Élaine Michaud

[National Defence, December 8th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, there is a reason that most of our allies decided not to carry out air strikes in Syria.

Let me set the record straight. The Prime Minister said that if Canada had clear support from the government, it would proceed with strikes against the Islamic State in Syria.

However, now the Minister of Defence is telling us that he has no plans to take action in Syria.

What exactly does that mean? Bashar al-Assad said no?

[Respect for Communities Act, December 1st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague’s speech and quite frankly I found it to be ironic. I heard him say just how much the government cares about the safety and well-being of Canadians, families and communities. He talked at length about how drug use can harm people and their families.

Meanwhile, by introducing this bill, the Conservatives are taking services away from people and endangering not only the health and safety of people with drug problems, but also that of their families and different communities.

My colleague seems to forget that requests for the construction of supervised injection sites are coming from areas of Canada that are already affected by drug use problems. No one is asking for supervised injection sites to be built near schools. The Conservatives are being asked to provide services where they are most needed.

How can my colleague opposite justify closing facilities such as InSite or making it more difficult to open them in areas such as east Vancouver? These are places where people who really need help can turn to. These are not sites where people go to use drugs, but sites where people receive services.

How can he keep saying that he is protecting Canadians' health with a bill that is so flawed and so ridiculous?

[National Defence, December 1st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, recently released documents reveal that hundreds of cases of sexual assault, harassment and violence have been reported within the the cadet program, which is funded by the federal government. Despite the disclosures, investigations often go nowhere and the aggressors are rarely charged.

Was the minister aware of those reports? What steps have been taken to investigate?

[Yukon and Nunavut Regulatory Improvement Act, December 1st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his excellent speech and also for how well he represents the interests of the people of the north. When I see the work that has been done by the Conservative members, particularly the member for Yukon, I think that the people of that part of the country could do a lot better in terms of representation.

Frankly, I find it strange to hear the member opposite calling for consultations and asking to travel all over the country. His government could have consulted the people of Yukon and the other territories a long time ago. Now he stands up in the House to say that the Conservatives need to go and talk to Yukoners. Why did they not do that before? I do not understand. Furthermore, if they really did do any consultation, absolutely none of the comments they received were included in the bill.

Indeed, this appears to be another attempt by this government to put its own interests and the interests of friends ahead of those of Yukoners. There are many natural resource development projects in Yukon, a territory I have been lucky enough to visit many times. There are some very troubling issues, especially around the Peel River watershed.

The bill currently before us is further proof that the government does not respect the people of the north, including Yukoners. I wonder if my colleague could talk a little more about that.

[National Defence, November 26th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, it is not true that we are going to give them a blank cheque.

The minister told us that he would inform us of the costs of the mission, and I quote, “when they are fully known”. The problem is that he knows how much the mission is going to cost. The Chief of the Defence Staff, Tom Lawson, says that he has already forwarded a cost assessment to the minister.

The cost of the U.S. mission is $7.5 million a day; for the Australians, it is $500 million a year. Why do we know how much our allies spend, but not how much the mission will cost Canadians?

[National Defence, November 19th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are incapable of following through on their military procurement plan. It is failure after failure.

As a result of the Conservatives' mismanagement, the Canadian navy now faces a seven-year period with no re-supply capacity. The new ships will not arrive until 2021.

How much will the government's failure to renew its supply capacity on time cost Canadians?

[National Defence, November 18th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, while the minister is claiming that no decision has been made, the Pentagon insists that the Conservatives want to buy at least four F-35 fighter jets.

The Conservative government is getting ready to spend billions of dollars without informing Canadians or Parliament. It was that same lack of transparency and inability to control costs that put an end to the previous program. The Conservatives are clearly not learning from their mistakes.

Why is the minister refusing to tell Canadians the truth about the F-35s?

[National Defence, October 31st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the theft of 6,000 combat uniforms and thousands of firearms is not just a matter of money. Of course it is a great financial loss, but it also threatens the safety and security of our soldiers and of Canadians. Clearly, there was negligence, and the minister must be able to explain how this happened.

The thieves now have thousands of military uniforms and could very well use them for malicious purposes. What measures will the minister take to ensure that this situation is brought under control?

[National Defence, October 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, last year, 1,190 soldiers, like Louise Groulx, lost their jobs for health reasons.

Ms. Groulx sustained a workplace injury that resulted in a number of complications. When she returned to work a year later, she was able to do 90% of her duties. Nevertheless, she was discharged from the Canadian Forces. Ms. Groulx's case is a perfect example of why the universality of service policy does not make any sense.

Does the minister sincerely believe that the universality of service policy serves the interests of our soldiers and the Canadian public?

[International Development, October 24th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, these measures are a good start, but we need to do more. We need to be quicker at delivering the goods and contributing more to the World Health Organization. We need to control this epidemic because soon it will be too late.

Does the government plan to strengthen our approach?