Mr. Speaker, it has never been a question of star wars. The hon. member has had a little difficulty with this. That has never been the issue. The issue is, would Canada participate in ballistic missile defence? The answer is, no.
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2006, with 48% of the vote.
National Defence February 24th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, it has never been a question of star wars. The hon. member has had a little difficulty with this. That has never been the issue. The issue is, would Canada participate in ballistic missile defence? The answer is, no.
The Budget February 24th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I would simply ask the hon. member to look at what has been done. Over the next 10 years, $74 billion will be transferred to the provinces. When it comes to health care and equalization, Quebec is the biggest winner. The transfer payments for this year and next year will increase by $2.8 billion, for a total of $12 billion for Quebec alone.
National Defence February 24th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I should certainly like to answer why the minister should stay in cabinet.
One of the reasons that we have been able to put the amount of money into defence and we have been able to develop the strategy that we have is the very hard work and the vision of the minister and the new chief of defence staff, and the concept, the vision and the understanding of defence in North America and around the world that Canada must play. I congratulate him for that.
National Defence February 24th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, on August 5 the government was very clear that it was going to ensure that Norad, which for 30 years was responsible for monitoring any incursions into North American airspace, would be allowed to continue that in its modern evolution and to provide that information to the United States. That is exactly what we have done.
What we have now said is that we are not prepared to participate in the evolution of BMD.
National Defence February 23rd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I have here the press release of November 5, and, with the House's leave, I would be pleased to table it. May I have the leave of the House to table this document?
National Defence February 23rd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, what Mr. McKenna said yesterday in committee was that the issue of ballistic missile defence would be decided by the Government of Canada. That is what the potential ambassador said. He has my total confidence and the total confidence of the government.
National Defence February 23rd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I will certainly make the requisite announcement when it is in Canada's interest to do so.
National Defence February 23rd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I will, if I may, reread the communiqué issued ages ago, on August 5. It states: “The amendment authorizes Norad to make its missile warning function—a role it has been performing for the last 30 years—available to the U.S. commands conducting ballistic missile defence.” It goes on: “This amendment safeguards and sustains Norad regardless of what decision the Government of Canada eventually takes on ballistic missile defence.”
National Defence February 23rd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, Canada will make its announcement in due course. That has always been our position, when it is in Canada's best interest to do so.
National Defence February 23rd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian government's position is exactly what I stated in response to the first question. It is exactly what I stated in response to the second question.
Perhaps the hon. member ought to go back and take a look at what was said on August 5 and then perhaps he would not be so surprised on February 23.