National Defence Committee on April 29th, 2024

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

I know, but we're concerned about the ones that could be detrimental to our national security.

[LGen Blaise Frawley]

Absolutely.

When we have an unknown track and we think it might be a balloon, we first of all have to identify it as such, which is challenging, given our domain awareness issues. In other words, our radar coverage does not go far enough out over our coast and over northern Canada. Once we've identified what it is, we have to determine whether it is a threat to North America. We haven't seen a similar type of threat since February of last year, but we do assess every single balloon.

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

Have you improved your equipment—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We're going to have to leave that—

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

Has your equipment improved at all so that you can detect more?

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

You'll have to work your answer back in on something else.

Thanks, Ms. Gallant.

Mr. Fillmore, go ahead for six minutes, please.

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Thank you, Chair.

Generals, thank you very much for making time to be with us today and for your service and that of the team that is with you as well.

This is the first time the Standing Committee on National Defence has engaged on the topic of space, so there is a lot we don't know. I don't think anyone around this table would call themselves an expert in any respect. I think we're all very cognizant that there's a lot we don't know, and I'm really looking forward to this exercise today and over the coming weeks of the study so that we can understand those things that we don't know and that we need to understand better.

We've framed the study in such a way that we're trying to get an understanding of the role of space in national security and sovereignty, the role of space in how we fulfill our international obligations with international partners, and the role for Canadian technology and industry such that Canada can maintain its position as a leader. I'm hoping that today we can cover all those things, although maybe not in the six minutes.

Maybe I could start with the last item I mentioned.

We're seeing increasingly that the private sector is being turned to in order to get things into space. Right now Canada doesn't have a domestic launch capability. We're working hard on that at Maritime Launch, but this brings up the question of collaboration and co-operation and even interdependence with international partners. I wonder if you could talk about the role of the private sector in Canada and elsewhere in the world in achieving our space objectives.

[BGen Michael Adamson]

Mr. Chair, this is a great question. It's an initiative that we've seen advanced not just in Canada but also among our allies over the last couple of years.

As the previous commander of the U.S. Space Force was fond of saying, space is hard. It's resource-intensive and it's expensive and it takes a lot to field all of the capabilities one would want in order to conduct space operations. As we look at that and the intricacies of space domain operations, it has become very clear to us and our allies over the last little while that this really needs to be a large team effort in terms of not just having defence capabilities but also leveraging those of industry partners. We've seen that in current conflict environments, where industry is providing information or assisting in the collection of information, if you will.

What we've done, in order to recognize that and make sure we're able to work collaboratively with our industry partners, is stand up something called a commercial integration cell within our own Canadian Space Operations Centre. This is mirroring the intent behind what we've seen in the U.S., where over a dozen companies are part and parcel of that integration cell. It's something we've worked on through Interchange Canada to make sure this is purely for us to be able to speak with industry partners at a classified level about what's going on in the domain and is separated from any potential future projects or procurement or anything else so that we can keep it compartmentalized.

As we leverage industry and commercial capabilities, it's going to be really important for us to have that conversation and that dialogue at appropriate security classification levels. It is certainly a change we've seen in the paradigm of delivering space defence effects, and as I said, it's something that all of our allies are working on as we collectively look at how we do this with partners in industry and defence and allies internationally.

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Thank you for that.

[LGen Blaise Frawley]

I'm in town for this, but I'm also here for a NORAD summit. This is a first-ever Canadian summit for our program within NORAD. It's called STRDI, or Science and Technology, Research and Development, and Innovation. It annually brings industry to Colorado Springs. This is the first time we're doing it in Canada, in order to encourage Canadian industry. We outline the challenges of the future, looking 15, 20 and 25 years out for NORAD, and industry comes up with solutions.

You understand there's NORAD modernization, which is the Canadian project, but the modernization of NORAD is a thing that will continue long into the future. We want to make sure that we not only include Canadian industry but also identify space capabilities that could help us with our future problems in the NORAD context.

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Thank you.

Brigadier-General, you mentioned leveraging the private sector to achieve our objectives, which touches on what the Lieutenant-General said as well. The result of this study will be recommendations to government. This would be a good opportunity to let the committee and therefore the government know what we might do better or differently to make sure we're able to leverage the private sector and position the private sector and the domestic technology sector in Canada for that kind of support role and commercial success.

Do you have any reflections on that?

[BGen Michael Adamson]

This is a great question and one that, again, we've been looking at over the last little while.

When we look at the adversarial challenges that are out there, we often refer to China as the pacing threat, and trying to keep pace with that can be a challenge. The organizations that are probably best positioned to move innovation and technological development quickly are going to be our industry partners. I think we need to consult with industry to understand what new technology they may be working on and where we might be able to utilize that for best effect. Certainly, it has to be a collaborative and consultative engagement that we have with industry as we go forward.

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Thank you.

[LGen Blaise Frawley]

If I may, Mr. Chair, one of the things that we run into the most when we hold our STRDI symposiums is classification levels. When we talk about the future of NORAD, we're talking at least at the secret level, if not at the TS level. U.S. companies make an effort to have folks who are cleared right up to that level. Canadian companies do not do that as much, so they get excluded from the discussions that have to be at those levels. If there was one thing I could change, it would be to encourage Canadian industry to obtain the classification levels so we can have the discussions with them and we can include them.

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Is it important input into the planning and the—

[LGen Blaise Frawley]

Absolutely.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Fillmore. We have our first recommendation.

Ms. Normandin, you have six minutes.

Madam Normandin will speak en français.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank the witnesses for joining us today.

I'd like to pick up on one of the first things you said, Brigadier-General Adamson. You mentioned that one of your roles was to identify operational deficiencies within the armed forces when it comes to space. Can you tell us about these deficiencies?

[BGen Michael Adamson]

Thank you for the question. I will answer in English, as there are likely some technical terms I don't know in French.

Identifying deficiencies is one of the roles that we set out for the 3 Canadian Space Division when we stood it up. There was no operational authority within the Canadian Armed Forces up until that point to look at that. Really, we talk to our allies. We take a frank look at the adversarial threat that is out there. Almost on a daily basis, we learn something that we didn't know to begin with that will speak to what we should be doing from a capability development perspective. The nature of the threats and the nature of activities in the domain change on a regular, daily, weekly basis. Certainly we need to be, I think, agile in terms of how we look at that.

In terms of looking at capabilities we may not have now and ones that we might want to look at going forward, we have to do this in a holistic sense. We do something we call “allied by design” in terms of addressing how all of our allies work together to deliver space effects. We work very closely, obviously, with the Americans, with Australia, with the U.K. and others. There's no point in our building something that already exists. I think we have to have a complementarity in our capability development efforts in order for us to bring something relevant to the table and be of value to our allies. That's basically shaping the way that we're going forward and recognizing what we need to do next.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you.

In terms of what you consider should be done to go further, could you tell me which weaknesses were identified and are currently being addressed?

[BGen Michael Adamson]

I don't know that I would characterize them as weaknesses at the moment, as opposed to understanding the threat environment.

What we've seen over the last little while is a significant level of effort and development on the part of our adversaries to deny us the ability to be able to conduct operations in the space domain. Everything we do, whether it's aircraft or ships or tanks or a soldier walking through the woods, relies on some kind of space-enabled capability, whether that be a GPS or satellite communications or what have you. Our allies are looking to make sure that we maintain assured access to those things so that we can use them. Our adversaries understand that that is something they would want to rob us of in order to then give themselves the upper hand.

It becomes interesting when we realize that the GPS signal that is helping us formulate our plans to conduct military operations is the same GPS signal that's in your car and is getting you to the grocery store or getting the first responders to the heart attack victim or what have you. The same satellite communications that they would deny are the same ones that we rely on societally on a daily basis as well. Certainly there is added interest and impetus for us to be able to address those things.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much.

I'll come back to something Ms. Gallant raised in her questions, which is nuclear power in space. Unless I'm mistaken, the United States and Japan are sponsoring a resolution at the United Nations Security Council to prevent the deployment or development of nuclear power in space.

Is there a deterrence approach for nuclear power in space similar to the one used at ground level? I'd like to know if the concept exists and, if so, how it is articulated.

[BGen Michael Adamson]

Thank you for the question.

Deterrence is a whole-of-government effort. Something like this is going to rely on a number of different departmental entities and stakeholders to be able to deter the adversary.

Obviously, impacts would not be felt just militarily; there would be impacts to society in terms of our ability to access these services that I've just spoken about. However, the deterrence component will come from Global Affairs Canada. It will come through sanctions. It will come through diplomatic means, démarches, and what have you. Certainly, I can't speak at great length about that.

The other deterrent is the fact that militarily we want our adversaries to understand that it's not ever going to be in their best interest to do something like that. The best way for us to deter adversaries is to maintain a strong, united front with our allies. When they look across the table and they see that we are part of a team, that is, I think, the strength in our deterrence capability. Our adversaries don't necessarily have friends and colleagues like we do in the west, whether that be through alliance frameworks or what have you. Really, it's important to maintain a strong and collaborative front in that regard to deter those kinds of activities.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you.

Space debris is also a problem. We're hearing some rather strange suggestions, including a giant magnet or a laser that could rid us of this waste. So I'd like to know what realistic solutions are being considered to deal with space debris.

[BGen Michael Adamson]

Thank you for the question.

Debris is interesting. I think what we're going to have to see going forward is legislation globally, internationally, on norms of behaviour that would state that if you're going to launch a rocket into space, it would behoove those launching parties to de-orbit rocket bodies responsibly. If you have a satellite in space and it's going to reach end of life, make sure that you keep enough fuel on board to de-orbit or to be able to dispose of it.

At the same time, there's going to be, I think, business opportunities for folks out there or companies that come up with a great way of being able to either capture or dispose of debris in their own way. I've seen lots of innovative ideas out there, from butterfly nets to lasers and everything in between.

Debris is certainly a problem, and I think we're probably going to be hard pressed to negate some of the debris or a lot of the debris that is out there. It's going to be in our best interest to make sure that we don't add to that problem going forward, and that's internationally.