Evidence of meeting #40 for Public Accounts in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was forces.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Thank you very much.
That concludes the first round. The second round will be five minutes. I will ask all members of the committee to keep their questions short, and witnesses to keep their answers as brief as possible under the circumstances.
Mr. Wrzesnewskyj, you have five minutes.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Just prior to beginning, once again on a point of order, I made a request for a schedule of critical equipment and spare parts for equipment that's necessary for the success of field operations to protect life and limb of our soldiers engaged in those operations. You raised the issue of security quite correctly.
I'd like to point out that not all meetings have to be in public and televised. We have the capacity to go in camera and have that sort of document numbered, circulated to members, and resubmitted to the clerk at the end of the in camera meeting. That would alleviate security concerns and guarantee that as a committee of accountability we could address the issue of accountability on a very important issue—the success of field operations—and also the potential jeopardy of life and limb of our troops in the field. So I'd like to make that request and point out that we have the capacity to do it in a way that would not jeopardize security.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Before I hear from the vice-chief, I'm still not clear what you're looking for.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
We've heard critical equipment mentioned several times in the report, whether it's ground transport equipment, equipment of various types that we don't have or haven't had in the past in the field, or spare parts for that sort of equipment that may be running low and would jeopardize our ability to perform our functions there.
My question at that time to General Natynczyk was do we at this time know what we are critically short of in terms of that equipment and the spare parts for that? If he has that, can he provide a schedule to this committee? And on the security concerns, we have methods to address those.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
I'm going to hear from the vice-chief, but I believe he or the accounting officer answered this before. They said it was a moving target--what the shortage was three months ago, or when the auditor did the report.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
12:10 p.m.
LGen Walter Natynczyk
On equipment holdings, we guard our security very closely. That goes without saying, because it's a matter of life and limb of our soldiers. At the same time we insist that given the various fleets of vehicles—be they tanks, light-armoured vehicles, reconnaissance vehicles, or trucks—there are spare vehicles in theatre. That is our number one priority. Theatre is our number one priority.
We look at our stocks of equipment back home and ensure that in theatre they have everything they need to be successful. Indeed, with the priority ones we force or push spare parts forward to make sure those vehicles are serviceable. So when we look at where we are in terms of vehicle states and serviceability, it's always a snapshot in time. When we have significant operations and vehicles that are damaged, the challenge is how quickly we can turn those vehicles around by either getting them fixed or replaced.
So I guess I would say to you that we have a lot of data we could provide. It's always a snapshot in time, but we ensure that in theatre they have not only the vehicle fleets, but spares behind.
12:10 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence
If the question is whether we have or forecast critical shortages, I would turn to the general. He may undo my answer, but I would expect the answer to be that we have no critical shortages, because we manage our supply chain to ensure that we don't. I'd ask the general to comment.
12:10 p.m.
MGen Daniel Benjamin
This was the point I was trying to make earlier. I look at the overall supply chain. I look at what's needed in theatre and what the requirement is, where the resources are available, and how much time and space it will take to bring it into the theatre. For every capability, I track it to make sure. If there is a single point of failure, e.g., if a manufacturer cannot provide a spare part, I'm aware of it and we put pressure on the manufacturer to make sure we don't compromise operations. This is what we are putting in place to have total visibility. It changes on a daily basis.
12:15 p.m.
MGen Timothy Grant
In theatre I was briefed daily on the status of every vehicle fleet. I made sure that the information was shipped back to Canada to my boss, General Gauthier, to ensure that he could discuss with General Benjamin on a daily basis those issues that needed attention. Because there was the dedication of troops on the ground and the close supervision of the stockpiles in theatre, we never had an operation affected by a shortage of spare parts. This is an important point that the Auditor General noted in her report: operations didn't suffer for lack of spare parts.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
With those assurances, I withdraw my request. It's a good-news story there.
The $7 million has been raised a number of times. I'm not particularly perturbed about that, because we seem to have good answers on it, but it was mentioned several times that we distribute and share equipment with our allies. I assume that you included our Afghan allies when you made that reference.
In the last week, we've had the minister question the loyalty of our Afghan allies. Do we keep a separate count? Do we inventory equipment that we share or provide to our Afghan allies, especially when it comes to small arms and ammunition? Do we have those numbers? Do we track those numbers? This is important, especially with questions about their loyalty to the mission.
12:15 p.m.
MGen Daniel Benjamin
One of the key donations that Canada has made to the Afghan security forces is the 2,500 C7 rifles. We had to put in place the control measures to make sure we could track them throughout. Those control measures are being taken in theatre by the contingent.
12:15 p.m.
MGen Timothy Grant
We acknowledge that the Afghan army as it stands today does not have the same mature logistics system that we have in Canada. As a result, we work closely with them through our operational mentor liaison team not only to build the capacity in their logistics battalion, but also to make sure that we can account for all of our equipment that they are using in operations. That's closely monitored and accounted for. We want to make sure we know exactly where it is and what it's being used for.
12:15 p.m.
LGen Walter Natynczyk
We have seen huge progress in the capacity and professionalism of the Afghan security forces, both the Afghan army and police. We have a lot of our soldiers right with them, providing them with training, education, and mentoring. We have military police working with the RCMP and others professionalizing their police and staying with them in various outposts. Similarly, we have a lot of our great soldiers with the Afghan army providing that accountability function, but also providing the professionalism and mentoring they need.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
That seems to indicate that you have no question about the loyalty of the Afghan security forces that you're providing materials to, especially when it comes to light arms and ammunition.
12:15 p.m.
LGen Walter Natynczyk
That's correct.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Thank you.
The military has been lauded for its inventory systems, which have served as a template for other countries. Mind you, when you look at the situation in Iraq with the Americans and how they track—or don't track—their billions and billions of dollars worth of equipment contracts, that's not the best model to measure yourself against. Why wouldn't we go one step further? Most large corporate entities that carry critical inventories would actually, as opposed to the mission or the rotation, use 13 four-week inventory periods. Every four weeks there's an inventory done. Is there an intention to step it up one level, so we don't wait until end of mission to find out the status?
The second part to this question is, is there an upgrade? When we take inventories, there's the equipment in Afghanistan and also the spare parts and equipment back in Canada. It's a continuous pipeline. Is it a coordinated inventory system? When we make inventories in Afghanistan, do we do it at the same time in Canada? If we move to an even more precise system, for instance a 13 four-week system, would that be coordinated throughout the pipeline?
12:20 p.m.
MGen Daniel Benjamin
Yes. That's the beauty of having one supply system, which no other country in the world has. What we do in inventory control here in Canada is the same system we push in theatre, which is then connected throughout. We have one supply system, one end to the other. That allows Canada to do the proper tracking, which the other countries cannot do.
We adjust the inventory stock-taking in theatre, basically on the operational tempo. The units do their own, then I come in and I do a big spot check at the rotation. We amend through the process and try to do our best. This is something that we want to do better and better, so we'll be the best in the world. Nobody right now can touch us. The U.S., for example, has four or five different pipelines going into Iraq and Afghanistan. How can you reconcile this? It's almost impossible.
June 17th, 2008 / 12:20 p.m.
LGen Walter Natynczyk
To reinforce General Benjamin's point, platoon commanders, company commanders, and battalion commanders all have stock checks occurring on a regular basis. When they finish a major operation and get back to one of the four operating bases, or to Kandahar airfield, they take stock. They have a responsibility to make sure the soldiers are successful on the next mission. The NCOs will tell the soldiers to lay out their kits and they'll check their equipment. Some of the inventories that General Benjamin does are outside that chain of command, to make sure we have an independent audit of what's on the ground. These stock checks happen on a regular basis, depending on the operational tempo.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to start by congratulating General Natynczyk on his promotion to the Chief of Defence Staff. I also want to say hello to my good friend General Tim Grant. If the Afghan mission is in his hands, it's in good hands. Welcome to Parliament.
12:20 p.m.
Some hon. members
Hear, hear!
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
I have two concerns: getting proper supplies to our soldiers, and minimizing corruption in the war zone. These are the two things that I think are fundamentally important. Yes, there are losses and slippage and shrinkage of inventory. But even retail stores here in Canada have shrinkage in inventory. We're not that concerned about the $7 million in inventory, provided that it's not going into the hands of the other side. I need to get your assurance that everything is being done to ensure that this isn't happening.
12:20 p.m.
LGen Walter Natynczyk
Mr. Chair, that's absolutely the case. Ensuring that the soldiers and sailors and airmen have what they need is an absolute priority. Our challenge is anticipating the next demand. How do we anticipate their needs so that, even before the soldiers ask for something, a new piece of equipment arrives that will enable them to achieve success while mitigating their risks?
As General Grant mentioned earlier, we have no indication of any infiltration at our base. Indeed, from intelligence we have no indication that anyone has taken a piece of our equipment and used it inappropriately.
We have a huge challenge, however, in the realities of this theatre. We have all kinds of circumstances where a vehicle goes into a minefield or hits an improvised explosive device, and it blows up, and then the ammunition inside blows up. Indeed, there have been situations where we actually have to put a bomb into that vehicle, because we cannot extract it, and we don't want that sensitive equipment to get into anybody else's hands. So these vehicles are decimated.
Can we account for every radio, every grenade, every piece of equipment in that vehicle? We can't. It might be just obliterated through that destruction. Those are the kinds of challenges we have.