Again, on the national security and public safety committee, the reason we began the study to review the security posture concerning Russian aggression is that Canada shares a very long Arctic border with the Arctic Ocean and Russia, and they have numerous military bases, 19. They have over 40 icebreakers, most of them nuclear powered.
To think that any member of Parliament doesn't believe that what is happening in Ukraine does not impact the security posture of Canada.... The member is perhaps not fully aware of the magnitude of the situation going on in Ukraine, how it impacts Canadians and the conversations parliamentarians should be having to ensure that we are not only supporting our Ukrainian allies, but also doing everything we can at home.
We can even talk about cybersecurity. Ukraine has experienced significant cybersecurity attacks and threats from Russia. Canada, which overall does quite well with cybersecurity compared to others, is lending support to Ukraine. That may be an issue that this committee would like to review as well, considering that the cybersecurity field is growing in importance in terms of its threat to critical infrastructure, hospitals and Canada's contacts to CRA and to Global Affairs. We're seeing considerable security threats to cybersecurity. I'm very glad and proud that Canada was able to provide expertise to Ukraine in this regard.
I would also say that the study at SECU, the national security and public safety committee, is relevant to this discussion to underline the importance of staying on the study of Ukraine because of the infrastructure we're looking at in the Canadian context if we want to talk about the threat that Russia poses to the rest of the Western world. We're also looking at our surveillance technology in Canada. We can talk about NORAD, which is four decades old and has not been updated in quite some time.
Again, when we're talking about the invasion of Ukraine, we also have to be reviewing, as parliamentarians, our ability to defend ourselves should the worst happen, however unlikely that may be.
We've had numerous leading academic and national security experts underline this position so clearly that it would be foolish for parliamentarians not to take this seriously in the Canadian context of what's happening in Ukraine. Not only do we need to focus, Mr. Chair, on supporting our Ukrainian allies, but also we need to focus on ensuring that Canada is prepared for a cyber-attack, for an attack on our critical infrastructure.
In fact, when I was briefed by the cybersecurity officials of Public Safety, they said that the worst, like the Pearl Harbor event.... I asked what would be the worst thing that could happen, and they said it was an attack on our critical pipeline infrastructure. These are the types of conversations we need to be having at both the foreign affairs and the national security and public safety committees. I've been very pleased but alarmed to hear the testimony from leading national security advisers. Again, I think that everyone recognizes that it is very important that we have these discussions.
I think what we're seeing as well, when we talk about Ukraine, is that a lot of our allies are leading the way in providing arms and support. The Americans, of course, have provided billions and billions of dollars. I heard one statistic that the amount—I want to say it's 21 billion dollars' worth—of arms they've committed and various defence technologies and tools is more than the entire Ukrainian federal budget, so it's considerable.
Perhaps it's something this committee would also like to look at, or perhaps the defence committee. What kinds of arms are being provided, why is Canada providing what it is, and are we providing everything that we can? Unfortunately, I don't have the expertise to go into all the technology that Canada has in its arsenal and which ones should be provided that have not yet been.
I think that, overall, this committee should be focusing on Ukraine. I very much appreciate the efforts of my fellow Conservative committee members for making this point very clear, and I look forward to their testimony and what they have to say.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.