National Defence Committee on April 15th, 2024

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

According to one report, only 58% of the armed forces could respond to an emergency request from NATO and 45% of military equipment is considered unavailable or non-functional. In response to the defence policy that has been presented, the CDA Institute said:

...as the newly allocated funds are primarily aimed at Vote 5 (Capital equipment) while the cuts are focused on Vote 1 (Operations and Maintenance) funds, the negative effects will likely be on readiness which is already a major problem in the RCN, RCAF and CA.

In 2017, when Canada was vying for a seat on the UN Security Council, it promised a rapid reaction force. It gave itself five years to achieve this. Then it decided to give itself until 2026. Given the state of readiness of current forces, will we have a rapid reaction force in 2026?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Yes, I think you raise some very important questions.

I want to point out, first of all, that we are working very hard and, I think, making very significant progress in support of our former presence in Latvia and our NATO commitment. We'll be moving to brigade strength in 2026, which could involve the deployment of up to 2,600 CAF members. We are also acquiring equipment—armoured vehicles, anti-tank weapons, air defence systems and even anti-drone missiles. There are many other accelerated capital equipment requirements they will need that we're working very hard on.

You raise a very important point. One of the things I found most compelling when I first came into this portfolio was the real challenge of making sure our capital equipment is functional and available for use. That includes our planes, ships, armoured vehicles and artillery pieces. As the general has shared with me—and I believe he will share this with you—much of that was not available for use. We recognized that we had to do a much better job of maintaining that equipment. What we put into this program was $9 billion over the next 20 years to maintain that equipment and make it functional. It requires money and certainty that they can get it fixed.

Additionally, for the navy, our Halifax class of frigates required a very significant new investment to make sure it will remain functional and afloat until the surface combatants are delivered.

In this defence policy, we're not just buying new capital equipment. We're making the investment that is absolutely required to maintain what we have while we acquire new capabilities.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Normandin.

Ms. Mathyssen, you have two minutes and 50 seconds.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The escalation following the bombing of the Iranian consulate in Syria and Iran's subsequent attack on Israel is extremely worrying. Canada has said little about the bombing of its own Canadian embassy building. The Iranian regime has targeted its own citizens, including women—we cannot forget that—and now it's targeting Israel. I'm very worried about the ongoing war in Gaza. Canada doesn't seem to be playing a vital role in the de-escalation of this terrible situation.

Can you talk about what the Canadian government and CAF are doing to de-escalate the mounting tensions in the area?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

First of all, let me be very clear that Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism. We've made that declaration.

The Canadian Armed Forces play a strong supporting role with all of our allies in the region. We are not in the leadership in those positions, but we are there and we are engaged. Canadians make a very significant and real contribution.

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

Can you be more specific?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Certainly, in the region, they're in the planning.... In a number of our allied bases that are in the region, Canada is present.

I'm a little limited in how forward I can be leaning here, but we're on the team and we play, I think, important roles in those places. At the same time, however, it is under the leadership of others. I want to acknowledge that.

There are some other very important discussions that have been taking place on the foreign policy level with our minister of global affairs. I don't think I should speak too closely to those here, but I think there are legitimate questions to put about the role GAC is playing. I will tell you that I, personally, have condemned the attack by Iran on Israel. I think Israel has a right to defend itself, but we certainly want to make sure that is done in a way that is not escalatory.

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

Just quickly, with the 20 seconds I have left, at the last meeting, this committee unanimously endorsed my motion to express our solidarity with Non-Public Funds workers. For months, CFMWS has refused to provide these workers a fair offer. It has used private security guards, cease and desist letters, scab labour and inappropriate bargaining practices.

Since the motion, have you reached out to CFMWS leadership to give them the new wage mandate required to offer a fair, living wage?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I have spoken to them. I have also spoken to the presidents of PSAC and the Canadian Labour Congress.

As a matter of fact, I want to acknowledge here publicly that the president of the Canadian Labour Congress was very helpful in facilitating the appointment of a mediator to try to bring the parties back to the table. We've worked closely with all parties to try to facilitate an agreement between them.

I share your frustration. They are good people and they provide important services to us. They are valued by the Canadian Armed Forces. At the same time, we're trying very hard to facilitate a properly bargained agreement between the parties.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Mathyssen. That's a stretch.

You have five minutes, Mr. Kelly.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Minister, on December 7, you were at committee and you spoke of the shortage and the low production numbers for artillery shells. You said there was a commitment to increase the production in Canada fourfold. You said at the end of that meeting that it would take place this year.

When will the newly produced shells be rolling off Canadian production lines?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

As quickly as Canadian industry can produce them, but they have told us—

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

You said this year.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

What I told them is that Canada will do our part this year, and we have. We've now committed $300 million, and we're working with industry to make the necessary investments that industry said they required. We now have the money to negotiate the long-term contracts, which was also the certainty that industry said they required.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

That's great for announcements.

On what date this year will the production target of a fourfold increase be hit?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Last Monday, Canada announced the money that will allow industry to move forward, and now there is work that will take place between the Department of National Defence and industry. I've also engaged with the ISED minister to move on that as quickly as possible.

Canada did what Canada needed to do. Now we'll work with industry to deliver that—

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Okay. Are you walking back the answer you made then that it would take place this year?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Again, to be really clear, I said we would take action to cause that to happen, and we've taken that action to cause that to happen. We're now going to work with industry so that they can deliver.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Canada is the only NATO country that is not meeting both of the NATO investment pledges: the 2% of GDP on defence spending and at least 20% of the defence budget on equipment and research and development. We're the only NATO country not meeting them.

Why does this DPU not address that lack of commitment?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thanks.

First of all, under this DPU, beginning next year and every year thereafter, we'll be meeting the 20% commitment for investment in capital expenditure. I would also point out, as I mentioned earlier, that in Canada, we do not publish our aspirations. We publish our funded plans. This document talks about the money we'll be committing in this upcoming budget to bring that forward.

I've spoken to our allies. All of them want and continue to encourage us to meet the 2% requirement, but all of them have acknowledged—

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

I have to stop you, Minister.

Your entire policy update is aspirational. It's full of exploring options. It's full of reaffirming existing commitments. There are actually very few policy changes in this policy update, unless you hadn't been considering the management of all of these priorities all along. This entire thing is an exercise in aspiration. There are no tangible outcomes that can be measured by dates and specific dollar amounts, other than far down the road, far after another election.

Minister, this defence update cannot possibly be characterized as anything other than an aspirational document.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Well, $8.1 billion isn't aspirational. It's a budget, and it has clear plans for when expenditures can be made.

Now, I cannot.... Frankly, I have some very serious doubts whether any other government would ever make the same type of investment in defence, because your record speaks for itself, but what I can tell you is that this is a funded plan that has real dollars and real investments.

It has been well received by industry. They told us they needed that clarity and certainty, and we've provided it. It's been well received by our allies, who see a very strong upward trajectory of defence spending, a near tripling of defence budgets by our Canadian government since the last time another government was responsible for defence spending.

There is a real, clear plan. If you didn't see it here, I would invite you to go back and read it again.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

I'm running out of time, Minister.

I have one more question, just as a reminder for people about the detachment between announcement and reality.

On January 10, 2023, your government announced their purchase of a NASAMS system for Ukraine worth $406 million. One year ago last week, your predecessor falsely claimed that system was “en route”. It was an announcement.

These are claims that you make about expenditures, but they haven't happened. Could you tell me on what date that system will be delivered?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I can share with you what Ambassador Cohen and the U.S. Department of Defense have shared with us. In order to deliver that system to Ukraine.... We already provided all the missiles and systems we had available to us, but we had to acquire—

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Why did that predecessor mislead Canadians, then, and say that it was “en route”?