Government Operations Committee on June 9th, 2016

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

There are no icebreakers in this country that can break ice on a year-round basis, whenever we need it. Is that correct?

[Jeffery Hutchinson]

The Louis S. St-Laurent is not a vessel that we consider to be capable of overwintering.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

So it's not a Polar class 1. The Russians would love to hear the testimony this afternoon.

I think we should go in camera, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Keep going, Mr. Blaney. You have half a minute.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Regarding the Louis S. St-Laurent, I would appreciate it if you could provide me with the date for your retrofit. At least we need to have some capacity for our Coast Guard.

[Jeffery Hutchinson]

The Louis S. St-Laurent is scheduled for a vessel life extension in 2019.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Do you think the Louis S. St-Laurent can still float until 2019?

[Jeffery Hutchinson]

Absolutely, there's no question about that.

The Louis S. St-Laurent is a safe vessel and it is extremely well built. It is nearing the end of its operational life, but with a vessel life extension, we will keep it operating for several years to come.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

I would argue that it was probably built in one of the best Canadian shipyards.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much, Mr. Blaney.

Mr. Weir, take seven minutes, please.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Lockheed Martin is saying publicly that it can't get a meeting with the government about the F-35. I'm wondering whether that's true, and if so, why not.

[RAdm Patrick Finn]

I can't speak on behalf of the government. What I can tell you, by being a participant in the F-35 program, is that I have people who work in the joint program office. We also have specific officials who have key roles in, for example, the chief executive officer's organization, who oversee it internationally. Lockheed Martin routinely meet with those officials. I would say that, for example, at CANSEC last week or the week prior, any number of companies were here who actually provide fighters. I met with a significant number of them. Certainly at the officials level, they routinely come and talk to us.

[Lisa Campbell]

I would add as well that I meet with Lockheed Martin and other major suppliers as part of my job often. We also have the Aerospace Industries Association of Canada and several of its members as part of our defence industry advisory committee.

At an officials level, we consult with industry as part of our everyday job.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Thank you.

I was struck by the fact that both Mr. Finn and Mr. Hutchinson cited off-the-shelf availability as a major point in military procurement. While I understand you're indicating that no decision has been made to purchase the Super Hornet, I would note that this is the main argument that Boeing advances in favour of it.

Do you consider the availability of the Super Hornet off the shelf as being a compelling argument for that aircraft?

[RAdm Patrick Finn]

I would say it is a factor. It has clearly been delivered and is in use with some of our allies, as are other aircraft.

However, when we talk about off the shelf, I would say that a key component of it, in the vernacular I would use, would be around margins, the ability to grow, to change, the upgrades. Maturity at the outset can be an important factor, but it's one of many. Interoperability, price, being able to upgrade; all of those are key factors that we typically look at in any procurement.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

In terms of those factors, has the government set out any parameters or criteria for the acquisition of a replacement for the CF-18?

[RAdm Patrick Finn]

At this point, again, decisions have not been made. We continue to provide information on it and have not been provided with the kind of decision, I would say, on a broad way forward, which would then cause us in any procurement to then do a bit more of a detailed look at what the criteria for evaluation would be, what the weighting would be, what the rating would be. That would come later in the process.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

In terms of the process, if it were to be a competitive one and the government wanted to pursue that approach, would it have been realistic to have started that process sometime in the past seven months?

[RAdm Patrick Finn]

Most of the capabilities we're talking about, whether of fighters or ships, are almost half-century decisions. The future fighters that we acquire over the next 10 years will probably fly for 30 years beyond that, if not more. I think it's therefore really important to make sure that we have all the information, that we understand it, that we understand the through life costs, that we understand a number of factors that are extremely complex to get at.

To your earlier question about budgets, it is a question of trying to make sure that we pull all of this information together. I think our minister has explained to us that he's trying to make sure that he moves out, but that he does so in a prudent manner and that he's well informed.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

I absolutely agree. I think that's why it's so very important to have an open and transparent competition to make sure that we get aircraft that are going to work for our armed forces and will also provide good value for Canadian taxpayers. It would seem to me that the best way to ensure a fulsome process would be to start that process as soon as possible.

I'm just wondering whether there's any reason, in your judgment, why the government hasn't started that process since the election.

[RAdm Patrick Finn]

Again, I can't speak for the government other than to respect their decision-making process. I can tell you that departmentally it's a very active file, with the minister asking us a lot of probing and appropriate questions, and we're developing a lot of information for him. It is a complex procurement, and we're trying to make sure collectively that we do it justice.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

I want to ask about the history of the F-35 consortium. Can you tell us when it started and just a little about how it has developed?

[RAdm Patrick Finn]

I have some of the information. I'll provide you with what I do have.

It follows a model that has been used in other international procurements. One that I'm very familiar with is the NATO Seasparrow project, which similarly was done internationally based out of the U.S. under the aegis of NATO in that particular case, and we've had various countries involved with it. It goes back, in that particular case, to the 1970s.

Typically, they do it in three phrases. The first is what we would call an option analysis phase. That started a little over a decade ago—and again, I apologize that I don't have the exact dates—when it brought a number of like-minded nations together to determine if it was something they could do, should do, had the ability to do, and if the international requirements were aligned.

That evolved into a second phase, which in our vernacular we would call project definition where, again, the partners—and that's the MOU that we're a part of right now—were basically funding a design and some of the early production, again, with competition to all of our native industries. That has continued to evolve.

It's now moving into the production phase, which would be the follow-on phase. That is now under way with initial aircraft delivered to a number of countries. There are still what we would call operational tests and evaluation under way, software development under way—

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

It sounds as though this started under the former Liberal government. I am wondering if you could tell us how much Canada has paid since then into the F-35 consortium.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Can you answer that in about 10 seconds?