Peter MacKay

[Justice, October 17th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin answering this question by expressing condolences again to the family of Rehtaeh Parsons, to the Todd family, and to all families who have suffered as a result of cyberbullying and victimization.

With respect to legislation, it is our intention to bring a bill before the House of Commons. There will be opportunity to debate the bill and to make it pass through the House very quickly. If the Leader of the Opposition is expressing his support for this legislation when the government produces it, then we will hold him to that promise to pass it quickly through the House.

[Aboriginal Affairs, October 17th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, we have in fact been very focused on taking action with respect to support for the aboriginal community and specifically on this tragic issue of murdered and missing aboriginal women. For example, we recently passed legislation giving women living on first nations the same matrimonial rights as all Canadians, including emergency protections and protection orders for those living in violent situations.

That is real action. There has been massive consultation, and that will continue.

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 17th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), (b) and (c), the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces do not maintain a central database to track information related to the prescription of opioid drugs to Canadian Armed Forces members. It is not possible to produce a response in the time available, as this would require a manual search of medical files of all Canadian Armed Forces members who have served during the time period.

With regard to (d), Canadian Armed Forces personnel are not released for drug abuse. Personnel may be released as a result of a violation of the Canadian Forces drug control program, and this may involve the use of opiates. Between 2000 and 2012, eight members were released in relation to opiates under the Canadian Forces drug control program.

With regard to (e), all Canadian Armed Forces members diagnosed with substance abuse problems will be assessed for any underlying medical conditions, such as chronic pain, etc., and offered the appropriate level of treatment, including the opportunity to undergo a residential treatment program for substance abuse.

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 17th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces searched their records and found no instances of ex gratia payments to Canadian Armed Forces members in relation to the home equity assistance provisions between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2013.

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 17th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the latest edition of the Department of National Defence’s investment plan is considered cabinet confidence. Neither the document nor extracts from it will be released.

Detailed information on defence investments has been reported in reports on plans and priorities and departmental performance reports, which can be found at the following links: for the report on plans and priorities 2013-14, http://www.vcds.forces.gc.ca/sites/internet-eng.aspx?page=15184; for the departmental performance report 2011-12, http://www.vcds-vcemd.forces.gc.ca/sites/internet-eng.aspx?page=14493.

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 17th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), there are currently five serving Deputy Judge Advocates General in the regular force. To protect their privacy, their names were not included in the response. The dates of nomination for these Deputy Judge Advocates General were as follows: Deputy Judge Advocate General 1: September 4, 2009; Deputy Judge Advocate General 2: July 1, 2011; Deputy Judge Advocate General 3: August 2, 2005; Deputy Judge Advocate General 4: May 4, 2012; Deputy Judge Advocate General 5: August 13, 2010.

With regard to (b), these responses do not include post-secondary education provided at the Royal Military Colleges in Saint Jean and Kingston, as the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces own these institutions and do not reimburse any of the costs associated with the degrees obtained there.

With regard to (b)(i), information concerning allowances could not be generated within the allocated time.

With regard to (b)(ii), information concerning travel and moving expenses could not be generated within the allocated time.

With regard to Deputy Judge Advocate General 1, the salary range is $62,635 - $87,710; reimbursement of the costs for academic books and materials was $435; degree obtained was Master of Laws, LL.M., in legislative drafting, 1998; tuition and academic fees were $6,074.

With regard to Deputy Judge Advocate General 2, the salary range was $42,096 - $55,632; costs for academic books and materials were included in tuition and academic fees; degree obtained was Bachelor of Laws, LL.B., 1994; tuition and academic fees were $12,148. With regard to Deputy Judge Advocate General 2 as well, the salary range is $134,484 - $142,920; reimbursement of the costs for academic books and materials was $2,827; degree obtained was Master of Law, LL.M., in international law, 2007; tuition and academic fees were $26,938.

With regard to Deputy Judge Advocate General 3, salary range was $42,096 - $55,632; information on costs for reimbursement of academic books and materials could not be generated within the allocated time; degree obtained was Bachelor of Law, LL.B., 1993; information on tuition and academic fees could not be generated within the allocated time. With regard to Deputy Judge Advocate General 3 as well, salary range is $131,460 - $139,704; reimbursement of the costs for academic books and materials was $2,471; degree obtained was Master of Law, LL.M., in air and space Law, 2006; tuition and academic fees were $8,010.

With regard to Deputy Judge Advocate General 4, the question is not applicable.

With regard to Deputy Judge Advocate General 5, salary range is $138,552 - $147,240; reimbursement of the costs for academic books and materials was $2,024; degree obtained was Master of Law, LL.M., in international law, 2009; tuition and academic fees were $50,311.

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 17th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces do not possess a central database containing all the contract data requested in this question. The authority to issue contracts resides with more than 20 organizations within the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, each of which retains the contracts that it has issued. A manual search of the estimated several thousand contract records from 2010-11 and 2011-12 would be the only method to obtain the requested detailed information. Information regarding whether a consultant was a former civil servant within the Department of National Defence or a retired member of the Canadian Armed Forces is in many cases not readily available even through a manual contract search, and would require some organizations to contact the consulting companies directly. It is estimated that the research required to respond to this question could take at least six months of full-time work for several officials. Therefore, a response cannot reasonably be produced for this question. However, in accordance with the Treasury Board Secretariat’s policy on contracting with former public servants, the Department of National Defence is undertaking efforts to improve, as expeditiously as possible, the data integrity of the system in place to track contracts with former public servants.

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 17th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the most accurate information on post-traumatic stress disorder and other operational stress injuries is based on a recent study that examined the cumulative incidence of these illnesses attributable to deployment in Afghanistan. The study group included all Canadian Armed Forces members enrolled in the regular or primary reserve forces who returned from deployment of any duration in support of the mission in Afghanistan between October 1, 2001, and December 31, 2008. The Canadian Armed Forces identified 30,518 such personnel and examined the medical records of a random sample group of 2,045 personnel. Information available based on this recent study by the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces indicates that 8% of the entire cohort was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder related to Afghanistan. As indicated above, this is based on a sample of Canadian Armed Forces members who deployed in Afghanistan and not a representation of the overall situation in the CAF as a whole.

The Canadian Armed Forces are currently conducting studies to further develop their understanding of the impact of operational stress injuries on their members, including those who deployed to Afghanistan, and on mental health among Canadian Armed Forces members more generally. These studies are ongoing and their results are not yet available.

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 13th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), the government target should read 100% of the target planned reserve strength of 27,000. This information was omitted in error and is intended to reconcile with the information found in the human resources full-time equivalent table on page 22 of the report on plans and priorities for fiscal year 2013-14.

With regard to (b), the target is a result of government direction in budget 2012 to maintain reserve strength at 27,000. The response to (c), (d) and (e) is provided in the answer to (a).

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 13th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), the following buildings were selected for targeted divestment: Area Support Unit Chilliwack, British Columbia, building B1041; Area Support Unit Calgary, Alberta, Northeast Armoury; Area Support Unit London, Ontario, buildings B53, B55, B56, B57, B91, B92, B130, O Block and P Block; Area Support Unit Northern Ontario, North Bay, Ontario, building B45 and Timmins Garage; Area Support Group Detachment Moncton, New Brunswick, buildings B1, B2, B35, B41, B42, B60, B60A, B66 and B70, and 70 residential housing units.

With regard to (b), this divestment is linked to the transfer of functions from the area support units in Chilliwack, Calgary, London and northern Ontario and Area Support Group Detachment Moncton to major bases. This will allow the Canadian Army to reduce administrative overhead. This will also increase overall efficiency and allow investment in key priorities, such as training and equipment.

With regard to (c), the preliminary estimated disposal costs are provided below. These costs include demolitions, renovations, environmental assessments and appraisals, as well as any activities required to address the findings of these assessments and appraisals, such as the removal of contaminants. These estimates are subject to service cost fluctuations.

In the case of Area Support Unit Chilliwack in British Columbia, the potential transfer of building B1041 to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police is under consideration. This transfer is estimated to cost approximately $300,000.

In the case of Area Support Unit Calgary in Alberta, the Mewata Armouries and Currie Barracks will be renovated to accommodate units. These renovations are expected to cost approximately $500,000. The disposal of the facility is expected to cost approximately $500,000. In addition, moving these units is expected to cost approximately $161,000.

In the case of Area Support Unit London in Ontario and Area Support Unit Northern Ontario in North Bay, Ontario, the targeted divestments of Area Support Unit London and Area Support Unit Northern Ontario are expected to have a combined cost of approximately $3.12 million.

In the case of Area Support Group Detachment Moncton in New Brunswick, the targeted divestment of these buildings and residential housing units is expected to cost approximately $9.6 million.

With regard to (d), the expected savings of these targeted divestments are as follows:

In the case of Area Support Unit Chilliwack in British Columbia, the divestment of building B1041 is expected to generate savings of approximately $62,000 annually.

In the case of Area Support Unit Calgary in Alberta, the targeted divestment of the Northeast Armoury is expected to generate savings of approximately $631,000 annually. The sale of the building is also expected to generate revenue. The building does not currently have an estimated value, as an appraisal of its value has not been conducted yet.

In the case of Area Support Unit London in Ontario and Area Support Unit Northern Ontario in North Bay, Ontario, the targeted divestments of Area Support Unit London and Area Support Unit Northern Ontario are expected to generate savings of approximately $500,000 annually.

In the case of Area Support Group Detachment Moncton in New Brunswick, the targeted divestment of these buildings and residential housing units is expected to generate approximately $1.16 million annually.

With regard to (e), the expected savings are calculated by using payment in lieu of taxes, utilities costs and operations and maintenance costs, and facilities maintenance costs. The expected costs are calculated by using management fees until disposal, as well as payments to other government departments.

With regard to (f), as a result of targeted divestments, lines of communication between the remaining supported dependencies and their new support bases will be longer. However, the savings generated by reducing infrastructure holdings will be used to support operational readiness or other areas of higher priority.

With regard to (g), the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces are not in a position to determine the impact of these targeted divestments on local communities.