John McCallum

[National Defence, October 29th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, it is not my decision but I very much hope it will be treat.

As for the cuts since 1993, the hon. member should realize that just about every department in government had major cuts post-1993 because the government was determined to eliminate the $42 billion deficit that we inherited from the fifth party.

Now that we have had several years in a row of surpluses we are rebuilding the investment in selective areas. I hope it will be time for treat for defence but only time will tell.

[National Defence, October 29th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, of all the people in the House I am surprised that the hon. member speaks of roads to Damascus because, of all the people in the House, she took the greatest road to Damascus in Canadian history when she went from no pension to pension.

[National Defence, October 29th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that particularly in this post-September 11 world, in a dangerous world, we are dealing with important subjects when it comes to the military and equipping our men and women to go into harm's way. Cheap shots from the gentleman across the way do not really help the cause.

[National Defence, October 29th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, in my humble opinion the confusion is more on that side of the House. What I said in my speech was very clear, that yes, the government had invested $5 billion in future years into the military and yes, the government at the end of the day will be deciding on the priorities. However, in my humble opinion I submit respectfully that more resources for the military might be one matter the government might consider.

[Privilege, October 28th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the only comment I would make is that I have absolute 100% confidence in the integrity of my parliamentary secretary. I am sure, as the other parliamentary secretary just said, that answers were given on the basis of the best information at his disposal.

[National Defence, October 28th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know why the hon. member considers it appropriate to dump all over our military that has always done what it has been asked to do and that has performed magnificently in Afghanistan.

As for Iraq, the ball is in the court of the United Nations. It is hoped that we will not have a war at all, so I will not comment on a hypothetical contribution to a hypothetical war.

[National Defence, October 28th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member across the way seems to have a tendency to take things out of context. What I did say was that there were stresses in the military, both in terms of people being stretched because of too much time away from home, and because of some of the very positive accomplishments of my predecessor in terms of improving quality of life. Some of those were financed by deferring the capital budget. We do have those sustainable issues. We do have them even this year and I will be making a case to address them.

[National Defence, October 28th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I thought the hon. member was an intelligent person who has been around this House a lot longer than me. He should know by now that budgetary decisions are made at the time of the budget.

[National Defence, October 28th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned in response to an earlier question, I did acknowledge very clearly in my speech that the government has put more than five billion new dollars into the budget.

I acknowledged that at the end of the day the government would be making the decision but that I, having seen our soldiers in Afghanistan, having seen that they are in some cases overstressed and overstretched, will be making a case for additional resources.

[National Defence, October 28th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, we have received several reports from the Senate, this House and experts pointing to sustainability problems in terms of defence and funding. Everyone knows this. There is also the problem of military people spending too much time away from their family.

So, the problem is clear with respect to these pressures in the short term, and that is what I was referring to last Friday.