House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2011, with 53% of the vote.
National Defence June 1st, 2001
Mr. Speaker, cold war, hot war, no war, what is the difference when the chief of maritime staff says he cannot meet his domestic needs? Referring to reduced Sea King capability he says that it:
—will directly impact my ability to...maintain operationally ready maritime forces and to conduct surveillance and control of Canadian territory.
The end of the cold war is a poor reason to lower aircraft standards. Why are we not raising standards for our military?
National Defence May 31st, 2001
Mr. Speaker, let us listen to what the military has to say about this requirement:
—the required endurance of a helicopter mission to aid an naval vessel in distress 100 miles from Shearwater, Sydney or St. John's...could be greater than three hours.
That is from an internal DND document. It continues:
A less capable aircraft would lack the time...to achieve...probability of success.
Why is the minister saying the military is lowering the requirements when this document clearly indicates that politics are lowering the mission standard by a full 25% below the Sea King?
National Defence May 31st, 2001
Mr. Speaker, the 25 year Liberal procurement merry-go-round continues. Where it stops nobody seems to know: $500 million for a political cancellation, 25% of one cost estimate for the entire project, and new lower specifications: 25% less range, 25% less fly time, 25% less in mission capability, 25% less than the 40 year old Sea King.
Why is the Liberal way, the Liberal solution, a 75% helicopter the—
National Defence May 30th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, public safety and domestic emergencies are not only cold war urgencies, they are minimum requirements for day to day needs. The minister believes that the cold war seeking rescue standards should be greater than those of today.
Why are standards being downgraded? What price are lives today? Poor political decisions unnecessarily risk lives. Why has the minister lowered himself to politicizing not only the lives of our military men and women but also the civilians they may be sent out to rescue?
National Defence May 30th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, an internal Department of National Defence document contradicts the defence minister's statement of yesterday. The document states that the required endurance of a mission to aid a vessel in distress could well be greater than three hours. Need I state that a rescue mission 50 miles short is no rescue at all?
Why would we politically compromise safety, go against advice and put lives at risk for a helicopter with only a two hour and twenty minute endurance? Why?
National Defence May 29th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, Canada's government has the dubious distinction of continuing the worst procurement circus in history.
After 25 years of studying, haggling and indecision the government is prepared to replace the 40 year old Sea Kings with craft whose range in a straight line is 20 nautical miles short of Canada's 200 mile maritime boundary and 50 nautical miles short of the Sea King's range.
Why does the government want replacements that fall 50 critical life saving miles short of the 40 year old Sea Kings?
National Defence May 29th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, national defence documents describe our Sea King helicopters as materially obsolete and operationally irrelevant when they do fly. The emergency landing on an Australian warship last week again showed how unreliable they are.
Recently a Sea King kept in touch with the Katie mission by Bell Mobility. The government has now delayed replacements until at least 2006. For the safety of our crews will the government consider looking for interim options including leasing new helicopters before a disaster occurs?
National Defence May 28th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, imagine if Canadians were aware that only 5% of our CF-18s had the necessary targeting systems to fly in operational missions with our allies. In Kosovo we had to borrow from the Americans to equip 12 CF-18s with precision guided targeting equipment. This level of readiness is deplorable and disgraceful for a G-8 country.
Is our armed forces' state of readiness based on what we can beg and borrow from the Americans? Will the planned CF-18 upgrade equip all our fighters with precision guided targeting systems?
National Defence May 28th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, during the war in Kosovo, Canada's air force very quickly ran out of precision guided munitions for our CF-18s. Modern missions require modern precision guided munitions but the government failed to provide the necessary capability to the air force. This represents a shocking level of unpreparedness.
What is the minister doing to address this issue? Why is our munitions' inventory at such an abysmally low level?
National Defence May 18th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, again we get vague and evasive answers.
This same official report states that helicopter delivery will not be completed for another 10 years. Yes, another 10 years. This official report gives the date of July 2011. A 25 year procurement nightmare will continue until Canada Day 2011.
If the assistant chief of defence staff knows when the helicopters are coming, why does the minister not know?