44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 5, 2022 10:00AM
- Apr/5/22 1:22:21 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as always, it is a true honour to enter debate in this place. I will start by saying that the circumstances under which we are debating this motion are so relevant. We see each day, on television, social media and through reports from Ukraine, the despicable images and consequences of Putin and Russia's aggression against the state of Ukraine. I am here to stand up, once again, in this place to say that unequivocally we need to stand with the people of Ukraine and do everything we can to ensure that the people of Ukraine and the state of Ukraine are victorious against Russian aggression.
As I enter into debate, I note that I will be splitting my time with the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo.
We are debating a very important motion that simply says Canada needs to uphold its obligation as a member of NATO, and a founding member at that, a defence organization that, for the last 70 years, has had a significant role in ensuring that global peace has been preserved. We see today a significant threat to that peace that we have enjoyed for so many decades, and I agree with the perception that we are at a time when we may be seeing, since World War II, the greatest threat to the peace we have enjoyed over the last seven decades. It is absolutely essential that we look at our approach to organizations like NATO and make sure that we follow through on the commitments that have been made.
As referenced by a number of speakers, both from the official opposition and other parties, there is a reason and explanation for the 2%-of-GDP expectation. The target that a nation spends 2% of its GDP on its military is to ensure that we are equipped to defend ourselves, our allies and NATO partners against the instability that can exist in our world. This is very present.
I would like to take a brief step back. What I have found interesting is that over the last number of months, there have been a host of issues, defence being paramount as we discuss the motion put forward by the Conservative shadow minister of defence, the member for South Surrey—White Rock. In this whole host of other issues, we are seeing issues the Conservatives have prioritized over the last number of years, like energy security. That is incredibly relevant today and is not that disconnected from the reality that our nation faces in terms of Ukraine and where we are in the world.
I find it fascinating that even today there was an announcement from the White House in the United States that it is going to ask Canada for more energy. It is tragically ironic, I would suggest, that we are at a place where, had the Liberals listened to what the Conservatives have been supporting the entire way along, we would have the capacity to simply provide the United States the energy it needs to reduce or eliminate its dependence on Russia oil, in addition to being able to displace Russian oil and gas from Europe.
On COVID, we see the Conservatives have been advocating for a common-sense approach to policies that we see being adopted not just by provincial governments across Canada, but by others around the world. It is a more pragmatic, realistic and longer-term approach to the pandemic.
On foreign policy and the need for strength in our foreign policy, the Conservatives have been calling for that, not to simply position Canada as convener, nor to simply have a movie-star-type leadership that positions itself with the “all things woke culture” type narrative when travelling on the international stage. We need to be a leader when it comes to global affairs and to be respected for the principles that Canada has, for so long, stood up and been proud to defend.
When it comes to budgets and fiscal policy, it is a bit like déjà vu. The Conservatives have been talking over the last seven years or so about how we need to ensure there is fiscal restraint. Even in the week prior to the pandemic breaking out and it being official positioned as a global pandemic, the Conservatives were debating that in this place. I remember that two years ago, the Liberals were laughing at the Conservatives for saying that we needed to have a fiscal and monetary policy that reflected the reality we face so that when we faced a crisis we would be well positioned.
I cannot help but think, whether it is the very important issue we are debating today or the host of issues that our nation is facing, that had the Liberals listened to what the Conservatives have been saying over the last six or seven years, we might be in a very different position. I suggest that the clearest examples of this today, which specifically relate to the motion regarding NATO, are two very closely connected issues.
Number one is the fact that we need to have a modern, equipped military. I am pleased that the Liberals finally, albeit seven years too late, have committed to ensuring that Canada's air force is equipped with the best modern technology. I am not sure if the Liberals remember this, but they actually promised they would not do that. It is unfortunate that they are flip-flopping and flip-flopping again. The misleading rhetoric that has existed over the last six or so years has led to Canada being six or seven years behind when it comes to Canada's air force having the equipment required to do its job.
Closely related to that, it is important for me to acknowledge to the House that although the government made an announcement saying they were going to acquire the F-35s, which was in a great press conference where they were boasting about having come to this decision and whatnot, they refused to acknowledge that we have actually invested hundreds of millions of dollars over the last couple of decades in the joint fighter task force. These are all things that both the Liberals and Conservatives had supported, but they, of course, did not want to give Stephen Harper any credit for that. When it comes to the reality we are facing, they have not even committed to purchasing the F-35s. I would love to hear in this place today not just a commitment to negotiate, but a commitment to actually see these aircraft purchased.
When it comes to our northern sovereignty, it is a sad state of affairs that we have, over the last six or seven years, seen a significant diminishment in our national efforts to see that our north is strong and secure and that there is economic development to ensure that our military installations have everything they need. I come from a resource-rich area of our country. I hear often from constituents who say that, when talking about resources and the potential that exists in our country, they look at east central Alberta, which is, I would suggest, one of the most, if not the most, beautiful regions in not just our country but the world. They also look across north, east, south and west. They look across our country and see the potential that exists.
I find that through what seems like systematic efforts, the government has reduced the ability of our north to develop and has limited our military's ability to defend. The fact is that we do not have the equipped fighting force that would be required to defend our north, if that were to ever happen.
I am proud to stand today in this place, as I mentioned at the beginning, not just to support the people of Ukraine and ensure that Canada, as a proud founding member of NATO, has the tools that it needs to be a strong partner in defence, but also to ensure that Canada is the world leader that it should be. I find it absolutely tragic that over the last number of years we have seen our position on the world stage diminished.
With that, I look forward to answering questions.
1386 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:32:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, if the Conservatives really do not want us to keep bringing up the Harper years, perhaps members of the House should not stand here and ask us to pay credit to Stephen Harper, as this member just did. Since he did that, allow me to ask him what Stephen Harper's objective was. The member complained about the last seven years. How about the time before that when Stephen Harper was spending less than 1% of GDP on our military? How does he justify his need for Stephen Harper to be praised when Stephen Harper was not even spending 1% of GDP?
Please do not respond to this question by somehow suggesting I should not be bringing up Stephen Harper because so much time has passed, when the member himself brought it up. I ask him to just answer my question. How does Stephen Harper somehow get the opportunity to be—
154 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:33:30 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for Battle River—Crowfoot has the floor.
11 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:33:34 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I suppose his indignation is justified with how the Liberals have failed so miserably on the defence file.
Let me list a few of the successful procurement projects that existed under the Harper government. There was the purchase of five C-17 Globemaster transport planes, the 17 CC-130J Hercules transport planes, the 15 Chinook helicopters, the Leopard 2 tanks, the modernized CP-140 Aurora surveillance planes, the modernization of the Halifax-class frigates and the acquisition of the Asterix auxiliary oil replenishment vessel, which is a contract the Liberals tried to cancel despite Admiral Norman's objections.
I could go on, but let me look back a little further. The amount of work Stephen Harper did to rebuild our military after the decade of darkness that I hear about every single time I—
137 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:34:29 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for Berthier—Maskinongé has the floor.
11 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:34:34 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like my colleague to give me a ray of hope. I understand all the factors underlying his positions. I understand that the member represents an oil-producing riding. I understand that people are asking him to get the oil out and sell it.
However, does he also realize that the time has come to start the climate transition? Does he also realize that the Bloc's position does not go against his constituents, but supports the entire planet?
We are prepared to leave the $14 billion my colleague mentioned earlier that is invested every year in the oil sands, but it must be used to start a transition. Can my colleague give me a glimmer of hope by acknowledging that we must start thinking about making the transition?
133 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:35:30 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, with respect to the member, I will say two things. One, the reality is that resource development is provincial jurisdiction. As I respect Quebec, I ask that he simply respects Alberta. Two, if he is concerned about the $14 billion being invested in our oil sands, maybe Quebec could give back the $13 billion in net transfer it received because of the prosperity the province of Alberta has seen.
When it comes to ensuring my province and all of Canada are secure in the midst of the challenges we face in the world, we need to be a country that simply says yes again. We need to say yes to resource projects, yes to green technologies and yes to manufacturing and development. We need to finally say yes again.
131 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:36:23 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as I listen to the hon. member for Battle River—Crowfoot, I am trying to wrap my head around the fact that just yesterday he was part of a group of parliamentarians who put forward a motion talking about fiscal responsibility and no new taxes, and today he is speaking about one that would propose an additional $28 billion in spending.
Can the member share more about how he would want to go about this additional new $28-billion investment?
83 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:36:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, when it comes to the full re-evaluation of what needs to be accomplished in terms of how the government spends its money, I agree entirely. I believe we need to fulfill our international obligations when it comes to NATO's 2%. I believe that is required to ensure our military is well equipped and that we can play the rightful role Canada has when it comes to our place in the world.
When it comes to ensuring Canada is well positioned and well funded, let us be a country that prospers again. As we have seen in Alberta, when Canada prospers, when Alberta prospers, we can in fact increase the spending on the needed things to ensure that our country is—
125 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:37:42 p.m.
- Watch
We have to resume debate.
The hon. member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo.
14 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:37:48 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, especially on such an important issue as this one.
I am going to be speaking in favour of this motion. This is an important issue not just generally, but because we are in a different world. The world changed in 2014. The world also changed again a couple of months ago. We are debating here today an issue that should cross party lines.
I would like to thank the member for Mount Royal for his speech, and I see him speaking with the member for Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, a veteran, and I would like to thank him for his service. I learned in the speech from the member for Winnipeg North that he is also a veteran. I thank him for his service, as I thank also the member for Cumberland—Colchester. I thank them all for their service.
Before I really get into the speech, I also want to recognize a member of my riding. That is Master Corporal Erin Doyle, with whom I went to high school. I have fond memories of him shouting my last name as we walked down the hallways. He was a veteran who was killed in Afghanistan, and I am going to take a moment of silence to remember his life.
I want to point out as well the excellent work done by the Rocky Mountain Rangers, which I consider to be one of the crown jewels of my riding. They are led by Lieutenant-Colonel Amadeo Vecchio. He is quite a leader, somebody who has given himself to this country both as a police officer and in his lifelong service to the armed forces. I also want to recognize my friend, Corporal Michael Bosa.
I am, admittedly, fairly new to the House of Commons. I may not have the institutional knowledge that some of the people here have. That being said, despite still learning, I have tremendous pride as a Canadian, just as most people in the House have a lot of pride. I have pride in the military. One of the first places I visited as a parliamentarian was the Room of Remembrance. It is one of my favourite places to go when I am in West Block.
Where I would like to see improvements is in our military spending. Canada has a proud history. We have a history of intervening, of peacekeeping, of making a difference and of more than just convening. When I think about our achievements and our interventions as a military, I think about Juno Beach, where right now it is being contemplated that condominiums will be built on what should otherwise be a sacrosanct space, and I think about Vimy Ridge, which in just a few days will be celebrating its 105th anniversary. I am going to be proud to be present there to commemorate that with the Minister of Veterans Affairs and other parliamentarians. The Battle of Vimy Ridge stands out in this nation's history. That is a time when we were obviously proud of our military and proud of our history, and I want to restore that pride. That is one reason I am in favour of this motion.
Simply put, we need greater political leadership and a will when it comes to the military and when it comes to meeting our NATO commitments, but we should not be seeking to meet the NATO commitments for the sake of meeting them. Yes, it is important that we meet our international commitments; that is an obvious no-brainer. When we commit to something, we should do it, and too frequently we slough our commitments aside once they fade from the public eye. However, we need to honour that commitment, because it is good for Canada, it is good for our brave soldiers and it is good for the security and sovereignty of this brave nation.
That is why I am so pleased that we are buying the F-35 jets. Our F-18s are an aging fleet that should have been replaced many years ago. Therefore, while I am pleased that we are buying F-35 jets, I am disheartened that we took seven years to do so. Those seven years involved years of lost training, years of waiting for procurement, paying for outdated Australian jets and, once we got those Australian jets, paying for the necessary upgrades in our own military and for the new jets that we got. We need to give our soldiers the best equipment. Let us not forget that these people who don our uniform are prepared, each and every day they put on that uniform, to make the ultimate sacrifice. The least we could do is to give them the best equipment possible, regardless of the cost.
I know that Canada ranks 25 out of 30 when it comes to NATO countries' spending. This may have been acceptable in the past, but, as I said at the outset, the world has changed. We are in a different world and with a different world comes different military spending.
We have Arctic sovereignty that worries me and that worries, and should worry, other people in the House. The Russia that has invaded Ukraine and has committed war crimes against Ukraine is perilously close to the Canadian Arctic and that is something we often forget. My understanding is that Russia has over 40 armed icebreakers. Canada has one. That is a statistic that should alarm all Canadians. Our Arctic is not that far. Our Arctic is also an area where Russia has asserted its sovereignty.
The international community is not ad idem when it comes to Canada's land boundaries. While it may be very clear to us as Canadians that our land extends well into the Arctic, into what has always been recognized as Canadian land, that may not be recognized by our allies and certainly will not be recognized by the Russia that seeks the natural resources in that area, that invaded Ukraine and that is currently perpetuating war crimes against innocent civilians and children in Ukraine. I do not presume that Putin will be rational, and we have him essentially on our doorstep in the Arctic.
Let us not make any mistake. There could come a time when somebody wants Canadian land. I hope it never comes to be. I am sure Ukrainians hoped it would never come to be. I would love for the Minister of National Defence to come to the House and tell us what we would do in the invent of an Arctic invasion and what we would do in the event of a Canadian invasion. While that may have been something we said years ago would never happen, as I said at the outset, we are in a different world. Gone are the days when we said our allies will handle it. We have no guarantees at this point as to the recognition of our international borders.
I wish to highlight, in closing, that a number of the points that I am making today were made in a Senate report in April 2017, titled “Military Underfunded: The Walk Must Match the Talk”. In that report, the Senate made a number of recommendations including at that time increasing spending to 1.5% of GDP and to 2% by 2028. The time has come to speed that up. We are not at 1.5%. I implore the finance minister in our upcoming budget to increase military spending to 2%.
1270 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:47:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member said that the purchase of the F-35 was seven years too late, and the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan is clapping to that.
I am curious if the member could explain to the House how he came to that determination. Stephen Harper upgraded the CF-18s between 2007 and 2010, so when he says it is seven years too late, what was magic about seven years ago? Did these planes not just get upgraded between 2007 and 2010 by Stephen Harper? What happened in 2015, seven years ago? Was it just an election, and therefore, when it should have happened?
107 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:48:44 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, what happened is that the member's party said it would not buy the jets, rather than entertaining buying the jets. It is a decision that should have been made. It was an election promise that was followed through on. In my view, that was an election promise that should not have been made. Now we have a reckoning in 2022 that it was the wrong decision. That is why 2015 is the magic number.
77 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:49:14 p.m.
- Watch
Qujannamiik, Uqaqtittiji.
I would like to ask the member about investments in the Arctic. What importance would he place in engaging the Inuit in the Arctic and ensuring it is the Inuit who are able to invest in protecting their own lands? As we know, Arctic sovereignty has been the greatest initiative in Canada. What would he do to make improvements so that our Arctic sovereignty includes the Inuit in the Arctic?
72 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:49:47 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it has been a pleasure getting to know my hon. colleague over the past few months, and I look forward to hearing more.
Reconciliation applies here too. Part of what we have to do is involve our stakeholders and rights holders in the Arctic. When it comes to maintaining Arctic sovereignty with the Inuit, they should have not just a seat at the table, but the primary seat at the table, because let us face it, they have a key voice, likely the most key voice, and it should be present. I would love to hear from them on that.
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:50:28 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his intervention.
He spoke a lot about the importance of being properly equipped to protect the Arctic. However, having equipment without personnel is of no use. The retention and recruitment of personnel for the Canadian Armed Forces is a challenge, and it is important to change the image of the armed forces.
In the last Parliament, I studied the issue of sexual assault at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. My colleague said that he is new to politics, but I would like him to state his position because we will have to intervene. His party did appoint General Vance. This file on the allegations has existed for a long time. Now it is important to take action. There are solutions in Justice Deschamps' report.
What are my colleague's views on the importance of taking action and no longer appointing people who believe they are above everyone else and who continued to perpetuate a culture of toxic masculinity in the Canadian Armed Forces, which hindered the recruitment of women?
179 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:51:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for raising a very important point. I too was disheartened not only when I learned about the allegations but also when I saw that General Vance received a conditional discharge in relation to a finding of obstruction of justice.
I will not disparage the brave women and men who put on the uniform each and every day. I agree with the hon. member that we need a culture in the military that embraces vitality, diversity and safety. Whatever can be done to achieve that culture, so all people in the armed forces feel comfortable coming forward to serve their country, I will give my full support to.
116 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:52:28 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, does the member not see the hypocrisy that could be perceived? President Obama is saying that the Conservative Party, back in 2013, spent less than 1% of the GDP on defence. Now the Conservative Party is advocating for 2%, yet when they were in government, they actually had less than 1%.
53 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:52:52 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, in 2009 we had 1.37%. Let us talk about 2022, not 2014 or 2013. For one moment, can we please just park the partisan sanctimony?
28 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 1:53:11 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kingston and the Islands.
I rise in the House today, on behalf of the residents in my riding of Davenport, as a proud Ukrainian Canadian and as the chair of the Canada NATO Parliamentary Association. At the outset, let me condemn in the strongest possible terms Russia's unjustifiable and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine and the enormous human suffering and destruction it has caused. Thousands of Ukrainians have died and entire cities have been destroyed.
Together with many partners, Canada referred Russia's illegal and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine to the International Criminal Court in early March as a result of numerous allegations of serious international crimes by Russian forces, including war crimes and crimes against humanity. Reports of atrocities carried out by Russian forces have become more numerous and serious since that referral. Just these past few days, we have seen images of hundreds of innocent civilians brutally murdered in cold blood in Bucha. These are horrifying acts. Russia needs to be held accountable and brought to justice.
Putin's actions are an assault on the rules-based international order. They have shattered Euro-Atlantic security. Canada and our NATO allies and partners are responding to Putin's aggression with unprecedented sanctions as we continue to arm Ukrainians and provide them with the support they need to defend themselves.
The Minister of Foreign Affairs will attend the upcoming NATO foreign ministerial meetings to coordinate Canada's support to Ukraine with our NATO allies. Foreign ministers will also look to collectively respond to global challenges with global partners while supporting regional ones in countering malign Russia influence and interference.
The ministerial meeting follows the extraordinary NATO leaders summit of March 24, which was attended by our Prime Minister. At that summit, NATO leaders agreed to provide further support to Ukraine, and they agreed on the need to reset NATO's deterrence and defence policies for the longer term to face a new security environment.
NATO is a defensive alliance founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law. Its primary task is to guarantee the security of the Euro-Atlantic area and the one billion citizens of its 30 members. NATO has been a cornerstone of Canada's defence and security policies for the last 73 years, and we remain committed to the foundational principles that underpin European and global security. As such, we have contributed to nearly every major NATO military operation since 1949. We continue to provide a significant number of personnel to various organizations within the alliance, and we are the sixth largest financial contributor among our allies to NATO's common budget.
For years, NATO allies and our partners have provided extensive bilateral support to Ukraine to strengthen its military capabilities and capacity and to enhance its resilience. In the immediate lead-up and since Russia's invasion, NATO allies and partners significantly expanded that assistance, and they continue to provide Ukraine with the lethal and other critical military assistance it needs to defend itself. NATO allies have stepped up in other ways as well by also providing financial and humanitarian aid, which includes hosting millions of Ukrainian refugees.
Let me also recall the fact that Canada was the first western country to recognize Ukraine's independence 30 years ago. Since then we have been resolute in our support for Ukraine and a strong advocate for its Euro-Atlantic integration. Canada has invested significantly in bilateral defence relations with Ukraine. We strongly supported granting Ukraine NATO-enhanced opportunity partner status in 2020 in order to deepen NATO-Ukraine relations.
In addition, Canada has also provided multifaceted assistance to support Ukraine's security, prosperity and reform objectives, including through the authorization of $160 million in military aid. Canada's Operation Unifier has trained nearly 35,000 members of the Ukrainian military and security forces to date. The operation was recently extended and expanded. However, as a result of the current situation, the Canadian Armed Forces has temporarily moved its mission.
In response to Canada's action against Ukraine, NATO has deployed troops from both sides of the Atlantic and has increased its readiness to protect allied territory and guard against any spillover of the conflict. For the first time, the alliance has deployed the NATO response force for collective defence and deterrence. There are now hundreds of thousands of forces at heightened alert, as well as around 40,000 troops under direct NATO command, mostly in the eastern part of the alliance.
This is backed up by major air and naval power, as well as air defence. NATO is establishing four multinational battle groups in Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia, as well as strengthening battle groups already in the battle states and in Poland. Further steps are being taken to ensure the security and defence of allies across all domains with a 360° approach.
While these measures are preventative, proportionate and non-escalatory, there must be no doubt that our commitment to article 5 of the Washington treaty is ironclad. We will protect and defend every inch of NATO territory.
Following the deployment of an additional 460 soldiers to Operation Reassurance, Canada currently contributes approximately 1,375 troops to deterrence and assurance measures on NATO's eastern flank. These additional forces include ground troops for the Canada-led enhanced forward presence battle group in Latvia, and an additional frigate and patrol aircraft. As well, approximately 3,400 Canadian Armed Forces personnel across all branches of the service are authorized to deploy to the NATO response force, if they are required.
On March 8, the Prime Minister announced that Canada would renew its commitment to Operation Reassurance—
957 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
