Douglas Young

[Somalia Inquiry, April 7th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member and his party, I know, have a long record of unmitigated support for the justice and court system of Canada. We have heard many times in here over the last three years the great respect Reformers have for the justice system.

What I would suggest to the hon. member is that if he wants to find out how the Canadian forces feel about the decisions of the government, he might demonstrate his intestinal fortitude and go on to the bases in this country and-

[Somalia Inquiry, April 7th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I want to say to my hon. friend that the decision of the federal court indicated clearly that the government should spell out, in unmistakable language, what we thought we had done in the original request to bring the commission to a close by the end of June, and that is that we would not be asking the commissioners to report on matters which they had not looked into or which they did not feel were appropriate to report on.

What is going to be happening is, at the end of June, after two years of hearings, 125 witnesses and hundreds of thousands of pages of documents, the commission of inquiry on Somalia will report on those matters it has had an opportunity to evaluate and which the commissioners feel are important to report on.

[Somalia Inquiry, April 7th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the commission of inquiry has now spent more than two years examining elements of the incidents in Somalia which it considered to be a priority.

As I have pointed out many times, I never commented on the commission's work schedule or on the way it organized its hearings to hear witnesses and their testimony.

Two years, 125 witnesses and 100,000 pages of documents later, I am now, like all Canadians, looking forward to the report and conclusions of the commission of inquiry, which will probably make a number of suggestions that will be very useful and will do so soon enough that they can be used.

[Somalia Inquiry, April 7th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, in his question the hon. member said that the federal court ruled that the procedure followed by the government was inappropriate. In this decision, the court indicated how we should proceed to ensure that the commission of inquiry reports only on the matters it has examined.

Obviously, we wanted to make the situation very clear to prevent any confusion, such as, the government asking the commissioners to report on and draw conclusions respecting situations they had not checked, examined and heard described in testimony. That is what we did.

[SOMALIa INQUIRY, March 21st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member and his party over the last few months have demonstrated exactly what they think of the Canadian forces. They have not told us what they believe should be done for the Canadian forces. They have made absolutely no attempt to provide any input into the very thorough review we have made of the Canadian forces, the military justice system, the military police, all the questions dealing with the selection and promotion of people in the Canadian military organization.

All Reformers have been able to do so far to help the Canadian forces is insist that the Somalia commission of inquiry continue for as long as they feel is appropriate; it could be a year, two years or three years. Reformers might be interested in history but we are interested in getting things done. If they have the interest of the Canadian forces at heart, they should be here next Tuesday when I will report to the Canadian people and to the Prime Minister on what the Liberal government believes should be done for the Canadian forces.

[SOMALIa INQUIRY, March 21st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, one of the obvious differences, and the member has recognized it, is that Liberals are able to think, unlike the hon. member and members of his party.

The fact remains that if Reformers believe the Somalia commission of inquiry should continue indefinitely, in other words, never mind the cover-up or the whitewash, but a carte blanche, then that is what they should say.

With respect to the inquiry being terminated at the end of June, everyone knows it has gone on now for over two years. It has heard hundreds of witnesses. It has reviewed hundreds of thousands of pages of documents. I think Canadians look forward to the report, the conclusions and the recommendations of the Somalia commission of inquiry.

With respect to what happens in the Senate, the hon. member should respect that the question of looking into incidents surrounding the affair in Somalia was raised by a Conservative member of the Senate several weeks ago. Subsequent to a number of discussions it was determined unanimously in the Senate, as I understand it, that it should look into the Somalia situation. It has a right to do that. Constitutionally we are operating as two separate House, the Senate and the House of Commons. It has every right to look into whatever it wishes.

[SOMALIa INQUIRY, March 21st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, members of the Canadian forces look forward to an unequivocal statement from the Reform Party that Reformers believe the Somalia commission of inquiry should continue indefinitely. I hope at some point Reformers will come clean with the Canadian people and say without equivocation that they want the ticker to keep running.

Over $3 million has now been spent on lawyer fees and $15 million to $25 million, depending on how we calculate it, has been spent on the commission of inquiry.

With all due respect to the hon. member, the government has decided that after three extensions the Somalia commission of inquiry should report by the end of June.

The hon. member should respect the fact that this is a parliamentary system and the Senate is allowed to conduct its business as it thinks appropriate, as is the House of Commons.

[National Defence, March 20th, 1997]

This is pretty scary stuff, Mr. Speaker. I fear the hon. member speaketh with forked tongue.

Yesterday the hon. member and his party refused to co-operate in arranging for the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs to travel across the country to meet with members of the Canadian forces to be able to see exactly what the people needs are in the Canadian forces. That is something I have done from coast, to coast, to coast. I have visited with the Canadian forces. They know there are needs they would like to have addressed.

Instead of spewing whatever it was that the hon. member has just got finished with, it is too bad he would not spew the truth some time and support the Canadian forces instead of yap about it.

[National Defence, March 20th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, again the hon. member does not do his party any service in the preamble to that question. No doubt the fate of the Canadian forces and their appropriate requirements to be cared for in an adequate way are some things that we have under active consideration.

The hon. member will know that we have asked the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs to look into the people needs of the Canadian forces. There will be an in depth study over the next few months to ensure that we respond to those needs.

In the interim I can tell the hon. member that I will be announcing some improvements in the situation for the Canadian forces next week. I only regret the Reform Party has not made any contribution to the process of reviewing the future of the Canadian forces.

[National Defence, March 18th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is often sheeplike but I will not try to pull the wool over his eyes today.

We say to the hon. member and to members of his party that we have been trying for 2.5 months to find out what the Reform Party wants to do for the Canadian forces rather than try to tear them apart.

If the hon. member is to stand behind the document "The Right Balance-What is Wrong with the Canadian Forces" that has been circulated to Canadians by Andrew Davies, a candidate for his party, if that is the position of the Reform Party, you ought to be ashamed of yourself.