National Defence committee  Absolutely. That's a very good question. It's a typical Canadian response that instead of understanding that the ship strategy as it has been conceived and as the experts have called for is supposed to be seen as an ongoing process, rather than an end-all, and as you've pointed out, there has been a growing tendency to say that we're not dealing with an ongoing process.

National Defence committee  Absolutely. One of the great difficulties we face whenever we talk about submarines—and this gets right back to your colleague's comment on secrecy—is that we don't know their record of success. In other words, if you talk to Rear-Admiral John Newton or anyone who has submarines under their operational command, they'll tell you that they can't talk about how successful they are.

National Defence committee  We did look at having nuclear submarines twice and, ultimately, what's been the killer both times has been the cost. There's no question that having a nuclear-capable submarine is what will allow us to go under the ice, but the problem that has always bid the devil for all planners has been what to sacrifice to get that capability.

National Defence committee  That's a very difficult one right now. As I said in my opening statement, what we're seeing increasingly among many of our closest friends and allies is an inward look that I don't think is allowing them to take an alliance perspective in looking outward to the type of threats we're meeting.

National Defence committee  That's a very important question because it gets down to the brass tacks of trying to look forward into what we need the navy for. In the context of the Russian capability, where we see the Russians putting most of their money and succeeding is in their nuclear submarine program.

National Defence committee  Thank you very much. First of all, it is indeed my honour to be able to appear before you again just to share some thoughts that I have on the issue of North America and naval power. Let me start with a major issue that many Canadians often forget about but the fact remains that Canada depends upon sea power and has been a naval power since at least the end of the Second World War.

National Defence committee  I would totally agree, and I would even go further to suggest that the manifestation of Russian defence and willingness to use military force really starts not with the Ukrainian crisis but rather with the Georgian intervention. We saw at that point in time the Russians become clear about the defence of what they refer to as the “near abroad”, where they will use military force.

National Defence committee  Thank you very much. I'll go first, I guess. It's almost to the point of being a no-brainer. When we look at missile proliferation, when we look at the technologies that are now being developed.... Adam made reference to the most recent Russian cruise missile. What the Russians and Chinese are also developing is a hyperkinetic cruise missile capability that is probably going to be about six or seven times the speed of sound.

National Defence committee  I'd like to thank the members of the committee for giving us the opportunity to come before you to discuss one of the critical elements of Canadian security. I would begin by pointing out that there is a tendency to view the Arctic as somehow a separate, peaceful component that does not have a bearing on overall Canadian security.

National Defence committee  That's an excellent question but I've got to update you. The Finns have just gone through a major debate and have reversed that decision. In other words, they're about to engage upon a large-scale recapitalization because the paradox is less ice actually means more ice. You have the situation that when you get into the environment where the ice is melting, you actually need more icebreakers.

National Defence committee  That's an easy one. We have to go to the all-encompassing. I look beyond just simply...the Russians are the ones with their increase of long-range bomber patrols, and, I would add, for the first time ever, fighter patrols. They actually sent a MiG up this time which they never even did during the Cold War.

National Defence committee  The UAV is the wave of the future. Everybody knows there are unique challenges with the north. There is line of sight, limited population, the problems of GPS lock, and so forth, but these are all technical issues that Canada will figure out in time. The problem, of course, is that a lot of this technology is out of sight.

National Defence committee  Well, it's a critical first step. There is no question that at the end of the Cold War we lost the capability to operate our land forces in the north, with the exception of the Rangers, and I want to make that very clear. The Rangers always retained that capability, of course. But we simply lost the ability, and we saw that when we resumed exercises.

National Defence committee  That's where you have to have the capability to push back. Full stop.

National Defence committee  You hit on a whole host of answers within your questions. First of all, on the charting, the general consensus of the coast guard is that we've got charted to modern standards approximately 5% to 10%, which means that we've got 95% to 90% that is not properly charted. So, you need to chart.