National Defence Committee on Dec. 7th, 2023

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all of the witnesses for coming today.

My questions will be focused on you, Lieutenant-General Allen.

It's been said that there's a culture issue in the Canadian Forces. We've talked about the sexual misconduct. I want to talk about another side of this culture.

It seems to me that the backbone of any military's performance and competence requires a moral strength that's grounded in a belief in our communities, our country, the ability of our forces and camaraderie not only with your fellow soldiers but with your commanders and the nation.

Do you believe that our government and our military are doing everything they can to ensure that those fundamentals for our moral strength are being met in the Canadian Forces?

[LGen Frances J. Allen]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the question.

Certainly I would say that for us, on values and ethics.... There was the recent revitalization of Trusted to Serve, which is the foundation of the ethos and ethics of the Canadian Armed Forces. I believe it was back in 2022. It is the basis of trust. It is the basis of ethical behaviour. It's obviously the basis of the nature of the environment we must be in to do the work we do in our jobs and for ourselves to be Canadians within the communities we have, going forward.

At a foundational level, at bases and wings distributed around the country, members of the Canadian Armed Forces quickly become members of their community as well. It is about working with members of the local community, where we engage in sports programs and coach each other's kids. I think there's a strong connection between members of the Canadian Armed Forces and the communities they're in, and therefore the Canadians they serve, going forward.

It is important to us in the Canadian Armed Forces that we build strong connections with our communities, because we know it's an important home for us as we move from community to community. I would say strongly that we, within the Canadian Armed Forces, think it's important as a basis for us, moving forward.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

I know it's a very recent change, but are we seeing results in terms of increased recruitment and retention in the Canadian Forces?

[LGen Frances J. Allen]

I would say it is still a work in progress as we go forward. We are building capabilities to work towards the culture change we see is needed.

When we think about some of the programs we've put in place to promote that, we talk about the challenges we face around the ethical circumstances we can find ourselves in. What do you do about that? How do you think about it?

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

I understand hen you talk about the ethical side—it's been talked about a lot—but what about pride in our country and in our Canadian Forces? What are we doing to promote that pride in our young people in this country and to inspire them to serve, as previous generations have served? What are we doing right now, as a government and a military, to imbue that pride in our communities?

[LGen Frances J. Allen]

I would say that people join the Canadian Armed Forces for very different reasons. Everybody in the Canadian Armed Forces feels a very strong sense of service and a sense of the obligation they signed up for—what they're doing for their fellow Canadians, going forward. That probably doesn't exist for most people as they're walking into a recruiting centre. It's what you find when you get into the Canadian Armed Forces and start to feel the effects of the missions and of the support you provide.

The first part, when it comes to attraction.... It's probably about attracting people to the opportunities the Canadian Armed Forces offers to them as they look to a career. Then, as they're in the Canadian Armed Forces, they start to feel and see the sense of community and sense of obligation.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

What is specifically being done—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We're going to have to leave it there. I'm sorry.

Mr. Fillmore, you have four minutes.

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Thanks very much, panel.

To answer Mr. Lloyd, one thing we're doing to create a sense of pride is Halifax International Fleet Week. I invite you to learn more about that.

Today I'd like to talk to you about space, Lieutenant-General.

In the coming months, this committee will be undertaking a study on space that I was inspired to initiate based on successive years of conversations at the Halifax International Security Forum and discussions with industry leaders. I'm very happy to see today, on the U.S. Department of Defense's website, that Canada participated in the meeting of the combined space operations initiative principals board, or CSpO, in Berlin recently. I think that is a very positive sign.

It seems very clear that space is, if not the final frontier in defence policy, certainly the next frontier. The committee is eager to learn more about how Canada is preparing for this shift, including what's happening with the armed forces in the 3 Canadian space division.

I wonder if we can take the time remaining to talk about how Canada is preparing to occupy the space of space domestically, and how we're going to be doing that with our international partners.

[LGen Frances J. Allen]

We all think that space is—and I don't mean to be punny—the next frontier, but it truly is, as one of the domains, an area we need to lean into.

Often we don't think about how dependent on space we are to live our day-to-day lives when you check your watch or when the GPS in your car directs you to where you're going. Our reliance on space in our day-to-day functions simply passes over our heads because it's become such an integral part of our lives.

In that way, as we talk about space from a military perspective and a reliance on space to be able to achieve military effects going forward, it's so clear that we have to make sure we are thinking about the use of space, the protection of space and the protection of our reliance on space assets to be able to execute our military functions going forward. Whether it's surveillance of the ground, timing and precision navigation that we often get from space, or understanding the threats that are approaching our shores, space is a big player there.

It's not a place that anybody engages in alone. As you said, it is a very strong international community, and not only from a military perspective; from even just a military perspective, it is closely connected with commercial industry and space commercial industries.

I had a conversation with the commander of space division about force development and how to think about the next thing we need and where space is in that. If you're thinking about things you want to try to do by yourself in space, you're going to approach it the wrong way. You need to think about where the space industry is going and how to leverage where the space industry is taking us. Capitalize on that innovation and that development so that we can ensure the military requirements we have can be leveraged through commercial assets and through engagement with commercial entities, because space is very much managed as an international entity.

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Thank you. I love how that came back naturally to DIANA.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Fillmore.

Madame Normandin, you have a minute and a half.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

In 2017, Canada promised to establish a rapid reaction force. We know that if we had done so, we might have been able to respond to the Americans' request and intervene in Haiti, for example, rather than awarding a contract by mutual agreement to one of their companies—to appease them because Canada may not be the ally they'd hoped for.

Where are we on the rapid reaction force?

[Bill Matthews]

Since that period of time, there's been no deployment of a rapid intervention force, so there's really not much more I can say beyond that right now. There's been no deployment.

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

I'm well aware that there have been no deployments. No force has been established. I'm talking about a promise that was made but not delivered.

Are there any plans to follow through on that promise?

[Bill Matthews]

I would say no, not at this time. Ms. Allen may know something about this.

[LGen Frances J. Allen]

I don't have anything else to add to that.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Ms. Mathyssen, you have a minute and a half.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

The minister was answering a question from Mr. Bezan earlier about working with GDLS in my riding and ramping up production on the LAVs to send those vehicles to Ukraine.

I'd like to hear if you can confirm to us whether GDLS has those vehicles produced, if they're on hand and ready to meet our commitments to Ukraine and when they will be delivered.

[Bill Matthews]

There are a couple of points here, and my colleague Nancy might wish to add more.

GDLS continues to produce the vehicles. Ukraine is certainly interested in them, as are the Canadian Armed Forces. We are trying to find the balance in terms of what comes off the production line and when, in terms of where they go. This contract was put in place initially as part of a project for the Canadian army because of the vehicles they needed to do their work. We have not yet finalized the schedule as to when vehicles will be shipped to Ukraine.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

That's interesting, because ultimately I believe there is a delay on your end and not their end.

[Bill Matthews]

There are a couple of points that are important here. One is the production schedule. We are working with GDLS to ramp up production or speed up production so that we can get vehicles for the Canadian Armed Forces and for Ukraine more quickly. I expect we'll have news in a month or so in terms of what the rough schedule looks like, but we're still working that through.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Mathyssen.

We'll go to Mr. Bezan for four minutes.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to follow up on some of the comments earlier about funding to Operation Reassurance and the funding for Ukraine. I'm just looking at the fall fiscal update. It shows a decline in military assistance to Ukraine: this fiscal year, $816 million dollars; next year, $318 million; the year after that, $197 million. The dollars are declining, and that's where I was talking from. It's either not being there to support Ukraine or just running out of cash and running out of equipment to donate.

It's the same on Operation Reassurance. Money ramps up, up to 2025, and then drops right down, with adjustments in 2027-28 cutting it by half a billion dollars, with a total cut of $141 million over the next five years. That's coming right out of the government's own numbers.

I want to talk about equipment. We know the state of repairs on our existing Leopard 2 tanks that are sitting in Canada, the ones we haven't deployed to Latvia and the ones we have already donated. The ones that are sitting here in Canada are sitting in storage and are barely usable to train on at this point in time. We know that of the howitzers that we have left—we donated a dozen or so to Ukraine—only about four or five are operational. How do we maintain training of our forces when we can't keep our equipment in maintenance and overhaul so it is usable?

[LGen Frances J. Allen]

Mr. Chair, maybe I can start, and then I can perhaps turn to my colleague Ms. Tremblay, as it pertains to questions related to maintenance contracts and the like.

Certainly the member is 100% correct with respect to having equipment to train upon being an important part of force generation.

All equipment is not always in use all the time, so equipment sharing has been a traditional way in which force generation training has been able to proceed even with less than a one-for-one equipment-to-unit ratio, but it's not necessarily ideal, and there are probably cost implications that are associated with that.

There is also the importance of exercises as that force generation function, and then making sure that the equipment you have that is ready for exercises or for force employment can also deliver force generation function moving forward.