National Defence Committee on Nov. 24th, 2009

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Particularly because of the uncertainty of ice presence and where it might be, the changing nature, etc.

[VAdm Bruce Donaldson]

The challenge of ice adjacent to land and the depth of the water. It shoals considerably around land, and we really haven't had the type of hydrographic surveys done in the north that we've been able to do in other parts of the country. That's some of the research that's going on now that I've talked about already. We're able to keep vessels safe in the areas where they need to transit in the north, and we continue to build our awareness of the region, but I would say it still poses some challenges for the operations of submarines submerged under the ice in the Arctic.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

Thank you.

Did you want to add something?

[Commander Dermot Mulholland, Director, Maritime Policy, Operations and Readiness, Chief of Maritime Staff, Department of National Defence]

Yes, sir, only to say that, as the Admiral has pointed out, a submarine by its very nature has a lot of vulnerable fittings external to it. These can be damaged quite a bit by touching the bottom of the sea. Submarines, even in areas that aren't iced, are very careful to avoid shallow waters for numerous reasons. They don't have very much room to manoeuvre, so they tend to stay away from these. Certainly the problem is compounded greatly in areas that are iced, where navigational techniques are much more difficult and the sonar conditions, which enable them to see where they're going, are not conducive to safe and efficient navigation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

Thank you very much.

I will give the floor to Mr. Hawn for seven minutes.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you both for being with us today.

Admiral Donaldson, I want to follow up a little bit on what Mr. Harris was saying. I know you can't get into detail, but are you confident that the various measures we have for detection and awareness can detect submarine traffic in the Arctic?

[VAdm Bruce Donaldson]

Am I confident? I'm confident that we can risk-manage this. We're looking at developing technologies that will give us a higher degree of confidence when some of the challenges to operating submarines diminish. We continue to look at vulnerabilities and try to adjust to them.

I don't want to give the impression, after discussing all the challenges, that it would be impossible for a submarine to actually operate up in our north; in fact, it would be possible for a submarine to operate in our north. We take that seriously. If we get an indication that there may be submarines operating in the north, of course we'll react to them, but at this point I feel confident that we have enough of a network of intelligence, sensors, and response platforms that we know what's going on up in our north.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

You talked about the obvious desirability of not having sub-to-sub collisions. Within NATO, obviously, we operate very closely. You talked about the non-NATO subs. From your knowledge of submarine ops--the Russians, for example, or the Chinese or anybody else--are their procedures pretty similar to NATO procedures? Do they conform to general safety considerations and communication in terms of avoidance of collision?

Maybe Commander Mulholland would be better for that.

[Cdr Dermot Mulholland]

There is no similar protocol among non-NATO submarine-operating nations in the Atlantic. We do have similar protocols with certain nations in the Asia-Pacific region to avoid mutual interference when submarines are operating on exercises with each other, and that sort of thing.

With the Russians, the answer is no. They do operate an underwater telephone communications device on an international frequency, usually for emergency communications, but beyond that there is no process in place to allow a Russian submarine and a NATO submarine to operate in the same vicinity at the same time.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

So it's not similar to ICAO, the International Civil Aviation Organization. There are no similar procedures in place, no international SOPs to deal with that.

[Cdr Dermot Mulholland]

No. If the submarines are on the surface, then the normal collision regulations would apply to them, but underwater, if they don't know they're operating in the same space of water, then there is no procedure for them. No.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

But submarines can obviously see around them to some extent.

[Cdr Dermot Mulholland]

To some extent they can. Yes, sir.

[VAdm Bruce Donaldson]

Certainly, sir, we don't have a history of submarines colliding with one another. That type of thing is seen as a major incident and a highly unusual accident.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

We talked about maritime domain awareness. Admiral Donaldson, are there any holes in our maritime domain awareness that you're concerned with and that we should address?

[VAdm Bruce Donaldson]

Maritime domain awareness, a perfect awareness of everything happening within our maritime domain, is a huge area. There's a lot of activity, and we necessarily have to focus on some of the areas of higher concern. As the MSOCs mature, as our approach to maritime domain awareness matures, as the techniques and information available to us and our pursuit of automatic information transmission in commercial vessels give us more information that we can manage, and as our sharing of information matures, we're getting better and better at it. In fact, I think it's an international success story that's garnering a fair amount of interest around the world.

We tend to speak quite a lot about the success and the approach of our MSOCs. Certainly we still have work to do, work that we continue to do. We have opportunities to push the awareness out further than our own maritime spaces to get intelligence and information from vessels before they even leave port, and that sort of thing. NORAD, as I think the committee has been told, is undertaking a maritime warning role; as that matures, it will allow us to refine how we go about things as well.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

For either one of you, with respect to environmental impact owing to increased naval operations in the north—it's the kind of question that an environmentalist would ask—what measures do our ships take to operate in an environmentally responsible manner?

[VAdm Bruce Donaldson]

Our naval ships are incredibly fastidious. We comply with Canadian law. We're extremely careful, as are all Canadian Forces, not to leave a footprint in the north. We recognize how vulnerable the environment can be, and we take great pains to avoid any impact on the environment. Whether it's discharges, waste from activity, or what we build when we operate in the north, we take everything out with us when we go.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

What would be the impact on our sovereignty if we didn't have submarines for collecting information? What would be the impact if we had no submarines in the Canadian navy?

[VAdm Bruce Donaldson]

The answer to that will be awfully speculative. I can only give you an opinion.

By virtue of having operated submarines for as long as we have, and by virtue of the capability of the submarines that we now possess, we have in effect become part of an international group of professional submariners. As part of this group, we share information about movements, capabilities, and techniques that we would not otherwise have been able to acquire or maintain.

Do you want to add anything to that?

[Cdr Dermot Mulholland]

As a NATO submarine operating nation, we are required to have a submarine operating authority and to participate in the submarine movement advisory authority, which is the central clearing house for submarine movements. That is an obligation on our part, but it is also a two-way street that enables us to remain informed about submarine movements as they pertain to Canada's maritime domain.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

Thank you.

Now, Mr. Wilfert.

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

I have two quick questions. The first one may be a bit theoretical. What does the term “Canadian sea power” mean when it is applied to northern waters?

[VAdm Bruce Donaldson]

I suppose it's the ability to exert control over the maritime environment; to deny, where necessary, maritime activities to others if the Government of Canada so wishes; to enforce Canadian laws in our jurisdiction; and to protect Canadian interests and Canadian citizens in international waters.

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

I raise this because our current interest in the Arctic stems from two issues: climate change and resource development. To deal with these issues, we are going to have to increase our maritime presence, particularly because some nations don't recognize Canada's legal claim to parts of the north. Monitoring and police action will be necessary, which raises questions about the types of capabilities we need. Some navies are not using submarines; others are. Norwegians are becoming specialists in certain submarine activities; the Danes aren't. As to freer passage because of climate change, the capabilities we need to be thinking about are not for today but for 10 years down the road.

Could you respond to that?