Government Operations Committee on March 22nd, 2022

[Troy Crosby]

There has been a lot of progress made since the “Strong, Secure, Engaged” defence policy was released in 2017. Since 2019, in some cases, projects have had some delays. However, we've also advanced some projects ahead of their originally intended timelines, such as the armoured combat support vehicle project, which is currently seeing delivery of vehicles well ahead of the initial timelines. We've also advanced the replacement of two of the older Challenger business aircraft that are part of the RCAF's fleet.

We have moved many projects through various phases and gates of the project approval processes. As I mentioned earlier in my opening remarks, we have 74 equipment projects currently under the materiel group's leadership in the phases that we are working on alongside our PSPC colleagues. These are projects for which we are developing the requests for proposals as part of the procurement process, or that have moved through to implementation. We're seeing delivery of equipment now.

We are seeing good progress. There are challenges. It's complex work, which COVID-19 has confounded over the past number of years, but we are looking forward to further progress.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Do you think they are planned before 2036-37, in terms of a timeline?

[Troy Crosby]

Could you clarify what you mean, specifically?

There are a host of projects, as you'd be well aware. Some of those projects were quickly moved through approval gates right after the release of “Strong, Secure, Engaged”. Others, such as the Canadian multi-mission aircraft project, which is going to replace the CP-140 Aurora aircraft, had been planned for later in the program. It's a phased approach that meets up with the requirements to replace some of the legacy equipment.

In the longer term, there will be additional projects, including the updates and continuous investment in the fleets that we have in service today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

You have 20 seconds left, if you want to ask a quick question.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

That's all I have for now.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you.

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

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to begin by thanking and sincerely congratulating Mr. Crosby for taking the time to deliver his remarks in both official languages. He delivered over half his remarks in French, and I really appreciate that, as it does not happen very often.

Mr. Ménard, the CF‑18s currently need about 30 hours of maintenance per hour of flight. I would like to establish a comparison with the Australian F/A‑18s. How many hours of maintenance per hour of flight do those aircraft need?

[MGen Sylvain Ménard]

Thank you very much for the question.

I don't know the exact number of hours required for maintaining our Australian aircraft, so I could not make a comparison with our Canadian CF‑18s.

However, I can say that, so far, the six Australian aircraft that have been added to the fleet have flown for over 800 hours. But 800 flight hours for six aircraft is not a lot. So I am not sure this would provide us with all the information we need to give you an exact number.

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

Thank you for your honesty.

Mr. Crosby, the aircraft that have been kept, both the F‑35s and the Gripen, are not air superiority aircraft.

Why didn't we opt for air superiority aircraft?

[Troy Crosby]

I can provide some initial comments, but this may be a question that my colleague, General Ménard, can address.

What I can say is that as part of the selection process, we've looked at the capability, as well as cost and the economic opportunities that come with each of the potential solutions. The capability lens considers typical fighter roles and missions that would be required and addressed by the Royal Canadian Air Force in the near and longer term.

Perhaps General Ménard has additional comments.

[MGen Sylvain Ménard]

Thank you.

From an air force perspective, we identified the high-level monetary requirements for the aircraft. What we need for Canada is an aircraft that is multirole and that can be a good jack of all trades. At this stage, that's pretty much all I can offer.

We have a relatively small air force but a proud one and one that is renowned to be extremely capable for its size. Whatever platform we select, I think we'll be able to support it in all the roles we need the platforms to do.

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

Am I to understand that the army is interested in not only air combat, but also ground attacks with those aircraft, explaining the need to turn toward versatility?

[MGen Sylvain Ménard]

According to Canada's defence policy, Strong, Secure, Engaged, we must fulfill our mandate as a NORAD partner and member of NATO. That does mean we have to be a versatile force in order to complete the missions assigned to us.

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

Thank you.

My next question is about drones, and it will be for Mr. Page, Mr. Ménard or Mr. Cosby.

Bagotville's specialization and its strategic geographic location are practically ideal for rapid air deployment toward the Atlantic, as well as toward the north.

Why have 14 Wing Greenwood and the Ottawa region been preferred over Bagotville for drones?

[MGen Sylvain Ménard]

Thank you very much for the question.

If it's okay with you, I can answer part of the question.

The Royal Canadian Air Force has mandated a committee to perform a detailed analysis of a number of factors before selecting the locations where those new aircraft will be set up. Our country is very large. One of the things we considered is where those aircraft should be set up to cover the entire country. I remind you that Canada is the world's second largest country and that it is bordered by three oceans.

Those factors make it necessary for those places to be close to our area of operations. We also had to take into account infrastructure and the staff required to maintain those platforms. In addition, those places are close to strategic points in terms of command, control and intelligence, as well as all IT infrastructure, among other things.

At the end of the day, the goal was to cover as much territory as possible for Canada. Therefore, 14 Wing Greenwood, in Nova Scotia, and 19 Wing Comox, in British Columbia, were chosen. The main control centre will be established here, in the national capital region.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Mrs. Vignola, you have 20 seconds left.

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

Gentlemen, I will have time to put other questions to you later.

I just think it's a shame for Quebec's expertise not to be taken into account in these kinds of decision–making processes. I understand that the idea is to share expertise, but this should not be detracting from anyone.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you.

We'll now go to Mr. Johns for six minutes.

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

Thank you to all of you for being here today, and I'm going to leave it open as to who answers the questions.

The Liberals in 2015 campaigned against the F-35 to find a solution to better match the country's defence needs. Now that the F-35 is a front-runner, what's changed?

[Simon Page]

Maybe, as the entity here running the procurement process for this project, I can provide some light.

The future fighter capability project process continues to progress soundly. It is very active. Our mandate as a defence procurement apparatus was to conduct a fair, open and transparent competition with this project, and we have done so.

We have significantly advanced the competition that was launched in July 2019. This competition was launched through the release of a formal request for proposal to all eligible suppliers at that time.

The evaluation of the proposal was completed in late 2021. I think, as you were tracking, in early December 2021, Canada announced that we had two compliant bidders moving forward with the next procurement phase. The procurement remains very active and very live.

From a process point of view, that's pretty much all the information that can be shared at this time.

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

We've been a level three partner all these years. What have been the measurable economic benefits of that? Will there be benefit in the future?

[Simon Page]

With regard to the two compliance bidders we have left, bidders were assessed against specific compliance requirements. Both bidders now have acceptable levels of capability and value propositions. This means that, notwithstanding our next phase in the procurement and notwithstanding the eventual winning bidder, there will be economic benefits for Canada.

Discussing the specifics at this time cannot be done.

Thank you.

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

I appreciate that.

In terms of one of the advantages of the upgradability and their operability, can you talk about some of the upgrades? How do they make us dependent on other countries? Will there be a bill, for example, from Lockheed every year for software?

As well, how can Canadians be involved in the benefit of this?

[Simon Page]

Maybe I'll break the ice and turn it over to my colleagues from DND for the second part.

At this time, as the procurement process remains live and very active, we cannot assume anything about the winning bidder.