Conservative and Bloc Québécois MPs have accused a Nova Scotia Liberal MP of using a parliamentary committee investigation into veterans' services to deflect criticism over the closure of a historic military armoury in her riding.Blacklock's Reporter says in separate dissenting opinions tabled in Parliament, opposition MPs questioned the motives behind a study initiated by first-term Liberal MP Alana Hirtle, who represents Cumberland-Colchester, N.S.The Conservatives alleged the investigation was intended to distract from the Liberal government's decision to close the Colonel James Ralston Armoury in Amherst, while the Bloc characterized the study as a local political initiative rather than a serious examination of veterans' needs.Hirtle's office rejected suggestions that her efforts to improve services for veterans were politically motivated.The controversy centres on a Commons government operations committee report titled Use Of Underused And Surplus Federal Lands And Buildings For Services For Veterans, tabled last Thursday.Although the committee was tasked with examining how surplus federal properties could be used to support veterans across Canada, the report focused particular attention on the Amherst armoury.Hirtle, a former community organizer and president of the Truro Rotary Club, was elected in 2025 by a margin of 1,228 votes.Nine weeks after her election, federal officials closed the century-old Amherst armoury, prompting protests from local residents concerned about losing the historic military facility.Hirtle subsequently introduced a motion calling on the government operations committee to examine alternative uses for surplus and underused federal properties.The motion proposed that the committee “undertake a study on alternative ways to make use of underused and surplus federal lands and buildings in ways that help reinvigorate communities by serving as centres that provide services for veterans.”The House of Commons approved the motion April 22 by a vote of 168 to 151, with support from the Liberal majority..Conservative committee members criticized Hirtle for choosing a parliamentary study rather than introducing legislation they argued could have provided direct assistance to veterans.“Rather than using the rare opportunity in the order of precedence for private members’ business to introduce legislation that could have delivered tangible results for veterans, she used it to call for another study and delay action on an important issue,” the Conservatives wrote in their Dissenting Opinion.They also alleged the motion was intended to divert attention from the government's decision to close the Amherst facility.“Conservatives believe the motion was meant to distract from the Liberal government’s closure of the Colonel James Ralston Armoury in Amherst, N.S., in her constituency,” the dissenting report stated.The Conservatives cited testimony from Nova Scotia MLA Elizabeth Smith-McCrossin, who criticized Hirtle's response to the closure.“Her government closed our armoury after 101 years of training soldiers. Her response was to propose another study,” Smith-McCrossin told the committee.Opposition MPs also questioned Hirtle's attendance at hearings examining her own proposal.“Conservatives were further disappointed that Ms. Hirtle was not present at the committee’s final meeting where a veteran who served more than 22 years raised concerns about the cost, safety and suitability of converting the Amherst armoury into housing for veterans,” the dissenting report stated.The Bloc Québécois raised similar objections in its own dissenting opinion, arguing the committee's work had become focused on a single property rather than broader federal policy.“It dealt exclusively with a single project, the conversion of the Amherst Armoury in Nova Scotia,” the Bloc wrote.“At no point during the process was it suggested that the project be treated as a pilot project or that it reflected the wishes of the community.”Bloc MPs argued the proposal originated with Hirtle rather than Veterans Affairs Canada or a broader government initiative.“Rather, it was a personal, local initiative of the MP for Cumberland-Colchester,” the party stated..The Bloc also noted Veterans Affairs Canada had not developed a proposal for the property or determined whether it would be suitable for delivering services to veterans.According to the dissenting report, the federal government had not presented a credible plan for converting the former military facility.Aaron Emery, a spokesperson for Hirtle, disputed the opposition's criticism and defended the MP's commitment to veterans.Emery confirmed Hirtle missed one of the four committee meetings held to examine her motion but rejected suggestions that her absence reflected a lack of interest.“Alana has certainly not lost interest in her efforts to better serve Canadian veterans,” Emery said.“Neither have the veterans’ groups and social service organizations that are stepping up as part of this team of problem-solvers.”The opposing accounts leave the future of the Amherst armoury unresolved, with opposition MPs questioning the purpose of the parliamentary study and Hirtle's office maintaining that efforts to find new ways to serve veterans are continuing.
