelph-Wellington were taken out of context.
She was referring to the fact that we have had the most open budget making process in Canadian history. The Minister of Finance should be congratulated for consulting widely, not just with his parliamentary colleagues but with industry and all Canadians.
She was referring to the fact it was well known because my colleague, the President of the Treasury Board and the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs had talked about the downsizing of the public service. It was in the public domain. It was not a leak of the budget.
I should tell members that all of us in the ministry were only informed of the budget's contents shortly before the minister presented it to the House.
The Budget February 28th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, in last year's budget we announced the elimination of 16,500 people from national defence. Yesterday it was just under 12,000. That is nearly 30,000 people. All of these people will be eligible for the force reduction plan covering the uniformed personnel and the civilian reduction plan covering the civil servants.
There has been a 73 per cent take up with an average payout of $53,000 for those people announced last year. We envisage that these people will be dealt with fairly and humanely and will accept the buyout packages.
The Budget February 28th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the House of Commons and Senate special joint committee on defence recommended that to save money we eliminate one command structure within the armed forces. In yesterday's budget we did that by closing air command in Winnipeg, maritime command in Halifax, and land forces command at Saint Hubert.
National Defence February 27th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member really should take a stroll over to national defence headquarters one day. I think he will be amazed at the degree of bilingual discussion and personnel there. Twenty-five per cent of all the senior officers in the armed forces are francophone.
This will be improved upon, as I said, when the postings are announced shortly.
National Defence February 27th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, first of all, I must point out that the Canadian Forces better reflect the Canadian reality of two official languages.
Mr. Speaker, the armed forces is probably the one institution in this country that reflects the duality of Canada's linguistic constitutional reality more than anything else. Thirty per cent of the armed forces personnel are francophones, about 25 per cent at the officer level. There is room for improvement and that is why when the postings and promotions for general officer level are made public shortly we will see francophones in very significant positions within the hierarchy of the armed forces.
National Defence February 27th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, we have been through this argument a number of times before.
We felt that with the declining numbers of the armed forces we only needed one military college in Canada, located at Kingston.
This government is very eager that Royal Roads in B.C. and St-Jean in Quebec, those military colleges, have their facilities used for the ongoing betterment of the citizens in the region. It is for that reason that my colleague, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, negotiated a very successful agreement with the local people in the St-Jean region over the objections of the Bloc Quebecois and the government in Quebec City.
National Defence February 27th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, military installations were not built as part of some kind of infrastructure program to benefit various regions of the country. They were built to serve the real needs of the Canadian Armed Forces in two world wars. Since we fought two wars in Europe and since most of the troops left by ship it is natural that there would be a big military presence by virtue of the navy headquarters being in Halifax.
With respect to Quebec, obviously if the port closest to Europe is Halifax troops would not be dispatched from Montreal or somewhere else farther inland.
However, I should point out that later this year we will be opening the naval reserve headquarters in Quebec City. We have been opening a number of small naval operations along the St. Lawrence River and in the Gulf of St. Lawrence so that Quebec does have a naval presence.