Jason Kenney

[National Defence, April 21st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, it seems that the hon. member was not here yesterday, because I said that Canada is conducting two internal investigations. The Canadian Special Operations Forces Command is leading one of the inquiries and the other is being done by the Canadian Forces national investigation service. As I said yesterday, and on many other occasions, we will make both reports available as soon as we receive them, except, of course, the parts that deal with confidential military activities.

[National Defence, April 21st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, the member deliberately asked a question that is impossible to answer, because she knows that I am constrained by the Privacy Act. If the member would like me to release the details of the report from the Surgeon General's review committee, I would be very happy to do so. The findings in that report are not consistent with what the member just said.

I believe the member should respect the professional opinion of the physicians on that panel, including the external physician who reviewed these matters. The Forces has given extraordinary medical care and treatment and consideration to Leading Seaman Young and has offered a transition plan to this individual as well. We will continue to support Leading Seaman Young.

[National Defence, April 20th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for the question about this very tragic friendly fire incident. The National Investigation Service, which is operated by the Canadian Forces Military Police, is conducting an inquiry. We have not yet received a report. Another inquiry is being done by the Canadian Special Operations Forces Command.

I do intend to release those aspects of these reports that do not bear on confidential military operations.

The CDS informed me this morning that he had received a summary of a U.S. report as well.

[National Defence, April 20th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for her question.

Canada is conducting two internal investigations.

The military investigation service is leading one of the inquiries and the other is being done by Canadian Special Operations Forces Command. As soon as I have received both of those reports, I would be happy to render all aspects of those reports public that would not affect operational effectiveness.

[Privilege, April 2nd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I respectfully submit in response to my hon. friend from St. John's that there is nothing approaching a prima facie case of privilege in the submissions that he just made to the Chair. I would be happy, Mr. Speaker, for the record and for your consideration, to offer a brief summary of the relevant facts in response to claims made by the member opposite.

As Minister of National Defence, in preparing to make recommendations to the Governor-in-Council with respect to a prospective expansion or extension of our military operation against ISIL, known as Operation Impact, I was briefed that the Royal Canadian Air Force was furnished with precision-guided munitions that would be particularly useful in striking ISIL targets in Syria and that currently only the United States military was using similar munitions in Syria. It is true that I repeated the information that I received and I have to take responsibility for that.

The Governor-in-Council, the cabinet, considered advice that I provided and made a decision on expansion and enlargement of the mission based overwhelmingly on the government's view that we ought not to allow the so-called Islamic State to have a safe haven to operate in eastern Syria in an area where it has de facto sovereignty, an area from which it has launched an invasion of Iraq and terror attacks against Iraq and indeed where the capital of ISIS is found. That was the basis upon which the government made its decision to expand and enlarge the mission, as reflected in the motion tabled in this place, which was adopted recently, expressing majority support for the government's decision.

It is true that in debate questions and comments in this place and in some media interviews, I reiterated the information that I received from our military with respect to unique capabilities of RCAF munitions. Last week, military officials contacted my office to indicate that they had received new information indicating, with greater nuance, that the precision-guided munitions of the RCAF were more specifically useful against dynamic as opposed to static targets. Consequently, the Chief of the Defence Staff issued a letter, I believe initially to the Ottawa Citizen, to convey the new information that had come to the military's attention.

Again, I accepted the veracity of the information with which I was provided. While I am responsible for all information conveyed either by me or by my department, obviously the minister is in a position to accept the information briefed by military commanders.

This week, military officials again contacted my office to indicate that the letter issued by the Chief of the Defence Staff was not accurate and that indeed we are aware of at least two other countries in addition to the United States that have used precision-guided munitions against ISIL targets in Syria. Consequently, the Chief of the Defence Staff sent the following correction to the Ottawa Citizen on March 27, saying that:

Since the publication of the letter below, in which I stated that the United States was the only nation that used advanced precision-guided munitions in Syria, new information has come to light. A coalition ally has in fact used advanced precision-guided munitions in Syria on at least one occasion. The information contained in the letter, and which was provided by the Canadian Armed Forces to the Minister of National Defence, was based on the best information available at the time it was written. This error is sincerely regretted.

At the earliest opportunity I stood in the House, yesterday afternoon, to table the letter I just cited and to take responsibility as Minister of National Defence. Again, even if I receive inaccurate information, according to the principle of ministerial accountability, I am responsible for that. I conveyed it and I regret it. I do take responsibility.

Yesterday I said:

As the Minister of National Defence, I am ultimately responsible for all of the information provided by my department. Therefore, I regret this inaccurate information having been put in the public domain and would like to table this to correct the record.

There are two points I want to emphasize. First, at no time was information withheld. To the contrary, my approach has been to be transparent. It has been to share information. Typically the opposition criticizes the government for being insufficiently transparent and not sharing enough information. Nothing was withheld and, as soon as the military saw that new information had come to light, steps were taken to correct the record. As soon as I became aware of that, I stood in this place and did the same, so no information was withheld.

I can absolutely assure the hon. member that neither I nor the military, I believe, at any point purposefully or deliberately misled this place or the media. I have absolutely no doubt that the military believed the veracity of the information I was given, and I accepted the source credibility of those briefing me in conveying that to this place and to the public.

Again, it is regrettable that inaccurate information was provided, but that was not done with any mala fides, with any deliberation, or with any intent to falsify information, as the hon. member alleges.

Second, I do not believe that the member's privileges were in any way infringed. He implies that this one piece of inaccurate contextual information may have caused him to vote in a certain way on this motion. I know that is not the case because the New Democratic Party, including the member, made it patently clear months ago that it opposed any element of the military operation in which Canada is engaged against ISIL. It made it patently clear that it would vote against this matter in any event. Moreover, as I have said, the government's decision, the decision of Conservative members in this place, to support the extension of the mission was based on our belief that we must deny ISIL a safe haven.

Yes, this information was inaccurate, but it was offered as contextual information not critical to the motion adopted by this place to support the government's decision.

I would further remind the hon. member that the Standing Committee on National Defence has scheduled to hear from the Chief of the Defence Staff, I understand, as soon as this place reconvenes after the Easter constituency week. As the member knows, I am always happy to appear before committee. Therefore, if the member would like to question me, the Chief of the Defence Staff, or other officials on this matter, we would be happy to make ourselves available, as is the normal practice.

In sum, I submit that there is no prima facie case of privilege here. I stood in this place and accepted responsibility for the errant information, which was not relevant to the government's or the House's decision in the vote earlier this week. I will certainly, in accepting that responsibility, work with my military advisors to be doubly sure of the veracity of any information we put into the public domain.

[National Defence, April 2nd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I have instructed the armed forces to cover all of Ms. Young's medical expenses relating to her present condition, going back to before DND was even aware of that condition.

My instruction was clear. This is to continue regardless of the outcome of the current review. In fact, the armed forces covered the cost of her relocation to British Columbia and provided her with interim housing upon her move.

If there are any other outstanding medical claims, we encourage her to submit them to the armed forces, which is providing full support for medical and rehabilitation costs.

I have also instructed officials to treat all of Leading Seaman Young's requests as priority and provide her with everything that can be made available to her.

[National Defence, April 2nd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, again, I reported publicly the information that I received in briefings from the Canadian military. As the Chief of the Defence Staff has said, when new information came to light, he corrected the record. As minister, ultimately I am responsible for all information provided to the department, and I do regret that inaccurate information was provided.

Having said that, the real reason, of course, that we are now preparing to strike ISIL targets in Syria is so that this genocidal terrorist organization does not have a safe haven in which to plan terrorist attacks against Iraq or other countries, including Canada. We are doing the right thing by taking on this genocidal terrorist organization.

[National Defence, April 2nd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, last week I disclosed the estimates of the cost of Operation Impact against the terrorist and genocidal Islamic State. We believe that the additional cost of about $400 million is completely justified to respond to the threat that the Islamic State poses to the safety of Canadians and to the world. We must obviously combat this threat, and that is what we are doing right now in Iraq with our air force.

[Points of Order, April 1st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I believe on Monday in question period I quoted a letter from the Chief of the Defence Staff with respect to precision guided munitions used by other air forces in Syria.

The Chief of the Defence Staff has subsequently issued a correction to part of that letter, which I would like to table. He expresses regret for the inaccurate information that was provided. As soon as new information became available, he corrected the record.

As the Minister of National Defence, I am ultimately responsible for all of the information provided by my department. Therefore, I regret this inaccurate information having been put in the public domain and would like to table this to correct the record.

[National Defence, March 31st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his good work on behalf of the Royal Canadian Air Force.

Back in the decade of darkness, we used to have to beg, borrow and plead countries like Russia in order to get strategic airlift capabilities. Thanks to the historic investments made by this government in our armed forces, we can now project Canada's presence around the world.

Indeed, I am pleased to report that yesterday I received the fifth C-17 Globemaster, significantly increasing the flexibility and lifespan of this critical asset. Thanks to this fleet, we have been able to respond to humanitarian disasters all around the world, and support our men and women operating against ISIL in Iraq.