Gordon O'Connor

[National Defence, February 6th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, first, the Military Police Complaints Commission has not even determined whether it will get involved. It is investigating it right now.

However, I can assure the member that any board of inquiry, any reports that come from the investigations will be made public.

[National Defence, February 6th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, members of the Canadian Forces are professional and well disciplined and they live by the best values of society. The alleged incident reported in the media today is under investigation and those investigations will determine the facts, whatever they are.

I assure the member that I do not interfere with, nor will ever interfere with, any investigative process.

[National Defence, February 5th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, this is a case where one cannot always believe what one reads.

This government will meet its commitments. The commitment to the north is at the centre of our defence policy. We will enforce our sovereignty. We will ensure that the air force, army and navy are there in increased capacity in the north.

[National Defence, February 2nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, this government is committed to improving the state of the military, the navy, the army and the air force, unlike the previous government that just did not get it done. No decisions whatsoever have been made with respect to the future of the armed forces.

Everything one reads in newspapers and hears on TV is sheer speculation.

[Points of Order, January 31st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to apologize to the member for New Westminster—Coquitlam for any of my previous words that may have offended her.

[Afghanistan, January 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite will certainly not be one of our image consultants.

The military, as I said, has built a plan. It has also built a communications plan because soldiers, when they return to Canada, unbridled, tell Canadians about their experiences. So far their experiences are quite positive. They believe in the mission and they believe in what they are doing.

[Afghanistan, January 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I answered this question yesterday, but I will answer it again. The military produced a campaign plan based on the Afghanistan compact and upon government direction. The Afghanistan compact is five years, but in the plan it says specifically that it is committed to the end of February 2009 and that is it.

[Aerospace Industry, January 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I think he is going to win the actor's award.

Requirements are set by the military and they go through a process from a desk officer all the way to the Chief of the Defence Staff, and then they come to me. At that point I get the requirements from the military.

The military requirement was not changed after the Chief of the Defence Staff gave it to me. By the way, the weight I think was 39 tonnes and the aircraft we eventually selected lifts 85 tonnes.

[Questions on the Order Paper, January 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, there was never any intent to establish northern sites with the high frequency surface wave radar, HFSWR, network project. The sites under consideration for the network project as outlined in the statement of work in June 2004 included: Flagstaff Point, Nfld.; New Harbour Head, N.S.; Hartlen Point, N.S.; Estevan Point, B.C.; and Topknot Point, B.C.

a) The high frequency surface wave radar network project was cancelled by the Government of Canada primarily because the Department of National Defence was unable to secure unrestricted operational use of the technology due to commitments under an international agreement on the use of the radio frequency spectrum. This added significant and unacceptable risk to the project.

The future of the high frequency surface wave radar hinges on evolving the technology from its current state to one that not only meets the operational requirement, but that also satisfies Canada's obligation under international agreements. As research and development was not the stated goal of the high frequency surface wave radar network project, the project, as it was originally conceived, was cancelled.

b) As discussed above, the current technology will not be considered for implementation, due to obligations under an international agreement on the use of radio frequencies.

c) There is no body of evidence that indicates high frequency surface wave radar technology provides capability in the northern environment. The technology was developed on the east coast of Canada, and was developed to accommodate the environmental, ionospheric and geographic conditions of Atlantic Canada. While it is scientifically reasonable to assume that this technology would function reasonably well on the Pacific coast, there is no such assurance that this could be applied in the north, given that high frequency surface radar technology would be impacted by the significantly different operating conditions in the Arctic. For this reason, northern sites were never considered for the HFSWR network project.

[Questions on the Order Paper, January 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the response is as follows:

a) CF-18 aircrew use the North Atlantic Treaty Organization training standards to qualify air personnel in air-to-ground delivery of weapons on firing ranges. These standards are based on North Atlantic Treaty Organization Allied Command Europe Force Standards Volume 3, Annex A to Chapter 2, which describes weapons employment standards for weapons in the CF-18 munitions inventory declared to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

b) CFB Valcartier is used for air-to-ground training by the CF-18 aircrew based at CFB Bagotville, Quebec. Access to the range allows the aircrew to train in order to be able to meet the internationally recognized North Atlantic Treaty Organization training standard adopted by Canada. Although the range at CFB Valcartier is one of a number available for required training, it is considered extremely valuable because it is the only range within flying distance of CFB Bagotville, where a number of CF-18s are stationed. Without access to the CFB Valcartier range, CFB Bagotville CF-18s would have to deploy from their main operating base, an expensive proposition in terms of time and financial resources.

c) The exemption highlights different safety standards of the army and air force at CFB Valcartier due to different training needs. The CFB Valcartier air weapons range is safe for bombing exercises, and that is why it was issued an exemption. Under the existing waiver, the air weapons range at CFB Valcartier is authorized for strafe, rockets, and single release of Mk-80 series bombs, both live and inert. There are also a series of risk mitigation actions for the use of live weapons, including restricting access to the range and currency requirements for the aircrew. Additional restrictions, to increase safety at the range, include the following:

1. The secondary tower is unmanned during live bomb deliveries;

2. Only essential personnel are allowed into the master tower for all missions;

3. Visual confirmation by the range safety officer, RSO, that the aircraft is lined up properly must be achieved prior to the aircraft arming its delivery system; and

4. In order to develop range familiarity, each pilot must practice inert bomb deliveries prior to a live drop.