Government Operations Committee on Oct. 6th, 2026

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Good morning, everyone.

Welcome to meeting number 51 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates. For witnesses new to us, it is commonly known as the mighty OGGO.

We're continuing our study of motion M-16. We have two groups of witnesses today.

Mr. Trudel, welcome back. You'll do an opening statement, and then we will go to Mr. Thompson from DND.

Mr. Trudel, the floor is yours for five minutes.

[Francis Trudel, Associate Deputy Minister, Public Services and Procurement Canada]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll be joined today by Mark Quinlan, senior assistant deputy minister for real property. He's on his way. My apologies.

We're pleased to assist the committee in its discussion of motion M-16, which calls for the study of using surplus federal lands and buildings for services for veterans.

With nearly 1,500 buildings and properties across Canada, Public Services and Procurement Canada, or PSPC, is one of the largest real property custodians in the federal government and has an important role to play in addressing the challenge of providing services for veterans.

At present, there are many surplus government buildings sitting vacant in communities across the country. A number of these vacant lands and properties have already been repurposed to help tackle the ongoing housing crisis, but potential uses go beyond housing provision.

I'd like to explain the disposal process in brief, and to highlight some of what PSPC is doing to improve outcomes. As with so many government initiatives, it comes down to efficiency of process.

Under Treasury Board policy, surplus properties that are not acquired for housing development may be circulated to federal departments, Crown corporations, provinces, municipalities and indigenous groups before being offered for sale more broadly.

Federal departments, including Veterans Affairs Canada, may express an interest in a property when it supports an identified program requirement, including initiatives undertaken in partnership with not-for-profit or community organizations. PSPC is accelerating these disposals by starting work earlier, conducting activities concurrently where possible, engaging partners early to resolve issues and streamlining the approval process to support faster risk-informed decision-making.

These measures are intended to reduce disposal timelines for housing-suitable properties and for lower-priority disposals, while continuing to meet all applicable requirements. As well, PSPC recently completed a government-wide review of approximately 11,600 federally owned properties to identify potential opportunities for housing development.

The review did not specifically identify properties for veteran initiatives, but where opportunities related to veteran housing are proposed, they may be considered through the applicable housing or disposal process.

PSPC maintains regular engagement with Veterans Affairs Canada through established national and regional forums. These forums enable departments to raise emerging requirements and explore opportunities for collaboration.

Veterans Affairs brings expertise on veteran needs and services, while PSPC provides real property expertise and administers disposal processes in accordance with the applicable legislative and policy framework. To date, Veterans Affairs has not identified any specific surplus property requirements related to veteran housing or services, but existing engagement forums are available to support future discussion as needs evolve.

The men and women who make up the Canadian Armed Forces make enormous sacrifices in the line of duty. We owe them, at a minimum, the assurance of safe, affordable housing upon their return to civilian life.

There is an opportunity to make use of Canada's surplus federal properties to directly support the immediate housing and other real property needs of our veterans. I'm proud of the essential role that PSPC plays in that effort.

I'm pleased to answer the committee's questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you.

Mr. Thompson, welcome to OGGO. The floor is yours for five minutes.

[David Thompson, Director General, Portfolio Requirements, Department of National Defence]

Mr. Chair, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.

My name is David Thompson, director general, portfolio requirements within the assistant deputy minister responsible for the infrastructure and environment branch at the Department of National Defence.

In my role, I oversee the planning of DND's real property portfolio, including ensuring that our lands, buildings and other supporting infrastructure continue to meet the evolving needs of the Canadian Armed Forces and the Canadian Coast Guard.

I am joined here by Brigadier-General Serge Ménard, Commander of the CAF transition group.

He is responsible for transition and casualty support services to CAF members and their families, with a particular focus on supporting ill and injured personnel as they prepare for life after military service. He can answer questions related to CAF member transition to post-service life, including coordination between National Defence, the Canadian Armed Forces, Veterans Affairs Canada and other government departments and agencies involved in the transition process.

We are also joined by Robert Wight, the deputy commissioner of shipbuilding and materiel, from the Canadian Coast Guard, who leads Coast Guard fleet renewal, shipbuilding procurement and the in-service support of the Coast Guard's fleet and shore-based assets. He can answer questions related to the national shipbuilding strategy, fleet sustainment, asset management and major Coast Guard procurement projects.

Federally, the department manages one of the largest and most diverse real property portfolios.

Our foremost responsibility is to ensure that these properties support current and future defence requirements. As Canada increases defence spending and invests in the growth of the armed forces and the sustained readiness of the Canadian Armed Forces and the Canadian Coast Guard, this includes the infrastructure required to support force growth and new capabilities. The department carefully assesses the demand signal and translates this into real property portfolio requirements.

Maintaining the right properties in the right locations at the right time remains essential to supporting CAF and CCG operations and the needs of our personnel. Growth, however, does not mean that every property currently held by National Defence will continue to be required. We assess our portfolio against both current and anticipated operational needs, rather than looking only at whether a property is occupied or being used today. A property that no longer supports operations, training, force growth or other future needs may be considered for disposal.

This allows National Defence to focus its portfolio on the requirements of the CAF and CCG needs now and into the future space. It also recognizes that some properties may face significant building-condition, health and safety, environmental, heritage or other considerations that must be weighed alongside ops needs. In that sense, retaining property and disposing of property are not competing goals. Both are part of ensuring that the defence portfolio remains aligned with Canada's evolving security needs.

Thank you. I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks, Mr. Thompson.

We'll start with Mr. Mazier for six minutes.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Thank you, Chair.

Welcome to our guests.

Mr. Thompson, in budget 2024, the government said it was working to “divest 14 surplus properties that have potential for housing, and are not needed for National Defence operations.” That was more than two years ago. How many of those 14 properties have actually been turned into housing?

[David Thompson]

Fourteen properties were indeed identified that could have a potential for housing. Nine of those were accepted onto the public land bank. To my knowledge, none of those properties, at this point, have housing on them.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Could you table a status update of the entire project, then, with all the information from that report on how that development is going? Could you table that?

[David Thompson]

Is the question to bring that forward?

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Yes.

[David Thompson]

Is it for a further point in time? I don't have the—

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

No, just table it with the committee, a further report.

[David Thompson]

Yes.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

The Ottawa Citizen reported that the defence minister advised VETS Canada that he was waiting on this committee's recommendations to determine the future of the Amherst armoury.

My question is for PSPC. Is there any policy or requirement that says that the defence minister must wait for a non-binding committee report before a surplus building can be converted into housing?

[Mark Quinlan, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Public Services and Procurement Canada]

If I understand the question correctly, we're referring to the Treasury Board policy on disposals.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Is there any policy or requirement that says that the defence minister must wait for this committee's report?

[Mark Quinlan]

I don't believe the disposal policy includes that.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Thank you.

Brigadier-General Ménard, why do you and your minister need to wait for a non-binding committee report before action can be taken on this file?

[Brigadier-General Serge Ménard, Commander, Canadian Armed Forces Transition Group, Canadian Armed Forces, Department of National Defence]

Unfortunately, I have not been part of any discussions concerning government assets in support of veterans. Unfortunately, I'm not in a position to answer that question this morning.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

You have no knowledge of this.

[BGen Serge Ménard]

I don't, sir.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Okay.

Mr. Wight, the Coast Guard operates offshore fishery science vessels. The vessels are used to help count fish. Is the government now counting this as defence spending?

[Robert Wight, Deputy Commissioner, Shipbuilding and Materiel, Canadian Coast Guard, Department of National Defence]

My understanding of the accounting of the Coast Guard's expenditures is that 100% of the expenditures of the Coast Guard are counted against the NATO targets, given that the Coast Guard is now a special operating agency under the Department of National Defence, along with the CAF and CSE. According to NATO rules, that accounting allows for 100% of that expenditure to be counted against the NATO targets.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

To be clear, it does count now as defence spending, counting fish or scientific research for—

[Pauline Rochefort, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

I have a point of order.