Government Operations Committee on March 25th, 2022

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

After September we can't even operate in the Low Arctic. Is that correct?

[Andy Smith]

Yes, we can operate in the Low Arctic until September, bearing in mind—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

It's just that after September we can't generally operate in the Low Arctic until around April again.

[Andy Smith]

With these ships—bearing in mind, though, that the primary missions of these ships—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

I'm not asking about the mission. I'm just asking specifically when they can operate.

That's wonderful.

I want to go over to the T26 quickly. England has reduced its original order down to eight, perhaps even more. With the Aussies, we've seen their problems with the weight and other issues with the design.

I'm wondering what level of confidence we have in our going forward with the T26 design, knowing that England has said they're too expensive to fill their original order; Australia is having issues, and there have been reported issues—I think we're getting sued over it—that the original T26 design cannot achieve the original speed set out in the RFP, as well as crew compartment issues.

Is that an issue to the navy, seeing that our brethren in England and Australia are having these issues?

[VAdm Craig Baines]

Mr. Chair, we are obviously very closely monitoring the situation in the United Kingdom and in Australia through our global combat ship users group. We're doing our very best to take advantage of the lessons learned in those programs to make sure that—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Have we learned from the U.K. and the Aussies so far?

[VAdm Craig Baines]

Yes. As they are developing and designing their ships, we're learning from their experiences and pulling through those lessons through the global combat ship users group.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Could you comment on the much bandied-about issue of overweight for the T26 and the fact that it will not perhaps be able to achieve the speed set out in the original requirements?

[VAdm Craig Baines]

We are, of course, watching the weight of the ship very closely. We should all appreciate that we're still in the design process, which means that as the original Type 26 design is being built and they have more certainty around the weight that's required for that ship—and we pull that weight through to our design—we're able to manage that.

Because we're still in the design process, we're also still looking at ways to mitigate any sort of weight change and through-life weight that the ship might require. As we go through these design processes, we'll be able to model what the effect will be on speed, and then after we've built the first one to see for real what that actually means.

It is something that we're watching very closely.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Admiral.

We'll now go to Mr. Duguid for four minutes.

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the witnesses today, as well as to the members of the committee. I have learned a lot about the NSS, a lot more than I knew before I came on the screen today.

My questions are about the north. I'm new to the committee, so I hope that these are relevant.

Things are changing very rapidly in our north. Canada is warming at two times the rate of other countries around the world, the Arctic three times the rate. We know that we're going to have open ice in the Arctic, ice-free Arctic conditions, sometime within the next 20 years. Also, the sovereignty situation is changing as we speak with the war in Ukraine, and we know that Russian submarines are scouting around in our Arctic without permission.

Given this situation that I just described, I'm wondering if there is a need to re-evaluate our national shipbuilding strategy. Are we able to pivot there? I know there are long periods between approval of a project and delivery, but are we being flexible and are we re-evaluating our needs?

Mr. Chair, I'll maybe get both of my questions out.

I'm wondering if we have formal community benefit agreements. I know that is government policy, through a private member's bill that went through Parliament, I think in 2019.

Does someone have a comment on that? I think a number of our members are in favour of having those benefits accrue to not only where the shipbuilding happens, but to some of the smaller communities that benefit from those ancillary contracts.

[Simon Page]

Mr. Chair, maybe I'll address it at a very high level. Currently the national shipbuilding strategy is significantly focused on operational requirements as articulated by the Canadian Coast Guard and the Royal Canadian Navy. We have projects and implementation in the two large shipyards, so we're working very hard with both shipyards to make sure that these remain on pace.

To your question and your point about flexibility, we are also looking at increasing the capacity of the national shipbuilding strategy by accepting a third strategic partner into the strategy for large ship construction. We are competitive with respect to other needs and requirements across the national shipbuilding enterprise.

With respect to your point about formal community benefits, we do have programs with the two large shipyards for some benefits as part of the NSS value proposition, and we monitor those with the shipyards.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you very much, Mr. Page.

We'll now go to Ms. Vignola for two minutes.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Vice-Admiral Baines, we talked a little bit about the Asterix earlier. When it was ordered, there was an opportunity to order the Obelix. We're not talking about bringing back the whole Gallic village, but simply one ship.

Given the delays in ship deliveries over the past few years, would it be a good idea to ask for the construction of the supply tanker Obelix?

[VAdm Craig Baines]

Mr. Chair, the navy has made plans to deal with the transition between the Asterix and the joint support ship in a way that sees us continuing to work with the Asterix while also working very closely with our allies.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

For now, according to your plans, you do not need a second supply tanker.

Is that correct?

[VAdm Craig Baines]

I would articulate that we do need to have this capability filled through the national shipbuilding strategy. While we wait for those joint support ships to come, we plan to use the Asterix and to work closely with our allies to make sure we have the appropriate capability for the missions we're tasked with.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you, Vice-Admiral Baines.

Mr. Page, how many years do Seaspan and Irving have to comply with international shipyard requirements?

[Simon Page]

Thank you for the question.

It's not a set number, we determine that with them. We look at their plans and what's happening on the job sites, the status of the work and some specific variables.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

As I understand it, they are not yet in compliance with international standards.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Ms. Vignola.

Mr. Johns, go ahead for two minutes.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Thank you, all, again for the important work you're doing.

I seem to be surrounded by end-of-life vessels in my riding.

The Union Bay fiasco with ship-breaking happened in my riding. There is clearly a lack of regulations in Canada to deal with ship-breaking and the end of life and divestment and disposing of vessels.

I just think about the Laurier II that was in Union Bay in my riding. It was listing, and we actually had to fight tooth and nail to get the government to remove it instead of letting it sink. It was formerly a federal vessel that was sold to the private sector and it went down the line and it was going to sink.

We know that right now there aren't any good regulations in place. Obviously, it's better to break them apart on land than to let them sink because of the leaching and the environmental impact.

Seventy per cent of vessels right now end up in Bangladesh, where there are very, very low environmental and labour standards.

I want to know what the government's plan is in terms of improving regulations and adhering to the Basel Convention, which we're a signatory to, or even taking it to the next level, which we should, and having something like the EU ship recycling regulations, which are very strong and much better than those of Hong Kong. We should be there as a leader and should be investing in national capacity when it comes to ship-breaking as well, and ensuring we have dry-dock space, which you have heard me talk about many times now.

Can you respond to that? What responsibility are you going to take for these vessels as they retire?

[Simon Page]

Mr. Chair, with respect to disposal efforts, the life-cycle management of assets is effected by the client departments, the Canadian Coast Guard and the Royal Canadian Navy. When they articulate the requirements for a specific disposal effort, the disposal efforts are completed, across normal processes, through the enterprise. In recent years, we have executed in Canada very specific disposal projects with success. When we do so, we follow all the environmental rules and associated rules that would be part of disposal efforts.

With respect to the question about dry-docking, we have a comprehensive infrastructure study on the way now, across the NSS, that will look at dry-docking and a really complete picture of infrastructure versus assets for dry-docking, shipbuilding, ship repair and ship maintenance over time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Mr. Page. If you do have anything further that you think you can add with regard to those questions, by all means do submit that in writing, please.

We'll now go to Mr. Paul-Hus for four minutes.