Evidence of meeting #12 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was aircraft.
A recording is available from Parliament.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
Majid Jowhari Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
I'm sorry to interrupt you, but specifically what is it about Canada and Canadian needs that drives the need for those types of customization?
2:45 p.m.
Adjunct Professor, University of Prince Edward Island, As an Individual
I'm sorry. Now I have a better appreciation of your question. I'd say geography, shipbuilding, the longest coastline in the world, three oceans, alliances and the transatlantic. Also, increasingly now, we're looking at getting involved in the Indo-Pacific. We're partnering up with Japan, Australia and South Korea. We have one of the few navies in the world that actually have that type of geopolitical operational demand to really have the capabilities, if we so desired, to move in that direction.
I think it goes back to Mr. Kasurak's point: What is the vision of how you want to have an armed forces, and what do you want them to do? Up to now, it's been a desire to want to satisfy all those check boxes. In doing so, you need a design that enables you to do that. That is one of the reasons, for example, for putting so much emphasis on anti-submarine capability in our version of the type 26, but it's also related to attack targets on land and in the air.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
Majid Jowhari Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
Thank you.
I have only about 50 seconds left. I want to go back to an alternative that I'd like to recommend for your consideration. I'd like to hear your feedback.
You talked about the fact that changing the process of procurement management in the midstream of such a large transformation is going to be, if not costly, impeding further progress on the procurement side. What are your thoughts about centralizing the oversight of this project from a project management point of view in the interim, as a short-term remedy to a decentralized procurement process?
2:45 p.m.
Adjunct Professor, University of Prince Edward Island, As an Individual
Well, there is already a centralized office, the national shipbuilding strategy office, set up to do it. I think the big challenge is just in getting clear, consistent political and bureaucratic alignment and direction off the top and ensuring that it's there consistently over what will be decades. That's the real challenge.
2:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Robert Gordon Kitchen
Thank you.
We'll now go to Ms. Vignola for two minutes.
2:45 p.m.
Bloc
Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Thank you very much.
Mr. Collins, you partially answered my question earlier, but I ask that you send me a more complete answer.
I have a second question for you.
What do you think the Canadian government should do to ensure the viability of shipbuilding in Canada and secure our country's sovereignty over our land and home waters? What needs to be done to ensure sustainability beyond the national shipbuilding strategy?
Because of what you said about our geography, I feel like it would be ridiculous not to have solid shipbuilding, just as it would be ridiculous to say that Japan or England had no ships. In my humble opinion, it would make no sense.
How can we ensure the viability of shipbuilding in Canada?
2:50 p.m.
Adjunct Professor, University of Prince Edward Island, As an Individual
Sustainability is certainly a key part. When we purchase large-scale military platforms and equipment, we expect them to last for decades. That's been the trend going back to the sixties, and this is the vision that has been adopted for this particular ambitious project. We're not the only ones doing this. That's why the ability to have a domestic capability and to understand how to sustain and modify those ships for decades is so important.
Our challenge is that we have effectively two mini navies and two defence industrial bases, one on each coast, because you can't simply move a ship around from one port to another. That is a tremendous project management challenge, and it is a tremendous extra cost. It's about whether we seriously want to have a three-ocean navy and, ideally, year-round, a two-ocean navy—
2:50 p.m.
Bloc
Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC
You mentioned two small shipyards.
The older, more experienced yard, with five docks and 50% of the shipbuilding capacity, was cast aside. Has this caused a problem, in your opinion?
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
2:50 p.m.
Adjunct Professor, University of Prince Edward Island, As an Individual
The biggest challenge for all three shipyards is that the schedule is king. If it's a continuous build, it's a question of what else is in the pipeline to ensure the viability of those shipyards. They're there for building and not just for simply sustaining and modifying ships.
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Robert Gordon Kitchen
Thank you for the quick answer. If you feel that you have more to add to it, please, by all means, submit that in writing.
We'll now go to Mr. Johns for two minutes.
2:50 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
Thanks to all of you.
Mr. McCauley, I do have to mention the boondoggles of the previous liberal-conservative government in the province of B.C., including the Port Mann Bridge, which was 500% over cost, never mind BC Hydro, the roof of BC Place and the Vancouver Convention Centre. I could go on all day, but I won't waste my few minutes.
My question is around the PBO. The PBO comes in and its costs are so vastly far apart from the government's.
Mr. Collins, do you want to comment on why the costing is so out of sync?
2:50 p.m.
Adjunct Professor, University of Prince Edward Island, As an Individual
Sir, that's a great question. It goes back to something I had in my opening remarks, which was communications and better transparency.
What is going into the costing models? We're told that the budget of $62 billion is supposed to be satisfactory going forward, yet we're also hearing that the yard in Halifax needs some type of modification to deal with the extra large version of ship to be built there, which wasn't envisioned over a decade ago.
There are different costing models. I would just like more transparency to understand what goes into that particular modelling.
2:50 p.m.
NDP
2:50 p.m.
Fellow, Centre for International and Defence Policy, Queen's University, As an Individual
I think that's well said. The PBO has basically used a forecast based on the weight of the ship, and given the fact that we don't really know much about the ship, it's as good of an estimate as you're going to get.
As I mentioned in my opening statement, the former director general for naval construction in National Defence said that you'd need to build three or four ships before you could get an accurate idea of what they're going to cost. It really is a black box.
More transparency is needed, but we also need to be informed on a more continuous basis, and that really is what's missing.
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Robert Gordon Kitchen
Thank you, Mr. Johns.
We'll now go to Mr. Lobb for four minutes.
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON
Thanks very much.
I'm glad Mr. Johns touched on transparency, because that's been a constant source of frustration since I've been on this committee. I don't blame any of the people who have appeared before the committee. If you look at the members of Parliament on the committee and people who are in the public service, such as the budgetary officer, none of us really, truly have access to any of the important details that would give us any sense of whether things are going the right way or the wrong way.
I wonder if Mr. Kasurak could touch on his experience when he was in the Auditor General's office.
Were you privy to any of the information that you needed, or did you have to go to the U.S. to try to run off some other estimates?
2:55 p.m.
Fellow, Centre for International and Defence Policy, Queen's University, As an Individual
One of the virtues of working under the Auditor General Act, which I now miss, is that you're entitled to see every record and interview any person. The short answer is that I didn't have great difficulty, although sometimes there was a bit of a cat-and-mouse game going on between my people and defence officials. Generally, we could get the information we required. It's a lot more than you can get as a citizen or a member of Parliament.
I think the Senate asked for a time-phased expenditure for major capital projects, and DND just didn't give it to them. I think there is a major issue in terms of provision of information to Parliament, but as the Office of the Auditor General, we could get whatever we wanted.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON
I think it doesn't matter.... I've been in government and I've been in opposition, and it goes over both. It probably goes back to the Martin and Chrétien years, and into the Mulroney years, and on and on, right to Wilfrid Laurier, I suppose.
I think one of the recommendations that should come out of this committee is that we need to have the ability, as members of Parliament and as committees, to get this information. I know the immediate reaction for some would be, well, that's just going to be more partisanship, but I actually think the opposite could be true. If you have a lot of this information, it will take the partisanship out of it.
Do you have any thoughts on that, or is it too hard to tell what partisans will do?
2:55 p.m.
Fellow, Centre for International and Defence Policy, Queen's University, As an Individual
I think that would be a constructive move. Part of the problem is that Canadian politics are the most partisan of nearly all of the Westminster systems. When you look at the Australians, they have a lot more standing joint committees that tend to be much less partisan. The British committees are also more non-partisan.
It's something that I think would be a goal to work towards, and you can't work towards it without information. If there's information, you can start having a discussion about specifics rather than taking a political position based on what you think might be true.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON
I'll go quickly.
This one is just for Mr. Collins, quickly. It goes back to the air defence. Do we have enough time to train everybody up for the F-35s, the pilots, mechanics, all the way through?
2:55 p.m.
Adjunct Professor, University of Prince Edward Island, As an Individual
It will definitely be part of the timeline of reintroducing that aircraft and at some point we're going to have to deal with two training regimens for CF-18s and F-35s. As my colleague noted, that's expensive and complex.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Robert Gordon Kitchen
Thank you.
We'll now go to Mr. Kusmierczyk for four minutes.