House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2025, with 42% of the vote.
National Defence December 10th, 2015
Mr. Speaker, ISIS has engaged in deadly attacks across the entire world, and it still has Canada in its sights. The government must protect Canadians and fulfill its commitments to our allies.
Withdrawing our CF-18s from Iraq and Syria sends the message that Canada does not take this threat seriously and, even worse, that we are incapable of doing so.
Why is the Prime Minister abandoning the fight against ISIS instead of fighting alongside our allies?
Business of Supply December 10th, 2015
Mr. Speaker, there were two parts to the speech by my hon. colleague on the government side.
In the first part of his speech, he said that we were training Iraqi police to enable them to occupy a stabilized area. However, we are not yet there. The minister is talking as though we are already at this post-war stage, when we are still in the middle of a war.
Furthermore, at the beginning of his speech the minister said that in the past 12 months, the coalition has made significant progress in stopping ISIL and that people are returning to their cities. This confirms that the bombings were effective, since people are returning to their cities. It works.
Will the CF-18s continue to help the coalition?
Business of Supply December 10th, 2015
Madam Speaker, to explain why this will work, we could ask President Obama, President Hollande, and the Prime Minister of Great Britain. Countries decided to form an international coalition. Over 25 countries are involved in the same kind of combat. Top generals, military strategists, who have a great deal more experience than I do, decided that that was the right thing to do. I, sitting here in the House, am not the person to draw up a major military strategy, and I think our allies are strong enough and competent enough that we can follow them, not blindly, but by standing shoulder to shoulder with our partners.
Business of Supply December 10th, 2015
Madam Speaker, today we learned straight from the mouth of our Liberal colleague that this is in fact a financial decision that the Liberals are making. The purpose of withdrawing the CF-18s is to save money. That is news to us. We are making cuts to our forces and ceasing air strikes just to save money.
I take issue when the government says it is going to withdraw our pilots from a mission when in fact it is their job. It is what they do. Their job is to fly CF-18s. The government is withdrawing them from this mission because they might be in danger. In danger of what? We are involved in bombings, not air combat.
We see where the government is heading, and it is insulting.
Business of Supply December 10th, 2015
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Thornhill.
I am very proud to speak today in the House on a subject that is very important to me.
I had the honour and privilege of working for the Canadian Armed Forces for more than 20 years and I earned the rank of lieutenant-colonel, like our colleague from National Defence. I am therefore in a position to talk about something that concerns me and many Canadians, specifically the withdrawal of our CF-18s from Syria and Iraq.
Our allies, including the United States, France, and England have decided to ramp up their attacks and bombing against ISIS. An international coalition is being formed on a consensus that it is their common duty to combat ISIS, which has made no secret of the fact that Canada and many other allied countries are potential targets for deadly attacks.
The Prime Minister has not provided a single plausible explanation to justify withdrawing our CF-18s from Iraq and Syria, from this so-called asymmetrical warfare, for our NDP colleagues who may need some information.
The explanations from Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs were nebulous at best, and completely incomprehensible at worst. He spoke about potentially increasing training for local police, providing governance assistance, without defining what that means in the middle of a war against ISIS, and helping create democratic institutions in Iraq. Does the minister understand that when we are in the middle of a war, that is not the time for teaching, but the time for combatting the common enemy?
This government does not seem to have a plan. The Minister of Foreign Affairs promised us a plan soon, and I cannot wait to see this plan in writing, since the minister is not even able to explain it to us in the House. We cannot wait to see it.
Canada must now make a clear commitment to combatting ISIS by keeping our CF-18s in Iraqi and Syrian territory. The Iraqi government openly called for military support from members of the international community to combat ISIS.
My NDP colleague mentioned the United Nations Security Council. Does she know that the United Nations Security Council remains seized of the threat posed by international terrorism? On September 24, 2014, the UN unanimously passed resolution 2178, which states, and I quote:
Reaffirming that terrorism in all forms and manifestations constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security and that any acts of terrorism are criminal and unjustifiable regardless of their motivations, whenever and by whomsoever committed, and remaining determined to contribute further to enhancing the effectiveness of the overall effort to fight this scourge on a global level...
Yes, you can make what you will of a UN resolution. However, we saw what happened in Rwanda in 1994 when we put General Dallaire in an impossible situation where he was unable to prevent the massacre of 800,000 Tutsis.
From my experience, I know that in this fight against ISIS, it is critical to destroy the enemy's resource base. We must not forget that ISIS is advancing on the ground and that refugees are being hunted down. Our involvement keeps ISIS from advancing and thus helps the local population. In an armed conflict, our air force supports the supply effort, does locating, and so on.
Why take away the final resource, the one required to destroy located targets? The answer is obvious. Our CF-18 fighter jets must continue their mission in Iraq and Syria. We have special forces that are assisting the Kurds. We have soldiers who are giving valuable advice and getting a lot of information. If we withdraw the CF-18s, what will we do with the intelligence that our aircraft gather on their radar missions? We will send it to our American and British allies so that they can do the bombing.
By withdrawing our CF-18s, we are failing to complete the job. Soldiers do their job from A to Z. By withdrawing the jets, we are forgetting about Z. We are stopping at Y and letting others finish the job. As a former military officer, I can say that our Conservative government raised our Canadian Armed Forces to unprecedented heights.
Why beat a retreat? Why stop?
That would be a slap in the face to all of our men and women in uniform who laboured for years to perfect their skills, an insult to the sacrifices their families were forced to make when they spent months away from home being trained to do their work well.
I would like to make another important point. When I was teaching in France, at the military school in Paris, I would ask my students to stop making long speeches about their plans and to focus on the ultimate mission. I can assure you that I got results that way.
Canada's goal and that of our allies is to destroy ISIS. That is what everyone wants. President Obama even said last week that we have to put an end to ISIS because it is a major threat to humanity.
In the battle against a mobile and formidable enemy, our CF-18 fighter jets are making a valuable contribution to eliminating ISIS targets. We are blocking its progress by attacking its caches of supplies, weapons, munitions and fuel. That is extremely important.
I am appealing to the government's good sense to preserve Canada's international reputation. I am asking the government to keep our CF-18 fighter jets in Iraq and Syria. “Army” rhymes with “credibility”. As a country, we need to preserve our credibility.
Business of Supply December 9th, 2015
Mr. Chair, those are all of the questions that I had.
With regard to the points that I made, it is important to understand that we have not been given any specifics on several aspects of the budget. We therefore need more information in that regard.
I am giving my colleague the floor.
Business of Supply December 9th, 2015
Mr. Chair, my colleague could ask him, since we need to know the costs associated with these issues.
Operation PROVISION, the military operation in support of refugee resettlement, includes two important components. Reserve resources have been requested, and several hundred reservists have started work.
I would like to know which budget will be used to pay these reservists. Will the funds come from the internal budget, the reservists' training budget or a supplementary budget?
Business of Supply December 9th, 2015
Mr. Chair, we understand that none of our troops will be displaced. That is perfect. If I understand correctly, cadet camps will be used on all of the bases. Is that correct?
Business of Supply December 9th, 2015
Mr. Chair, I understand the minister's answer.
However, every military base in Canada was instructed to prepare, yet they were not given any money to do so. The Valcartier base publicly announced that it had taken $2.7 million from its own budget. What about the other bases, such as Petawawa, Borden and Trenton? We need to know.
The bases will be there for overflow, which is perfect. However, the money used to set up the bases will not be available for other potentially important future needs of our men and women in uniform.
Similarly, does the minister know approximately how many Canadian Forces troops will be relocated off military bases, if need be? Have plans already been made?
Business of Supply December 9th, 2015
Mr. Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman.
Before I ask my first question, I would like to say that our colleagues on the government side have been blinded by their sunny ways. We are here today to determine whether our federal financial resources are being properly used, in the context of refugee resettlement. The government is winging it quite a bit. It seems to be making things up as it goes along.
I have some straightforward questions about defence. My first question goes back to what I just said. Yesterday, the commander of CFB Valcartier, in the Quebec City area, told the media that he had been ordered under Operation PROVISION to ready the base to receive refugees. He did not receive any clear instructions or a budget for this operation. Being a good soldier, he took the initiative of taking $2.7 million out of his own internal budget to ready the base as best he could, given the mission he had been assigned. He made that statement to journalists who had been invited to visit the base.
Can the minister tell us what an order to ready a military base means and where the money to do so will come from?