David Collenette

[National Defence, March 10th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Reform Party has certainly an odd version of democracy where we make the private lives of individual Canadians known on the floor of the House of Commons. We do not do this with the tax system. We do not do this with health benefits, and we are not going to do it with the people concerning defence. I cannot believe the Reform Party is preaching this Orwellian view, something that we totally reject.

We respect the privacy of individuals. We are very concerned with those people who are losing their jobs. I think the statements I made following the budget underlie that.

If the hon. member looks at the severance packages that have been announced, that are now being negotiated base by base and throughout the department, I think he will see we are treating people in a most generous fashion.

[National Defence, March 10th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps my colleague, the Minister of Industry, can talk about the defence conversion program; he has responsibility for that.

We are trying something very new and bold in dealing with our public servants and the military, in trying to give them a combination of moneys-we call it an enhanced buyout provision-so they can take early retirement. In some cases money is applied for retraining and other allowances that will help them make the necessary conversion the hon. member is so concerned about.

With respect to the conversion on a mass scale, that is something we are committed to as a government under the defence conversion program. I will be working along with my colleague, the Minister of Industry, to ensure this is done as we gradually downsize the armed forces.

[National Defence, March 9th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I have no knowledge of such practices. I am sure my colleague the President of the Treasury Board does not have any knowledge of those practices.

They are very serious allegations. The hon. member has not given us any details. These are just wild assertions and hearsay as one would say in court. If the hon. member has specifics, perhaps he could make them available to us.

[National Defence, March 9th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member posed the question. It certainly is troublesome.

I cannot believe it is true. I will investigate and get back to him at a later date.

[Collège Militaire Royal De Saint-Jean, March 9th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, this was not a decision that was made at the last minute. It was a decision that was part of the original proposal for the defence cuts. It is one that I opposed, the Prime Minister opposed and many people opposed. We would have liked to have done it another way rather than close this college. However, from the point of view of financial sense in meeting our red book commitments, it seemed to us that the best business case was to to concentrate the college in Kingston.

We tried to avoid this but in the final analysis we felt that it was the only wise decision to make in saving the taxpayers money, not just the taxpayers of other provinces but the taxpayers of Quebec as well.

[Collège Militaire Royal De Saint-Jean, March 9th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I told the member's colleague yesterday that there will be ample opportunity to answer all of these questions next Tuesday when I appear before the standing committee dealing with the estimates. I will have all the information available at that time.

Therefore, we do not have to take the time of question period to get into an argument with numbers. The member will have everything. Our case will be substantiated. If members want the report that was commissioned by the previous minister which was the subject of discussions a few weeks ago, I will make that available. They can read it over the weekend. I am sure on Wednesday they will not be asking any more questions on collège militaire Saint-Jean.

[Collège Militaire Royal De Saint-Jean, March 8th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I would be pleased to show the hon. member the figures if she would come to the standing committee next Tuesday when I will be appearing and defending the estimates for the Department of National Defence. She can have all the answers she wants.

[Collège Militaire Royal De Saint-Jean, March 8th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, that is not quite accurate. The hon. member knows we have been decreasing the size of the armed forces. In fact in the recent budgetary statement the size of the armed forces will go from about 76,000 at present to 66,700. It goes without saying there will be a reduction in the number of officers required.

It is not true to say it is simply a rollover, taking the people from St. Jean and putting them in Kingston. There is an overall reduction. That is why we need to centralize in one particular location.

[Bristol Aerospace, February 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, it is well known that we have had to cut back in a number of areas. As a result we do not need the original number of CF-5s to be refurbished. Most of them have either been completed or are in the workshops at Bristol in Winnipeg. We have had some discussions with Bristol Aerospace to see what our future requirements would be, to see what kind of arrangement we could make. We do not anticipate any immediate job losses.

However, I do have to underscore to the hon. member and the people of Winnipeg that our needs will not be as high as before the cuts in the budget last week.

[Governor General, February 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, again a member of the Reform Party from western Canada has taken a very indecent shot at the head of state, the Governor General. That is to whom he is referring.

It is well known that the Prime Minister and the Governor General have to take these flights for security reasons. To call the Governor General a snowbird, somebody should demand an apology on behalf of the Governor General.