National Defence Committee on March 9th, 2015

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

From a national security standpoint, how is Canada's lack of air force bases in the high Arctic making us vulnerable?

[LGen J.A.J. Parent]

We have a system of main operating base, deployed operating base, and then forward operating location. Building in the north is very expensive and it takes time. Right now we have an adequate situation given where the Canadian air defence identification zone is located. However, in future there could be a requirement to study having a forward operation location further north, or to study and work with allies to see if we could use their installation.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

General, are there areas in which our partners in NORAD would like to see Canada step up more constructively to do our part in that partnership in terms of the mandate of NORAD? If so, what specifically are they pressuring us to do?

[LGen J.A.J. Parent]

The U.S. and Canada in NORAD have had a great relationship since 1958. Canada is considered to be pulling our weight in the enterprise, and I am not being pressured to do anything more. We're doing good, madam.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

Ms. Gallant, you'll start the next round. These will be five-minute segments.

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

Mr. Chairman, I just want to confirm that in 2005 the Liberals were in power, were they not?

[The Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

They were.

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

Thank you very much.

I welcome any additional lobbying for funding for the military from the third party.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

[Inaudible—Editor]...the promises were made in 2005.

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

General, the suggestion has been made that NORAD expand its early warning attack assessment to the realm of cyber. Now, we know that there is the U.S. Cyber Command. Do you see this as a necessary addition to the realm of NORAD?

[LGen J.A.J. Parent]

“Necessary” is a big word, madam. If we look at the history of NORAD, we've evolved. Today's NORAD is not the NORAD that started in 1958. We've evolved to address the threat to Canada and the U.S. in a combined fashion.

In 2005 General Eberhart, the former commander of NORAD, was asked after 9/11 what kept him up at night, what threat he thought we needed to pay more attention to. He said he was concerned with the maritime approaches, and stated that he needed a maritime NORAD. Well, he didn't need an additional NORAD or a maritime NORAD; the right thing happened, and NORAD evolved into the maritime domain.

If we look at cyber, if one day either party to the agreement, Canada or the U.S., says we need a cyber NORAD, I think it would be wise to have NORAD evolve into the cyber domain, instead of creating a separate agency, and deal with cyber in a binational fashion.

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

What threats does NORAD face with respect to cybersecurity? You gave one example where through electronic communication you're able to stop a person who shouldn't be travelling by air. You can tell whether they buy a ticket online. What other aspects would be helpful?

[LGen J.A.J. Parent]

The threats that NORAD faces in the cyberdomain are the same that pretty much every citizen faces. Asymmetrically, first you have those who break the law, the hackers. They try to establish their prestige by how much damage they can do. That's in the realm of law enforcement. Then you have the terrorist organizations, who may want to impose harm through an attack on our cybersystem. Then you have the state actors, who mainly try to get information on how we operate and how to break the system so that, in the event of confrontation, they could either create a diversion or make us blind.

As I said previously, NORAD operates with cybersystems in a contested cyber environment.

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

The tri-command strategy is also meant to improve the shared situational awareness in the five domains you mentioned: land, sea, air, space, and cyber. To what extent has this been accomplished?

[LGen J.A.J. Parent]

Aerospace warning and control is completely binational through NORAD. Maritime warning is binational through NORAD. Maritime control is bilateral through CJOC and USNORTHCOM, with NORAD providing some of the information.

In terms of cyber, right now the responsibility for Canada rests with Public Safety Canada, and for the U.S. with the Department of Homeland Security. There is still a long road to travel before we go in a binational manner in the cyber domain, but we do as much as we can to collaborate bilaterally through NORAD, CJOC, and USNORTHCOM.

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

What concrete measures has NORAD taken in recent years to protect its system from cyberattacks?

[LGen J.A.J. Parent]

I'm not a zero and one type of person who knows the technicalities of it, but the first thing that comes to mind is good cyber hygiene: antivirus, proper firewalls, and isolating critical systems from the Internet.

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

To what extent has the tri-command framework from 2009 improved cooperation, efficiency, and interoperability among the three commands?

[LGen J.A.J. Parent]

It has improved in that we have a series of Arctic exercises in the tri-command framework. We have a tri-command staffed up with various working groups who see how we can tackle issues bilaterally in a cooperative manner. I would say the relationship at the tri-command is very healthy, cordial, and productive.

[The Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

Thank you, General.

Thank you, Ms. Gallant.

Ms. Michaud, you're up. You have five minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I also want to thank you, General Parent, for your presentation.

You talked about maritime warnings NORAD now participates in. You said that information sharing was one of the main barriers to the proper operation of those warnings.

Could you elaborate a little more on that problem?

[LGen J.A.J. Parent]

There was a delay in the translation, and I missed the question: where we have to make improvements....

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

That's what I'm asking you.

When it comes to maritime warnings, you said that information sharing was one of the main barriers, and I assume that involves Canada and the U.S.

[LGen J.A.J. Parent]

In terms of maritime alert and maritime warning and information exchange, it can always be better. It's been iterative and evolutionary, because at first, in 2006 a lot of the organizations, stakeholders in maritime domain awareness, were wondering what business an aerospace defence command had in maritime warning, but there was a lot of wisdom in putting it into the binational agreement.

I think our challenge is to make sure every stakeholder and everybody who gets a picture of the maritime domain has a habitual relationship with NORAD in sharing that information, so that our job is really to fuse the information to make sure nobody misses anything. A concrete example is that during the recent Ebola crisis, we made sure that every time a ship came in from a west African country, all the stakeholders would share that information with NORAD, so that everybody would have the same picture in case health agencies needed to inspect or quarantine the vessel to make sure we would not get infected by the Ebola virus. It's a work in progress and just as in any family, the sharing of information can always get better.