National Defence Committee on Oct. 28th, 2010

[LGen J.P.A. Deschamps]

You bring up a very good point. Within the department there's always consensus before we go to any major procurement program. So this is not something the air force runs up to the minister's office with and gives our advice, saying we'd like him to procure this. I have to get my colleagues---the army, navy, and special forces, the entire department--to support the program as to what is needed to meet defence needs. So we have to go through a very robust internal vetting process, because, as you mentioned, money is tight for all these programs, and therefore great scrutiny is applied outside the air force to make sure this is truly what the department needs to look at and needs to program into procurement.

So before it gets to the minister or to government for advice, it has been thoroughly scrutinized within the department by CF colleagues and the department, the non-military side. That's why we sit around these project boards, and all these programs have to go through that filter at several levels--joint, and then the project management board--before it even gets close to government advice. So internally there's a very robust screening process to make sure programs that make it to advice to government have been looked at very thoroughly.

I think your question is a bit beyond the internal mechanisms of Defence. It probably speaks more to how we get to policy, because that's what we're reacting to. It goes back to the Canada First defence strategy, which announces our international policy. Therefore, we will be able to participate nationally as a coalition or within other alliances to deliver international peace and stability.

This is really the debate I think you're referring to. How do we shape national policies? That's very much in the political domain, and that's a process I believe that has been debated or talked about for a long time, and I certainly can't answer it. But I would believe that's the area that nationally should be well aired, so when we go to these procurements, there's at least an agreement that fighters are required. If fighters are not seen as required, anything we buy seems too much. We have to get the principles of understanding in the first instance. I think that's the important piece, and afterwards it's a lot easier to have consensus on what equipment best fits that need.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

Thank you very much.

I now give the floor to Mr. Payne.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Gentlemen, welcome. I'd like to ask my questions through the chair to you, and certainly the option is open to whoever wants to respond to the question.

Previously you talked, General Deschamps, about the options that Canada would have, particularly when we know that Russia and China are probably building fifth-generation aircraft. If this fighter F-35 program is cancelled, where does that leave Canada in terms of being able to meet these other international crises, when we know other countries are probably selling those aircraft to other countries?

[LGen J.P.A. Deschamps]

The question goes back to my statement about the future environment being more dangerous because of the proliferation of technology and potentially non-state actors having access to very high technology. So for us it goes back to the point that if we can't evolve our capabilities into a more complex and less predictable domain, we will be subject to limitations as we face international crises or are required to participate in peace and stability operations as part of our international commitments. That would certainly leave us at a disadvantage in being able to do that international mission.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

From what I understand, that means you would have great difficulty working with our allies and NATO and so on.

[LGen J.P.A. Deschamps]

As the colonel mentioned with the example of Kosovo, we would become the partner that would have to be given special allowances given the limitation of their platform. That means either we would not be able to go into the same level of mission integration or potentially that would put significant enough limitation on our participation to make it irrelevant. So this is the challenge as we try to look at the future. If we cannot maintain relevancy in these complex scenarios, our usefulness will be limited.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

The F-35 with stealth capabilities, to me, sounds very much like having a submarine in the ocean with such capabilities that people don't know where that particular submarine is. Is that a good analogy?

[LGen J.P.A. Deschamps]

In fact, that's exactly the analogy I used a few months back to try to express how this is different from other airplanes. It's basically the game changer that submarines were to naval surface warfare. Why? Because submarines were almost undetectable and therefore always had first strike. They could always get the first blow in.

What happened afterwards was sometimes more of an even fight, especially with technology later on. But even to this day, submarines remain the most dangerous threat in the ocean because of their stealthiness. They're hard to detect, almost impossible in certain conditions, and they always have first-strike option.

That's what stealth does; it's that same equivalent to submarine warfare. By and large, you will always have that first option of not being detected and therefore being able to take first action, which is usually a determinant to winning.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Okay.

We've talked a bit about the stealth. That certainly means we can do more with less aircraft and participate with our allies.

There has been some talk about the interoperability. I'd like you to clarify that again for me. Colonel Burt was talking about the data transfer, and I'd like more clarification on that.

[Col Dave Burt]

The data transfer capabilities available in the fifth-generation F-35 are unique to the F-35. The F-35 is interoperable with fourth-generation capabilities, understanding the limitations of that lesser interoperability. But in order to remain fully interoperable and operationally relevant with our key allies for the mid and far future, we must have the types of technologies that are available only through the fifth-generation F-35.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

That's it.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Okay, thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

I will give the floor to Mrs. Gallant for five minutes.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Would you please remind me of the year that our former Chinook helicopters were sold to the Netherlands?

[LGen J.P.A. Deschamps]

If memory serves, I believe it was in 1993 or 1994 that the airplanes were sold off.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Okay. So it's as a consequence of selling those off that we even got into the position of needing to buy new ones when our soldiers were on the ground in Afghanistan.

[LGen J.P.A. Deschamps]

At the time I believe the decision was made that the anticipated roles for the military did not require the continued use of that platform. Those were decisions that were made in the nineties.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Okay. A comparison of the Chinook purchase to that of the F-35 has been made a number of times today. Quite apart from the fact that our soldiers were dying after having been sent on a mission to Afghanistan without proper equipment and without parliamentary approval, in the case of the F-35, we do now, and we have had over the last decade, the luxury of time in planning for the F-18 replacement.

But if the purchase is delayed we will be under the gun again, just like we were in acquiring the Chinooks. So I'm truly inspired by the new-found fiscal responsibility that the opposition wants to find and exercise in this purchase.

Can you explain to us, with respect to the JSF video and high resolution, whether they can take the high-resolution photos to assist in surveillance operations on Canadians, such as fishing, human smuggling, and drug smuggling?

[LGen J.P.A. Deschamps]

The F-35 platform has very credible and powerful sensors, in the conventional sense of radar and so on, but it also has passive systems and electrical optical sensors such as you just mentioned. Combined with stealth, it certainly opens up more capability and options for government when it comes to building situational awareness, whether that's off our coastal waters or over foreign countries, where we are required to understand what's going on before we can make decisions or take action.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Do you feel that 65 F-35 aircraft are sufficient for our projected needs at this time?

[LGen J.P.A. Deschamps]

The 65 aircraft will meet our defence needs as expected currently.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

I just had confirmed that the Netherlands took delivery of our Chinook choppers in 1996.

I will always remember being on the tarmac in Afghanistan in 2002 and 2008 and seeing the Chinook helicopter with a faded-out portrayal of our flag on the tail. Again, in the past we were in a situation because of short-sightedness, the same sort of short-sightedness we are trying to avoid in thinking through this purchase.

Pilots and technicians will have to be trained on this platform. Is the air force ready to undertake this, and how much effort will it entail?

[Col Dave Burt]

We are working through the partnership process in different committees to understand clearly how we will do our pilot training and our technician training. We understand the timelines for bringing the aircraft to Canada and starting our operations, and we are confident that we will get the training completed in time to have the people in place to operate the aircraft safely and effectively.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Will this mean more jobs at the air bases--for example, Bagotville--or will it be simply a replacement of skills on the part of the people who currently service F-18s?

[Col Dave Burt]

We expect that the number of people who will be involved in JSF operations will be approximately the same as what we have in our fighter operations now. Some of the types of jobs will change, but we expect the total number to remain approximately the same.