National Defence Committee on Sept. 15th, 2010

[Tom Ring]

Yes.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Now--

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bryon Wilfert]

I would ask again that questions and answers go through the chair so that we keep some order here. Thank you, Mr. Simms.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Oh, that's right. I didn't imply that you weren't that important, sir.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bryon Wilfert]

No, and I didn't imply that I would let you go on unless—

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Mr. Chair, before I go any further, just so that I can lay the groundwork here, you're not going to let me ask about fixed-wing search and rescue, are you?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bryon Wilfert]

No.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

I didn't think so. I just thought I'd cut that out of the equation. I'm sure Mr. Hawn would agree.

Going back to the timing of the issue, it seems to me that the decision was made for us in 2002, when Lockheed Martin was chosen as the supplier for these F-35s. That's a pretty big difference, between just a short time ago and back in 2002.

Did the Department of National Defence give you any indication up until then that this was the aircraft? It seems to me that this should have been done a long time ago. Obviously there was another player involved, I guess, if you received notice only a short time ago.

[Tom Ring]

I'm going to address that question and then turn it over to my colleague to talk about some of the process for the development of the statement of requirements.

Perhaps if I could, sir, I'll begin by just describing a little bit about the procurement process. As was mentioned earlier today, the formal part of the procurement process begins when a statement of requirements has been developed by our client and provided to us. Prior to the development of an actual requirement or what are the specific needs, there is often, frequently, a dialogue between ourselves as the service provider and the client department about the development of those requirements and the needs, and the statement of needs, so that we can be involved in the process, but it is to the client to actually develop those requirements and give them to us.

There was an awfully long process, as I think you've referenced, between 1997 and the current time, where a program was in development, requirements were being developed, decisions were being made, and approvals were being sought. But when that process has been completed, the requirement then is given to the Department of Public Works and we then activate the formal part of the procurement process.

I'll leave it to my colleagues to speak to some of the details around what transpired between 1997, as you say, and 2010.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bryon Wilfert]

Just briefly, Mr. Ross.

[Dan Ross]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Sir, I'd just point out that the announcement of Lockheed Martin as the winner of that competition was not necessarily a fait accompli that Canada or any of the partners would acquire the aircraft. It gave us access to the information as the concept and testing and trials proceeded, but we needed to closely monitor that to determine whether it was going to be successful. Would they be able to deliver the three variants? Would they be able to fly them successfully and test them successfully? At the same time, we monitored other countries and the development of other aircraft.

So it has only been in the last year or so that we've watched the success of the joint strike fighter program and with a degree of confidence we could come to government and say, “Yes, we've participated early. We've watched it. We know what we're doing. We have access to detailed, classified information and we're going to make the right decision.”

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bryon Wilfert]

Mr. Simms.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Thank you, Chair.

Okay...I just apologize, because I get the feeling that it was more of a fait accompli well before that.

Nonetheless, I have a question for Monsieur Deschamps.

Can you describe to me what a perceived threat is and how the F-35 would be effectual during a perceived threat?

[LGen J.P.A. Deschamps]

Thank you, Mr. Simms.

I think it's a good question, because every time I've been out recently, talking to different groups of folks about the program, the first question people ask me is typically, “Why do we need fighters?” If you can't answer that question, then no matter how much money it is, it seems to be too much. So I believe that's a fundamental question.

As I tried to express in my opening remarks, right now the only thing that allows any country to exercise control of its airspace is the manned fighter. There is the potential that in the future unmanned technology would be mature to the point where that might become an option. It doesn't mean it would be cheaper, but it might become an option.

Right now we don't see it being a feasible solution for many decades, and neither does the United States, because it's investing enormous sums of money in that next generation of fighters, as are all the industrialized nations, western and others. So the manned fighter remains the critical platform that's required to maintain control of your airspace, with regard to both a situation of awareness and a capability for deterrence and acting.

The definition of threat, sir, depends on what the circumstances are. There are two components to deterrence. Deterrence comes from having awareness of or at least being alert to what's out there and having the ability to react. For us the combination of that would translate into knowledge, situational awareness, and readiness. Readiness is made up of people and equipment and training.

The two add up to deterrence. If you don't have situational awareness, if you don't know what's going on inside or outside your own domain, then you're very prone to surprise and some very negative outcomes.

As for the second component, if you don't have the capabilities to react or act, then you're also likely not to be successful. Therefore you don't have a deterrent effect.

For us it's really about maintaining balance. As we looked at the future scenarios and the very uncertain future security environment, it was part of our analysis.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bryon Wilfert]

Thank you, General.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

That's my time, isn't it. Okay, thank you, sir.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bryon Wilfert]

Thank you, Mr. Simms.

Mr. Bouchard, you have the floor for seven minutes.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, everyone. My first question is for Lieutenant-General Deschamps.

The minister talked about the distribution of F-35 aircraft between Cold Lake and Bagotville, in other words, 24 in Cold Lake and 24 in Bagotville. Seventeen will be used for pilot training, and the base for those will be announced in due course.

How is the current F-18 training going? Will the same F-18 plan be used? I believe the majority of the F-18s are based in Cold Lake. Of 80 F-18 planes, 30 are based in Bagotville and nearly 50 are based in Cold Lake. Will the same plan be put forward for the F-35s?

[LGen J.P.A. Deschamps]

Thank you for your question, Mr. Bouchard.

It is a bit premature right now to give details about that. As you said, the task forces can at least be split in two. There are approximately 24 planes per base. Seventeen is the maximum number of planes that has currently been set aside and that may be used for training. These aircraft are still operational but are primarily used for training. My goal is to reduce that number. It is too early to say how that will be achieved, be it through simulation, partner training or a contract. This is a relatively new area for us. We will need a few years to put together a program proposal that meets our needs at an affordable cost.

Training currently takes place in the United States, with our partners, for the beginning of the program. We still have many years ahead of us before we have to decide what the future of training will be. My goal is to reduce the number of planes that would be dedicated to training and to allocate those planes to operational units in order to maximize our operational strength. I cannot say where that will be, as it will depend on how effective and efficient the partnership is.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you.

Bagotville is the only French-speaking military base in Canada. And it has state-of-the-art simulators. Could you see Bagotville being used for education and training in order to increase the use of French in defence? Everyone knows that defence is highly criticized and that there are complaints regarding the French fact. Could Bagotville be used for education and training?

[LGen J.P.A. Deschamps]

It is very possible. Again, that will be part of our analysis on the future of fighter force training. It is still too early to say what the most beneficial location would be, from a cost perspective, for pilot and technician training.

As for the training that could be done at Bagotville, I think we are already distributing the work well between the two bases. But obviously we also need to focus on an economy of effort, given the large number of employees that receive training. We are going to keep all of our options open until we know more details about the training. It is still a bit early yet. Training has just begun in the United States, and we are not yet certain of the scale it will involve. So we have to wait a bit longer before determining which direction we are going to take.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

In terms of the 17 other aircraft, you said you would like to reduce the number of aircraft used for training. To that end, do you anticipate sending F-35s to bases other than Cold Lake and Bagotville? Can we expect to see more F-35s in Bagotville?

[LGen J.P.A. Deschamps]

My goal is to have as many operational aircraft available as possible. Right now, we expect to have to allocate a certain number of planes to training, but it is also important to understand what is involved with simulation. As part of this new generation of aircraft, simulation will be very sophisticated, very advanced. Therefore, my goal is to reduce the number of flights in real planes and to put more focus on simulation. With that in mind, we will need to find a balance, but it is still a bit early yet. Any savings achieved through my training fleet I want to reinvest fairly between my two operational fighter squadrons, Bagotville and Cold Lake. I cannot specify the number of aircraft. We have to wait and see. There is some work to be done.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bryon Wilfert]

Mr. Bouchard, you have 1 minute and 30 seconds left.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

General, I would like you to confirm something for us. Is it true that the United States will have exclusive control over data related to stealth techniques and the electronic system, among other things, and that Canada will not be able to obtain that information to maintain the bases?