National Defence Committee on Nov. 18th, 2014

[VAdm Mark Norman]

The consequences are fairly easy to describe. The retirement of current refuellers and the delay in the construction of joint support ships have led to capacity issues, which have a ripple effect. Owing to the capacity issues, Canada is unable to support and maintain those ships at sea if it needs to deploy them elsewhere. We have to ensure that other allies are with us. We cannot do that by ourselves. That is the first consequence.

The second consequence is that it is very difficult, almost impossible, to organize training for a group of vessels at sea. Training for a group of ships poses the same challenges as does deploying a group of ships elsewhere. That is the second challenge.

I think the third consequence is the most challenging one. I am talking about a potential lack of skills or loss of skills among seamen—those who work aboard refuellers to facilitate the deployment and commissioning of new refuellers.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Perhaps I could stop you there.

The consequences you are talking about are fairly serious. That jeopardizes the navy's operational capacity. With that in mind, I find it incomprehensible that the Davie shipyard was completely excluded in 2011 under the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy. As you know, that is the largest dry dock in Canada. The shipyard's production capacities are available now, and its management even told Public Works and Government Services Canada they could help other shipyards that have already been awarded contracts in order to keep up with the demand and help the navy acquire the vessels it needs as quickly as possible.

Would it be possible to use the Davie shipyard at this point to accelerate the vessel acquisition process? That shipyard has the required capacities.

[The Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

Please give a brief answer.

[VAdm Mark Norman]

Unfortunately, Ms. Michaud, it is not my place to offer an opinion on decisions related to acquisitions, operations and contracts in shipyards.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

You can still conclude, as I have, that this could potentially help accelerate the process.

[The Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

Thank you, Ms. Michaud.

Mr. Norlock, please.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and through you to the witnesses, thank you for attending today.

I was very interested in your introductory remarks, Admiral. You mentioned, of course, that the Halifax-class modernization project will bridge this fleet into the future, and that the $4.5-billion project is on track, to be completed on time and on budget. That's a fairly accurate statement, based on what I know and what you've just confirmed.

I'm very interested in all the problems that some of the members here have talked about. I'd like to come back to the part of your statement where you said, “As this committee no doubt recognizes, the fleet of today represents decisions of nearly 50 years ago.” You said as well that the fleet that will serve the Prime Minister in 2050...are the decisions that are made today.

We talk about the national shipbuilding strategy and all the things we're going to do for the navy that bode us well for the future. Would you agree with that, by your statement, the decisions we make today we will be living with for 50 years? If the navy is in as dire straits as some of the members across the way suggest, perhaps the governments of their day, of their political stripe, not reinvesting in the navy is why we're dealing with some of those results today. Would you say that's accurate and that it goes along with your statement?

[VAdm Mark Norman]

Well, thank you for the question. I....

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

It's rather pointed. If you don't want to answer it, that's fine.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Nine years in government, Rick?

[An hon. member]

It's our fault.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Nine years?

[VAdm Mark Norman]

I would suggest that what an NPS offers us is an opportunity for a long-term commitment and long-term planning. I think that's a key element of the strategy.

Certainly, like any major decision of the complexity that we're talking about, it's never a seamless or perfect execution, but we're now where we need to be. As I say frequently, we're now no longer talking about building ships, we're actually building the capability to build those very ships.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Thank you very much for that. I think you've nailed it on the head. We're where we need to be today, and the plans we have will bode us well for 50 years down the road, or at least 30 years to 50 years down the road; I won't put words in your mouth. These new ships will last approximately that long.

[VAdm Mark Norman]

I can't say that the ships themselves will last.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

The capabilities.

[VAdm Mark Norman]

What I can say is that the plan is to deliver three classes of ship over the next almost 25 or 30 years, and that those ships will then serve for upwards of 30 years. They're being designed for a 30-year life. That's what we're engineering into the designs of the ships. This is recognizing that decisions will have to be made, then, some decades down the track by future governments as to what they want to do, whether they replace the capability completely, or, as we've done—to your opening comment—decide to recapitalize the capability by modernizing it, because the platforms themselves are still viable platforms. That's the difference—

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Thank you for that.

You've been in the navy for quite some time. I suspect, by your rank, it would be close to 25 to 28 years—okay, plus that—so you were present when a previous government purchased some submarines. How much did it cost to get those submarines serviceable?

[VAdm Mark Norman]

I would have to go back and take that question—

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Perhaps you would provide us with that material. We talk about replenishing the navy, so if somebody bought some used equipment for us and we had to make it...and by the way, I know they're a useful platform, but it took a lot of money to get them shipshape, if I may.

Would you not agree with me that if the budget in 2005 for our defence department was $12 billion and in 2014 it's $18 billion, that affords the Department of National Defence a capability to do more things with an increase in their budget? If I increase your budget, you can do more. Would you agree with that?

[VAdm Mark Norman]

I would agree that the budget has gone up, and I would agree that more money will buy you more.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Thank you very much.

Would you also say that the Department of National Defence is your one component of it? And would I not be correct in saying that this government has increased the capacity of the Royal Canadian Air Force by purchasing strategic and tactical lift aircraft and other aircraft to assist in the complete serviceability of the Canadian Armed Forces, as well as purchasing some very needed equipment so that we can do some things from the army's perspective, and now it's the navy's turn to get some new equipment and to be able to do the job that the Canadians expect them to?

[The Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

Give a brief answer please, Admiral.

[VAdm Mark Norman]

I will be brief, Mr. Chair.

I would say that there is no denying the degree to which there have been significant investments made in new capability over the last several years. I would also agree that the navy is very much looking forward to operationalizing—if I may use a military term—or bringing to life this shipbuilding program.

As to your last point, I don't necessarily agree with the notion of turns, but I'm quite happy to be where we are right now on the cusp of some very exciting new capabilities that are just around the corner.

[The Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

Thank you, Admiral.

Mr. Larose, the floor is yours. You have five minutes.