House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2011, with 56% of the vote.
Supply May 7th, 2002
Mr. Chairman, on page 42 of Part III there is a reference to the Hercules replacement acquisition, but there is nothing in the estimates on requiring strategic airlift in that regard. Will the minister tell us what percentage of Canada's equipment sent to Afghanistan has been airlifted by the U.S. forces?
Supply May 7th, 2002
Mr. Chairman, the point is still the same. As early as 1981 the Sea King helicopters were slated for replacement and a process was put in place to do that. It has now been 21 years and over $1 billion has been spent. The government still has not managed to figure out how to do it and what it will do and in what order.
How can the minister sit here and say after all the politics that were played over the EH-101 versus Sea King debate, which was not really a debate but a slapfest that happened, that the Sea King procurement process, which has taken 21 years and over $1 billion, is something about which he can feel pride?
Supply May 7th, 2002
The minister did not know the answer to the last question. It is not Trivial Pursuit. He did not know the answer. It has been around for 21 years. Can the minister tell Canadians how much money the government has spent in 21 years trying to replace Sea Kings that it has not managed to get its head around yet?
Supply May 7th, 2002
Mr. Chairman, can the minister tell the House and Canadians whether he has any idea exactly how much money has been spent on the project? The answer to the question of when the project started is 1981. Can the minister tell Canadians how much money has been spent--
Supply May 7th, 2002
Madam Chairman, could the minister please tell Canadians when the Sea King replacement project office opened?
Supply May 7th, 2002
Madam Chairman, can the minister tell Canadians how many aircraft his department anticipates it will be ordering and will it commit to a minimum of 28 aircraft?
Supply May 7th, 2002
Madam Chairman, the minister says they are performing well but nobody believes that. There are 40 hours of maintenance for one hour in the air. Is that what the minister considers performing well? Those are the defence department's own numbers. According to Jane's Defence Weekly the date for ordering the basic aircraft has slipped to at least March 2003. Is that accurate? If so, are we now actually looking at a delivery even further past 2006?
Supply May 7th, 2002
Madam Chairman, Canadians take little solace in that answer in the sense that the government announced a pittance in terms of the financial commitment to the armed forces in the December budget. The defence minister could not even protect that part of the budget and prevent the government from buying its new flying palaces, the new Challenger jets, which were totally unnecessary and a bad sense of timing.
Canadians have learned that the Sea King replacement project has been delayed yet again. The pre-qualification letter was to have been released on April 2 but it was postponed. Why? When is it expected that the pre-qualification letter will be issued?
Supply May 7th, 2002
Madam Chairman, the minister might want to start with environment appropriate camouflage.
The minister has repeatedly told the House that he expected the first of the new maritime helicopters in 2005. However we have a February 2001 memo which was passed to the minister by his assistant deputy minister of material which shows that he was told in early 2001 that the delivery date for the new helicopters had slipped to the end of 2006. The memo said “the target date for delivery of the first maritime helicopter has shifted from the end of 2005 to the end of 2006”.
That memo was passed to the minister on March 7, 2001. Did that affect the minister in what he was saying publicly? It did not.
On March 14, in the press, he said “Our aim is 2005”.
In Hansard , on March 16, 2001, he said “I am still hopeful that we could have them by the end of 2005”.
In Hansard , on November 27, 2001, he said “We will be looking to get the replacement for Sea Kings by the end of 2005”.
Why did the minister of defence tell parliament that the date was still 2005 when he knew that was not correct?
Supply May 7th, 2002
Madam Chairman, I stand corrected but I did want to compliment them anyway for their silent and dutiful work to House and to the minister.
I want to ask questions regarding the Sea King helicopters, the maritime helicopters, and the concerns that many Canadians have. These concerns have been longstanding for a number of Canadians and for a number of years.
I want to read a quote from Hansard. This is from April 12, 1999. This is a direct quote:
We have here in front of us the Liberal government that cancelled, for purely partisan purposes, a highly needed program, namely the EH-101 helicopter acquisition program. It is the Liberal government that sent Canadians to be taken hostage in the former Yugoslavia. It is the Liberal government that does not put bread on the table of military families.
It is the Liberal government that sends teams on search and rescue missions in Labrador helicopters and, when they do not come back, tries to take benefits away from widows and children.
That is a direct quote from Hansard is by the vice chair of the defence committee, the member for Compton--Stanstead, the gentleman sitting right behind the minister of defence.
I want to know what changes have happened in the armed forces that have made such an easy 180 degree position and principle so easy. Who changed parties?
What assurances did the minister of defence give him that made him change his position so absolutely on the EH-101 when he said some of the most extreme things that could possibly be said in this House on that subject?