SoVote

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Apr/5/22 12:04:36 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, as the member has indirectly, if not directly at times, referenced, Canada does have an obligation to continue to play a strong leadership role. When we think of NATO as an organization and the role it is playing today in Europe, we can quickly understand why it is so critically important to have faith and to support NATO countries, our allies. I am wondering if my friend could provide her thoughts on leadership. It is about more than us just speaking. It is also about materializing, and that means supporting our military the best way we can, rather than comparing Canada to other nations. Yes, the member does not want to talk about the hard 2%, but there is an obligation to increase from the low of 1% that it was in 2013. Would she not agree?

139 words

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen

Apr/5/22 12:05:42 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, yes, and through my speech I talked about increasing spending, doing it smartly and doing it in a way that will have significant impacts for the people in the Armed Forces. I also talked about other ways that Canada can play a huge leadership role. In terms of the ending of nuclear weapons, Canada could sign on to the treaty to prohibit nuclear weapons or increase nuclear disarmament. I do not have the exact terminology for that treaty, but these are key ways that we can show leadership. Canada has not signed on yet, and it should.

99 words

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

Apr/5/22 12:06:29 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, the member for London—Fanshawe for her excellent contribution to this debate. She has been a staunch supporter of our women and men in military for many years. I have learned a great deal from her on this topic. I would also like to thank the member of Parliament for South Surrey—White Rock for moving this motion, giving us the opportunity to discuss how to support our military and highlight the deplorable state of Canada's military. I am the daughter of a veteran, and the opportunity to stand in this place today and speak about this is vitally important to me. As my colleague from London—Fanshawe mentioned, New Democrats have always pushed for the government to make sure that our troops have the equipment, training and support they need to do the very difficult and dangerous work we ask them to undertake. New Democrats have always strongly believed that the federal government must play a larger role in supporting the Canadian Armed Forces. We know that we need a military that can work safely, can get the support that they need when they need it and can count on their policies from our government. What we have seen instead is years of cuts from both Conservative and Liberal federal governments. I have to say that I am somewhat amazed at the audacity, I guess, of the Conservatives standing in the House and talking about support for the military, when we saw very clearly the decimation of spending on the military and the abandonment of our peacekeeping efforts under Stephen Harper's Conservative government. I will speak to that a little bit later on, but I do think it is important to note that we are in a place where our military has not been supported by multiple governments. Part of the reason that New Democrats believe so strongly in the support of our men and women in the military is because we are the party of working people. We are a party that has always believed that workers have a right and they are entitled to all the tools they need to do their work safely and effectively. With regard to the Canadian Armed Forces, that becomes more important, as their job is to protect us, to look after Canadians, to hold Canada's place in the world, to protect Canadians during climate emergencies and to protect Canadians during the COVID pandemic. What we saw the armed forces do in Quebec during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, what we asked them to do, was incredible. If we do not give them the tools to do those jobs, it is a stain on our reputation, on the federal government and on parliamentarians. One of my colleagues from the NDP caucus has brought forward the argument that she represents many men and women in the military, in the armed forces, who do not have the tools to do some of the things in Canada that we require them to do, so they do not have the tools to do the search and rescue that we ask them to do. She raised the issue in the House earlier today of helicopters and equipment that we are asking the men and women in uniform to repair by creating their own parts because these supplies are so old and so dated that they can no longer get parts. The military is being asked to patch together things so they can do the incredibly difficult work we are asking them to do, which is unsustainable. It is impossible to sustain. Canada, right now, is looking at the world, the world that changed on February 24. I think we all should be looking at Arctic sovereignty. It is very clear that global climate change is making more of Canada's Arctic accessible and that global powers have their eyes on the Arctic as a place to exploit natural resources. We have seen what Russian aggression has meant to stability in eastern Europe and the sovereignty of Ukraine. We must be prepared to protect Canada's Arctic from Russia and from other powers that may threaten our sovereignty and our environment. We have to have a plan in place to protect the north, and our armed forces must be that plan. They must be supported to undertake that work. What do New Democrats want? New Democrats want a military where armed forces members can work safely, can get the support they need when they need it and can count on their government to produce policies that will work for them. We want our military to be able to work within NATO. New Democrats have regularly called for the government to take a leadership role within NATO in beginning the work necessary for achieving a world free of nuclear weapons. I have called many times for the government to sign onto the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. We have not done that. At the very least, and I have asked this of the government, ministers, parliamentary secretaries and chairs at the foreign affairs committee, we could send an observation mission to Vienna this June for the first member meeting of the TPNW. I have pushed as hard as I can on this. New Democrats want more commitment to peacekeeping. We have pledged 860 members to go into the field as peacekeepers. Canada used to play a vital role in peacekeeping in the world. We have 58 members in the field currently. Before the election in 2015, Trudeau criticized Stephen Harper's government for the decline in the number of—

951 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Apr/5/22 12:12:57 p.m.
Watch

Could I remind the hon. member that we do not use member's names?

14 words

Ms. Heather McPherson

Apr/5/22 12:13:03 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my apologies. The Prime Minister criticized the Conservative government of Stephen Harper for his decline in the number of uniformed personnel. We were, at that time, 66th in our ranking, but since then, it has gone lower and we are now at the 81st—

47 words

Mr. Marty Morantz

Apr/5/22 12:13:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Immediately after you asked the member not to use the name of the former prime minister, she used it again.

29 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Apr/5/22 12:13:35 p.m.
Watch

We can use the names of former prime ministers and people who are no longer members of the House. The hon. member for Edmonton Strathcona.

25 words

Ms. Heather McPherson

Apr/5/22 12:13:44 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would point out to my colleague that the Speaker has outlined why I am allowed to use the name of Stephen Harper. We would like to see an improvement in government procurement. As my colleague from London—Fanshawe pointed out, we have not been able to spend the money we have allocated to the armed forces. In fact, we heard Andrew Leslie, a former Liberal MP and retired general, say, “You can promise the moon and the stars. If you can't get the money out the door [and if that is the reality] then it's of no value”. I also want to highlight something else that my colleague from London—Fanshawe said. She spoke about what 2% means. The PBO has said meeting that 2% budget would mean $54 billion to $56 billion a year being spent on defence. It would be a doubling of our military spending, which would be over our current $24.29 billion per year. This would make military spending the largest expenditure of the Government of Canada. It would be more than we spend on the health care transfer, which is $45 billion a year. We all need to think about that. We all need to think about where Canadians would like to see those investments. I hope I have an opportunity during questions to ask my colleagues within the Conservative Party how they would pay for this. As party members who constantly stand in this place and say taxes and revenue is not something they are interested in, what things would they cut? What things are they interested in cutting away from Canadians for this? I would like to talk about humanitarian spending. When we look at defence spending, we must tie it to humanitarian spending. We must look at the fact that in Canada right now, we are spending approximately 0.3% of our gross national income on humanitarian support. We all know that war is a failure. No one wants to go to war. Nobody wants to see what is happening in Ukraine. We need to commit to that humanitarian support, the diplomatic and multilateralism, and the efforts we can do so that we are not required to go to war. Yesterday, David Beasley from the World Food Programme came to the international human rights subcommittee. He said that, if we do not invest in food security, humanitarian aid, diplomacy, multilateralism and all of these things, then we will pay 1000 fold in conflict and impacts on populations. I will end by thanking every woman and man in our military. I am so proud of all of our people in the Canadian Armed Forces. They punch above their weight. They defend the world's longest coastline covering three oceans. They are experts in all of the work they do, and they are world-renowned. I want to say thank—

487 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Apr/5/22 12:17:03 p.m.
Watch

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons.

15 words

Secretary

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Apr/5/22 12:17:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would echo the appreciation and care that the member just expressed to members of our Canadian Forces for the fantastic job they do in Canada's best interests all the time, seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. I want to pick up on what I emphasized earlier. If there were no NATO forces or organization, there would be that much more pressure on Canada to spend even that much more of our resources on a military. Because we have a NATO organization, countries around the world come together to protect the common interests of those countries. I am wondering if the member could provide her thoughts in regard to why, from her perspective, it is important that Canada meet its NATO obligations in whatever way it can.

133 words

Ms. Heather McPherson

Apr/5/22 12:18:13 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I think that Canada has to find its way back to playing an important role on the world stage. Not only has our role within NATO diminished, but our role within the United Nations has diminished, our role in peacekeeping has diminished, our role in diplomacy has diminished and our ability to move things forward has diminished. As a country that used to be a leader in diplomacy and multilateralism and all of these things, including Canadian peacekeeping, which Canadians saw their identity in, we are those things no longer. We spend all of our time investing solely in trade and forget to look at these other areas. Yes, I agree with the member that we do need to live up to our obligations within NATO. February 24 changed the world, and we need to also live up to our obligations to the world and other countries.

149 words

Mr. Warren Steinley (Regina—Lewvan, CPC)

Apr/5/22 12:19:18 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my one question for the member for Edmonton Strathcona is that I thank her for changing her opinion. On January 31, in an exchange with the member for Calgary Shepard, she said, “Mr. Speaker, I have to disagree with my colleague across the way. Hitting a bully is not the best way to deal with bullying.” We were talking with about Vladimir Putin and Russia. On January 31, this member was against any aggression toward Russia and then, just yesterday, she had an excellent unanimous consent motion passed to provide Ukraine all military assistance possible to defend themselves against Russian aggression. One thing I will say about the NDP member is that she does always have the ability to change positions and listen to reason. I want to ask her what made her change her mind, as she is now supporting Ukraine and supporting Canada sending military assistance there after she was so against it.

159 words

All Topics

Ms. Heather McPherson

Apr/5/22 12:20:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is an excellent question. I would like to point out that when the member quoted me, we were in a very different world than we are now. Of course, in January, Ukraine had not been invaded to date. In fact, in January, we were still trying to find ways to avoid a war. Yesterday, when I stood in the house, I was responding to the crimes against humanity and war crimes perpetrated by Putin. That had not happened on January 31. I certainly hope every member of the House is able to adapt their opinion to the changing realities that we see on the ground. If we are not able to change our opinion when the world changes, what is the point of us being here?

129 words

All Topics

Ms. Andréanne Larouche (Shefford, BQ)

Apr/5/22 12:21:08 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to hear what my colleague has to say about another aspect she only touched upon, namely the difficulty in recruiting. Does she agree that the Liberals, by filibustering at the Standing Committee on National Defence and the Standing Committee on the Status of Women when they were reviewing the cases of sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces, only made it more difficult to recruit women? Their objective is 25% by 2026. They are far from that number. Moreover, given the new allegations made public recently, they are not getting any closer. Does she agree that they should apply the recommendations in the Deschamps report, which the Liberals still have not implemented?

117 words

All Topics

Ms. Heather McPherson

Apr/5/22 12:21:43 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, of course, I agree 100% with my colleague from the Bloc Québécois. Of course, we should be implementing those so that we can help recruit women. We also need to bring forth the feminist foreign policy. The government has promised this for some time and has not brought forward our feminist foreign policy. We need to do everything we can to make sure that our military is a welcoming space for women who want to contribute and who want to represent Canada. I thank her for her advocacy on this issue.

97 words

All Topics

Hon. Michael Chong (Wellington—Halton Hills, CPC)

Apr/5/22 12:22:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I believe if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for me to speak to this motion, seeing that I moved the motion but did not speak to it when it was initially moved in the House.

40 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Apr/5/22 12:22:29 p.m.
Watch

Does the member have unanimous consent? Some hon. members: Agreed.

10 words

Hon. Michael Chong

Apr/5/22 12:22:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my colleague from Louis-Saint-Laurent. President Putin and the Russian Federation are committing war crimes and crimes against humanity in Ukraine. Reports from Bucha last weekend of dead Ukrainian civilians with their hands bound behind their backs and others buried in makeshift pits have shocked the world, and these war crimes in Bucha are not all of it. We have seen numerous credible reports of Russia deliberately attacking civilians in other parts of Ukraine. The UN has officially confirmed thousands of civilian casualties, and no doubt the unofficial number is much higher. There are other atrocities as well. The Russian military has deliberately destroyed hospitals, schools and apartment buildings. It targeted a Mariupol theatre full of civilians that was clearly marked, and visible from the air, with the Russian word for children. The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights concluded that Russia deliberately attacked the Mariupol maternity hospital. Beyond these war crimes, day after day and week after week for the last five weeks, we have been barraged by countless photographs, videos and reports detailing Russia's indiscriminate shelling of civilian areas. Major Ukrainian cities are being levelled. Mariupol, once home to some half a million people, is now 90% destroyed. In Kharkiv, a city once home to 1.4 million Ukrainians, some 600 buildings have been destroyed. The list goes on. The data and images have come so fast and furious in the last five weeks it is hard to process all of it, but one thing is abundantly clear: The world has changed, and Canada must change with it. The attack on Ukraine by President Putin and the Russian Federation is the first European war between states since 1945. This attack threatens not only Ukraine but Canada. Our security has always been inextricably linked to that of Europe's. Since Samuel de Champlain founded Quebec City in 1608, the outbreak of major wars in Europe has always affected Canada. The Seven Years' War, which some call the first major global conflict, a war in Europe between Great Britain and France, led to the conquest of Quebec in 1759. What we call the War of 1812 was part of a broader European war: the Napoleonic Wars. Canadians know full well the high price paid in the First World War and the Second World War in Europe. Some 100,000 Canadian war dead can attest to that. Most of them are buried in northern France and the Italian peninsula. It is clear President Putin and the Russian Federation's unprovoked and illegal attack on Ukraine is a challenge to our peace and security here at home in Canada. This attack also threatens Canada in a second way, because it comes on the heels of an autocratic pact between the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China, which threatens the rules-based order that has existed since 1945. This is an order that Canada was instrumental in establishing, an order that has ensured the longest period of relative peace and prosperity in modern times and an order that, if successfully challenged by the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China, threatens the peace and security of 38 million Canadians here at home. President Putin and President Xi's autocratic pact was signed just ahead of the invasion of Ukraine, on February 4 of this year. It declared each other's support for their respective positions on Ukraine and Taiwan, and it stated that there are “no forbidden areas” and “no limits” between China and Russia. It is the most detailed and assertive alliance between the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China ever. It is a challenge to the international order that has existed since 1945, and it threatens our peace and security here at home. The world has changed and Canada must change with it. The events of the last decade make clear something else. We can no longer live in splendid isolation on the north half of this vast continent, assuming that we are protected on three coasts, by three oceans and on our southern border by a superpower. It is true that, since the founding of Quebec in 1608, we have lived under the protection of one empire or another for over 400 years. For much of our history, we have lived under the protection of the French and British empires. When the French empire fell in North America on the north half of this continent in 1759, the Royal Navy and the British empire provided protection until August 1940. In that month, during the early dark days of another war, a Canada-U.S. defence pact was signed in upstate New York, in Ogdensburg, that set in place the protection that we have enjoyed since 1940. Since then, we have lived under pax Americana, but no longer. It is clear that the United States is no longer willing to shoulder the burden of Canada's defence and security and that of the NATO alliance. That was made clear by President Obama in 2014 during the NATO Wales Summit, which resulted in the Wales Summit Declaration that called on Canada and other NATO members to increase their defence spending to at least 2% of GDP by 2024. It was reiterated by President Obama in this very chamber in 2016 when he called on Parliament to meet the Wales Summit Declaration goal. It was reiterated by President Trump loudly on numerous occasions during his administration, and it has been reiterated by the current Biden administration. The world has changed and Canada must change with it. We can no longer count on another country to take care of our defence and security here at home. It is time for us to get serious about our defence and security and our contribution to the defence and security of the NATO alliance. That is why we have introduced this motion in the House today. The government needs to increase defence spending in the budget. There is no priority more important to any Government of Canada than the safety and security of some 38 million Canadians living here at home. The government needs to fully uphold the obligations Canada made in the Wales Summit Declaration of 2014 to increase defence spending to 2% of gross domestic product in two years. While the government has been decreasing defence spending in recent years, there remains only two short years to fulfill the Wales Summit Declaration. Let me close by saying that in fulfilling our obligation to the NATO alliance, we can contribute not only to the defence of Europe but to our own defence and security here at home. Canada, like Ukraine, shares a border region with Russia: the Arctic Ocean. Russia considers the Arctic region its most important theatre. It has spent considerable resources to strengthen its capabilities in the Arctic, and it is time that we took Canada's Arctic defence and security seriously. We need to modernize NORAD's early warning system. We need to fix our broken military procurement system and acquire new equipment for the Canadian military, as well as additional equipment for Ukraine's military. We need to accelerate the national shipbuilding program. We need to purchase the F-35 jets. We need to join ballistic missile defence in the face of Russian hypersonic missile technology. We need to work in closer co-operation with Scandinavian allies and the United States in Arctic peace and security. If we do these things, we can provide Ukraine with lethal weapons and ensure a future Bucha, a future Kharkiv and a future Mariupol will not happen. If we do not do these things, we are weakening the democratic alliance and potentially losing our sovereignty in our own north. The world has changed and Canada must change with it. If we rise to the task like previous generations of Canadians, we can strengthen both our democracy here at home and abroad and ensure that our children can continue to live in peace and security.

1355 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Apr/5/22 12:32:45 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member made reference to President Obama's visit when he put the 2% challenge to all members of Parliament. That was back in 2016. We acquired governance in late 2015. I would like to highlight to the member that in 2013, Canada's percentage of GDP going toward the military was less than 1%. I suspect that is one of the reasons Obama made reference to it. Upon reflection and using hindsight today, does the member recognize that the former Harper administration did us no service by underfunding our Canadian Forces?

94 words

Hon. Michael Chong

Apr/5/22 12:33:38 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I think the world before February 2014 was a very different one. We had the peace dividend as a result of the fall of the Berlin Wall, and many NATO members significantly reduced their defence budgets in the view that Russia no longer presented a threat to the safety and security of Europe. That changed after the Sochi winter Olympics, when Russia invaded Ukraine. Prime Minister Harper understood the world had changed, which is why Canada agreed to the Wales Summit Declaration of 2014. We need to understand that the world has changed since then and since the invasion of February 24 of this year, and that Russia now presents a direct threat to the safety and security of this country, as does the People's Republic of China. We need to respond accordingly with an increase in the defence budget.

143 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 53