National Defence Committee on May 6th, 2024

[Mike Greenley]

Really quickly from me, we have a lot of mechanisms to work with the United States. Often, we just have to have the fortitude to exercise them to stick up for Canadian interests, and in our negotiations with the United States, to stick up for Canadian-built systems in combined force and combined government solutions. I think we can do that. I think the national space council could certainly help.

I'm sure Brian has something to say about that.

[Brian Gallant]

Thank you, Mike.

If I may add, whether you think that—“you” in the general sense—we need to compete with the U.S. and try to put our elbows up when it comes to our space sector or you think we need to collaborate more with the U.S., a national space council will help us do that. A national space council will help us get organized, obviously, and make sure we can be as nimble and as holistic as possible.

If I may, from the previous question that I didn't have time to completely finish answering, my worry about an aerospace strategy is that it would make it a siloed strategy—meaning that, perhaps, it's ISED that's focused on the strategy. However, I think that, when it comes to space, we really need a whole-of-government strategy that embodies the way in which other departments can play a role and what space can do for other departments. A national space council will help us have that holistic approach that we need to be a big player on the international stage, for all the reasons already discussed as to why space is already important. We think that makes a lot of sense.

When it comes to collaborating with the U.S., the U.S. wants countries, especially allied countries, to step up and, for lack of a better way of describing it, get their acts together. They created a National Space Council to coordinate their efforts, and I think it would be very well-received, from a collaboration point of view, if we do the same.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Gallant, I apologize for having to cut you off again.

Colleagues, we've got 15 minutes left and 25 minutes' worth of questions. This math doesn't work, so we'll have three minutes each, and Ms. Normandin, two minutes.

Mr. Kelly.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Thanks.

I'd like to start with, you, Mr. Greenley, just by unpacking a little bit of your testimony in your opening round and in response to some of the questions from Ms. Gallant. You were somewhat dismissive of the threat of a nuclear explosion in space, under I guess the thought that any such event disrupts all sides and it's not possible to just target an adversary.

You characterized it as the bluster of certain people, and we're talking about the bluster of Putin. We've ignored his bluster at our own peril. He has a proven track record of comfort with “war of attrition”, where he sacrifices his own equipment and the lives of his own people.

What would be a prudent defence response? I think we've got to do better than just hope that such an event doesn't take place.

[Mike Greenley]

To be honest, I think that was me expressing my personal opinions before, and I think the topic we're into here is certainly one for the military. On my previous comments about us needing to make sure that we get the appropriate clearances so industry and the military can collaborate when we talk about these things being essential, I don't feel I would be informed enough at this time.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Okay, good. This takes us to the first ask in your response. Where would you get your information if you don't have that security clearance?

[Mike Greenley]

You're left with unclassified information that the general public would have from the media or participation in conferences. Often what happens with security clearances is that the system has been established: if you have a contract whereby you need to be secure, then you can get the appropriate clearance. However, in this case we need to have the clearances so we can have the conversations to develop the capabilities to then get the contract. The government has to do things differently.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

How will Canada ensure domain awareness in the Arctic when RADARSAT reaches its end of life? We've had testimony at this committee and in an Auditor General's report that show there's a gap coming. How can we prevent this coverage gap?

[Mike Greenley]

I think the RADARSAT+ will help by adding additional satellite capability into the constellation. You'll get some resiliency from that. Leveraging commercial services, which I—

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

If I may, I've got really short time, what about non-maritime domain awareness? Does your company, or is there technology available that can give us...? We've heard of huge gaps in awareness in the Arctic. Are there solutions at hand commercially?

[Mike Greenley]

Yes, there are solutions for non-maritime domain awareness, yes. Our Chorus system, for example, which combines what's called C-band and X-band, two different types of synthetic aperture radar, greatly enhances our capability to do non-maritime domain awareness.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Kelly.

Mr. Collins, three minutes.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

I'll start with Mr. Gallant, if I could.

Mr. Gallant, you talked about the high wages and the amount of R and D in the sector. What recommendations do you have for the Government of Canada as it relates to attracting and retaining top talent? This is supports for colleges and universities, and immigration policies that might help us to ensure the labour force you require in the short, medium, long term is here for the companies that are driving innovation here in Canada.

[Brian Gallant]

Those are certainly policies that could ensure we have the strong workforce needed.

However, there are two things.

The first thing is that we need to make sure we've chosen this to be a priority sector for us. There's immense growth projected for the next few decades in space, but if we don't, again, get our act together and make sure we're set up to seize those opportunities, we may not have to worry about the workforce as much.

The national space council could help us with the first thing mentioned.

My next thing would be ensuring that we have consistent investment in space. As you can imagine, in the past it's been very peaks and valleys when it comes to major projects and investments in space. I won't belabour that point. It's pretty evident. It's hard to keep a workforce recruited, retained and as productive as possible when you have those sorts of peaks and valleys that affect our large space companies, but also the SMEs in the ecosystem as well.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Thank you for that.

Ms. Beck, we've heard testimony in this meeting and others that with increasing competition, there'll be more congestion in space. I think the Government of Canada needs to develop some policies relating to being a responsible actor in this space.

What policies or recommendations should we adopt to ensure that the Canadian companies we're working with are responsible actors in space?

What steps should we take to ensure that we're protecting the infrastructure that you have in the earth's orbit?

[Michele Beck]

Thank you.

I think the space council can help develop the right policies to ensure that space remains available and remains a protected area. The space council can also identify regulations for at least Canadian companies to operate in and abide by those specific regulations.

Today, we work through ISED and CSA in terms of the regulation, but a space council would bring together the global interests and ensure that space remains secure and available.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you.

Madam Normandin, you have one minute and 30 seconds.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Greenley, you have an impressive track record in the defence sector. You talked about the challenges relating to classified information, which prevent the industry from perfecting products for the defence sector.

Everyone has talked about dual-use goods and technologies. I would like to hear your thoughts on the relationship between the civilian and military sectors. Do dual-use goods and technologies help accelerate some aspects of procurement or, on the contrary, do the specific characteristics of the military sector slow down certain projects in the civilian sector? I would like to hear more about the interaction between the civilian and military sectors as regards space and telecommunications in particular.

[Mike Greenley]

I think that dual-use technologies would mean that they could be used for both civil and military purposes. We're increasingly seeing the opportunities for dual use. In space, we've talked about earth observation, which we use for climate change, climate detection, immigration detection or deforestation detection, for example. It's the same technology that we use to detect things for military operations.

Telesat's example of providing high-speed communications for civil purposes can absolutely be reused for military purposes.

Work that we do on servicing spacecraft with robotics and servicing satellites could also be used for military purposes someday in satellites.

The same technology can be used for both. I think the important thing in military procurement is recognizing what the core capability is and that they can benefit from dual use of civilian capability. We don't have to perfectly customize everything for military purposes every time.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you.

Ms. Mathyssen, you have one minute.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Throughout the Cold War, the International Space Station represented a shared project. It brought the world together in difficult times. Throughout the Apollo-Soyuz project, we saw it help in terms of co-operation throughout the Cold War detente.

As we are now seemingly moving away from the International Space Station towards commercialization of a space domain, what wider implications does that have for diplomacy? What can we do to ease that tension up in space that we feel here on the ground?

[Mike Greenley]

I think that the commercial space stations are going to be very international. A lot of different countries are going to want to get access to those. They'll be like large, commercial, collaborative industrial parks.

If we look at the moon, we have 36 countries now on the Artemis program. We had six countries collaborate on the International Space Station. For the Artemis accords, we have now had 36 countries sign up with the United States to collaborate on the moon.

The actual level of geopolitical collaboration on the next hardest problem.... The hard problem used to be having the space station. Now the hardest problem is going to live and work on the moon.

The amount of participation globally now—having 36 countries working together—is tremendous. We also have another group—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Unfortunately, we're going to have to leave the answer there. Thank you.

Mr. Bezan, you have three minutes.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Thanks to our witnesses for being here.

Mr. Greenley, you talked about the Chorus satellite constellation. Is that in service already?

[Mike Greenley]

No, that's in development. It'll be launched in the fourth quarter of 2025.