House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was forces.

Last in Parliament October 2015, as Conservative MP for Edmonton Centre (Alberta)

Won his last election, in 2011, with 48% of the vote.

Statements in the House

National Defence June 11th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, my noisy friend from the porta-potty party over there is playing with numbers that he knows absolutely nothing about of which he states.

The simple fact is this a capability that is required by the Canadian Forces. It is required of us by our allies. It will give jobs to Canadians. It will give jobs to Canadians by the thousands.

Every program that we have done, and frankly any program that the Liberals did when they were in power, every contract that the military does has dollar for dollar value back to Canadian industry, back to Canadian jobs, and back to the people of Canada. The hon. member should get his facts straight.

National Defence June 11th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, that is just absolute rubbish from top to bottom.

The government has been looking at the next generation fighter capability for many years. In fact, it started with the previous Liberal government. This is a program that was started by Art Eggleton when he was minister of national defence.

Everything that we do is going to have economic spinoffs for Canadian industry. That is how every program has been run so far and that is how this program is going to be run as well.

Afghanistan June 11th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, after spending last week in Afghanistan, I rise today to pay tribute to the men and women of the Canadian Forces, the RCMP, members of the Department of Foreign Affairs, the Canadian International Development Agency, Canada Border Services Agency, Correctional Service Canada, and others who are doing tremendous work and are delivering results under very difficult circumstances.

I want to take this opportunity to remind all members of the House to appreciate the efforts and dedication of the members of our whole of government team who are doing a tremendous job and are making Canada proud in a difficult land on the far side of the world.

Our people are doing terrific work and are making a real difference in the lives of the Afghan people. Just the other night, a revered CBC sports commentator said that the one thing soldiers always say to him is that the message they want to put to politicians and the people is, hey, be more worried about them, the guys who do it, than the Taliban who are trying to blow them up.

Grapes gets it. Our government gets it. The Canadian people get it, and in the words of Don Cherry, I say amen to that.

National Defence June 10th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, that is absolute rubbish. Whatever contract is signed is going to benefit the Canadian Forces and Canadian industry.

That is a bit rich coming from those members who did not want us to buy the C-17. The soldiers in Afghanistan who depend on it are happy. The people of Haiti whose lives we saved are happy.

Those are the same guys who did not want us to buy the Leopard tank. The Taliban may agree with that, but members of the Canadian Forces whose lives have been saved in Afghanistan are sure glad we did that.

National Defence June 10th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, the government has committed to acquiring the next generation fighter capability as part of the Canada first defence strategy. This represents a key capability in the Canadian Forces. The government has not yet made a decision. The procurement process will conform to government rules.

I can assure the member that whatever procurement process is followed, it will benefit the Canadian Forces and benefit Canadian industry.

Business of Supply May 27th, 2010

Mr. Chair, I am happy to discuss the main estimates for the Department of National Defence and speak about a group of people that I respect and admire greatly.

I will be sharing the last five minutes of my time with the hon. members for Kitchener—Conestoga and Edmonton—Leduc.

Much of today's discussion will revolve around dollar figures, funding levels, programs and initiatives, but these figures are meaningless without understanding how they support the serious, dangerous and courageous work being done by the Canadian Forces every day.

For 46 years, in and out of uniform, I have got to know our service men and women. They are extraordinary at what they do. They are passionate and committed about what they do. They are consummate professionals. They are the very embodiment of what Canada is and what it wishes to be: a force for good in the world.

Our Canadian Forces are deployed in 16 diverse and dangerous missions around the world and for this they need their country's support.

However, let me speak about Afghanistan. Most of our roughly 2,800 troops there are in Kandahar, the heart of southern Afghanistan, the heart of the fight and a turbulent area that is in need of our help, a place that, had our thin khaki line not been present, would have fallen to the Taliban years ago.

Every cent of Canadian tax dollars are being put to good use and making progress in Afghanistan. The lives of Afghans are getting better after decades of war. Villages that did not know what electricity, roads, fresh water and irrigation were now have them. Villages once threatened by disease are now free from it. However, it is a long and laborious process, with no shortcuts to rebuilding a war-ravaged society that ranked near the bottom of the UN development index, especially when it is still plagued by heinous insurgency, one that kills Afghans and Canadians without remorse and throws acid in the faces of little girls simply because they wanted to go to school.

I have talked to hundreds of soldiers, I have shaken their hands as they have arrived from or departed to Afghanistan. I have visited them in theatre a number of times, as have others. I have seen first-hand how passionate they are about their mission, following through on what we in the House of Commons asked them to do two years ago.

They talk of their accomplishments alongside compatriots, DFAIT, CIDA, Correctional Service Canada and the RCMP, all working together to improve the lives of Afghans. The soldiers on the provincial reconstruction team have taken me along as they have worked on projects, like helping build and supply schools. I have met Afghan soldiers and police officers being trained by our operational mentor and liaison teams. I have seen Afghans' enthusiasm for learning and applying new skills and their progress to now leading operations, to deliver security to their own countrymen in their own country. The latest quarterly report on Afghanistan shows that since I was last there at Christmas another Afghan national army kandak, or battalion, in Kandahar has become able to operate with almost complete autonomy.

The men and women of the Canadian Forces and their families are remarkable people, who are members of our communities and dynamic society. They are on the front line carrying out a mandate given to them by the House in support of the UN and alongside our 45 NATO allies and partners to help the people and government of Afghanistan rebuild their country. There is a long way to go, but there is absolutely no question that we are seeing the signs of success.

As mandated by the House, our Canadian Forces will leave their combat mission in 2011, but there is a lot of work to be done in the next year and a half. We need to stay focused. We need to remember that the mission is not only about Canada's role, as significant and as important as our role may be. The United States continues to dramatically increase its presence in Afghanistan, with an urgency driven by the understanding that the international community does not have forever to get things right.

This is not just about additional military forces, as necessary as they are for security. The United States is spending billions each month training Afghan security forces and on governance, reconstruction and development, However, the U.S., with all its will and resources, cannot accomplish this alone.

The new government of the United Kingdom has recommitted itself to this international effort. Our other major allies, such as Germany, Poland and Australia and smaller partners such as New Zealand, Denmark and Estonia, are all committed to this challenging but vital task.

I wish we had more time to talk about the mission, its purpose and the progress being made, but in Ottawa we are distracted from the complex and compelling situation in Afghanistan by the debate about prisoners. I have been deeply troubled by allegations, innuendo and unsubstantiated accusations, allegations that cast aspersions on the character of those who conduct themselves with dignity and the highest ethical standards every day and who serve their country with pride at the risk of their own lives.

The narrative has been driven by hindsight, suggesting that five years ago there were clear warnings when in fact the overwhelming body of testimony demonstrated this was simply not the case. As Gavin Buchan, the political director of the PRT in 2006 and 2007, has said, “Burying an observation in paragraph 12 of a report and without making a recommendation is no way to raise a flag”. He goes on to say:

I saw nothing in the record through March 2007 that indicated Canadian-transferred detainees were being abused, nothing that changed the baseline understanding from 2005, when the original arrangement was put in place...

The facts surrounding this debate are straightforward and I will lay them out again. I will begin by quoting Mr. Paul Chapin in the Ottawa Citizen on May 8:

Regrettably for the inquisitors, no evidence has yet been uncovered: no mutilated bodies, maimed survivors, photographs, first-hand accounts, or authoritative reports documenting specific cases with names, dates and places. Not a single individual appearing before the committee has yet provided any such evidence, beginning with the first one.

In late 2005, Canada signed an arrangement with the government of Afghanistan to allow the transfer to Afghan authorities of individuals detained by Canadian troops. The hon. Bill Graham, former minister of foreign affairs and minister of national defence, told a special committee recently that the government of the day, given what it knew at the time, genuinely believed that the arrangement contained the highest level of protection for any possible prisoners.

When allegations surfaced in April 2007, the Government of Canada immediately raised the issue with the highest Afghan authorities and negotiated a supplementary prisoner transfer arrangement. This arrangement set up additional monitoring provisions to help Afghans meet their obligations as the sovereign government responsible for the treatment of prisoners.

These provisions gave Canada itself the ability to monitor Canadian-transferred prisoners in Afghan detention facilities. Combined with the capacity-building work of Correctional Service Canada, this new approach gave our whole-of-government team greater confidence through verification that transferred prisoners would be treated humanely.

Under the new arrangement, we have consistently been monitoring the condition of CF-transferred prisoners, building the capacity of the Afghan correctional system and justice system in responding to all credible allegations of mistreatment. We have made 230 visits so far. Prisoners are only transferred to Afghan authorities when the Canadian commander on the ground is satisfied that the conditions are right and that Canada's international obligations are met.

This fully meets Canada's obligations under international law. It accords with the practice of NATO and our allies, and is consistent with Afghanistan's responsibilities as a sovereign country.

Simple facts have been presented again and again by reputable men and women, most recently by three recent heads of mission: David Sproule, Arif Lalani and Ron Hoffman; by retired Major General Tim Grant, a former commander of Joint Task Force Afghanistan, and by Gavin Buchan, a former political director of the Kandahar PRT; and before them, by three of our most respected and decorated senior officers: General Rick Hillier, Lieutenant General Michel Gauthier and Major General David Fraser; and by dedicated public servants such as Linda Garwood-Filbert, who worked for two years as the Correctional Service coordinator for Afghan prison reform, who visited prisons and other correctional facilities nearly 50 times over the course of a single year in 2007.

Let me add that these visits were undertaken at great personal risk. Afghan prisons are constantly targeted by insurgents for terrorist attacks. She travelled hundreds of kilometres along potentially IED-laced roads in convoys protected by Canadian soldiers both ways, all this to ensure that our transfer arrangement was implemented, and that the human rights and dignity of prisoners were respected.

These facts have been reiterated and restated by a dozen witnesses, all of whom have felt that their integrity was impugned by the accusations they have faced. These highly respected individuals and others have stressed the commitment of all Canadian officials, military and civilian, to Canada's international obligations in their own code of ethical behaviour. That includes rigorous adherence to international law and to the provisions of the Geneva conventions.

Despite all this, the debate continues. Allegations and accusations continue to be made on the flimsiest of grounds.

We have responsibilities as parliamentarians to understand and to question, but I believe we also have a duty to promote the valuable contributions that members of the Canadian Forces are making in our name so far away, a duty to recall that sometimes they come home physically or mentally changed, and that on so many occasions, 146 to date for Canadian Forces personnel, they do not come home at all.

This government has worked hard and made careful investments to give them the tools they need to carry out their challenging responsibilities: Chinook helicopters, Leopard 2 tanks, unmanned aerial vehicles, M777 Howitzers and C17 strategic airlifters.

The government has also made provision for extensive pre-deployment training, from individual soldiering skills at home to Exercise Maple Guardian, a large-scale, month-long training scenario designed to replicate situations our soldiers might encounter in Afghanistan.

We have arranged for their personal needs, making sure they get time out of theatre during their tour for rest and relaxation, and making sure they have the support they need and their families need once they come home.

The Canadian Forces could not do it without this kind of equipment, training and care. The main estimates for consideration today include a request for $822 million for our mission in Afghanistan, so our troops can be safe and operationally effective.

I ask members to remember them throughout this debate, consider the good they have done for both the people in need as well as Canada's image and reputation, and give them the support they need to continue to perform their selfless work overseas and at home.

National Defence May 14th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, we are not gutting the navy. What is being gutted across the floor is common sense.

We are supporting the navy with more money this year than we did last year, and more than the year before that. We have a long-term program to re-equip the navy. The hon. member knows that. It is going to be huge for the navy. It is going to be huge for jobs for Canadians. We would never jeopardize the lives of our servicemen and servicewomen. We have proven that over the years.

We are going to continue to do a good job for the Canadian Forces and the Canadian people.

National Defence May 14th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, the feigned outrage is getting richer and richer coming from that side of the House.

The fact is we will not be tying up any ships. Please understand that.

The fact is the navy is getting $200 million more this year than last year, and it got more last year than the year before. We are embarking on a shipbuilding program that is going to last 30 years, that is going to take $40 billion, and that is going to produce 50 ships.

We do have a great navy. We will continue to promote the navy. We will continue to make the navy stronger, in terms of equipment, in terms of personnel. It would be nice if we got some co-operation from across the floor.

National Defence May 14th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, the only thing we get from that member normally is the curl of his lip.

Let me reiterate for the third time that the navy is not tying up any ships. The navy is going to manage the resources expertly as it always does. Half the fleet is not being tied up. That is simply false. The member should simply try to stick to the truth. I know that is difficult at times, especially from a party that opposes any military spending at all. That is very rich and completely off base.

National Defence May 14th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, that is absolutely absurd. The first priority for any member of the Canadian Forces, for any leader of the Canadian Forces, is the protection of the safety of our men and women in uniform. We equip them to do that.

What the member is saying about the navy is simply not true. It is simply false. We are not tying up any ships. No ships are going into dry dock.

The navy has been given $200 million more this year than last. We have, through the Canada first defence strategy, a 30 year program investing about $40 billion in the building of 50 new ships primarily for the security of Canada, for the navy.

We are getting the job done for the Canadian Forces. That member should hardly talk about equipping the Canadian Forces.