National Defence committee  Very simply, even the funding by the Canadian government of the DND program outreach program has been cut completely. There is no appetite for advice from the outside world to this government. There is no interest in expert advice in the government. That's why we're so delighted

National Defence committee  I think it's the first one. You know it's funny, because the way we've put them out is precisely that we focused on the essential from a Canadian perspective, and then we offered options about whether we want to have a greater role in this region, and if that is so, this is what

National Defence committee  I'd just add that CFDS was never fully funded, so how can you expect, at a time of further restrictions, the budget, and the postponement of some major procurement decisions in order to get to a balanced budget next year.... How can you expect anything else than fluff and reducti

National Defence committee  I would add, because it's a way to answer the previous question as well, that in this “Strategic Outlook”, you've noticed that instead of fully going to every single recommendation budget-wide, we've provided options. The five options are actually to assist the government in look

National Defence committee  Yes.

National Defence committee  I don't have a problem with your question, but once again it is up to the government to determine what it wants to do internationally. We are not on the international stage to participate in a beauty contest. We are there to act based on specific interests.

National Defence committee  Yes, and I believe that, if the Government of Canada were to define our interests in terms of a leading position in some areas of the international stage, it could serve us well. But, as long as we do not know what the government wants, I have no answer for you. I do not disagree

National Defence committee  That is why we are saying that Canada cannot do without an expeditionary capability, though it must be well defined. It is exactly related to what you said. It may be to fight an epidemic, or to deal with the aftermath of an earthquake, but we cannot allow ourselves not to have t

National Defence committee  If we participated, it would be part of the discussion we would have with the Americans. If we collectively thought it was required, a decision would be made accordingly.

National Defence committee  No, I'm fine.

National Defence committee  I would just say I was very harsh in my comments when I referred to the post-Afghanistan amnesia. I think we've done some stellar work in Afghanistan. I think we've created a bit of a legend, and I think there's a deliberate desire on the part of the government to move on and try

National Defence committee  No.

National Defence committee  We've said it time and again. Canada relies for 40% of its GDP on trade, and if you can't provide your country with the means to defend the trade routes, to project a certain amount of power, or as George and I have said, a ship going into the area of difficulty.... But also if y

National Defence committee  It is a threat for Canada, to the extent that, were there to be some action by North Korea against South Korea, we have some treaty obligations that would bring us into some way of a support for the American efforts in countering what North Korea does. I think there's an issue ou

National Defence committee  It's interesting. We've had a very lively debate on that issue. We've concluded that terrorism is still a threat, but it is no longer a strategic threat because it tends to happen more in the countries where there is some counter-insurgency, like Syria, Libya, and where you have