House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2011, with 57% of the vote.
Business of Supply May 17th, 2007
Mr. Chair, at least four ministers get involved in procurement: the defence minister is responsible for the requirement and the funding, the public works minister is responsible for the contracting, the industry minister is responsible for industrial benefits, and the Treasury Board President is responsible to make sure that the money is authorized to be spent.
Business of Supply May 17th, 2007
Mr. Chair, I believe foreign affairs is responsible for coordinating the Afghan effort and it would be through the Department of Foreign Affairs.
Business of Supply May 17th, 2007
Mr. Chair, the only part of that question I know for certain is that we have used the right of access. We used it in the foreign affairs committee the day I said we had a verbal agreement. We used it that day. I do not know subsequently because it is not within my area of responsibility. The member would have to ask the foreign affairs minister.
Business of Supply May 17th, 2007
Mr. Chair, this question is more properly in the domain of the Minister of Foreign Affairs.
I will try to answer her question, but just so the member understands the defence department is responsible to conduct operations, operate the PRT and assist with development. When and where our forces get individuals of interest who become detainees, they process them properly in accordance with all the rules of war. Then they hand them over to the legal Afghan authorities.
That is where the defence department's responsibility ends as a department. It is not where the government's responsibility ends but the defence department's. I answer for the defence department.
I do not know the details of how it is going to be done because that is within the domain of the foreign affairs minister, but we have officials working with Afghan officials now to ensure all these details are worked out.
Business of Supply May 17th, 2007
Mr. Chair, let me say first that since I have been in the department, no defence official has ever informed me of any abuse or torture of any detainee. Zero, none. There are a lot of hints and things out there, but there has never been a case brought to my attention.
Rather than going into the past, I think we should appreciate the fact that we have now an extended agreement that is improved over the previous one signed in December 2005 by the previous government. This agreement guarantees human rights access. It guarantees officials from our government access. It also guarantees that the Afghan authorities will reduce the number of detention centres where Canadian detainees will be placed so we can track them better.
Business of Supply May 17th, 2007
Mr. Chair, the Canadian Forces defence strategy, which is what we call it now, is well advanced in the government system. I anticipate it will be public within a month or two. Yes, we are using it as the guide for our acquisitions.
Business of Supply May 17th, 2007
Mr. Chair, I can give the member the full cost as of today. That includes salaries of troops that we already have and will have no matter what. That is why, although we can give the full cost, it does not reflect the cost of Afghanistan because those full costs were absorbed in the rest of the department.
As of today, the full costs are $6.1 billion. I do not have a figure for the future because we have to wait to see how it evolves.
Business of Supply May 17th, 2007
Mr. Chair, I do not include any substantive equipment. There might be minor equipment which would be included, but not substantive equipment because we are going to use it for 20 years: aircraft, tanks, trucks, whatever.
Business of Supply May 17th, 2007
Mr. Chair, the incremental cost as of today is about $2.6 billion. By the end of February 2009, $4.3 billion is our estimate at the moment including any costs in withdrawing.
What has changed the figures from the previous ones is that we have added some soldiers there. There are a few hundred more soldiers. They cost money. There are more machines there. We brought in a tank squadron. The operating costs while it is there add to these costs. That is the difference.
Business of Supply May 17th, 2007
Mr. Chair, the member opposite is mixing up two different pieces of equipment. They may look the same, but they are different.
One is ADATS. It is an air defence anti-tank system, which we currently have right now and which is serviced by Oerlikon. The second is MMEV, which will take ADATS and morph it into another system.
At the moment, I am waiting for a recommendation. I have not received a recommendation from the Canadian Forces on what they want to do with MMEV, if they want to proceed with it. That is where it stands at the moment. For now we have ADATS and we are using it.